Subject: [Jungles] Five years after deadly migrant shipwreck in English
Channel, rescuers blame each other: ‘It’s too easy to say we didn’t know’
[Le Monde, 1.09.2026]
Five years after deadly migrant shipwreck in English Channel, rescuers
blame each other: ‘It’s too easy to say we didn’t know’
officer and the operator at the maritime rescue center presented
irreconcilable accounts of the events of November 24, 2021. That night, 31
people drowned between French and British waters. *
By Abdelhak El Idrissi http:///en/signataires/abdelhak-el-idrissi/ and Julia
Pascual http:///en/signataires/julia-pascual/
Published yesterday at 4:03 am (Paris), updated yesterday at 8:32 am
[image: Commemorative march in honor of the 31 victims of the migrant boat
sinking in the English Channel on November 24, 2021, in Calais, November
23, 2025.] Commemorative march in honor of the 31 victims of the migrant
boat sinking in the English Channel on November 24, 2021, in Calais,
November 23, 2025. SAMEER AL-DOUMY/AFP
The united front maintained by the French rescue personnel under
investigation for failing to assist people in danger in connection with the
deadly shipwreck on November 24, 2021 has broken down. During a
confrontation on June 18 before the judge investigating the circumstances
of the deadliest tragedy in the Channel – 31 migrants drowned – two of them
shifted the blame onto each other, according to documents reviewed by *Le
Monde*.
On the night of the tragedy, the passengers on the distressed dinghy, most
of whom were Iraqi Kurds, made repeated calls for help, but French rescue
services did not provide assistance as the boat approached British
territorial waters.
While in police custody and later after being charged with failure to
assist a person in danger in spring 2023, the five military personnel from
the Gris-Nez regional operational center for monitoring and rescue (Cross)
in Pas-de-Calais – which is responsible for coordinating rescue operations
in the Channel – consistently denied any wrongdoing in their handling of
the distressed migrant boat.
A young Navy operator, Fanny R., who answered the distress calls between
midnight and 4 am on the night of the incident, the most critical hours,
admitted only to making “inappropriate remarks.” “You have your feet in the
water, well… I didn’t ask you to leave,” she muttered to herself after
the migrants begged her to send help.
Fanny R. attributed those remarks to stress and maintained that she had
followed procedure. During face-to-face questioning on June 18 with
Frédéric J., the duty officer on the night of the sinking, who is also
under formal investigation, she stood by her account and accused her
superior of failing to take the dinghy’s distress seriously. According to
the operator, the emergency was obvious given the alarming calls from
several passengers and the absence of engine noise during those calls,
suggesting that the motor had broken down. “I could tell from their voices
that they needed help,” she also told the investigating judge.
‘Imminent danger’
According to her account, her superiors that night – watch supervisor
Pauline M. and duty officer Frédéric J. – could not have been unaware of
the situation. The movements of migrant boats could be tracked in real time
on numerous screens, and information was also shared during regular
briefings. Yet Frédéric J. told the judge that he had not known how urgent
the dinghy’s situation was. “I did not have that information,” he said. “If
I had had that information, I could have (…) reassessed the situation,”
Frédéric J. maintained.
“It’s too easy to say we didn’t know,” Fanny R. protested. “Listening to
everyone, you’d think I was the only one involved in this operation.” The
young service member explained her version of events to the judge: Her
superiors preferred to let the migrants drift toward the British side,
which was nearby, and refused to dispatch a French Navy vessel, the
Flamant, even though it was patrolling in the Channel. According to her,
“the watch supervisor and the officer (…) said they would not send the
Flamant” because “they were waiting for the [dinghy] to cross into British
waters (…) they hoped it would make it across and they would not have to
deal with it.” She said she did not understand that decision and had made
her disagreement known to Frédéric J. and Pauline M. Frédéric J. denied
this during the questioning.
Frédéric J. also claimed he had not heard the conversation – conducted on
speakerphone – between Fanny R. and British rescue services, during which
the British repeatedly urged the French to send the Flamant to assist the
migrants while simultaneously issuing a “Mayday” alert to vessels in the
area. “I discovered this conversation while reviewing the case file,”
Frédéric J. stated. Conversely, Fanny R. insisted that the officer had
heard the exchange because he was standing behind her. “And just before
that, they had been very clear that we were not moving the Flamant,” she
emphasized. When the judge asked if, as Fanny R. claims, he was aware of
the British request to send the Flamant to help the dinghy in “imminent
danger,” Frédéric J. simply replied, “No, not at all.” The investigation
established that the French Navy vessel was only about 20 minutes’ sailing
distance from the location of the distressed dinghy.
In a previous interrogation, officer Frédéric J. blamed operator Fanny R.
for communication problems, arguing that she took initiatives on the night
of the sinking without informing him. During their confrontation, the
officer also provided the investigating judge with letters exchanged with
his superiors at the end of 2020, before Fanny R. joined Cross Gris-Nez. In
those exchanges, Frédéric J. tried to prevent her recruitment after
learning about the psychological support she was receiving. “Our operations
are not training exercises; human lives are at stake. Mistakes and
weaknesses have immediate consequences,” he warned at the time. He also
pointed out that his staff “are under great stress that some cannot
handle,” and that Fanny R.’s situation indicated “an assignment to the
Cross that will be cut short because of the danger she poses.” He further
warned: “We do not want her to come and weaken the operational capacity” of
the rescue center.
The operator explained that it had been a very difficult period in her life
but denied any misconduct, instead listing sexist remarks and comments
about her Muslim faith made by other service members.