A/HRC/23/46 35. The Special Rapporteur regrets this terminology, and laments the linking of irregular migration with crime and security concerns. Using incorrect terminology that negatively depicts individuals as “illegal” contributes to the negative discourses on migration, and further reinforces negative stereotypes of irregular migrants as criminals. Moreover, such language legitimates the discourse of criminalization of migration, which in turn, contributes to the further alienation, discrimination and marginalization of irregular migrants, and may even encourage verbal and physical violence against them. Th is is further exacerbated by European Union legislation such as the Facilitation Directive,12 which, although not explicitly criminalizing irregular migration, may discourage the provision of assistance to irregular migrants, due to potential criminal sanctions. (b) The gap between policy and practice: the absence of a rights-based approach on the ground 36. Yet perhaps the most striking aspect for the Special Rapporteur has been the gap between policy and practice. For, despite the above noted shortcomings , the European Union has certainly progressively developed a more rights -friendly approach with regard to migration policy, in particular with regard to regular migration. However, the Special Rapporteur did not necessarily see this reflected in meas ures adopted on the ground. Rather, in the context of his missions undertaken, the Special Rapporteur observed that the implementation of a rights-based approach remains largely absent. 37. The focus remains on control and surveillance of the European Union’s external borders. Activities around migration management, as he observed, were predominately focused on the identification, development and financing of measures which focus on the security aspects of irregular migration, including formalizing cooperation agreements on “illegal” immigration, improving external border controls through logistical and technological means, capacity-building in third countries towards stopping irregular migration (such as the Memorandum of Understanding between Frontex and Turkey), and the criminalization of migration through both legislative acts and practical programmes, including the promotion of detention of irregular migrants both within and beyond the European Union territory, and the funding of detention centres both in European Union countries and transit countries. 38. Another concern of the Special Rapporteur is the lack of an available independent oversight mechanism that can easily be applied in order to ensure full compliance with international human rights law by all programmes and institutions in the field of migration. For example, although GAMM cites human rights as a cross -cutting concern, it does not establish any enforcement mechanism that would enable an evaluation of practices tha t might infringe human rights. FRA of course plays an important role in providing expert advice to the European Union by collecting data, undertaking research and issuing opinions from a human rights perspective. And although the European Court of Justice may now be able to strike down policies that do not meet minimum human rights standards, this is a slow and lengthy process. In the meantime, there is no oversight or systematic evaluation as to how the policies are implemented by individual European Union entities, or national authorities who are charged with implementing European Union law. 39. Moreover, contrary to the dominant trend in the development of the international human rights doctrine, migrants themselves, in particular irregular mig rants, are rarely empowered effectively to fight for the proper respect and protection of their human rights: their access to remedies and independent decision-making bodies is very rarely facilitated. Most often, they experience difficulties with access to information, to courts, tribunals or 12 10 Council Directive 2002/90/EC.