74 Amendments of Jana TOOM related to 2018/0329(COD)
Amendment 147 #
(7) The link between the decision on ending of the legal stay of a third-country national and the issuing of a return decision should be reinforced in order to reduce the risk of absconding and the likelihood of unauthorised secondary movements. It is necessary to ensure that a return decision is issued immediately after the decision rejecting or terminating the legal stay, or ideally in the same act or decision. That requirement should in particular apply to cases where an application for international protection is rejected, provide. This should always be under the condition that the full scope of the principle of non-refoulement under European and international law is individually assessed in the asylum procedure and that the return procedure is automatically suspended until that rejection becomes final and pending the outcome of an appeal against that rejection.
Amendment 153 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) The need for Union and bilateral readmission agreements with third countries to facilitate the return process is underlined. International cooperation with countries of origin at all stages of the return process is a prerequisite to achieving sustainable return. This should be improved through constructive migration dialogues and the use of positive incentives, including financial, to improve the identification and readmission of returnees. Union formal readmission agreements negotiated by the Commission and coupled with Union parliamentary scrutiny and judicial oversight are crucial to achieve this.
Amendment 168 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) To ensure clearer and more effective rules for granting a period for voluntary departure and detaining a third- country national, determining whether there is or there is not a risk of absconding should be based on Union-wide objective criteria. Moreover this Directive should set out specific criteria which establish a ground for a rebuttable presumption that a risk of absconding existsa closed, harmonized and exhaustive list of proven, Union-wide objective criteria defined by law.
Amendment 180 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Where there are no reasons to believe that the granting of a period for voluntary departure would undermine the purpose of a return procedure, voluntary return should be preferred over forced return and an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to thirty days, depending in particular on the prospect of return, should be granted. A period for voluntary departure should not be granted where it has been assessed should be granted. Exceptionally, a period for voluntary departure of no less than 15 days could also be granted, after an individual assessment of the prospect of voluntary return. A period of less than 15 days can only be granted where it has been individually assessed, in line with the exhaustive list of objective criteria as outlined in this Directive, that third- country nationals pose a risk of absconding, have or had a previous application for legal stay dismissed as fraudulent or manifestly unfounded, or they pose a risk to public policy, public security or national security. An extension of the period for voluntary departure should be provided for when considered necessary because of the specific circumstances of an individual case.
Amendment 188 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) In order to promote voluntary return, Member States should have operational programmes providing for enhanced return assistance and counselling, which mayshould include support for reintegration in third countries of return tailored to the individual circumstances and prospects of the returnee, with particular attention for unaccompanied minors, taking into account the common standards on Assisted Voluntary Return and Reintegration Programmes developed by the Commission in cooperation with Member States and endorsed by the Council.
Amendment 203 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The deadline for lodging an appeal against decisions related to return should provide enough time to ensure access to an effective remedy, while taking into account that long deadlines can have a detrimental effect on return procedures. To avoid possible misuse of rights and procedures, a maximum period not exceeding fivebetween ten and fifteen days should be granted to appeal against a return decision. This provision should only apply following a decision rejecting an application for international protection which became final, including after a possible judicial review.
Amendment 208 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) The appeal against a return decision that is based on a decision rejecting an application for international protection which was already subject to an effective judicial remedy shcould take place before a single level of jurisdiction only, sinceonly when the third-county national concerned would have already had his or her individual situation examined and decided upon by a judicial authority in the context of the asylum procedure, including an individual assessment of the full scope of the principle of non-refoulement under European and international law.
Amendment 216 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) An appeal against a return decision should always have an automatic suspensive effect only in cases where there is a risk of breach of the principle of non-refoulementexcept where judicial authorities have fully assessed the principle of non-refoulement and have found that this principle does not risk to be breached.
Amendment 224 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) In cases where the principle of non- refoulement is not at stakejudicial authorities have fully assessed the principle of non- refoulement and have found that this principle does not risk to be breached, appeals against a return decision should not have an automatic suspensive effect. The judicial authorities should be able to temporarily suspend the enforcement of a return decision in individual cases for other reasons, either upon request of the third- country national concerned or acting ex officio, where deemed necessary. Such decisions should, as a rule, be taken within 48 hours. Where justified by the complexity of the case, judicial authorities should take such decision without undue delay.
Amendment 232 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) To improve the effectiveness of return procedures and avoid unnecessary delays, without negatively affecting the rights of the third-country nationals concerned, the enforcement of the return decision should not be automatically suspended in cases where the full assessment of the risk to breach the principle of non- refoulement under European and international law already took place and judicial remedy was effectively exercised as part of the asylum procedure carried out prior to the issuing of the related return decision against which the appeal is lodged, unless the situation of the third-country national concerned would have significantly changed since.
Amendment 245 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 25
Recital 25
Amendment 257 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Detention shouldmay be imposed, following an individual assessment of each case, where there is a risk of absconding, where the third-country national avoids or hampers the preparation of return or the removal process, or when the third country national concerned poses a risk to public policy, public security or national security.
Amendment 265 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) Given that maximum detention periods in some Member States are not sufficient to ensure the implementation of return, a maximum period of detention between three and six months, which may be prolonged,A maximum period of detention of three months should be established in order to provide for sufficient time to complete the return procedures successfully, without prejudice to the established safeguards ensuring that detention is only applied when necessary and proportionate and for as long as removal arrangements are in progress. This period may not be prolonged, except for twice for a period of up to three months each, each after judicial review, and only in cases where, regardless of all the reasonable efforts by the Member State authorities, the removal operation is likely to last longer owing to a lack of cooperation by the third-country national concerned.
Amendment 285 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Recital 32
Amendment 290 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Recital 33
Amendment 296 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
Amendment 306 #
Amendment 311 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
Recital 36
Amendment 322 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) The Union provides financial and operational support in order to achieve an effective implementation of this Directive. Member States should make best use of the available Union financial instruments, programmes and projects in the field of return, in particular under Regulation (EU) …/… [Regulation establishing the Asylum and Migration Fund], as well as of the operational assistance by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency according to Regulation (EU) …/… [EBCG Regulation]. Such support should be used in particular for establishing return management systems and programmes for providing logistical, financial and other material or in-kind assistance to support the return – and where relevant the reintegration – of illegaland post- return monitoring of irregularly staying third- country nationals.
Amendment 337 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) Member States' return authorities need to process personal data to ensure the proper implementation of return procedures and the successful enforcement of return decisions. The third countries of return are often not the subject of adequacy decisions adopted by the Commission under Article 45 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council18 , or under Article 36 of Directive (EU) 2016/68019 , and have often not concluded or do not intend to conclude a readmission agreement with the Union or otherwise provide for appropriate safeguards within the meaning of Article 46 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 or within the meaning of the national provisions transposing Article 37 of Directive (EU) 2016/680. Despite the extensive efforts of the Union inThe Union should thus cooperatinge with the main countries of origin of illegalrregularly staying third-country nationals subject to an obligation to return, it is not always possible to ensure such third countries systematically fulfil the obligation established by international law to readmit their own nationals. Readmission agreements, should therefore be concluded or beingand negotiated by the Union or the Member States and, providing for appropriate safeguards for the transfer of data to third countries pursuant to Article 46 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 or pursuant to the national provisions transposing Article 36 of Directive (EU) 2016/680, cover a limited number of such third countries. In the situation where such agreements do not exist, personal data should be transferred by Member States' competent authorities for the purposes of implementing the return operations of the Union, in line with the conditions laid down in Article 49(1)(d) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 or in the national provisions transposing Article 38 of Directive (EU) 2016/680. _________________ 18Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119 4.5.2016, p. 1). 19 Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA (OJ L 119 4.5.2016, p. 89).
Amendment 365 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7
7. ‘risk of absconding’ means the proven existence of specific reasons in an individual case which are based on objective criteriaand specific criteria strictly defined by law to believe that a third- country national who is the subject of return procedures may abscond;
Amendment 372 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9
9. ‘vulnerable persons’ means minors, unaccompanied minors, disabled people, elderly people, pregnant women, single parents with minor children, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex persons, persons belonging to religious minorities, non-believers, and persons who have been subjected to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual and gender based violence.
Amendment 378 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point a
(a) ensure that their treatment and level of protection are no less favourable than as set out in Article 10(4) and (5) (limitations on use of coercive measures), Article 11(2)(a) (postponement of removal), Article 172 (return and removal of children), Article 15 (form), Article 16 (remedies), Article 17 (safeguards pending return)14(1)(b) and (d) (emergency health care and taking into account needs of vulnerable persons), Article 18 (detention) and Articles 19 and 20 (detention conditions) and
Amendment 381 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) respect the principle of non- refoulement., best interest of the child, family life and state of health (Article 5)
Amendment 383 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the best interests of the child as the primary consideration in all decisions concerning minors;
Amendment 388 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph -1 (new)
Article 6 – paragraph -1 (new)
-1. The existence of a risk of absconding shall be determined on the basis of an overall assessment of the specific circumstances and the future behaviour that can be reasonably expected in the individual case, taking into account the following objective criteria
Amendment 393 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The objective criteria referred to in point 7 of Article 3 shall include at leastmay only include the following criteria:
Amendment 397 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 398 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 402 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 404 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 417 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) existence of conviction for a criminal offence, including for a serious criminal offence in another Member State;
Amendment 419 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point l
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point l
Amendment 422 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point m
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point m
(m) using false or forged identity documents, destroying or otherwise disposing of existing documents, or refusing to provide fingerprints as required by Union or national law;
Amendment 432 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 439 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – title
Article 7 – title
Amendment 446 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall impose on third-country nationals the obligation to cooperate withtake measures that facilitate that the competent authorities ofand the Member States at all stages of the return procedures. That obligation shall include the following in particular:third country national to mutually cooperate and provide information.
Amendment 447 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 454 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 457 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 463 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 474 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. The elements referred to in point (a) of paragraph 1 shall include the third- country nationals’ statements and documentation in their possession regarding the identity, nationality or nationalities, age, country or countries and place or places of previous residence, travel routes and travel documentation. (1) The third country national shall, to the best of his/her knowledge and capabilities, inform the competent authorities on the elements necessary to establish or verify his/her identity, including, where available, documentation regarding nationality or nationalities, age, country or countries and place or places of previous residence, travel routes and travel documentation. The third country national shall also remain present and available throughout the procedure and shall, to the extent possible and where not jeopardising his or her rights or safety, cooperate with lodging a request for obtaining a valid travel document with the competent authorities of third countries.
Amendment 478 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall inform the third-country nationals aboutin writing in a concise, transparent, intelligible and easily accessible form, using clear and plain language on the basis of a standard template which shall be developed by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, and in a language that the applicant understands. Where necessary, this information shall, in addition, be supplied orally and in a visual form through videos or pictograms, and shall take into account the individual circumstances, especially for vulnerable persons. This information shall include, at least, a clear overview of the return procedure, the rights and obligations during the procedure, the consequences of not complying with thean obligation referred to in paragraph 1. to return following a return decision, and the contacts of non-governmental and international organisations that can provide advice, and the options for sustainable returns, such as support and reintegration measures.
Amendment 507 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall issue a return decision immediately after the adoption of a decision ending a legal stay of a third- country national, including a decision not granting a third-country national refugee status or subsidiary protection status in accordance with Regulation (EU) …/… [Qualification Regulation], only where the full scope of the principle of non- refoulement under European and international law is individually assessed in the asylum procedure.
Amendment 512 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
This Directive shall not prevent Member States from adopting a return decision together with a decision ending a legal stay of a third-country national, a decision on a removal and/or entry ban in a single administrative or judicial decision or act as provided for in their national legislation, without prejudice to the procedural safeguards available under Chapter III and under other relevant provisions of Union and national law.
Amendment 514 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3
Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 521 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
A return decision shall provide for an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to thirty days, without prejudice to the exception referred to in paragraphs 2 and 4. Member States may provide in their national legislation that such a period shall be granted only followingAs a general rule, Member States shall grant such a period, without an application byfrom the third- country national concerned. In such a case,being required. Member States shall inform the third-country nationals concerned of the possibility of submitting such an applicationof this period for voluntary departure.
Amendment 526 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 533 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Member States shall not grant aIn exceptional cases, a shorter period for voluntary departure inof no less than 15 days could also be granted, after an individual assessment of the prospect of return. A period of less than 15 days can only be granted if an individual assessment has found that the following cases are applicable:
Amendment 537 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) where an application for legal stay has been dismissed as manifestly unfounded or fraudulent;
Amendment 573 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. Before deciding to issue a return decision in respect of an unaccompanied minor, assistance by appropriate bodies other than the authorities enforcing return shall be granted with due consideration being given to the best interests of the chiland the best interests of the child shall be the primary consideration and the guardian or legal representative who is appointed to assist the unaccompanied minor shall be consulted.
Amendment 587 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Amendment 603 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall set up, operate, maintain and further develop a national return management system, which shall process all the necessary information for implementing this Directive, in particular as regards the management of individual cases as well as of any return- related procedure, including post-return monitoring and support to ensure sustainable returns.
Amendment 609 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. The national system shall be set up in a way which ensures technical compatibility allowing for communication with the central system established in accordance with Article 50 of Regulation (EU) …/… [EBCG Regulation]. and in full compliance with all relevant EU data protection law, in particular the GDPR and the Law Enforcement Directive. The Commission shall adopt a delegated act to establish the specific legal framework for this central system and the communication with this system, including clearly identifying the purposes of the processing via this centralised system and of the categories of personal data to be processed for each of these purposes.
Amendment 614 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Such assistance mayshall include support for reintegration in the third country of return which follow up on personal reintegration plans of returnees where legally and practically possible, to ensure sustainable returns, especially taking into account the specific circumstances of each third country national, and giving full attention to the cases of vulnerable persons. Member States shall ensure a follow up of these plans by dedicated and independent monitoring bodies.
Amendment 621 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
The granting of such assistance, including its kind and extent, shallmay be subject to the cooperation of the third-country national concerned with the competent authorities of the Member States as provided for in Article 7 of this Directive, where the non- cooperation of the third country national gives substantial reason to assume that the third country national will not cooperate with the reintegration support in the future.
Amendment 634 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The third-country national concerned shall be afforded an effective remedy to appeal against or seek review of decisions related to return, as referred to in Article 15(1), before a competent judicial authority. Member states shall allocate to judicial authorities the capacity required for the proper implementation of this directive, including human resources and training, so as to guarantee the quality and expediency of judicial review
Amendment 637 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The third-country national concerned shallcan be granted the right to appeal only before a single level of jurisdiction against the return decision where that decision is based on a decision rejecting an application for international protection taken in accordance with Regulation EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation] that was subject to an effective judicial review in accordance with Article 53 of that Regulation, only where the full scope of the principle of non-refoulement under European and international law is individually assessed in the asylum procedure.
Amendment 643 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The enforcement of the return decision shall be automatically suspended during the period for bringing thean appeal at first instance and, where that appeal has been lodged within the set period, during the examination of the appeal, where there is a risk to breachgainst that decision during the examination of the appeal and until the decision on appeal has been notified to the third country national. An appeal against a return decision shall have an automatic suspensive effect except in cases where judicial authorities have assessed the full scope of the principle of non- refoulement. Should a further appeal against a first or subsequent appeal decision be lodged, and in all other cases, t under European and international law and have found that this principle does not risk to be breached. The enforcement of the return decision shall notcan also be suspended unlesswhen a court or tribunal decides otherwiseto do so, taking into due account the specific circumstances of the individual case upon the applicant’s request or acting ex officio.
Amendment 650 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 – introductory part
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 – introductory part
Where no relevant new elements or findings have arisen or have been presented by the third-country national concerned which significantly modify the specific circumstances of the individual case, the first and the second subparagraphs of this paragraph shall not apply where:
Amendment 656 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Member States shall grant a period not exceeding fivebetween ten and fifteen days to lodge an appeal against a return decision when such a decision is the consequence of a final decision rejecting an application for international protection taken in accordance with Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation].
Amendment 672 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Unless other sufficient but less coercive measures can be applied effectively in a specific case, Member States may only keep in detention a third-country national who is the subject of return procedures in order to prepare the return and/or carry out the removal process, in particular when:
Amendment 677 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Amendment 696 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 5
Article 18 – paragraph 5
5. Detention shall be maintained for as long a period as the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 are fulfilled and it is necessary to ensure successful removal. Each Member State shall set a maximumlimited period of detention of not less than three months and not more than sixwhich may not exceed three months.
Amendment 699 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
Article 18 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. Member States may not extend the period referred to in paragraph 5 except for two consecutive times of each a limited period not exceeding each a further twelve3 months in accordance with national law, and always after judicial review, in cases where regardless of all their reasonable efforts the removal operation is likely to last longer owing to:
Amendment 701 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 6 – point b
Article 18 – paragraph 6 – point b
Amendment 715 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Unaccompanied minors and families with minors shall onlynot be detained as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of timend will be provided with adequate, humane and non-custodial alternatives to detention when in the best interest of the child and where necessary to guarantee their protection.
Amendment 721 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
2. Families detained pending removal shall be provided with separate accommodation guaranteeing adequate privacyMember States shall therefore establish appropriate care arrangements and accommodate minors and families with minor children. Appropriate care arrangements and reception measures for minor children and their families shall be community based, the least intrusive possible and respect the right to privacy and family life. These care arrangements should provide for personnel and facilities which take into account the needs of persons their age. Minors shall have the possibility to engage in leisure activities, including play and recreational activities appropriate to their age, and shall have, depending on the length of their stay, access to education. Unaccompanied minors shall as far as possible be provided with accommodation in institutions provided with personnel and facilities which take into account the needs of persons of their age.
Amendment 726 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 3
Article 20 – paragraph 3
Amendment 728 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Amendment 735 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 5
Article 20 – paragraph 5
5. The best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration in the context of thealternatives to detention ofor minors pending removal.
Amendment 738 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. In situations where an exceptionally large number of third-country nationals to be returned places an unforeseen heavy burden on the capacity of the detention facilities of a Member State or on its administrative or judicial staff, such a Member State may, as long as the exceptional situation persistfor a period of maximum three months, decide to allow for periods for judicial review longer than those provided for under the third subparagraph of Article 18(2) and to take urgent measures in respect of the conditions of detention derogating from those set out in Articles 19(1) and 20(2). The Member States shall, within three months, and under coordination by the Commission and EU Agencies, take all necessary measures to ensure adequate capacity.
Amendment 740 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 22
Article 22
Amendment 752 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall report every three years to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Directive in the Member States and, if appropriate, propose amendments. Such report shall be accompanied by a full Commission impact assessment of the transposition and implementation of this Directive by each Member States.