Brussels: The EU is to start releasing money to Tunisia under a pact aimed at stemming irregular migration from the country, the European Commission said Friday.
A first payment of $135 million will be disbursed “in the coming days,” a commission spokeswoman, Ana Pisonero, said.
EU lawmakers, the bloc’s ombudsman and migrant assistance charities have questioned whether the deal with Tunisia meets European rights standards.
Under the agreement, a memorandum of understanding signed by commission chief Ursula von der Leyen in July, Tunisia will get 105 million euros to curb irregular migration, 150 million euros in budgetary support and 900 million euros in long-term aid.
Tunisia is one of the main launching points for boats carrying migrants trying to cross the Mediterranean for Europe, with most heading for Italy, in particular its island of Lampedusa.
The EU deal, strongly supported by Italy’s far-right government, aims to bolster Tunis’s coast guard to prevent boats leaving its shore. Some of the money also goes to UN agencies assisting migrants.
Pisonero said that, of the 127 million euros to be “swiftly” disbursed, 42 million euros came under the migration aspect of the July deal.
The rest was for previously agreed programs, with 60 million euros to help Tunisia with its budget.
The North African country is struggling with high debt and poor liquidity, and has suffered bread and power shortages.
Its hopes of accessing a $1.9-billion bailout from the International Monetary Fund are hobbled by a refusal to undertake IMF-mandated reforms.
Tunisian President Kais Saied has been criticized in Brussels for increasingly authoritarian rule.
The EU ombudsman, Emily O’Reilly, last week demanded the commission explain how the pact with Tunisia will not breach human rights standards.
MEPs have also raised that question, pointing out that hundreds of sub-Saharan migrants in Tunisia had allegedly in recent months been taken to the desert near the Libyan border and left to fend for themselves.
Tunisia has bristled at the criticism, and last week barred entry to a European Parliament fact-finding delegation.
![]()
EU to start paying Tunisia under migration pact
Short Url
https://arab.news/p8wre
EU to start paying Tunisia under migration pact
- Tunisia will get 105 million euros to curb irregular migration, 150 million euros in budgetary support and 900 million euros in long-term aid
- EU lawmakers, the bloc’s ombudsman and migrant assistance charities have questioned whether the deal with Tunisia meets European rights standards
US judge orders curbs on immigration agents’ tactics toward Minnesota protesters
- Arrests and tear-gassing of peaceful demonstrators prohibited
- Observers also protected from arrests, crowd-control munitions
MINNEAPOLIS: A federal judge in Minnesota on Friday ordered that US immigration agents deployed en masse to Minneapolis be restricted in some of the tactics they have taken against peaceful demonstrators and observers, including arrests and tear-gassing.
Handing a victory to local activists in Minnesota’s most populous city, US District Judge Kate Menendez issued an injunction barring federal agents from retaliating against individuals engaged in non-violent, unobstructive protest activity.
The ruling was in response to a lawsuit filed against the US Department of Homeland Security and other federal agencies on December 17, three weeks before an immigration agent fatally shot Renee Good, a 37-year-old woman in Minneapolis, spawning waves of protests and putting the city on edge.
The court case was brought on behalf of six protesters and observers who claimed their constitutional rights had been infringed by the actions of ICE agents.
The 83-page order explicitly prohibits federal officers from detaining people who are peacefully protesting or merely observing the officers, unless there is reasonable suspicion that they are interfering with law enforcement or have committed a crime.
Federal agents also are banned from using pepper spray, tear gas or other crowd-control munitions against peaceful demonstrators or bystanders observing and recording the immigration enforcement operations, the judge ruled.
Menendez wrote that the government, in defending the street tactics of its immigration officers, had failed to “explain why it is necessary for them to arrest and use force against peaceful observers.”
Stopping or detaining drivers and passengers in vehicles when there is no reason to believe they are forcibly obstructing or interfering with federal agents is likewise prohibited, according to the court order.
Order comes amid heightened tensions
“There may be ample suspicion to stop cars, and even arrest drivers, engaged in dangerous conduct while following immigration enforcement officers, but that does not justify stops of cars not breaking the law,” Menendez wrote.
The DHS did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment.
The ruling comes nearly two weeks after the Trump administration announced it was sending 2,000 immigration agents to the Minneapolis area, bolstering an earlier deployment in what the DHS called its largest such operation in history.
The surge in heavily armed officers from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency and Border Patrol has since grown to nearly 3,000, dwarfing the ranks of local police officers in the Twin Cities metropolitan area of Minneapolis and St. Paul.
Tensions over the deployment have mounted considerably since an ICE agent fatally shot Good, a mother of three, behind the wheel of her car on January 7.
At the time, Good was taking part in one of numerous neighborhood patrols organized by local activists to track and monitor ICE activities.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, one of the federal officials named in the lawsuit, said after the shooting that Good had been “stalking and impeding” ICE agents all day and had committed an act of “domestic terrorism” by trying to run over federal officers.
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey and local activists disputed Noem’s account, saying Good posed no physical threat to ICE agents. They pointed to video clips of the incident they said showed that Good was trying to drive her car away from officers and that the use of lethal force against her was unjustified.
Frey and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz have repeatedly demanded that the Trump administration withdraw the immigration agents, asserting that the operation is being conducted in a reckless manner endangering the public.
While largely siding with the plaintiffs in the case, the judge did not grant all their requests, declining to ban the federal government from actions not specifically taken against those who filed suit. She also limited the injunction to officers deployed in the Twin Cities, rather than extending it statewide.
Handing a victory to local activists in Minnesota’s most populous city, US District Judge Kate Menendez issued an injunction barring federal agents from retaliating against individuals engaged in non-violent, unobstructive protest activity.
The ruling was in response to a lawsuit filed against the US Department of Homeland Security and other federal agencies on December 17, three weeks before an immigration agent fatally shot Renee Good, a 37-year-old woman in Minneapolis, spawning waves of protests and putting the city on edge.
The court case was brought on behalf of six protesters and observers who claimed their constitutional rights had been infringed by the actions of ICE agents.
The 83-page order explicitly prohibits federal officers from detaining people who are peacefully protesting or merely observing the officers, unless there is reasonable suspicion that they are interfering with law enforcement or have committed a crime.
Federal agents also are banned from using pepper spray, tear gas or other crowd-control munitions against peaceful demonstrators or bystanders observing and recording the immigration enforcement operations, the judge ruled.
Menendez wrote that the government, in defending the street tactics of its immigration officers, had failed to “explain why it is necessary for them to arrest and use force against peaceful observers.”
Stopping or detaining drivers and passengers in vehicles when there is no reason to believe they are forcibly obstructing or interfering with federal agents is likewise prohibited, according to the court order.
Order comes amid heightened tensions
“There may be ample suspicion to stop cars, and even arrest drivers, engaged in dangerous conduct while following immigration enforcement officers, but that does not justify stops of cars not breaking the law,” Menendez wrote.
The DHS did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment.
The ruling comes nearly two weeks after the Trump administration announced it was sending 2,000 immigration agents to the Minneapolis area, bolstering an earlier deployment in what the DHS called its largest such operation in history.
The surge in heavily armed officers from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency and Border Patrol has since grown to nearly 3,000, dwarfing the ranks of local police officers in the Twin Cities metropolitan area of Minneapolis and St. Paul.
Tensions over the deployment have mounted considerably since an ICE agent fatally shot Good, a mother of three, behind the wheel of her car on January 7.
At the time, Good was taking part in one of numerous neighborhood patrols organized by local activists to track and monitor ICE activities.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, one of the federal officials named in the lawsuit, said after the shooting that Good had been “stalking and impeding” ICE agents all day and had committed an act of “domestic terrorism” by trying to run over federal officers.
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey and local activists disputed Noem’s account, saying Good posed no physical threat to ICE agents. They pointed to video clips of the incident they said showed that Good was trying to drive her car away from officers and that the use of lethal force against her was unjustified.
Frey and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz have repeatedly demanded that the Trump administration withdraw the immigration agents, asserting that the operation is being conducted in a reckless manner endangering the public.
While largely siding with the plaintiffs in the case, the judge did not grant all their requests, declining to ban the federal government from actions not specifically taken against those who filed suit. She also limited the injunction to officers deployed in the Twin Cities, rather than extending it statewide.
Latest updates
© 2026 SAUDI RESEARCH & PUBLISHING COMPANY, All Rights Reserved And subject to Terms of Use Agreement.