805 Amendments of Jussi HALLA-AHO
Amendment 3 #
2018/2271(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas despite numerous announcements and requests for safe and legal pathways offering access to European territory for persons seeking international protection there is currently no harmonisation at Union level of protected entry procedures (PEPs) and no legal framework at Union level for humanitarian visas, i.e. visas issued for the purpose of reaching the territory of the Member States in order to seekhumanitarian visas are one of the existing tools that sovereign Member States may decide to use in order to ensure that people in need can legally access international protection; in Europe.
Amendment 5 #
2018/2271(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the number of persons admitted on the basis of national entry procedures for humanitarian protection or through resettlement remain low in comparison to the global needs, with significant disparities between Member States; whereas the scope of national entry procedures for humanitarian protection and resettlement is narrowly defined and, in case of resettlement, it is strictly connected to the criteria of vulnerability and registrationseveral Member States currently have or have previously had national schemes for issuing humanitarian visas to guarantee national protected entry of people in need; whereas the scope of resettlement only includes persons who have already been recognised as a refugee with Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugeess and who fulfil further vulnerability or geographical criteria;
Amendment 6 #
2018/2271(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas - as a result - an estimated 90% of those granted international protection have reached the Union through irregular means, which laccording the UN Migration Agency (IOM), 58,158 migrants and refugees entered Europe by sea through 1 August 2018; whereads to them being stigmatised befohat total compares they even arrive at the external borders of the Member Stateso 113,283 at this time last year, and over 261,228 at this time in 2016;
Amendment 12 #
2018/2271(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas intensive work was undertaken, including with the help of experts, to draw up the recommendations which are annexed to this motion, the result is a proposal which encourages the smugglers' business model, with a fast- track route to the EU territory provided at the expense of EU taxpayers;
Amendment 141 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(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, provided that the return procedure is suspended until that rejection becomes final and pending the outcome of an appeal against that rejection, including in the border procedure.
Amendment 160 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) To reinforce the effectiveness of the return procedure, clear responsibilities for third-country nationals should be established, and in particular the obligation to cooperate with the authorities at all stages of the return procedure, including by providing the information and elements that are necessary in order to assess their individual situation. At the same time, it is necessary to ensure that third-country nationals are informed of the consequences of not complying with those obligations, in relation to the determination of the risk of absconding, the granting of a period for voluntary departure and the possibility to impose detention and an entry ban, and to the access to programmes providing logistical, financial and other material or in-kind assistance. The length of the entry ban should normally be no less than five years.
Amendment 168 #
2018/0329(COD)
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 thirtyen 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 that third- country nationals pose a risk of absconding, have 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. AIn exceptional cases where the prospect of voluntary return is high, 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 180 #
2018/0329(COD)
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 five days should be granted to appeal against a return decision. This provision should only apply once following a decision rejecting an application for international protection which became final, including after a possible judicial review, against which there has been an opportunity to appeal.
Amendment 186 #
2018/0329(COD)
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 should take place before a single level of jurisdiction only, since the third-county national concerned would have already had the opportunity to have his or her individual situation examined and decided upon by a judicial authority in the context of the asylum procedure.
Amendment 191 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) An appeal against a return decision should have an automatic suspensive effect only in cases where there is a risk of breach of the principle of non-refoulement. The return decision is enforceable once the period for lodging an appeal has lapsed and in case of an appeal, after the assessment of the risk to breach the principle of non- refoulement is done and where it is found that there is no such a risk.
Amendment 195 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
Amendment 204 #
2018/0329(COD)
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 assessment of the risk to breach the principle of non- refoulement 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 222 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Detention should always 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. During the detention all the assets of the person concerned should be frozen. For the sake of national finances, the persons detained should be required to pay back, whenever possible, and to contribute to their upkeep by having daily household duties at the detention facilities.
Amendment 233 #
2018/0329(COD)
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, an initial maximum period of detention between three and six months, which may be prolonged, 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.
Amendment 236 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) This Directive should not preclude Member States fromshould laying down effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties and criminal penalties, including imprisonment, in relation to the infringements of migration rules, with the aim of, among other things, persuading third-country nationals to return and third countries to comply with their duty to take back their citizens, provided that such penalties are compatible with the objectives of this Directive, do not compromise the application of this Directive and are in full respect of fundamental rights.
Amendment 256 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) For a rapid treatment of the case, a maximum time limit is to be granted to appeal once against a return decision following a decision rejecting an application for international protection adopted under the border procedure and which became finagainst which there has been an opportunity to appeal.
Amendment 262 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) An appeal against a return decision taken in the context of the border procedure should have an automatic suspensive effect in cases where there is a risk of breach of the principle of non- refoulement, there has been a significant change in the situation of the third- country national concerned since the adoption under the asylum border procedure of the decision rejecting his or her application for international protection, or if no judicial remedy was effectively exercised against the decision rejecting his or her application for international protection adopted under the asylum border procedurebe examined within a week from the appeal and should only have suspensive effect in cases where there is a risk of breach of the principle of non- refoulement.
Amendment 266 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) It is necessary and proportionate to ensure that a third country national who was already detained during the examination of his or her application for international protection as part of the asylum border procedure mayshould be kept in detention in order to prepare the return and/or carry out the removal process, once his or her application has been rejected. T to avoid that a third country national is automatically released from detention and allowed entry into the territory of the Member State despite having been denied a right to stay, a limited period of time is needed in order to try to enforce the return decision issued at the border. The third-country national concerned may be detained in the context of the border procedure for a maximum period of four months and as long as removal arrangements are in progress and executed with due diligence. That period of detention should be without prejudice to other periods of detention established by this Directive. Where it has not been possible to enforce return by the end of the former period, further detention of the third-country national may be ordered under another provision of this Directive and for the duration provided for therein.
Amendment 282 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) The purpose of an effective implementation of the return of third- country nationals who do not fulfil or no longer fulfil the conditions for entry, stay or residence in the Member States, in accordance with this Directive, is an essential component of the comprehensive efforts to tackle irregular migration and represents an important reason of substantial public interest. A systematic exploration of possibilities for cooperation with third countries as recipients of returnees is therefore necessary. Even a temporary willingness of a third country, be it the country of origin or other third country, to accept returnees from the Union should be the Member States´ priority as a means to achieving the objective of improved return rates.
Amendment 355 #
2018/0329(COD)
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, or having provided false verbal information;
Amendment 369 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
However, Member States shall establish that a risk of absconding is presumed in an individual case, unless proven otherwise, when one of the objective criteria referred to in points (f), (g), (h), (j), (m), (n), (o) and (p) of paragraph 1 is fulfilled.
Amendment 394 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the duty to lodge to the competent authorities of third countries a request for obtaining a valid travel document and a written request to be admitted to the country of return.
Amendment 420 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 5
Article 8 – paragraph 5
5. If a third-country national staying illegally on the territory of a Member State is the subject of a pending procedure for renewing his or her residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay, that Member State shall consider refraining from issuing a return decision, until the pending procedure is finished, without prejudice to paragraph 6.
Amendment 424 #
2018/0329(COD)
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 or together with 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]. A decision ending a legal stay of a third-country national and/or a return decision and/or a decision on a removal and/or entry ban may be adopted in a single administrative or judicial decision or act.
Amendment 437 #
2018/0329(COD)
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 thirtyen 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 following an application by the third-country national concerned. In such a case, Member States shall inform the third-country nationals concerned of the possibility of submitting such an application.
Amendment 466 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The fact that a period for voluntary departure has not been granted shall not preclude voluntary return of the person concerned.
Amendment 498 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to paragraph 3, Member States shall impose an entry ban of a nationally authorised maximum length in cases referred to in paragraph 1 or if a risk referred to in Article 9(4) has arisen during the period for voluntary departure or an obligation to cooperate referred to in Article 7 has not been complied with or the person represents a threat to public policy, public security or national security. Member States may impose an entry ban, which does not accompany a return decision, to a third- country national who has been illegally staying in the territory of the Member States and whose illegal stay is detected in connection with border checks carried out at exit in accordance with Article 8 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, where justified on the basis of the specific circumstances of the individual case and taking into account the principle of proportionality.
Amendment 520 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 528 #
2018/0329(COD)
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, shall be subject to the compliance with the obligation to return within the period for voluntary departure, if granted, the gravity of the reasons for not granting a period for voluntary departure and 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.
Amendment 544 #
2018/0329(COD)
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 authoritor administrative authority or a competent impartial body.
Amendment 549 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The third-country national concerned shall only be granted the right to appeal 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.
Amendment 551 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. The judicial authority or body mentioned in paragraph 1 shall have the power to review decisions related to return, as referred to in Article 15(1), including the possibility of temporarily suspending their enforcement due to the risk of a breach of the principle of non- refoulement.
Amendment 556 #
2018/0329(COD)
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 the appeal at first instance and, where that appeal has been lodged within the set period, during the examination of twhe appeal, wthere there is a risk to breach the principle of non- refoulement and when such a risk exists, pending the outcome of the appeal. Should a further appeal against a first or subsequent appeal decision be lodged, and in all other cases, the enforcement of the return decision shall not be suspended unless a court or tribunal decides otherwise taking into due account the specific circumstances of the individual case upon the applicant’s request or acting ex officio.
Amendment 560 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 565 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 568 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall establish reasonable time limits and other necessary rules to ensure the exercise of the right to an effective remedy pursuant to this Article. Member States shall allow third country nationals to rely on changes in circumstances occurred after the adoption of the return decision which may have a significant bearing on the assessment of their situation only once.
Amendment 573 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Member States shall grant a period not exceeding five 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]. The authority or body mentioned in paragraph 1 shall examine the appeal within two weeks from when the appeal is lodged.
Amendment 589 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) the third-country national concerned poses a risk to public policy, public security or national security in which case the person concerned shall, without exception, be detained until his or her removal.
Amendment 591 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
All grounds for detention shall be laid down in national law. Detention shall be obligatory at least when one of the conditions in points (a), (b) or (c) of this paragraph applies. The third-country national concerned shall be detained immediately after the issuance of the return decision as a precautionary measure in preparation for the return.
Amendment 595 #
2018/0329(COD)
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 maximum initial period of detention of not less than three12 months and not more than six months24 months, without prejudice to paragraph 1 point c of this Article.
Amendment 641 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 5
Article 22 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall grant a period not exceeding 48 hours to lodge an appeal once against the return decisions based on a final decision rejecting an application for international protection taken by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation] at the border or in transit zones of the Member States against which there has been an opportunity to appeal.
Amendment 642 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 22 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The enforcement of a return decision during the period for bringing the appeal at first instance and, where that appeal has been lodged within the period established, during the examination of the appeal, shall be automatically suspendedwhether there is a risk of breach of the principle of non- refoulement shall be suspended. The appeal shall be examined within a week from when it was lodged and shall only have suspensive effect in cases where there is a risk of breach of the principle of non- refoulement and one of the following two conditions applies :.
Amendment 643 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 22 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Amendment 644 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 22 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Amendment 645 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Where a further appeal against a first or subsequent appeal decision is lodged, and in all other cases, the enforcement of the return decision shall not be suspended unless a court or tribunal decides otherwise taking into account the specific circumstances of the individual case upon the applicant’s request or acting ex officio.
Amendment 646 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3
Article 22 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 647 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1
In order to prepare the return or carry out the removal process, or both, Member States mayshall keep in detention a third- country national who has been detained in accordance with point (d) of Article 8(3) of Directive (EU) …/… [recast Reception Condition Directive] in the context of a procedure carried out by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation], and who is subject to return procedures pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter.
Amendment 648 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 650 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 3
Article 22 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 4 #
2017/2270(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)
Citation 4 a (new)
– having regard to Article 5 TEU, and Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality
Amendment 8 #
2017/2270(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas despite numerous announcements and requests for safe legal pathways for persons seeking international protection there is currently no legal framework at European level for humanitarian visas, i.e. visas issued for the purpose of reaching the territory of the Member States in order to seekhumanitarian visas are one of the existing tools that sovereign Member States may decide to use in order to ensure that people in need can legally access international protection; in Europe.
Amendment 12 #
2017/2270(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas according to recent case law 'Member States are not required, under EU law, to grant a humanitarian visa to persons who wish to enter their territory with a view to applying for asylum, but they remain free to do so on the basis of their national law' (Case C- 638/16 PPU X and X v État belge);
Amendment 17 #
2017/2270(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the number of persons admitted on the basis of national protected entry procedurseveral EU Member States currently have or have previously had national schemes for through resettlement remain low in comparison to the need; whereas the scope of these possibilities is equally narrow and in casissuing humanitarian visas to guarantee national protected entry of people in need; whereas the scope of resettlement only includes persons who have already been recognised as refugees and who fulfil further vulnerability or geographical criteria;
Amendment 21 #
2017/2270(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas - as a result - an estimated 90% of those granted international protection have reached the Union through irregular meansaccording the UN Migration Agency (IOM), 58,158 migrants and refugees entered Europe by sea through 1 August 2018. Whereas that total compares to 113,283 at this time last year, and over 261,228 at this time in 2016;
Amendment 24 #
2017/2270(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas less than half (47%) of those applying for international protection are granted it at first instance; and with poor return rates (36%) this equates to high rates of absconding from those refused;
Amendment 26 #
2017/2270(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas a Union legal framework is urgently needed as one means toin order to effectively address the intolerable death toll in the Mediterranean, and on the migration routes to the Union, to truly combat human smuggling, human trafficking, exposure to labour exploitation and violence on the black market, to manage the orderly arrival, reception and processing of asylum claims and to reduce Member States’ and Union costs for asylum, law enforcement, border control, surveillance and search and rescue activities as well as to avoid fragmentation through diverging national practices risking to undermine common policies and the Uniohe EU should act responsibly and to deter asylum seekers from arriving in its territory, risking their lives at sea. Such measures may include offshore processing, mandatory detention, and the use of turn bacquis;ks.
Amendment 31 #
2017/2270(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas Parliament has trifailed to include provisions in this vein in Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and the Council of 13 July 2009 establishing a Community Code on Visas (Visa Code)1 ; _________________ 1 OJ L 243, 15.9.2009, p. 1. OJ L 243, 15.9.2009, p. 1.
Amendment 33 #
2017/2270(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas both Council and the Commission have rejected these amendments, on the ground, among others, that such provisiona Union legal framework establishing Humanitarian Visas should not be included in the Visa Code, given its scope covering short-stay visas only;
Amendment 35 #
2017/2270(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
Amendment 38 #
2017/2270(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
Amendment 39 #
2017/2270(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas intensive work was undertaken, including with the help of experts, to draw up the recommendations which are annexed to this motion, the result is a proposal which encourages the smugglers' business model, with a fast- track route to the EU territory provided at the expense of EU taxpayers;
Amendment 42 #
2017/2270(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Requesjects that Commission submit, by 31 March 2019, on the basis of Articles 77(2)(b) and 78(2)(g) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, a proposal for a Regulation on establishing a European Humanitarian Visa, following the recommendations set out in the Annex to this resolution;a proposal for a Regulation on establishing a European Humanitarian Visa.
Amendment 50 #
2017/2270(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 53 #
Amendment 43 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 1
Citation 1
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular point (e) of Article 778(2) and Article 84 thereof,
Amendment 48 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) In an area where persons may move freely, the reintroduction of border control at internal borders should remain an exception. The reintroduction of internal border control should be decided only as a measure of last resort, for a limited period of time and to the extent that controls are necessary and proportionate to the identified serious threats to public policy or internal security. However, the Member States have complete sovereignty over who is allowed to enter their territory across intra-Schengen borders beside the persons having the right to move freely within the area without internal border controls.
Amendment 54 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The identified serious threats can be addressed by different measures, depending on their nature and scale. The Member States have at their disposal also police powers, as referred to in Article 23 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code)8 , which, subject to some conditions, can be used in the border areas. The Commission Recommendation on proportionate police checks and police cooperation in the Schengen area9 provides guidelines to the Member States to that end. However, the conditions such as requirement for non- discrimination severely limiting the efficiency of such measures, the internal border controls should be used when deemed less burdensome or more effective a means to addressing the threat. _________________ 8 OJ L 77, 23.3.2016, p.1. 9 C(2017) 3349 final of 12.05.2017.
Amendment 63 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) However, experience has shown that certain serious threats to public policy or internal security, such as cross-border terrorist threats or specific cases of secondary movements of irregular migrants within the Union that justified the reintroduction of border controls, may persist well beyond the above periods. It is therefore needed and justified to adjust the time limits applicable to the temporary reintroduction of border control to the current needs, while ensuring that this measure is not abused and remains an exception, to be used only as a last resort. To that end, the general deadline applicable under Article 25 of the Schengen Borders Code should be extended to onetwo years.
Amendment 66 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) To maintain the control over large number of persons arriving to the Member States´ intra-Schengen borders, migration flows and the related enduring risk of terrorism and other serious crime should be acknowledged as legitimate reasons for reintroducing internal border controls.
Amendment 69 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 b (new)
Recital 4 b (new)
(4b) Reintroduction of internal border controls should be deemed necessary and proportionate when the influx of persons into or irregular movements within the Union puts a strain on a Member State´s capacity to manage the numbers of arrivals.
Amendment 70 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 c (new)
Recital 4 c (new)
(4c) With the rise of the phenomenon of radicalisation and recruitment by terrorist organisations of Union citizens and of other persons having the right to move freely within the area without internal border controls, reinstating internal border controls should be deemed necessary and proportionate when used against risks related to the intra-Schengen movements of persons with terrorist associations.
Amendment 73 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) In order to guarantee that these internal border controls remain an exception, Member States should submit a risk assessment concerning the intended reintroduction of border control or prolongation thereof. The risk assessment should, in particular, assess for how long the identified threat is expected to persist and which sections of the internal borders are affected, demonstrate that the prolongation of border controls is a last resort measure and explain how border control would help in addressing the identified threat. In case of internal border control going beyond six months, the risk assessment shcould also demonstrate retrospectively the efficiency of the reintroduced border control in addressing the identified threat and explain in detail how each neighbouring Member State affected by such prolongation was consulted and involved in determining the least burdensome operational arrangements, where applicable, involved in operational arrangements. Sharing especially terrorist-related sensitive information should be subject to the Member State´s decision whether to classify parts of the information.
Amendment 77 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The quality of the risk assessment submitted by the Member StateEuropean Border and Coast Guard Agency and Europol as wiell be very important for the assessment of the necessity and proportionality of the intended reintroduction or prolongation of border control. The European Border and Coast Guard Agency and Europol should be involved in that assessmentas the Member States affected by the planned reintroduction of internal border controls should be consulted.
Amendment 81 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The power of the Commission to issue an opinion under Article 27(4) of the Schengen Borders Code should be modified to reflect the new obligations on the Member States related to the risk assessment, including the cooperation with Member States concerned. When border control at internal borders is carried out for morOther Member States issuing an opinion should be required to provide than six months, the Commission should be obliged to issue an opiniongible proof of the disadvantages, such as considerable economic loss incurred to them by internal border control. Also the consultation procedure as provided for in Article 27(5) of the Schengen Borders Code should be modified in order to reflect the role of the Agencies (European Border and Coast Guard Agency and Europol) and focus on the practical implementation of different aspects of cooperation between the Member States, including the coordination, where appropriate, of different measures on both sides of the border. The procedures provided for in Article 27 and 27a should stress the cooperation of the Member States in the fight against common cross-border threats by considering, where appropriate, the use of concurrent internal border controls in various Member States.
Amendment 88 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In order to make the revised rules better adapted to the challenges related to persistent serious threats to public policy or internal security, a specific possibility should be provided to prolong internal border controls beyond onetwo years. Such prolongation should accompany commensurate exceptional national measures also taken within the territory to address the threat, such as a state of emergency. In any case, such a possibility should not lead to the further prolongation of temporary internal border controls beyond twohree years.
Amendment 95 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) Third-country nationals, who do not satisfy the entry conditions laid down in Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 and who do not request asylum at the border of the Member State, irrespective of their intention to do so in another Member State, should be refused entry into the territory of the Member State.
Amendment 97 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The possibility to carry out temporary internal border controls in response to a specific threat to public policy or internal security which persists beyond atwo years should be subject to a specific procedure.
Amendment 102 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) To that end, the Commission should issue an opinion on the necessity and proportionality of such prolongation and, where appropriate, on the cooperation with the neighbouring Member States, including possible concurrent introduction of internal border controls in various Member States.
Amendment 103 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
Amendment 107 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The Council, taking account of the Commission's opinion, may recommend such extraordinary further prolongation and where appropriate determinapprove the conditions for cooperation between the Member States concerned, with a view to ensuring that it is an exceptional measure, in place only for as long as necessary and justified, and consistent with the measures also taken at the national level within the territory to address the same specific threat to public policy or internal security. The Council recommendation should not be a prerequisite for any further prolongation beyond the period of one year and hence be of the same nature as the one already provided for in Article 29.
Amendment 122 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25 – paragraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 2
2. Border control at internal borders shall only be reintroduced as a last resort, and in accordance with Articles 27, 27a, 28 and 29. The criteria referred to, respectively, in Articles 26 and 30 shall be taken into account in each case where a decision on reintroduction of border control at internal borders is considered pursuant, respectively, to Article 27, 27a, 28 or 29.
Amendment 127 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25 – paragraph 3
Article 25 – paragraph 3
3. If the serious threat to public policy or internal security in the Member State concerned persists beyond the period provided for in paragraph 1 of this Article, that Member State may prolong border control at its internal borders, taking account of the criteria referred to in Article 26 and in accordance with Article 27, on the same grounds as those referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and, taking into account any new elements, for renewable periods corresponding to the foreseeable duration of the serious threat and not exceeding sixnine months.
Amendment 133 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
The total period during which border control is reintroduced at internal borders, including any prolongation provided for under paragraph 3 of this Article, shall not exceed onetwo years.
Amendment 137 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
In the exceptional cases referred to in Article 27a, the total period may be further extended by a maximum length of twohree years in accordance with that Article.
Amendment 145 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The maximum periods of internal border controls referred to in this Article, Article 27a, Article 28 and Article 29 may cumulate.
Amendment 146 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. While internal border controls are in place, third-country nationals who do not satisfy the entry conditions laid down in Article 6 of this Regulation and who do not request asylum at the border of the Member State, irrespective of their intention to do so in another Member State, shall be refused entry into the territory of the Member State.
Amendment 153 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point i
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point i
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a a – subparagraph 1
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a a – subparagraph 1
a risk assessment assessing how long the identified threat is expected to persist and which sections of the internal borders are affected, demonstrating that the prolongation of border control is a last resort measure and explaining how border control would help address the identified threat. Where border control has already been reintroduced for more than six months, the risk assessment shallmay also explain how the previous reintroduction of border control has contributed to remedying the identified threat.
Amendment 156 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point i
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point i
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a a – subparagraph 2
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a a – subparagraph 2
The risk assessment shallmay also contain a detailed report of the coordination which took place between the Member State concerned and the Member State or Member States with which it shares internal borders at which border control has been performed.
Amendment 158 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point i
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point i
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a a – subparagraph 3
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a a – subparagraph 3
Amendment 164 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point iii
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point iii
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – last sentence
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – last sentence
Where necessary, the Commission may request additional information from the Member State(s) concerned, including on the cooperation with the Member States affected by the planned prolongation of border control at internal borders as well as additional information needed to assess whether this is a last resort measure.
Amendment 174 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point iv
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point iv
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 27 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Following notification by a Member State under paragraph 1 and with a view to consultation provided for in paragraph 5, the Commission or any other Member State may, after one year of internal border control and without prejudice to Article 72 TFEU, issue an opinion.
Amendment 175 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point iv
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point iv
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 177 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point iv
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point iv
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 27 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 179 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point iv
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point iv
Amendment 184 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point v
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point v
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 5
Article 27 – paragraph 5
The information referred to in paragraph 1 and any Commission or Member State opinion referred to in paragraph 4 shall be the subject of a consultation led by the Commission. Where appropriate, the consultation shall include joint meetings between the Member State planning to reintroduce border control at internal borders, the other Member States, especially those having presented tangible proof of being directly affected by such measures and the relevant Agencies. The proportionality of the intended measures, the identified threat to public policy or internal security as well as the ways of ensuring implementation of the mutual cooperation between the Member States shall be examined. The Member State planning to reintroduce or prolong border control at intern, including effective use of the bilateral readmission agreements or other arrangements between the Member States and, where appropriate, removing legal or operational barriers from cross-border cooperation and information exchanges shall borderse examined. The Member States taking part in the consultation shall take the utmost account of the results of such consultation when carrying out border controls. in accordance with their national law.
Amendment 185 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point v
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point v
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Ways to minimise the disadvantages to other Member States, including by making use of modern technologies for surveillance and detection facilitating the performance of border control shall also be subject to consultation.
Amendment 186 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 a – title
Article 27 a – title
Specific procedure where the serious threat to public policy or internal security exceeds one yearpersists
Amendment 190 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 a – paragraph 1
Article 27 a – paragraph 1
1. In exceptional cases, where the Member State is confronted with the same serious threat to public policy or internal security beyond the period referred to in Article 25(4) first sentence, and where commensurate exceptional national measures are also taken within the territory to address this threat, the border control as temporarily reintroduced to respond to that threat may be further prolonged in accordance with this Article.
Amendment 193 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 a – paragraph 2
Article 27 a – paragraph 2
2. At the latest six weeks before the expiry of the period referred to in Article 25(4) first sentence, the Member State shall notify the other Member States and the Commission that it seeks a further prolongation in accordance with the specific procedure laid down in this Article. The notification shall contain the information required in Article 27(1)(a) to (e). The risk assessment shall in particular focus on consultations and cooperation with other Member States, including, where appropriate, proposals for reintroduction of internal border controls in other Member States. Article 27 paragraphs 2 and 3 shall apply.
Amendment 196 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 a – paragraph 3
Article 27 a – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall issue an opinionBased on the notification by the Member State, the Commission shall issue an opinion, including, where appropriate, a recommendation for other Member States to reintroduce internal border controls to strengthen the common response to the threat.
Amendment 200 #
2017/0245(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 a – paragraph 4
Article 27 a – paragraph 4
4. The Council, taking due account of the opinion of the Commission, may recommend that the Member State decide to further prolong border control at internal borders for a period of up to sixtwelve months. That period may be prolonged, no more than threewo times, for a further period of up to sixtwelve months. In its recommendation, the Council shall at least indicate the information referred to in Article 27(1) (a) to (e). Where appropriate, it shall determinmay approve the conditions for cooperation between the Member States concerned. Before a Member State reintroduces border control at its internal borders under this paragraph, it shall notify the other Member States, the European Parliament and the Commission accordingly. In the event that the recommendation referred to in paragraph 3 is not implemented by a Member State, that Member State shall without delay inform the Commission in writing of its reasons.
Amendment 170 #
2016/0409(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) The fact that the legislative basis necessary for governing SIS consists of separate instruments does not affect the principle that SIS constitutes one single information system that should operate as such. There should also be a reliable common backup system of the Central SIS (an active-active solution) ensuring continuous availability of SIS data to end- users in the event of a failure, upgrades or maintenance of the central system. Certain provisions of these instruments should therefore be identical.
Amendment 186 #
2016/0409(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) This Regulation should set out the conditions for use of dactylographic data and facial images for identification purposes. The use of facial images for identification purposes in SIS should also help to ensure consistency in border control procedures where the identification and the verification of identity are required by the use of fingerprints and facial images. Searching with dactylographic data should be mandatory if there is any doubt concerning the identity of a person. Facial images for identification purposes should only be used in the context of regular border controls in self-service kiosks and electronic gates.
Amendment 195 #
2016/0409(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) FingerprintBiometric identifiers found at a crime scene should be allowed to be checked against the fingerprintsbiometric data stored in SIS if it can be established to a high degree of probability that they belong to the perpetrator of the serious crime or terrorist offence. Serious crime should be the offences listed in Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA47 and ‘terrorist offence’ should be offences under national law referred to in Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA48 Directive (EU) 2017/541. _________________ 47 Council Framework Decision (2002/584/JHA) of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States (OJ L 190, 18.07.2002, p. 1). 48Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism (OJ L 164, 22.6.2002, p. 3).
Amendment 201 #
2016/0409(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) It should be possible to add a DNA profile in cases where dactylographic data are not available, and which should only be accessible to authorised users. DNA profiles should facilitate the identification of missing persons in need of protection and particularly missing children, including by allowing the use of DNA profiles of parents or siblings to enable identification. DNA data should not contain reference to racial origin.
Amendment 204 #
2016/0409(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) SIS should contain alerts on missing persons to ensure their protection or to prevent threats to public security. Issuing an alert in SIS for children at risk of abduction (i.e. in order to prevent a future harm that has not yet taken place as in the case of children who are at risk of parental abduction) should be limited, therefore it is appropriate to provide for strict and appropriate safeguards. In cases of children, these alerts and the corresponding procedures should serve the best interests of the child having regard to Article 24 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child of 20 November 1989.
Amendment 265 #
2016/0409(COD)
(n) ‘terrorist offences’ means offences under national law referred to in Articles 1- 4 of Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA of 13 June 200272 . _________________ 72Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism (OJ L 164, 22.6.2002, p. 3)Titles II, III and IV of Directive (EU) 2017/541.
Amendment 312 #
2016/0409(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point j
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point j
(j) whether the person concerned is armed, violent, has escaped or is involved in an activity as referred to in Articles 1, 2 , 3Titles II, III and 4IV of Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA on combating terrorismDirective (EU) 2017/541;
Amendment 320 #
2016/0409(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. data referred to in paragraph 3 (a - d), (f -i), (q), (s - v) and (z) of any other identification document(s) carried by the person.
Amendment 321 #
2016/0409(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. Before issuing an alert and when extending the validity period of an alert, Member States shall determine whether the case is adequate, relevant and important enoughonditions exist to warrant the entry of an alert in SIS.
Amendment 324 #
2016/0409(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2
Article 21 – paragraph 2
2. Where a person or an object is sought by a Member State in relation to an offence that falls under Articles 1 to 4 of Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA on combating terrorismTitles II, III or IV of Directive (EU)2017/541, the Member State shall, in all circumstances, create the corresponding alert under either Article 34, 36 or 38 as appropriate.
Amendment 336 #
2016/0409(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) A DNA profile may only be added to alerts provided for in Article 32(2)(a) and (c) and only where photographs, facial images or dactylographic data suitable for identification are not available. The DNA profiles of persons who are direct ascendants, descendants or siblings of the alert subject may be added to the alert provided that those persons concerned gives explicit consent. The racial origin of the person shall not be included in the DNA profile.
Amendment 343 #
2016/0409(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. An alert on a person may not be entered without the data referred to in Article 20(3)(a), (g), (k), (m), (n), when such data is available as well as, where applicable, (p), except for in the situations referred to in Article 40.
Amendment 359 #
2016/0409(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) children at risk of abduction in accordance with paragraph 4, genital mutilation or other future harm, including all practices that contravene Article 3, 9, or 10 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Amendment 376 #
2016/0409(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 4
Article 32 – paragraph 4
4. An alert on a child referred to in paragraph 2(c)at risk of abduction shall be entered at the request of the competent judicial authority of the Member State that has jurisdiction in matters of parental responsibility in accordance with Council Regulation No 2201/200374 where a concrete and apparent risk exists that the child may be unlawfully and imminently removed from the Member State where that competent judicial authority is situated. In Member States which are party to the Hague Convention of 19 October 1996 on Jurisdiction, Applicable law, Recognition, Enforcement and Cooperation in Respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children and where Council Regulation No 2201/2003 does not apply, the provisions of the Hague Convention are applicable. _________________ 74 Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 (OJ L 338, 23.12.2003, p. 1).
Amendment 378 #
2016/0409(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 32 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. An alert on a child shall be entered where a concrete and apparent risk exists that the child may be removed from the Member State for the purpose of genital mutilation. The assessment whether a missing child is at risk of other future harm shall take into account archaic customs such as child marriages and the possibility that the child be taken to a conflict zone, e g. for the purpose of radicalisation.
Amendment 390 #
2016/0409(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 36 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The alert mayshall be issued for the purposes of prosecuting criminal offences, executing a criminal sentence and for the prevention of threats to public security:
Amendment 416 #
2016/0409(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1
Article 40 – paragraph 1
Dactylographic and other biometric data may be entered in SIS, not related to persons who are subject of the alerts. These dactylographic data shall be either complete or incomplete sets of fingerprints or palm printsta shall be discovered at the scenes of crimes under investigation, of serious crime and terrorist offence and where it can be established to a high degree of probability that they belong to the perpetrator of the offence. The dactylographic data in this category shall be stored as “unknown suspect or wanted person” provided that the competent authorities cannot establish the identity of the person by using any other national, European or international database. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt a delegated act establishing rules on the use of biometric data for the purpose of identifying unknown suspects or wanted persons.
Amendment 423 #
2016/0409(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1
Article 41 – paragraph 1
In the event of a hit or a potential match with the data stored pursuant to Article 40, the identity of the person shall be established in accordance with national law, together with verification that the dactylographbiometric data stored in SIS belong to the person. Member States shall communicate by using supplementary information in order to facilitate timely investigation of the case.
Amendment 440 #
2016/0409(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 4
Article 42 – paragraph 4
4. As soon as this becomes technically possible, and while ensuring a high degree of reliability of identification, photographs and facial images may be used to identify a person. Identification based on photographs or facial images shall only be used at regular border crossing points where self-service systems and automated border control systems are in use.
Amendment 485 #
2016/0409(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 4
Article 49 – paragraph 4
4. Nothing in tThis Aarticle shall be interpreted as affectingis without prejudice to the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/1624 concerning data protection and the liability for any unauthorised or incorrect processing of such data by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency.
Amendment 551 #
2016/0409(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 62 – paragraph 1
Article 62 – paragraph 1
Amendment 138 #
2016/0408(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) The fact that the legislative basis necessary for governing SIS consists of separate instruments does not affect the principle that SIS constitutes one single information system that should operate as such. There should also be a reliable common backup system of the Central SIS (an active-active solution) ensuring continuous availability of SIS data to end- users in the event of a failure, upgrades or maintenance of the central system. Certain provisions of these instruments should therefore be identical.
Amendment 156 #
2016/0408(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) This Regulation should set out the conditions for use of dactylographic data and facial images for identification purposes. The use of facial images for identification purposes in SIS should also help ensure consistency in border control procedures where identification and the verification of identity are required by the use of dactylographic data and facial images. Searching with dactylographic data should be mandatory if there is any doubt concerning the identity of a person. Facial images for identification purposes should only be used in the context of regular border controls in self-service kiosks and electronic gates.
Amendment 178 #
2016/0408(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) Data processed in SIS in application of this Regulation should not be transferred or made available to third countries or to international organisations unless when strictly necessary.
Amendment 221 #
2016/0408(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point p
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point p
(p) ‘terrorist offences’ means offences under national law referred to in Articles, 1-4 of Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA of 13 June 200269 . _________________ 69Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism (OJ L 164, 22.6.2002, p. 3)Titles II, III and Title IV of Directive (EU)2017/541.
Amendment 268 #
2016/0408(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – point j
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – point j
(j) whether the person concerned is armed, violent, has escaped or is involved in an activity as referred to in Articles 1, 2 , 3Titles II, III and 4IV of Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA on combating terrorismDirective (EU) 2017/541;
Amendment 278 #
2016/0408(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – point y a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – point y a (new)
(y a) data referred to in (a - d), (f - i), (s - v) and (y) of any other identification document(s) carried by the person.
Amendment 279 #
2016/0408(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. Before issuing an alert and when extending the validity period of an alert, Member States shall determine whether the case is adequate, relevant and important enoughonditions exist to warrant the entry of an alert in SIS.
Amendment 282 #
2016/0408(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2
Article 21 – paragraph 2
2. In the application of Article 24(2) Member States shall, in all circumstances, create such an alert in relation to third country nationals if the offence falls under Articles 1 – 4 of Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA on combating terrorism71 . _________________ 71Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism (OJ L 164, 22.6.2002, p. 3)Titles II, III or IV of Directive (EU)2017/541.
Amendment 288 #
2016/0408(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. An alert may not be entered without the data referred to in Article 20(2)(a), (g),(k),(m),(n) and (q), when such data is available. Where an alert is based upon a decision taken under Article 24 (2) the data referred to in Article 20(2)(r) shall also be entered.
Amendment 301 #
2016/0408(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) a third-country national who has been convicted in a Member State of an offence carrying a penalty involving the deprivation of liberty of at least one year;
Amendment 306 #
2016/0408(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) a third-country national in respect of whom there are serious grounds for believing that he has committed a serious crime or in respect of whom there are clear indications of an intention to commit such an offence in the territory of a Member State.
Amendment 308 #
2016/0408(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. a third-country national who is very likely to try to abuse the asylum system of the Member State in accordance with Article 36(1) or (2) of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX (Asylum Procedures Regulation).
Amendment 331 #
2016/0408(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 4
Article 28 – paragraph 4
4. As soon as this becomes technically possible, and while ensuring a high degree of reliability of identification, photographs and facial images may be used to identify a person. Identification based on photographs or facial images shall only be used in the context of regular border crossing points where self-service systems and automated border control systems are in use.
Amendment 384 #
2016/0408(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1
Article 37 – paragraph 1
1. Article 36(2) shall not prejudice the right of a Member State to keep in its national files SIS data in connection with which action has been taken on its territory. Such data shall be kept in national files for a maximum period of threfive years, except if specific provisions in national law provide for a longer retention period.
Amendment 406 #
2016/0408(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1
Article 45 – paragraph 1
Data processed in SIS and the related supplementary information pursuant to this Regulation shall not be transferred or made available to third countries or to international organisations unless when strictly necessary.
Amendment 422 #
2016/0408(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 49 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
In order to gain a consistent overview of the functioning of remedies the national supervisory authorities shall be invited to develop a standard statistical system for reporting annually on:
Amendment 41 #
2016/0407(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Member States should take all necessary measures to return illegally staying third-country nationals in an effective and proportionate manner, in accordance with the provisions of Directive 2008/115/EC.
Amendment 53 #
2016/0407(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) It is necessary to specify the categories of data that can be entered in SIS in respect of third-country nationals who are the subject of a return decision issued in accordance with provisions respecting Directive 2008/115/EC. Alerts on return should contain only those data that are required in order to identify the data subjects, to allow the competent authorities to take informed decisions without losing time and to ensure, where necessary, their protection in relation to persons who are armed, violent, have escaped or are involved in an activity as referred to in Articles 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA on combating terrorismTitles II, III or IV of Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council26 . Furthermore, in order to facilitate identification and detect multiple identities, the alert should include also a reference to the personal identification document or documents and a copy of such document or documents, if available. _________________ 26 Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism (OJ L 164, 22.6Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 2005/671/JHA (OJ L 88, 31.3.200217, p. 36).
Amendment 67 #
2016/0407(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) When a return decision is accompanied by an entry ban, even if the alert on return is not entered in SIS the activation of the alert on the entry ban should follow immediately after the return has taken place.
Amendment 75 #
2016/0407(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Data processed in SIS or transferred through the exchange of supplementary information may provide to the enforcing Member State information that is useful for the rapid identification and re- documentation of illegally staying third- country nationals, in view of their return to a third country. In individual casesTo facilitate the return, it should be possible to share such data and information with a third country for this purpose. Sharing of any personal data should be subject to clear conditions, should be carried out in accordance with the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and be conducted with the agreement of the Member State that issued the alert.
Amendment 109 #
2016/0407(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point j
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) whether the person concerned is armed, violent, has escaped or is involved in an activity as referred to in Articles 1, 2, 3Titles II, III and 4IV of Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA on combating terrorismDirective (EU) 2017/541;
Amendment 120 #
2016/0407(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point x a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point x a (new)
(xa) data referred to in points (a) to (d), (f) to (i), (p) to (s) and (v) of any other identification document(s) carried by the person.
Amendment 123 #
2016/0407(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
An alert may not be entered without the data referred to in (a),(g),(k),(m),(n) and (w), when such data is available. When available, all other data listed above shall also be entered.
Amendment 136 #
2016/0407(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Where a third-country national who is subject of an alert on return is identified by a competent authority and it has been ascertained by the same authority that the obligation to return has not been complied with, that authority shall immediately consult the issuing Member State through the exchange of supplementary information in order to determine without delay the action to be taken and the issuing Member State shall be obliged to communicate without delay the preferred course of action.
Amendment 155 #
2016/0407(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Alerts on return entered in respect of a person who has acquired citizenship of a Member State or of any State whose nationals are beneficiaries of the right of free movement within the Union shall be deleted as soon as the issuing Member State becomes aware, or is informed pursuant to Article 39 of Regulation (EU) 2018/xxx [border checks], that the person in question has acquired such citizenship. This is without prejudice to the right of a Member State to keep in its national files data contained in an alert issued in SIS by that Member State in respect of a person who has acquired residency or citizenship of another Member State after the consultation procedure referred to in Article 8.
Amendment 196 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) A common policy on asylum, including a Common European Asylum System which is based on the full and inclusive application of the Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, as amended by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967 (Geneva Convention), is a constituent part of the European Union’s objective of establishing progressively an area of freedom, security and justice open to those who, forced by circumstances, legitimately seek protection in the Union. Such a policy should be governed by the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, including its financial implications, between the Member Statesaffordability, taking into account the absorption capacities of the receiving societies as well as maximal self-reliance of the applicants for international protection.
Amendment 204 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) This Regulation should apply to all applications for international protection made in the territory of the Member States, including those made at the external border, on the territorial sea or in the transit zones of Member States, and the withdrawal of international protection. Persons seeking international protection who are present on the territorial sea of a Member State should be disembarked on land and have their applications examined in accordance with this Regulation.
Amendment 209 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) This Regulation should apply to applications for international protection in a procedure where it is examined whether the applicants qualify as beneficiaries of international protection in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX (Qualification Regulation). In addition to the international protection, the Member States may also grant under their national law other national humanitarian statuses to those who do not qualify for the refugee status or subsidiary protection status. In order to streamline the procedures in Member States, the Member States should have the possibility to apply this Regulation also to applications for any kind of such other protection.
Amendment 215 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
Amendment 222 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) The European Union Agency for Asylum should provide Member State with the necessary operational and technical assistance in the application of this Regulation, in particular by providing experts to assist national authorities to receive, and register, and examine applications for international protection and by providing updated information on third countries, including country of origin information and guidance on the situation in specific countries of origin. When applying this Regulation, Member States should take into account operational standards, indicators, guidelines and best practices developed by the European Union Agency for Asylum.
Amendment 225 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In the interests of a correct recognition of those persons in need of protection as refugees within the meaning of Article 1 of the Geneva Convention or as persons eligible for subsidiary protection, every applicant should have an effective access to the procedure, the opportunitybligation to cooperate and properly communicate with the responsible authorities so as to present theall relevant facts of his or her case and sufficient procedural guarantees to pursue his or her case throughout all stages of the procedure.
Amendment 229 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The applicant should be provided with an effective opportunity to present all relevant elements at his or her disposal to the determining authority. For this reason, the applicant should, subject to limited exceptions, enjoy the right to be heard through a personal interview on the admissibility or on merits of his or her application, as appropriate. For the right to a personal interview to be effective, the applicant should be assisted by an interpreter and be given the opportunity to provide his or explanations concerning the grounds for his or her application in a comprehensive manner. The applicant should be given sufficient time to prepare and consult with his or her legal adviser or counsellor, and he or she may be assisted by the legal adviser or counsellor during the interview. The personal interview should be conducted under conditions which ensure appropriate confidentiality and by adequately trained and competent personnel, including where necessary, personnel from authorities of other Member States or experts deployed by the European Union Agency for Asylum. The personal interview may only be omitted when the determining authority is to take a positive decision on the application or is of the opinion that the applicant is unfit or unable to be interviewed owing to enduring circumstance beyond his or her control or when the application is clearly inadmissible. Given that the personal interview is an essential part of the examination of the application, the interview should be recorded and the applicants and their legal advisers should be given access to the recording, as well as to the report or transcript of the interview before the determining authority takes a decision, or in the case of an accelerated examination procedure, at the same time as the decision is made.
Amendment 234 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) It is in the interests of both Member States and applicants to ensure a correct recognition of international protection needs already at the stage of the administrative procedure by providing good quality information and legal support which leads to more efficient and better quality decision- making. For that purpose, access to legal assistance and representation should be an integral part of the common procedure for international protection. In order to ensure the effective protection of the applicant's rights, particularly the right of defence and the principle of fairness, and to ensure the economy of the procedure, applicants should, upon their request and subject to conditions set out in this Regulation, be provided with free legal assistance and representation during the administrative procedure and in the appeal procedure. The free legal assistance and representation should be provided by persons competent to provide them under national law.
Amendment 238 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Certain applicants may be in need of special procedural guarantees due, inter alia, to their age, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, serious illness, mental disorders or as a consequence of torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical, sexual or gender-based violence. It is necessary to systematically assess whether an individual applicant is in need of special procedural guarantees and identify those applicants as early as possible from the moment an application is made and before a decision is taken. The indications that the applicant is in need of special procedural guarantees include, inter alia, signs of physical, mental or developmental disorders or disabilities as well as age-related vulnerabilities such as dementia.
Amendment 241 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) To ensure that the identification of applicants in need of special procedural guarantees takes place as early as possible, the personnel of the authorities responsible for receiving and registering applications should be adequately trained to detect signs of vulnerability signs and they should receive appropriate instructions for that purpose. Further measures dealing with identification and documentation of symptoms and signs of torture or other serious acts of physical or psychological violence, including acts of sexual violence, in procedures covered by this Regulation should, inter alia, be based on the Manual on Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Istanbul Protocol)receive appropriate instructions for that purpose.
Amendment 250 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) With a view to ensuring substantive equality between female and male applicants, examination procedures should be gender-sensitive. In particular, personal interviews should be organised in a way which makes it possible for both female and male applicants to speak about their past experiences in cases involving gender- based persecution. For this purpose, womenthe applicant should be given an effective opportunity to be interviewed separately from their spouse, partner or other family members. Where possible, women and girlsthe applicant should be provided with female interpreters and interviewers of the same sex. Medical examinations on women and girlthe applicants should be carried out by female medical practitioners of the same sex, in particular having regard to the fact that the applicant may have been a victim of gender-based violence. The complexity of gender-related claims should be properly taken into account in procedures based on the concept of first country of asylum, the concept of safe third country, the concept of safe country of origin and in the notion of subsequent applications.
Amendment 279 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) The applicant should be informed properly of his or her rights and obligations in a timely manner and in a language that he or she understands or is reasonably meant to understand. Having regard to the fact that where, for instance, the applicant refuses to cooperate with the national authorities by not providing all the elements necessary for the examination of the application and by not providing his or her fingerprints or facial image, or fails to lodge his or her application within the set time limit, the application cshould be rejected as abandoned, it is necessary that the applicant be informed of the consequences for not complying with those obligations.
Amendment 282 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) To be able to fulfil their obligations under this Regulation, the personnel of the authorities responsible for receiving and registering applications should have appropriate knowledge and should receive the necessary training in the field of international protection, including when necessary with the support of the European Union Agency for Asylum. They should also be given the appropriate means and instructions to effectively perform their tasks.
Amendment 295 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) To ensure that unaccompanied minors have effective access to the procedure, they should always be appointed a guardian. The guardian should be a person or a representative of an organisatinatural person appointed to assist and guide the minor through the procedure with a view to safeguard the best interests of the child as well his or her general well-being. Where necessary, the guardian should exercise legal capacity for the minor. In order to provide effective support to the unaccompanied minors, guardians should not be placed in charge of a disproportionate number of unaccompanied minors at the same time. Member States should appoint entities or persons responsible for the support, supervision and monitoring of the guardians in the performance of their tasks. An unaccompanied minor should lodge an application in his or her own name or through the guardian. In order to safeguard the rights and procedural guarantees of an unaccompanied minor, the time-limit for him or her to lodge an application should start to run from when his or her guardian is appointed and they meet. Where the guardian does not lodge the application within the set time limit, the unaccompanied minor should be given an opportunity to lodge the application on his or her name with the assistance of the determining authority. The fact that an unaccompanied minor chooses to lodge an application in his or her own name should not preclude him or her from being assigned a guardian.
Amendment 297 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) In order to guarantee the rights of the applicants, decisions on all applications for international protection should be taken on the basis of the facts, objectively, impartially and on an individual basis after a thorough examination which takes into account all the elements provided by the applicant and the individual circumstances of the applicant. To ensure a rigorous examination of an application, the determining authority should take into account relevant, accurate and up-to-date information relating to the situation in the country of origin of the applicant obtained from the European Union Agency for Asylum and other sources such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. The determining authority should also take into account any relevant common analysis of country of origin information developed by the European Union Agency for Asylum. Any postponement of concluding the procedure should fully comply with the obligations of the Member States under Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX (Qualification Regulation) and with the right to good administration, without prejudice to the efficiency and fairness of the procedure under this Regulation.
Amendment 302 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) It is necessary that decisions on applications for international protection are taken by authorities whose personnel has the appropriate knowledge and has received the necessary training in the field of international protection, and that they perform their activities with due respect for the applicable ethical principles. This should apply to the personnel of authorities from other Member States and experts deployed by the European Union Agency for Asylum deployed to assist the determining authority of a Member State in the examinregistration of applications for international protection.
Amendment 310 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) Before determining the Member State responsible in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX of the European Parliament and of the Council (Dublin Regulation),29 the first Member State in which an application has been lodged should examine the admissibility of that application when a country which is not a Member State is considered as a first country of asylum or safe third country for the applicant. In addition, an application should be considered to be inadmissible when it is a subsequent applicantion without new relevant elements or findings and when a separate application by a spouse, partner, dependent adult or minor is not considered to be justified. _________________ 29 OJ L […], […], p. […].
Amendment 313 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) The concept of first country of asylum should be applied as a ground for inadmissibility where it can reasonably be assumed that another country would grant protection in accordance with the substantive standards of the Geneva Convention or the applicant would be provided sufficient protection in that country. In particular, the Member States should not examine the merits of an application where a first country of asylum has granted the applicant refugee status or otherwise sufficient protection. Member States should proceed on that basis only where they are satisfied including, where necessary or appropriate, based on assurances obtained from the third country concerned, that the applicant has enjoyed and will continue to enjoy protection in that country in accordance with the Geneva Convention or has otherwise enjoyed and will continue to enjoy sufficient protection, particularly as regards the right of legal residence, appropriate access to the labour market, reception facilities, healthcare and education, and the right to family reunification in accordance with international human rights standards.
Amendment 318 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) The concept of safe third country should be applied as a ground for inadmissibility where the applicant, due to a connection to the third country including one through which he or she has transited, can reasonably be expected to seek protection in that country, and there are grounds for considering that the applicant will be admitted or readmitted to that country. Member States should proceed on that basis only where they are satisfied including, where necessary or appropriate, based on assurances obtained from the third country concerned, that the applicant will have the possibility to receive protection in accordance with the substantive standards of the Geneva Convention or will enjoy sufficient protection, particularly as regards the right of legal residence, appropriate access to the labour market, reception facilities, healthcare and education, and the right to family reunification in accordance with international human rights standards.
Amendment 329 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) The examination of an application should be accelerated and completed within a maximum of two months in those instances where an application is manifestly unfounded because it is an abusive claim, including where an applicant comes from a safe country of origin or an applicant is making an application merely to delay or frustrate the enforcement of a removal decision, or where there are serious national security or public concerns, where the applicant does not apply for international protection in the first Member State of entry or in the Member State of legal residence or where an applicant whose application is under examination and who made an application in another Member State or who is on the territory of another Member State without a residence document is taken back under the Dublin Regulation. In the latter case, the examination of the application should not be accelerated if the applicant is able to provide substantiated justifications for having left to another Member State without authorisation, for having made an application in another Member State or for having otherwise been unavailable to the competent authorities, such as for instance that he or she was not informed adequately and in a timely manner of his or her obligations. Furthermore, an accelerated examination procedure may be applied to unaccompanied minors only within the limited circumstances set out in this Regulation.
Amendment 335 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Many applications for international protection are made at the border or in a transit zone of a Member State prior to a decision on the entry of the applicant. Member States should be able to provide for an examination on admissibility or an examination on the merits which would make it possible for such applications to be decided upon at those locations in well- defined circumstances. The border procedure should not take longer than four weeks and after that period applicants should be allowed entry to the territory of the Member Stateeight weeks. It is only where a disproportionate number of applicants lodge their applications at the borders or in a transit zone, that the border procedure may be applied at locations in proximity to the border or transit zone. A border procedure may be applied to unaccompanied minors only within the limited circumstances set out in this Regulation.
Amendment 342 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) As long as an applicant can show good cause, the lack of documents on entry or the use of forged documentsdemonstrate a satisfactory explanation as to the lack of documents on entry should not per se entail an automatic recourse to an accelerated examination procedure or a border procedure.
Amendment 351 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) Where an applicant makes a subsequent application without presenting new evidence or findings which significantly increase his or her likelihood of qualifying as a beneficiary of international protection or which relate to the reasons for which the previous application was rejected as inadmissible, that subsequent application should not be subject to a new full examination procedure. In those cases, following a preliminary examination, applications should be dismissed as inadmissible or as manifestly unfounded where the application is so clearly without substance or abusive that it has no tangible prospect of success, in accordance with the res judicata principle. The preliminary examination shall be carried out on the basis of written submissions and a personal interview however the personal interview may be dispensed with in those instances where, from the written submissions, it is clear that the application does not give rise to relevant new elements or findings or that it is clearly without substance and has no tangible prospect of success. In case of subsequent applications, exceptions may be made to the individual's right to remain on the territory of a Member State after a subsequent application is rejected as inadmissible or unfounded, or in the case of a second or further subsequent applications, as soon as an application is made in any Member States following a final decision which had rejected a previous subsequent application as inadmissible, unfounded or manifestly unfounded.
Amendment 363 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) The fact that a third country is on the EU common list of safe countries of origin cannot establish an absolute guarantee of safety for nationals of that country and therefore does not dispense with the need to conduct an appropriate individual examination of the application for international protection. By its very nature, the assessment underlying the designation can only take into account the general, civil, legal and political circumstances in that country and whether actors of persecution, torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment are subject to sanction in practice when found liable in that country. For this reasonExceptionally, where an applicant shows that there are serious reasons to consider the country not to be safe in his or her particular circumstances, the designation of the country as safe canmay no longer be considered relevant for him or her.
Amendment 370 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) As regards the designation of safe third countries at Union level, this Regulation provides for having such a designation. Third countries should be designated as safe third countries at Union level by means of an amendment to this Regulation based on the conditions set out in this Regulation and after carrying out a detailed evidence-based assessment involving substantive research and broad consultation with Member States and relevant stakeholders.
Amendment 376 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) The establishment of an EU common list of safe countries of origin and an EU common list for safe third countries should address some of the existing divergences between Member States’ national lists of safe countries. While Member States should retain the right to apply or introduce legislation that allows for the national designation of third countries other than those designated as safe third countries at Union level or appearing on the EU common list as safe countries of origin, the establishment of such common designation or list should ensure that the concept is applied by all Member States in a uniform manner in relation to applicants whose countries of origin are on the common list or who have a connection with a safe third country. This should facilitate convergence in the application of procedures and thereby also deter secondary movements of applicants for international protection. For that reason, the possibility of using national lists or designations should come to an end within a period of five years from entry into force of this Regulation.
Amendment 380 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) The Commission, assisted by the European Union Agency for Asylum, should regularly review the situation in third countries designated as safe third countries at Union level or that are on the EU common list of safe countries of origin and monitor the situation in prospective new countries with the aim of designating them as safe third countries at Union level or adding them to the EU common list of safe countries of origin. In case of sudden change for the worse in the situation of such a third country, the Commission should be able to suspend the designation of that third country as safe third country at Union level or the presence of that third country from the EU common list of safe countries of origin for a limited period of time by means of a delegated act in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Moreover, in this case, the Commission should propose an amendment for the third country not to be designated as a safe third country at Union level any longer or to remove that third country from the EU common list of safe country of origin within 3 months of the adoption of delegated act suspending the third country.
Amendment 385 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
(50) For the purpose of this substantiated assessment, the Commission should take into consideration a range of sources of information at its disposal including in particular, its Annual Progress Reports for third countries designated as candidate countries by the European Council, regular reports from the European External Action Service and the information from Member States, the European Union Agency for Asylum, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the Council of Europe and other relevant international organisations. The Commission should be able to extend the suspension of the designation of a third country as a safe third country at Union level or the presence of a third country from the EU common list of safe country of origin for a period of sixthree months, with a possibility to renew that extension once. It is of particular importance that the Commission carries out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council.
Amendment 392 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) The Commission, with the assistance of the European Union Agency for Asylum, should regularly review the situation in third countries that have been removed from the EU common list of safe countries of origin or safe third countries and the prospective new such countries, including where a Member State notifies the Commission that it considers, based on a substantiated assessment, that, following changes in the situation of that third country, it fulfils again the conditions set out in this Regulation for being designated as safe. In such a case, Member States could only designate that third country as a safe country of origin or a safe third country at the national level as long as the Commission does not raise objections to that designation. Where the Commission considers that these conditions are fulfilled, it mayshould propose an amendment to the designation of safe third countries at Union level or to the EU common list of safe countries of origin so as to add the third country. In the case of a sudden change for the better in a prospective third country, the Commission could apply the procedure of a delegated act and propose a subsequent amendment to this Regulation in order to speed up the procedure.
Amendment 400 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54
Recital 54
(54) Based on a range of sources of information, including in particular reporting from the European External Action Service and information from Member States, and the European Union Agency for Asylum, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the Council of Europe and other relevant international organisations, a number of third countries are considered to qualify as safe countries of origin.
Amendment 427 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 63
Recital 63
(63) With respect to the withdrawal of refugee or subsidiary protection status, and in particular in view of the regular status review to be carried out on the basis of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX (Qualification Regulation), Member States should ensure that persons benefiting from international protection are duly informed of a possibleregular and mandatory reconsideration of their status and that they are given the opportunity to submit their point of view, within a reasonable time, by means of a written statement and in a personal interview, before the authorities can take a reasoned decision to withdraw their status.
Amendment 429 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 64
Recital 64
(64) Decisions taken on an application for international protection, including the decisions concerning the explicit or implicit withdrawal of an application, and the decisions on the withdrawal of refugee or subsidiary protection status should be subject to an effective remedy before a court or tribunal in compliance with all requirements and conditions laid down in Article 47 of the Charter. To ensure the effectiveness of the procedure, the applicant should lodge his or her appeal within a set time-limit. For the applicant to be able to meet those time-limits and with a view to ensuring effective access to judicial review, he or she should be able to be assisted by an interpreter as well as be entitled to free legal assistance and representation.
Amendment 434 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 65
Recital 65
(65) For an applicant to be able to exercise his or her right to an effective remedy, he or she should be allowed to remain on the territory of a Member State until the time-limit for lodging a first level of appeal expires, and when such a right is exercised within the set time-limit, pending the outcome of the remedy. It is only in limited cases set out in this Regulation that the suspensive effect of an appeal is not automatic and where the applicant would need to request the court or tribunal to stay the execution of a return decision or the court would act of its own motion to this effect. Where an exception is made to the right to a remedy with automatic suspensive effect.Nevertheless, the applicant's rights of defence should be adequately guaranteed by providing him or her with the necessary interpretation and legal assistance, as well as by allowing sufficient time for the applicant to prepare and submit his or her request to the court or tribunal. Furthermore, in this framework, the court or tribunal should be able to examine the decision refusing to grant international protection in terms of fact and law. The applicant should be allowed to remain on the territory pending the outcome of the procedure to rule on whether or not he or she may remain. However, that decision should be taken within one month.
Amendment 442 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 71
Recital 71
(71) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, in particular as regards the provision of information, and documents to the applicants and measures concerning applicants in need of special procedural guarantees including minors, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council34 of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by the Member States of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers. _________________ 34 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by the Member States of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).
Amendment 447 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 72
Recital 72
(72) In order to address sudden changes for the worse in a third country designated as a safe third country at Union level or included in the EU common list of safe countries of origin, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of suspending the designation of that third country as safe third country at Union level or the presence of that third country from the EU common list of safe countries of origin for a period of sixthree months where the Commission considers, on the basis of a substantiated assessment, that the conditions set by this Regulation are no longer met. The opposite, designating a country as a safe third country at Union level or adding a country into the EU common list of safe countries of origin, should also be made possible by delegating powers to the Commission. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Inter- institutional Agreement on Better Law- Making of 13 April 2016. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts.
Amendment 515 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point f
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point f
(f) 'guardian' means a person or an organisatinatural person appointed to assist and represent an unaccompanied minor with a view to safeguarding the best interests of the child and his or her general well-being in procedures provided for in this Regulation and exercising legal capacity for the minor where necessary;
Amendment 546 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. The determining authority of the Member State responsible may be assisted for the purpose of receiving, and registering and examining applications for international protection by:
Amendment 559 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. The authorities applying this Regulation shall safeguard the confidentiality of any information about any individual application they obtain in the course of their work.
Amendment 597 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 7
Article 7 – paragraph 7
7. Where it is necessary for the examination of an application, the applicant mayshall be required by the responsible authorities to be searched or have his or her items, including the contents of electronic devices such as smartphones, tablets and laptops, searched. Without prejudice to any search carried out for security reasons, a search of the applicant's person under this Regulation shall be carried out by a person of the same sex with full respect for the principles of human dignity and of physical and psychological integrity.
Amendment 637 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Article 8 – paragraph 4
4. The determining authority shallmay, when deemed feasible, provide applicants with the opportunity to communicate with United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees or with any other organiszation providing legal advice or other counsellingprofessional legal advice to applicants in accordance with national law.
Amendment 645 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 6
Article 8 – paragraph 6
6. The determining authority shall give applicants notice within a reasonable time of the decision taken on their application. Where a guardian, or legal adviser or other counsellor is legally representing the applicant, the determining authority may give notice of the decision to him or her instead of to the applicant.
Amendment 647 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Applicants shall have the rightbe allowed to remain in the Member State responsible, for the sole purpose of the procedure, until the determining authority has taken a decision in accordance with the administrative procedure provided for in Chapter III.
Amendment 657 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The responsible authorities of Member States mayshall revoke the applicant's right to remain on their territory during administrative procedure where:
Amendment 662 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
(b a) a person poses risk to the internal security or public order of the Member State.
Amendment 675 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. In the substantive interview, the applicant shall be given an adequate opportunity to present the elements needed to substantiate his or her application in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX (Qualification Regulation), and he or she shall provide all the elements at his or her disposal as completely as possible. The applicant shall be given the opportunity to provide an explanation regarding elements which may be missing or any inconsistencies or contradictions in the applicant’s statements.
Amendment 682 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. A person who conducts the substantive interview of an application shall not wear a military or law enforcement uniform.
Amendment 698 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
The absence of a personal interview pursuant to point (b) shall not adversely affect the decision of the determining authority. That authority shall give the applicant an effective opportunity to submit further information. When in doubt as to the condition of the applicant, the determining authority shallmay consult a medical professional to establish whether the condition that makes the applicant unfit or unable to be interviewed is of a temporary or enduring nature.
Amendment 700 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 6
Article 12 – paragraph 6
6. The person conducting the interview shall be competent to take account of the personal and general circumstances surrounding the application, including the applicant’s cultural origin, age, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity and vulnerability. Personnel interviewing applicants shall also have acquired general knowledge of problems which could adversely affect the applicant's ability to be interviewed, such as indications that the person may have been tortured in the past.
Amendment 723 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 5
Article 13 – paragraph 5
5. Applicants and their legal advisers or other counsellors shall have access to the report or the transcript and the recording before the determining authority takes a decision.
Amendment 728 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 7
Article 13 – paragraph 7
7. The responsible authorities shall store either the recording or the transcript for ten years from the date of a final decision. The recording shall be erased upon expiry of that period or where it is related to a person who has acquired citizenship of any Member State before expiry of that period as soon as the Member State becomes aware that the person concerned has acquired such citizenship.
Amendment 735 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. Applicants shall have the right to consult, in an effective manner, a legal adviser or other counsellor, admitted or permitted as such under national law, on matters relating to their applications at all stages of the procedure.
Amendment 740 #
2016/0224(COD)
2. Without prejudice to the applicant's right to choose his or her own legal adviser or other counsellor at his or her own cost, an applicant may request free legal assistance and representation at alppeal stages of the procedure in accordance with Articles 15 to 17. The applicant shall be informed of his or her right to request free legal assistance and representation at alppeal stages of the procedure.
Amendment 744 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall, at the request of the applicant, provide free legal assistance and representation in the administrative procedure provided for in Chapter III and in the appeal procedure provided for in Chapter V.
Amendment 748 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Amendment 754 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Amendment 762 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 15 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The provision of free legal assistance and representation in the appeal procedure mayshall be excluded where:
Amendment 770 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Where a decision not to grant free legal assistance and representation is taken by an authority which is not a court or tribunal on ground that the appeal is considered as having no tangible prospect of success, the applicant shall have the right to an effective remedy before a court or tribunal against that decision, and for that purpose he or she shall be entitled to request free legal assistance and representation.
Amendment 772 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. A legal adviser or other counsellor admitted or permitted as such under national law, who assists or represents an applicant under the terms of national law, shall be granted access to the information in the applicant’s file upon the basis of which a decision is or shall be made.
Amendment 776 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
As regards point (b), the determining authority shall, in particular, grant access to information or sources to a legal adviser or other counsellor who has undergone a security check, insofar as the information is relevant for examining the application or for taking a decision to withdraw international protection.
Amendment 778 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3
Article 16 – paragraph 3
3. The legal adviser or other counsellor who assists or represents an applicant shallmay have access to closed areas, such as detention facilities and transit zones, for the purpose of consulting that applicant, in accordance with Directive XXX/XXX/EU (Reception Conditions Directive).
Amendment 779 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 4
Article 16 – paragraph 4
4. An applicant shall be allowed to bring to a personal interview a legal adviser or other counsellor admitted or permitted as such under national law. The legal adviser or other counsellor shall be authorised to intervene during the personal interview.
Amendment 780 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 5
Article 16 – paragraph 5
5. The determining authority may require the presence of the applicant at the personal interview, even if he or she is represented under the terms of national law by a legal adviser or counsellor, and may require the applicant to respond in person to the questions asked.
Amendment 783 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 6
Article 16 – paragraph 6
6. Without prejudice to Article 22(5), the absence of a legal adviser or other counsellor shall not prevent the determining authority from conducting a personal interview with the applicant.
Amendment 784 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
1. Free legal assistance and representation shall be provided by legal advisers or other counsellors permitted under national law to assist or represent the applicants or non-governmental organisations accredited under national law to provide advisory services or representation.
Amendment 788 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. Member States mayshall also impose monetary limits orand time limits on the provision of free legal assistance and representation, provided that such limits do not arbitrarily restrict access to free legal assistance and representation. As regards fees and other costs, the treatment of applicants shall not be lessmore favourable than the treatment generally given to their nationals in matters pertaining to legal assistance.
Amendment 795 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4
Article 17 – paragraph 4
4. Member States mayshall request total or partial reimbursement of any costs made if and when the applicant’s financial situation considerably improves or where the decision to make such costs was taken on the basis of false information supplied by the applicant.
Amendment 796 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18
Article 18
Amendment 810 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3
Article 19 – paragraph 3
3. Where thatReasonable, adequate support cannotshall be provided within the framework of the accelerated examination procedure referred to in Article 40 or the border procedure referred to in Article 41, in particular where the determining authority considers that the applicant is in need of special procedural guarantees as a result of torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical, sexual violence or gender-based violence, the determining authority shall not apply, or shall cease to apply those procedures to the applicant.
Amendment 814 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 4
Article 19 – paragraph 4
Amendment 828 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Where there are indications that applicants may have been victim of torture, rape or of another serious form of psychological, physical, sexual or gender- based violence and that this could adversely affect their ability to participate effectively in the proceduren necessary, the determining authority shallmay refer the applicants to a doctor or a psychologist for further assessment of their psychological and physical state.
Amendment 830 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 835 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The determining authority shall provide a minor the opportunity of a personal interview, including where an application is made on his or her own behalf in accordance with Article 31(6) and Article 32(1), unless this is manifestly not in the best interests of the child. In that case, the determining authority shall give reasons for the decision not to provide a minor with the opportunity of a personal interview.
Amendment 848 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The responsible authorities shall, as soon as possible and not later than five working days from the moment whenfter an unaccompanied minor makes an application, appoint a person or an organisation as a guardian.
Amendment 853 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 855 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
The determining authority shall inform the unaccompanied minor immediatwithout undue delay of the appointment of his or her guardian.
Amendment 864 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
The person acting as guardian shall be changed only when the responsible authorities consider that he or she has not adequately performed his or her tasks as a guardian. Organisations or iIndividuals whose interests conflict or could potentially conflict with those of the unaccompanied minor shall not be appointed as guardian.
Amendment 890 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1
Article 24 – paragraph 1
1. Medical examinations mayshall be used to determine the age of unaccompanied minors within the framework of the examination of an application where, following statements by the applicant or other relevant indications including a physical and a psychosocial assessment, there are doubts as to whether or not the applicant is under the age of 18. Where the result of the medical examination is not conclusive, or includes an age-range below 18 years, Member States shall assume that the applicant is a minor.
Amendment 902 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3
Article 24 – paragraph 3
3. Any medical examination shall be performed with full respect for the individual’s dignity, shall be the least invasive examination and shall be carried out by qualified medical professionals allowing for the most reliable result possible.
Amendment 906 #
2016/0224(COD)
4. Where medical examinations are used to determine the age of unaccompanied minors, tThe determining authority shall ensure that unaccompanied minors are informed, prior to the examination of their application for international protection, and in a language that they understand or are reasonably meant to understand, of the possibility that their age be determined by medical examination. This shall include information on the method of examination and possible consequences which the result of the medical examination may have for the examination of the application, as well as on the possibility and consequences of a refusal on the part of the unaccompanied minor, or of his or her guardian, to undergo the medical examination.
Amendment 938 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2
Article 27 – paragraph 2
2. Where the information is collected by the determining authority or by another authority assisting it for the purpose of examining the application, additional data necessary for the examination of the application may also be collected at the time of registration. The authorities of the Member State examining or determining the Member State responsible for the application shall have access to the Entry Exit data of the applicant referred to in Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX (the Entry Exit System).
Amendment 940 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 3
Article 27 – paragraph 3
3. Where simultaneous applications for international protection by a disproportionate number of third-country nationals or stateless persons make it difficult in practice to register applications within three working days from when the application is made, the authorities of the Member State may extend that time-limit to ten workingseven days.
Amendment 941 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 4
Article 27 – paragraph 4
4. The responsible authorities shall store each set of data referred to in paragraph 1 and any other relevant data collected under paragraph 2, for ten years from the date of a final decision. The data shall be erased upon expiry of that period or where it is related to a person who has acquired citizenship of any Member State before expiry of that period as soon as the Member State becomes aware that the person concerned has acquired such citizenship.
Amendment 951 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1
Article 28 – paragraph 1
1. The applicant shall lodge the application within ten workingseven days from the date when the application is registered provided that he or she is given an effective opportunity to do so within that time-limit.
Amendment 954 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3
Article 28 – paragraph 3
3. Where there is a disproportionate number of third-country nationals or stateless persons that apply simultaneously for international protection, making it difficult in practice to enable the application to be lodged within the time- limit established in paragraph 1, the responsible authority shall give the applicant an effective opportunity to lodge his or her application not later than one monththree weeks from the date when the application is registered.
Amendment 965 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 6
Article 28 – paragraph 6
6. The responsible authorities shall store the data referred to in paragraph 4 for ten years from the date of a final decision. The data shall be erased upon expiry of that period or where it is related to a person who has acquired citizenship of any Member State before expiry of that period as soon as the Member State becomes aware that the person concerned has acquired such citizenship.
Amendment 990 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 29 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
The document referred to in paragraph 2 shall be valid for a period of sixfive months which shall be renewed accordingly to ensure that the validity of that document covers the period during which the applicant has a right to remain on the territory of the Member State responsible.
Amendment 999 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Where there are indications that third-country nationals or stateless persons held in detention facilities or present at border crossing points, including transit zones, at external borders, may need international protection, the responsible authorities shall inform them of the possibility to apply for international protection, in particular, where:.
Amendment 1000 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 1003 #
2016/0224(COD)
Amendment 1006 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 1011 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 30 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1042 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 4
Article 31 – paragraph 4
4. Where an applicant does not lodge an application on behalf of his or her dependent adult as referred to in paragraph 1 within the ten working days referred to in Article 28(1), the determining authority shall lodge an application on behalf of and with the consent of that dependent adult if, on the basis of an individual assessment of his or her personal situation, it is of the opinion that the dependent adult may need international protection.
Amendment 1079 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3
Article 32 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1083 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) all relevant, accurate and up-to-date information relating to the situation prevailing in the country of origin of the applicant at the time of taking a decision on the application, including laws and regulations of the country of origin and the manner in which they are applied, as well as any other relevant information obtained from the European Union Agency for Asylum, from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and relevant international human rights organisations, or from other sources;.
Amendment 1085 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) the individual position and personal circumstances of the applicant, including factors such as background, gender, age, sexual orientation and gender identity so as to assess whether, on the basis of the applicant's personal circumstances, the acts to which the applicant has been or could be exposed would amount to persecution or serious harm;
Amendment 1093 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point f
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point f
(f) whether the applicant could reasonably be expected to avail himself or herself of the protection of another country where he or she could assert citizenship or residence status.
Amendment 1105 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – point b
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – point b
(b) the applicant has special reception needs within the meaning of Article 20 of Directive XXX/XXX/EU (Reception Conditions Directive), or is in need of special procedural guarantees, in particular where he or she is an unaccompanied minor.
Amendment 1114 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The time-limit for such examination shall be ten workingcalendar days where, in accordance with Article 3(3)(a) of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX (Dublin Regulation), the Member State of first application applies the concept of first country of asylum or safe third country referred to in Article 36(1)(a) and (b).
Amendment 1115 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 2
2. The determining authority shall ensure that an examination procedure on the merits is concluded as soon as possible and not later than sixfive months from the lodging of the application, without prejudice to an adequate and complete examination.
Amendment 1118 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The determining authority may extend that time-limit of six months by a period of not more than threewo months, where:
Amendment 1119 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) a disproportionate number of third- country nationals or stateless persons simultaneously apply for international protection, making it difficult in practice to conclude the procedure within the six- month time limit;
Amendment 1137 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 3
Article 35 – paragraph 3
3. In cases of applications on behalf of spouses, partners, minors or dependent adults without legal capacity, and whenever the application is based on the same grounds, the determining authority may take a single decision, covering all applicants, unless to do so would lead to the disclosure of particular circumstances of an applicant which could jeopardise his or her interests, in particular in cases involving gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or age-based persecution. In such cases, a separate decision shall be issued to the person concerned.
Amendment 1158 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 3
Article 36 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1187 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the applicant refuses to cooperate by not providing all the necessary details for the application to be examined andor by not providing his or her fingerprints and facial image pursuant to Article 7(3) or by noncompliance with Article 7(7);
Amendment 1198 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) the applicant has repeatedly not complied with resporting dunsibilities imposed on him or her in accordance with Article 7(5) and 7(6).
Amendment 1200 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 39 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. (g) the applicant violates the obligations set out in Article 4(1) and Article 20(3) of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX (Dublin Regulation), without being able to demonstrate that the violation was due to circumstances beyond his or her control.
Amendment 1206 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 2
Article 39 – paragraph 2
2. In the circumstances referred to in paragraph 1, the determining authority shall discontinue the examination of the application and send a written notice to the applicant at the place of residence or address referred to in Article 7(4), informing him or her that the examination of his or her application has been discontinued and that the application will be definitely rejected as abandoned unless the applicant reports to the determining authority within a period of one monthtwo weeks from the date when the written notice is sent.
Amendment 1211 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 3
Article 39 – paragraph 3
3. Where the applicant reports to the determining authority within that one- monthtwo-week period and demonstrates that his or her failure was due to circumstances beyond his or her control, the determining authority shall resume the examination of the application.
Amendment 1215 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 4
Article 39 – paragraph 4
4. Where the applicant does not report to the determining authority within this one-monthtwo-week period andor does not demonstrate that his or her failure was due to circumstances beyond his or her control, the determining authority shall consider that the application has been implicitly withdrawn.
Amendment 1245 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) the applicant may, for serious reasons, be considered a danger to the national security or public order of the Member States;
Amendment 1261 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2
Article 40 – paragraph 2
2. The determining authority shall conclude the accelerated examination procedure within two months from the lodging of the application. By way of exception, in the cases set out in paragraph (1)(d) and (1)(h), the determining authority shall conclude the accelerated examination procedure within eight working days.
Amendment 1266 #
2016/0224(COD)
Amendment 1279 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The determining authority mayshall, in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees provided for in Chapter II, take a decision on an application at the border or in transit zones of the Member State on:
Amendment 1284 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the implicit withdrawal of an application pursuant to the relevant points in Article 39(1) or the merits of an application in the cases subject to the accelerated examination procedure referred to in Article 40.
Amendment 1285 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 2
Article 41 – paragraph 2
2. A decision referred to in paragraph 1 shall be taken as soon as possible without prejudice to an adequate and complete examination of the application, and not longer than foureight weeks from when the application is lodged.
Amendment 1287 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 3
Article 41 – paragraph 3
3. Where a final decision is not taken within foureight weeks referred to in paragraph 2, the applicant shall no longer be kept at the border or transit zones and shall be granted entry to the territory of the Member State for his or her application to be processed in accordance with the other provisions of this Regulation.
Amendment 1296 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 41 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1312 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 41 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 1326 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 3
Article 42 – paragraph 3
3. The preliminary examination shall be carried outWithout prejudice to the time- limits referred to in Article 34, the preliminary examination shall be carried out within one month from the lodging of the application, on the basis of written submissions and a personal interview in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees provided for in Chapter II. The personal interview may be dispensed with in those instances where, from the written submissions, it is clear that the application does not give rise to relevant new elements or findings or that it is clearly without substance and has no tangible prospect of success.
Amendment 1337 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Without prejudice to the principle of non- refoulement, Member States may provide an exception from theshall revoke the applicant's right to remain on their territory and derogate from Article 54(1), where:
Amendment 1347 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) the person filing the subsequent application poses risk to the internal security or public order of the Member State.
Amendment 1365 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 44 – paragraph 2 – point e
Amendment 1367 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 2 – point f
Article 44 – paragraph 2 – point f
Amendment 1374 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 2 – point g
Article 44 – paragraph 2 – point g
Amendment 1387 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 6
Article 44 – paragraph 6
6. Where, despite multiple attempts, the third country in question does not admit or readmit the applicant to its territory, the determining authority shallmay revoke the decision rejecting the application as inadmissible and shallmay give access to the procedure in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees provided for in Chapter II and Section I of Chapter III. However, the return procedure should be continued until admission or readmission becomes possible.
Amendment 1389 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 7
Article 44 – paragraph 7
7. Member States shall inform the Commission and the European Union Agency for Asylum every year of the countries to which the concept of the first country of asylum is applied and of the cases in which the third country did not admit or readmit the applicant to its territory with the motivations given to the Member State.
Amendment 1395 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) there is no risk of serious harm as defined in Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX (Qualification Regulation);
Amendment 1404 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point e
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point e
(e) the possibility exists to receive protection in accordance with the substantive standards of the Geneva Convention or sufficient protection as referred to in Article 44(2)(a-d), as appropriate.
Amendment 1406 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The assessment of whether a third country may be designated as a safe third country in accordance with this Regulation shall be based on a range of sources of information, including in particular information from Member States, the European Union Agency for Asylum, the European External Action Service, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the Council of Europe and other relevant organisations.
Amendment 1435 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 7
Article 45 – paragraph 7
7. Where the third country in question does not admit or readmit the applicant to its territory, the determining authority shallmay revoke the decision rejecting the application as inadmissible and shallmay give access to the procedure in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees provided for in Chapter II and Section I of Chapter III. However, the return procedure should be continued until admission or readmission becomes possible.
Amendment 1439 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2
Article 46 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall regularly review the situation in third countries that are or could be designated as safe third countries at Union level, with the assistance of the European Union Agency for Asylum and based on the other sources of information referred to in the second paragraph of Article 45(1).
Amendment 1440 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 3
Article 46 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts to designate a third country or suspend the designation of a third country as a safe third country at Union level subject to the conditions as set out in Article 49.
Amendment 1445 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 2
Article 47 – paragraph 2
2. The assessment of whether a third country may be designated as a safe country of origin in accordance with this Regulation shall be based on a range of sources of information, including in particular information from Member States, the European Union Agency for Asylum, the European External Action Service, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the Council of Europe as well as other relevant organisations, and shall take into account the common analysis of the country of origin information referred to in Article 10 of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX (EU Asylum Agency).
Amendment 1449 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 47 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) the absence of expulsion, removal or extradition of own citizens to third countries where, inter alia, there is a serious risk that they would be subjected to the death penalty, torture, persecution or other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, or where their lives or freedom would be threatened on account of their race, religion, nationality, sexual orientation, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, or from which there is a serious risk of an expulsion, removal or extradition to another third country;
Amendment 1451 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 47 – paragraph 4 – point a
(a) he or she has the nationality of that country or has a permanent residence status in that country; or
Amendment 1458 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 2
Article 48 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall regularly review the situation in third countries that are on the EU common list of safe countries of origin and the prospective new such countries, with the assistance of the Union Agency for Asylum and based on the other sources of information referred to in Article 45(2).
Amendment 1461 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 4
Article 48 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts to introduce a third country to and suspend the presence of a third country from the EU common list of safe countries of origin subject to the conditions as set out in Article 49.
Amendment 1467 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 1
Article 49 – paragraph 1
1. In case of sudden changes in the situation of a third country which is designated as a safe third country at Union level or which is on the EU common list of safe countries of origin, the Commission shall conduct a substantiated assessment of the fulfilment by that country of the conditions set in Article 45 or Article 47 and, if the Commission considers that those conditions are no longer met, it shall adopt a delegated act suspending the designation of a third country as a safe third country at Union level or suspending the presence of a third country from the EU common list of safe countries of origin for a period of sixthree months.
Amendment 1480 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 1
Article 50 – paragraph 1
1. For a period of five years from entry into force of this Regulation, Member States may retain or introduce legislation that allows for the national designation of safe third countries or safe countries of origin other than those designated at Union level or which are on the EU common list in Annex 1 for the purposes of examining applications for international protection.
Amendment 1488 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 2
Article 50 – paragraph 2
2. Where a third country is suspended from being designated as a safe third country at Union level or the presence of a third country has been suspended from the EU common list in Annex 1 to this Regulation pursuant to Article 49(1), Member States shall not, without reasonable grounds, designate that country as a safe third country or a safe third country of origin at national level nor shall they apply the safe third country concept on an ad hoc basis in relation to a specific applicant.
Amendment 1496 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 1505 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 1
Article 51 – paragraph 1
The determining authority shall start the examination to withdraw international protection from a particular person without undue delay when new elements or findings arise indicating that there are reasons to reconsider the validity of his or her international protection, and in particular in those instances referred to in Articles 15 and 21 of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX (Qualification Regulation).
Amendment 1509 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 52 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the competent authority is able to obtain precise and up-to-date information from various sources, such as, where appropriate, from the European Union Agency for Asylum and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugeesthe European Union Agency for Asylum and the European External Action Service, as to the general situation prevailing in the countries of origin of the persons concerned; and
Amendment 1511 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 3
Article 52 – paragraph 3
3. The decision of the competent authority to withdraw international protection shall be made within two months from the initiation of the procedure and shall be given in writing. The reasons in fact and in law shall be stated in the decision and information on the manner in which to challenge the decision shall be given in writing.
Amendment 1537 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 53 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) within one monththree weeks in the case of a decision rejecting an application as unfounded in relation to the refugee or subsidiary protection status if the examination is not accelerated or in the case of a decision withdrawing international protection.
Amendment 1545 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3
Article 53 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3
The time-limits provided for in this paragraph shall start to run from the date when the decision of the determining authority is notified to the applicant or from the moment the legal adviser or counsellor is appointed if the applicant has introduced a request for free legal assistance and representation.
Amendment 1549 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 54 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. A court or tribunal shall have the power to rule whether or not the applicant may remain on the territory of the Member State responsible, either upon the applicant’s request or acting ex officio, where theWithout prejudice to paragraph one, applicant's right to remain in the Member State ishall be terminated as a consequence of any of the following categories of decisions:
Amendment 1551 #
2016/0224(COD)
(b) a decision which rejects an application as inadmissible pursuant to Article 36(1)(a), (b) and (c);
Amendment 1554 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 54 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) (D) an administrative or a judicial decision which discloses that the appealer's residence on the territory of the Member State endangers the internal security or public order.
Amendment 1557 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 3
Article 54 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1565 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 5
Article 54 – paragraph 5
5. An applicant who lodges a further appeal against a first or subsequent appeal decision shall not have a right to remain on the territory of the Member State unless a court or tribunal decides otherwise upon the applicant’s request or acting ex officio. That decision shall be taken within one month from the lodging of that further appeal.
Amendment 1567 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 55 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) within sixfive months in the case of a decision rejecting the application as unfounded in relation to refugee or subsidiary protection status if the examination is not accelerated or in the case of a decision withdrawing international protection;
Amendment 1573 #
2016/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 2
Article 55 – paragraph 2
2. In cases involving complex issues of fact or law, the time-limits set out in paragraph 1 may be prolonged by an additional threewo month-period.
Amendment 34 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) In its Communication of 6 April 2016,32 the Commission set out its options for improving the CEAS, namely to establish a sustainable and fair system for determining the Member State responsible for asylum seekers, to reinforce the Eurodac system, to achieve greater convergence in the EU asylum system, to prevent secondary movements within the European Union and a new mandate for the European Union Agency for Asylum agency. That Communication is in line with calls by the European Council on 18- 19 February 201633 to make progress towards reforming the EU's existing framework so as to ensure a humane and efficient asylum policy. It also proposes a way forward in line with the holistic approach to migration set out by the European Parliament in its own initiative report of 12 April 2016. Furthermore countering the abuse of the asylum systems of the Member States should act as a guiding principle of this Regulation. _________________ 32 COM (2016) 197 final. 33 EUCO 19.02.2016, SN 1/16.
Amendment 51 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The notion of family members should take into account the different particularprinciples laid down in the Council Directive 2003/86/EC1a, which stress the core family unit, the different circumstances of dependency and the special attention to be paid to thbe best interests of the child. It should also reflect the reality of current migratory trends, according to which applicants often arrive to the territory of the Member States after a prolonged period of time in transit. The notion should therefore include families formed outside the country of origin, but before their arrival on the territory of the Member State_________________ 1aCouncil Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification, OJ L 251, 3.10.2003, p. 12– 18.
Amendment 55 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Protection can be provided, where they are willing and able to offer protection, either by the State or by parties or organisations, including international organisations, meeting the conditions set out in this Directive, which control a region or a larger area within the territory of the State. Such protection should be effective and of a non-temporary nature.
Amendment 59 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations are set out in the Preamble and Articles 1 and 2 of the Charter of the United Nations and are, amongst others, embodied in the United Nations resolutions relating to measures combating terrorism, which declare that ‘acts, methods and practices of terrorism are contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations’ and that ‘knowingly financing, planning and inciting terrorist acts are also contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations’. These same acts, methods and practices should also constitute a reason to deny and revoke refugee status or subsidiary protection status.
Amendment 71 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) Beneficiaries of international protection should reside in the Member State which granted them protection. Those beneficiaries who are in possession of a valid travel document and a residence permit issued by a Member State applying the Schengen acquis in full, should be allowed to enter into and move freely within the territory of the Member States applying the Schengen acquis in full, for a period up to 90 days in any 180-day period in accordance with Schengen Borders Code38 and with Article 21 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement39. Beneficiaries of international protection can equally apply to reside in a Member State other than the Member State which granted protection, in accordance with relevant EU rules, notably on the conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purposes of highly skilled employment40 and national rules; however, this does not imply any transfer of the international protection and related rights. _________________ 38 Regulation 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders. 39 Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985 between the Governments of the States of the Benelux Economic Union, the Federal Republic of Germany and the French Republic on the gradual abolition of checks at their common borders. 40COM (2016) 378 final.
Amendment 74 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) In order to prevent secondary movements within the European Union, beneficiaries of international protection, if found in a Member State other than the Member State having granted them protection without fulfilling the conditions of stay or reside, should be taken back and sanctioned by the Member State responsible in accordance with the procedure laid down by Regulation41and this Regulation. _________________ 41 (EU)No [xxx/xxxx New Dublin Regulation].
Amendment 78 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
Recital 45
(45) The notion of national security and public order also covers cases in which a third-country national belongs to an association which supports international terrorism or supports such an associationeither directly or indirectly supports terrorism or religious radicalism.
Amendment 87 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) In order to enhance the effective exercise of the rights and benefits laid down in this Regulation by beneficiaries of international protection, it is necessary to take into account their specific needs and the particular integration challenges with which they are confronted, and facilitate their access to integration related rights in particular as regards employment-related educational opportunities and vocational training and access to recognition procedures for foreign diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications in particular due to the lack of documentary evidence and their inability to meet the costs related to the recognition procedures.
Amendment 91 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
Amendment 98 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51
Recital 51
(51) In addition, especially to avoid social hardship, it is appropriate to provide beneficiaries of international protection with social assistance without discrimination. Howevand their family members, as regards beneficiaries of subsidiary protectionferred to in the Article 2(9), with social assistance rights. However, Member States should be given somwide flexibility, to limit such rights to core benefits, which is to be understood as covering at least minimum income support, assistance in the case of illness, or pregnancy, and parental assistance, in so far as those benefits are granted to nationals under national law. In order to facilitate their integration, Member States should be given the possibility to make the access to certain type of social assistances specified in national law, for both refugees and beneficiaries of subsidiary protection, conditional on the effective and successful participation of the beneficiary of international protection and his or her family members in integration measures.
Amendment 103 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) Access to basic healthcare, including both physical and mental healthcare, should be ensured to beneficiaries of international protection.
Amendment 109 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) A common policy on asylum, including a Common European Asylum System (CEAS) which is based on the full and inclusive application of the Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, as amended by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967 (Geneva Convention), is a constituent part of the European Union’s objective of establishing progressively an area of freedom, security and justice open to those who, forced by circumstances, legitimately seek protection in the Union. Such a policy should be governed by the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, including its financial implications, between the Member Statesaffordability, taking into account the absorption capacities of the receiving societies as well as maximal self-reliance of the beneficiaries of international protection.
Amendment 112 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – introductory part
(9) ‘family members’ means, in so far as the family already existed before the applicant arrived on the territory of the Member Statesin the country of origin, or, in the case of a stateless person, in the country of former habitual residence, the following members of the family of the beneficiary of international protection who are present in the same Member State in relation to the application for international protection:
Amendment 115 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17
(17) 'social security' means the branches of social security as defined in Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council44 covering sickness benefits; maternity and equivalent paternity benefits; invalidity benefits; old-age benefits; survivors' benefits; benefits in respect of accidents at work and occupational diseases; death grants; unemployment benefits, pre- retirement benefits and family benefits; _________________ 44Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems (OJ L 166, 30.4.2004, p. 1)marked out by the Member State.
Amendment 116 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. The applicant shall submit without delay all the elements available to him or her which substantiate the application for international protection. He or she shall cooperate with the determining authority and shall remain present and available throughout the procedure. Any period of illegal stay in the territory of the Member State before lodging an application for international protection should be investigated as potential evidence of motives for staying in the Union other than legitimately seeking international protection.
Amendment 117 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 5 – point d
Article 4 – paragraph 5 – point d
(d) the applicant has applied for international protection at the earliest possible time, unless the applicant can demonstrate good reason for not having done so;
Amendment 119 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Amendment 119 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) In its Communication of 6 April 32 2016, the Commission set out its options for improving the CEAS, namely to establish a sustainable and fair system for determining the Member State responsible for asylum seekers, to reinforce the Eurodac system, to achieve greater convergence in the EU asylum system, to prevent secondary movements within the European Union and a new mandate for the European Union Agency for Asylum agency. That Communication is in line with calls by the European Council on 18- 19 February 201633 to make progress towards reforming the EU's existing framework so as to ensure a humane and efficient asylum policy. It also proposes a way forward in line with the holistic approach to migration set out by the European Parliament in its own initiative report of 12 April 2016. _________________ 32 COM (2016) 197 final. 33 EUCO 19.02.2016, SN 1/16.
Amendment 121 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Protection against persecution or serious harm shall be effective and of a non-temporary nature. That protection shall be considered to be provided when the actors referred to in paragraph 1 take reasonable steps to prevent the persecution or suffering of serious harm, among others, by operating an effective legal system for the detection, prosecution and punishment of acts constituting persecution or serious harm, and when the applicant has access to that protection.
Amendment 125 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) For a well-functioning CEAS, including of the Dublin system, substantial progress should be made regarding the convergence of national asylum systems with special regard to differing recognition rates and type of protection status in the Member States. In addition, rules on status review should be strengthened to ensure that protection is only granted to those who need it and for so long as it continues to be needed. Moreover, divergent practices regarding the duration of the residence permits should be avoided, and the rights granted to beneficiaries of international protection should be further clarified, restricted and harmonised.
Amendment 129 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) the concept of political opinion shall, in particular, include the holding of an opinion, thought or belief on a matter related to the potential actors of persecution mentioned in Article 6 and to their policies or methods, whether or not that opinion, thought or belief has been acted upon by the applicant.
Amendment 133 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The main objective of this Regulation is, on the one hand, to ensure that Member States apply common criteria for the identification of persons genuinely in need of international protection and, on the other hand, to ensure that a common set of rights is available for those persons in all Member States. Furthermore countering the abuse of the asylum systems of Member States should act as a guiding principle of this Regulation.
Amendment 135 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 5 – point b
Article 12 – paragraph 5 – point b
(b) planning of, incitement or contribution to or execution of terrorist acts, which are characterised by their violence towards civilian populations, even if committed with a purportedly political or religious objective.
Amendment 136 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 5 – point b a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 5 – point b a (new)
(ba) serious crimes against sexual self- determination, in accordance with national law of the Member State, such as rape or statutory rape.
Amendment 145 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
Amendment 146 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) he or she has committed a serious crime such as planning of, incitement or contribution to or execution of terrorist act, even if committed with a purportedly political or religious objective or a serious crime against sexual self-determination such as rape or statutory rape;
Amendment 148 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The exclusion of a person from subsidiary protection status shall depend exclusively on whether the conditions set out in paragraphs 1 and 2 are met and shall not be subject to any additional proportionality assessment in relation to a particular case.
Amendment 162 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) The European Union Agency for Asylum should provide adequate support in the application of this Regulation, in particular by providing experts to assist the Member State authorities to receive, and register, and examine applications for international protection, providing updated information regarding third countries, including Country of Origin Information, and other relevant guidelines and tools. When applying this Regulation, Member States' authorities shouldmay take into account operational standards, indicative guidelines, and best practices developed by the European Union Agency for Asylum [the Agency]. When assessing applications for international protection, Member States' authorities shouldmay take particular account of the information, reports, common analysis and guidance on the situation in countries of origin developed at Union level by the Agency and the European networks on country of origin information in accordance with Articles 8 and 10 of Regulation34 _________________ 34 COM(2016)271 final. COM(2016)271 final.
Amendment 167 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The notion of family members should take into account the principles laid down in Council Directive 2003/86/EC1a , which stress the core family unit, the different particular circumstances of dependency and the special attention to be paid to the best interests of the child. It should also reflect the reality of current migratory trends, according to which applicants often arrive to the territory of the Member States after a prolonged period of time in transit. The notion should therefore include families formed outside the country of origin, but before their arrival on the territory of the Member State_________________ 1aCouncil Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification, OJ L 251, 3.10.2003, p. 12– 18.
Amendment 171 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
Amendment 180 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2
Article 28 – paragraph 2
2. Within the limits set by international obligations, residence conditions may be imposed on a beneficiary of international protection who receives certain specific social security or social assistance benefits only where those residence conditions are necessary to facilitate the integration of the beneficiary in the Member State that has granted that protection.
Amendment 181 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Protection can be provided, where they are willing and able to offer protection, either by the State or by parties or organisations, including international organisations, meeting the conditions set out in this Directive, which control a region or a larger area within the territory of the State. Such protection should be effective and of a non-temporary nature.
Amendment 183 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2
Article 29 – paragraph 2
2. Where a beneficiary is found in a Member State other the one that him or her granted protection without a right stay or the right to reside there in accordance with relevant Union or national law, he will be subject to a take back procedure as defined under Article 20(1)(e) of the Dublin Regulation (EU) no. xxx/xxx at his or her own expense, deductible from the financial allowances received from the Member State granting the protection. The person subject to a take back procedure shall also be penalised by withdrawal of relevant rights in Section III for a limited period of time.
Amendment 184 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Beneficiaries of international protection shall enjoy equal treatment with nationals ofother third-country nationals legally residing in the Member State that has granted protection as regards:
Amendment 188 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Internal protection against persecution or serious harm should be effectively available to the applicant in a part of the country of origin where he or she can safely and legally travel to, gain admittance to and can reasonably be expected to settle. The assessment of whether such internal protection exists should be an inherent part of the assessment the application for international protection and should be carried out onceat the latest when it has been established by the determining authority that the qualification criteria would otherwise apply. The burden of demonstrating the unavailability of internal protection should fall on the determining authorityapplicant.
Amendment 190 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 1
1. Minors granted international protection shall have full access to the education system, under the same conditions as nationals of the Member State that has granted protection. other third country nationals legally residing in the Member State that has granted protection. Though Member States should be left the discretion to assign special school facilities for minors, who are granted international protection, in order to safeguard an orderly school environment.
Amendment 191 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Where the State or agents of the State are established as the actors of persecution or serious harm, there should be a presumption that effective protection is not available to the applicant. When the applicant is an unaccompanied minor, the availability of appropriate care and custodial arrangements, which are in the best interests of the unaccompanied minor, should form part of the assessment as to whether that protection is effectively available.
Amendment 193 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. Beneficiaries of international protection shall enjoy equal treatment with nationals ofother third-country nationals legally residing in the Member State that has granted protection in the context of the existing recognition procedures for foreign diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications.
Amendment 194 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2
Article 32 – paragraph 2
Amendment 195 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3
Article 32 – paragraph 3
3. Beneficiaries of international protection shall enjoy equal treatment with nationals ofother third-country nationals legally residing in the Member State that has granted protection as regards access to appropriate schemes for the assessment, validation and accreditation of their prior learning and experience.
Amendment 197 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Beneficiaries of international protection shall enjoy equal treatment with nationals ofother third-country nationals legally residing in the Member State that has granted protection with regard to social security.
Amendment 197 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) It is equally necessary to introduce a common concept of the persecution ground ‘membership of a particular social group’. For the purposes of defining a particular social group, issues arising from an applicant’s gender, including gender identity and sexual orientation, which may be related to certain legal traditions and customs, resulting in for example genital mutilation, forced sterilisation or forced abortion, should be given due consideration in so far as they are related to the applicant’s well-founded fear of persecution.
Amendment 198 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Beneficiaries of international protection shall enjoy equal treatment with nationals ofother third-country nationals legally residing in the Member State that has granted protection as regards social assistance.
Amendment 202 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Access to certain social assistance specified in national law mayshall be made conditional on the effective participation and successful conclusion of the beneficiary of international protection and his or her family members as referred to in the Article 2(9) in integration measures.
Amendment 202 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) In accordance with relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, when assessing applications for international protection, the competent authorities of the Member States should use methods for the assessment of the applicant's credibility in a manner that respects the individual's rights as guaranteed by the Charter, in particular the right to human dignity and the respect for private and family life. Specifically as regards homosexuality, the individual assessment of the applicant's credibility should not be based on stereotyped notions concerning homosexuals and the applicant should not be submitted to detailed questioningbut the competent authorities should firmly require factual proof orf tests as to his or her sexual practiceshe individual´s homosexuality.
Amendment 203 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations are set out in the Preamble and Articles 1 and 2 of the Charter of the United Nations and are, amongst others, embodied in the United Nations resolutions relating to measures combating terrorism, which declare that ‘acts, methods and practices of terrorism are contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations’ and that ‘knowingly financing, planning and inciting terrorist acts are also contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations’. These same acts, methods and practices should also constitute a reason to deny and revoke refugee status or subsidiary protection status.
Amendment 205 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 2
Amendment 208 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1
Article 35 – paragraph 1
1. Beneficiaries of international protection shall have access to healthcare under the same eligibility conditions as nationals ofother third country nationals legally residing in the Member State that has granted such protection.
Amendment 211 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. Beneficiaries of international protection who have special needs, such as pregnant women, disabled people, persons who have undergone torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violence or minors who have been victims of any form of abuse, neglect, exploitation, torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or who have suffered from armed conflict shall be provided adequate healthcare, including treatment of mental disorders when needed, under the same eligibility conditions as nationals of the Member State that has granted protection.
Amendment 217 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 5
Article 36 – paragraph 5
Amendment 217 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) As regards the required proof in relation to the existence of a serious and individual threat to the life or person of an applicant, in accordance with relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union36 , determining authorities should not require the applicant to adduce evidence that he is specifically targeted by reason of factors particular to his personal circumstances. However, the level of indiscriminate violence required to substantiate the application is lower if the applicant is able to show that he is specifically affected by reason of factors particular to his personal circumstance. Moreover, the existence of a serious and individual threat should exceptionally be established by the determining authorities solely on account of the presence of the applicant on the territory or relevant part of the territory of the country of origin provided the degree of indiscriminate violence characterising the armed conflict taking place reaches such a high level that there are substantial grounds for believing that a civilian, returned to the country or origin or to the relevant part ofany part of the country ofr origin, would, solely on account of his presence on the territory of that country or region, face a real risk of being subject to the serious threat. _________________ 36 C-465/07. C-465/07.
Amendment 218 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 6
Article 36 – paragraph 6
6. The persons and organisations working with unaccompanied minors shall receive continuous appropriate training concerning the rights and needs of minors and child safeguarding standards will be respected as referred to in Art 22 of Regulation EU No xxx/xxx[Procedures regulation].
Amendment 221 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2
Article 37 – paragraph 2
2. National dispersal practices of beneficiaries of international protection shall be carried out to the extent possible without discrimination of beneficiaries of international protection and shall ensure equal opportunities regarding access to accommodationin an appropriate and cost-effective manner.
Amendment 222 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) Family members, due to their close relationship to the refugee, will normally be vulnerable to acts of persecution in such a manner that could be the basis for international protection. Provided they do not qualify for international protection, for the purpose of maintaining family unity, they shall be entitled to claimapply for a residence permit and the same rights accorded tonot exceeding the duration of that of the beneficiaries ofy of the international protection. Without prejudice to the provisions related to maintaining family unity in this Regulation, where the situation falls within the scope of Directive 2003/86/EC on the right to family reunification and the conditions for reunification set out thereof are fulfilled, family members of the beneficiary of international protection who do not individually qualify for such protection should be granted residence permits and rights in accordance with that Directive. This Regulation shall be applied without prejudice to Directive 2004/38/EC.
Amendment 226 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 1
Article 38 – paragraph 1
1. In order to facilitate the integration ofinto society, beneficiaries of international protection into society, beneficiaries of international protectionand their family members as referred to in the Article 2(9) shall have access to integration measures provided by the Member States, in particulare.g. language courses, civic orientation and integration programs and vocational training which take into account their specific needs.
Amendment 230 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 2
Article 38 – paragraph 2
2. Member States mayshall make participation in integration measures compulsory. Access to social benefits shall depend on the effective participation and successful conclusion of the beneficiaries of international protection and his or her family members as referred to in the Article 2(9) in integration programs.
Amendment 231 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) With a view to ascertaining whether beneficiaries of international protection are still in need of that protection, determining authorities should review the granted status when the residence permit has to be renewed, for the first and second time in the case of refugees, and for the first and, second and third time in the case of beneficiaries of subsidiary protection, as well as when a significant relevant change in the beneficiaries' country of origin occurs as indicated by common analysis and guidance on the situation in the country of origin provided at Union level by the Agency and the European networks on country of origin information in accordance with Articles 8 and 10 of Regulation37 . _________________ 37 COM(2016)271 final.
Amendment 235 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) When the refugee status or the subsidiary protection status ceases to exist, the application of the decision by which the determining authority of a Member State revokes, ends or does not renew the status should be deferred for a reasonable period of time after adoption, in order to give the third-country national or stateless person concerned the possibility to apply for residence on the basis of other grounds than those having justified the granting of international protection, such as family reasons, or reasons related to employment or to education, in accordance with relevant Union and national lawin particular on work-related grounds, in accordance with relevant Union and national law. However this should not lead to circumvention of national immigration rules.
Amendment 240 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) Beneficiaries of international protection should reside in the Member State which granted them protection. Those beneficiaries who are in possession of a valid travel document and a residence permit issued by a Member State applying the Schengen acquis in full, should be allowed to enter into and move freely within the territory of the Member States applying the Schengen acquis in full, for a period up to 90 days in any 180-day period in accordance with Schengen Borders Code38 and with Article 21 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement39 . Beneficiaries of international protection can equally apply to reside in a Member State other than the Member State which granted protection, in accordance with relevant EU rules, notably on the conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purposes of highly skilled employment40 and national rules; however, this does not imply any transfer of the international protection and related rights. _________________ 38 Regulation 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders. 39 Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985 between the Governments of the States of the Benelux Economic Union, the Federal Republic of Germany and the French Republic on the gradual abolition of checks at their common borders. 40COM (2016) 378 final.
Amendment 245 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) In order to prevent secondary movements within the European Union, beneficiaries of international protection, if found in a Member State other than the Member State having granted them protection without fulfilling the conditions of stay or reside, should be taken back and sanctioned by the Member State responsible in accordance with the procedure laid down by Regulation41 _________________ 41 (EU)No [xxx/xxxx New Dublinand this Regulation].
Amendment 253 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
Recital 45
(45) The notion of national security and public order also covers cases in which a third-country national belongs to an association which supports international terrorism or supports such an associationeither indirectly or directly supports terrorism or religious radicalism.
Amendment 259 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) Competent authorities may restrict the access to employed or self-employed activities as regard posts which involve the exercise of public authority, and responsibility for safeguarding the general interest of the State or other public authorities. In the context of exercising their right equal treatment as regards membership of an organisation representing workers or engaging in a specific occupation, beneficiaries of international protection may likewise be excluded from taking part in the management of bodies governed by public law and from holding an office governed by public law; competent authorities may furthermore restrict the access to employed or self-employed activities in order to prevent imbalances in the labour market;
Amendment 261 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) In order to enhance the effective exercise of the rights and benefits laid down in this Regulation by beneficiaries of international protection, it is necessary to take into account their specific needs and the particular integration challenges with which they are confronted, and facilitate their access to integration related rights in particular as regards employment-related educational opportunities and vocational training and access to recognition procedures for foreign diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications in particular due to the lack of documentary evidence and their inability to meet the costs related to the recognition procedures.
Amendment 266 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
Amendment 274 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51
Recital 51
(51) In addition, especially to avoid social hardship, it is appropriate to provide beneficiaries of international protection with social assistance without discrimination. However, as regards beneficiaries of subsidiary protectionand their family members in the context of this Regulation with social assistance. However, Member States should be given somwide flexibility, to limit such rights to core benefits, which is to be understood as covering at least minimum income support, assistance in the case of illness, or pregnancy, and parental assistance, in so far as those benefits are granted to nationals under national law. In order to facilitate their integration, Member States should be given the possibility to make the access to certain type of social assistances specified in national law, for both refugees and beneficiaries of subsidiary protection, conditional on the effective and successful participation of the beneficiary of international protection and his or her family members in integration measures.
Amendment 283 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 53
Recital 53
(53) In order to facilitate the integration of beneficiaries of international protection into society, beneficiaries of international protection shall have access to integration measures, modalities to be set by the Member States. Member States mayshall make the participation in such integration measures, such as language courses, and civic integration courses, vocational training and other employment-related courses compulsory.
Amendment 310 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – introductory part
(9) ‘family members’ means, in so far as the family already existed before the applicant arrived on the territory of the Member Statesin the country of origin, or, in the case of a stateless person, in the country of former habitual residence, the following members of the family of the beneficiary of international protection who are present in the same Member State in relation to the application for international protection:
Amendment 330 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11
(11) ‘unaccompanied minor’ means a minor who arrives on the territory of the Member States unaccompanied by an adult responsible for him or her whether by law or by the practice of the Member State concerned, and for as long as he or she is not effectively taken into the care of such a person, including a minor who is left unaccompanied after he or she has entered the territory of the Member States;
Amendment 334 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17
(17) 'social security' means the branches of social security as defined in Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council44 covering sickness benefits; maternity and equivalent paternity benefits; invalidity benefits; old-age benefits; survivors' benefits; benefits in respect of accidents at work and occupational diseases; death grants; unemployment benefits, pre- retirement benefits and family benefits; _________________ 44Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems (OJ L 166, 30.4.2004, p. 1).marked out by the Member State;
Amendment 339 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation applies to the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection and to the content of the international protection granted. The provisions in the Articles 15 and 21 of this Regulation apply retrospectively to the beneficiaries of international protection who have not yet exhausted the validity of their residence permits.
Amendment 344 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. The applicant shall submit without delay all the elements available to him or her which substantiate the application for international protection. He or she shall cooperate with the determining authority and shall remain present and available throughout the procedure. Any period of illegal stay in the territory of the Member States before lodging an application for international protection shall be investigated as potential evidence of motives for staying in the Union other than legitimately seeking international protection.
Amendment 350 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. The elements referred to in paragraph 1 shall consist of the applicant’s statements and all the documentation at the applicant’s disposal regarding the applicant’s age, background, including that of relevant relatives, identity, nationality(ies), country(ies) and place(s) of previous residence, previous applications [for international protection and results of any expedited resettlement procedure as defined by Regulation (EU) no XXX/XX [Resettlement regulation]], travel routes, travel documents and the reasons for applying for international protection.
Amendment 351 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The determining authority shall assess the relevant elements of the application in accordance with Article 33 of Regulation (EU)XXX/XXX [Procedures regulation.] The applicant shall be subjected to an age assessment using the most up-to-date, scientific methods when there is a reason to suspect that the applicant is an adult and he or she claims to be, without solid evidence, between 15 and 17 years of age.
Amendment 368 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 5 – point d
Article 4 – paragraph 5 – point d
(d) the applicant has applied for international protection at the earliest possible time, unless the applicant can demonstrate good reason for not having done so;
Amendment 370 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. A well-founded fear of being persecuted or a real risk of suffering serious harm may be based on events which have taken place since the applicant left the country of origin.
Amendment 373 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Amendment 378 #
2016/0223(COD)
3. Without prejudice to the Geneva Convention and the European Convention on Human Rights, an applicant who files a subsequentn application in accordance with Article 42 of Regulation (EU)XXX/XXX [Procedures regulafor international protection] shall not normally be granted refugee status or subsidiary protection status if the risk of persecution or the serious harm is based on circumstances which the applicant has created by his or her own decision since leaving the country of origin.
Amendment 383 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) non-State actors, excluding criminal or terrorist organisations in which the applicant is or has been voluntarily involved with, if it can be demonstrated that the actors referred to in points (a) and (b), including international organisations, are unable or unwilling to provide protection against persecution or serious harm as referred to in Article 7.
Amendment 396 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Protection against persecution or serious harm shall be effective and of a non-temporary nature. That protection shall be considered to be provided when the actors referred to in paragraph 1 take reasonable steps to prevent the persecution or suffering of serious harm, among others, by operating an effective legal system for the detection, prosecution and punishment of acts constituting persecution or serious harm, and when the applicant has access to that protection.
Amendment 400 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. When assessing whether an international organisation controls a State or a substantial part of its territory and provides protection as referred to in paragraph 2, determining authorities shall take into account and may base themselves on any guidance provided in relevant Union law, in particular available Union level country of origin information and the common analysis of country of origin information referred to in Articles 8 and 10 of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XX [ Regulation on the European Union Agency for Asylum ].
Amendment 412 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. The assessment of the availability of internal protection shall be carried out onceas soon as possible and at the latest when it has been established by the determining authority that the qualification criteria would otherwise apply. The burden of demonstrating the unavailability of internal protection shall rest on the determining authorityapplicant. The applicant shall not be required to prove that, before seeking international protection, he or she has exhausted all possibilities to obtain protection in his or her country of origin.
Amendment 415 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3
Article 8 – paragraph 3
3. In examining whether an applicant has a well-founded fear of being persecuted or is at real risk of suffering serious harm, or has access to protection against persecution or serious harm in a part of the country of origin in accordance with paragraph 1, determining authorities shall at the time of taking the decision on the application have regard to the general circumstances prevailing in that part of the country and to the personal circumstances of the applicant in accordance with Article 4. To that end, determining authorities shall ensure that precise and up-to-date information is obtained from all relevant sources, including available Union level country of origin information and the common analysis of country of origin information referred to in Articles 8 and 10 of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XX [Regulation on the European Union Agency for Asylum], as well as information and guidance issued by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.
Amendment 420 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Article 8 – paragraph 4
4. When considering the general circumstances prevailing in that part of the country which is the source of the protection as referred to in Article 7, the accessibility, and effectiveness and durability of that protection shall be taken into account. When considering personal circumstances of the applicant, health, age, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity and social status shall in particular be taken into account together with an assessment of whether living in the part of the country of origin regarded as safe would not impose undue hardship on the applicant.
Amendment 440 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point d – indent 2 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point d – indent 2 – paragraph 1
that group has a demonstrable distinct identity in the relevant country, because it is perceived as being different by the surrounding society;
Amendment 441 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point d – indent 2 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point d – indent 2 – paragraph 2
depending on the circumstances in the country of origin, the concept might include a group based on a common characteristic of sexual orientation (a term which cannot be understood to include acts considered to be criminal in accordance with national law of the Member States); gender related aspects, including gender identity, shall be given due consideration for the purposes of determining membership of a particular social group or identifying a characteristic of such a group;leted
Amendment 445 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) the concept of political opinion shall, in particular, include the holding of an opinion, thought or belief on a matter related to the potential actors of persecution mentioned in Article 6 and to their policies or methods, whether or not that opinion, thought or belief has been acted upon by the applicant.
Amendment 447 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. When assessing if an applicant has a well-founded fear of being persecuted it is immaterial whether the applicant actually possesses the racial, religious, national, social or political characteristic which attracts the persecution, provided that such a characteristic is demonstrably attributed to the applicant by the actor of persecution.
Amendment 449 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Amendment 455 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 458 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 459 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) shallmay base itself on precise and up- to-date information obtained from all relevant sources, including Union level country of origin information and common analysis of country of origin information referred to in Articles 8 and 10 of the Regulation (EU) No XXX/XX [Regulation on the European Union Agency for Asylum] or information and guidance issued by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugee.
Amendment 467 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) he or she has committed a serious non-political crime outside the country of refuge prior to his or her admission as a refugee, which means the time of issuing a residence permit based on the granting of refugee status; particularly cruel actions, even if committed with an allegedly political objective, may be classified as serious non-political crimes;
Amendment 484 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 5 – point b
Article 12 – paragraph 5 – point b
(b) planning of, incitement or contribution to or execution of terrorist acts, which are characterised by their violence towards civilian populations, even if committed with a purportedly political or religious objective.
Amendment 486 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 5 – point b a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 5 – point b a (new)
(ba) serious crimes against sexual self- determination, in accordance with national law of the Member State, such as rape or statutory rape.
Amendment 509 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. In situations referred to in points (d) to (f) of paragraph 1, the determining authority may decideshall not to grant status to a refugee, where such a decision has not yet been taken.
Amendment 517 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 5
Article 14 – paragraph 5
5. Decisions of the determining authority revoking, ending or refusing to renew refugee status pursuant to point (a) of paragraph 1 shall only take effect three months after the decision is adopted, in order to provide the third-country national or stateless person with the opportunity to apply for residence in the Member State on other, especially work-related, grounds, in accordance with relevant Union and national law.
Amendment 537 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) when renewing, for the first and second time, the residence permit issued to a refugee.
Amendment 543 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment of an applicant in the country of origin; or
Amendment 554 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) shall have regard whether the change in circumstances is of such a significant and non-temporary nature that the person eligible for subsidiary protection no longer faces a real risk of serious harm;
Amendment 555 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) shall base itself on precise and up- to-date information obtained from all relevant sources, including Union level country of origin information and the common analysis on country of origin information as referred in Articles 8 and 10 of the Regulation (EU) No XXX/XX [Regulation on the European Union Agency for Asylum] or information and guidance issued by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugee.
Amendment 558 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Amendment 561 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. A third-country national or a stateless person shall be excluded from being eligible for subsidiary protection when he or she is recognised by the competent authorities of the country in which he or she has taken up residence as having the rights and obligations which are attached to the possession of the nationality of that country, or rights and obligations equivalent to those, or where there are serious reasons for considering that:
Amendment 562 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) he or she has committed a serious crime such as planning of, incitement or contribution to or execution of terrorist act, even if committed with a purportedly political or religious objective or a serious crime against sexual self-determination such as rape or statutory rape;
Amendment 572 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The exclusion of a person from subsidiary protection status shall depend exclusively on whether the conditions set out in paragraphs 1 and 2 are met and shall not be subject to any additional proportionality assessment in relation to the particular case.
Amendment 588 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3
Article 20 – paragraph 3
3. Decisions of the determining authority revoking, ending or refusing to renew subsidiary protection status pursuant to paragraph 1 (a) shall only take effect threone months after the decision is taken, in order to provide the third-country national or stateless person with the opportunity to apply for residence in the Member State on other, especially work- related, grounds in accordance with relevant Union and national law.
Amendment 605 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph b
Article 21 – paragraph b
(b) when renewing, for the first and, second and third time, the residence permit issued to a beneficiary of subsidiary protection.
Amendment 610 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 4
Article 22 – paragraph 4
4. When applying the provisions of this Chapter, the specific situation of persons with special needs such as minors, unaccompanied minors, disabled people, elderly people, pregnant women, single parents with minor children, victims of human trafficking, persons with mental disorders and persons who have been subjected to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violencein the meaning of needing special guarantees to benefit from the rights and comply with the obligations provided for herein, shall be taken into account provided an individual evaluation of their situation establishes that they have special needs.
Amendment 623 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) he or she, having been convicted by a final judgment of a particularly serious crime constitutes a danger to the community of that Member State.
Amendment 633 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. Family members as referred to in the Article 2(9) of a beneficiary of international protection who do not individually qualify for such protection shall be entitled to claimapply for a residence permit in accordance with national procedures and insofar as this is compatible with the personal legal status of the family member.
Amendment 635 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 2
2. A residence permit issued pursuant to paragraph 1 shall have the duration of the residence permit issued to the beneficiary of international protection and shall be renewable. The period of validity of the residence permit granted to the family member shall in principle not extend beyond the date of expiry of the residence permit held by the beneficiary of international protection.
Amendment 640 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 4
Article 25 – paragraph 4
4. Where reasons of national security or public order so require, a residence permit shall not be issued for a family member and such residence permits which have already been issued shall be withdrawn or shall not be renewed.
Amendment 643 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 6
Article 25 – paragraph 6
Amendment 651 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. No later than 30 daysAs soon as possible after international protection has been granted, a residence permit shall be issued using the uniform format as laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1030/2002.
Amendment 668 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) For beneficiaries of subsidiary protection status, the residence permit shall have a period of validity of one year and be renewable thereafter for periods of twoone years.
Amendment 681 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 3
Article 26 – paragraph 3
3. When applying Article 14(5) and 20(3), the residence permit shall only be revoked after the expiry of the three month periods referred to in those provisions.
Amendment 695 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2
Article 28 – paragraph 2
2. Within the limits set by international obligations, residence conditions may be imposed on a beneficiary of international protection who receives certain specific social security or social assistance benefits only where those residence conditions are necessary to facilitate the integration of the beneficiary in the Member State that has granted that protection.
Amendment 701 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2
Article 29 – paragraph 2
2. Where a beneficiary is found in a Member State other the one that him or her granted protection without a right stay or the right to reside there in accordance with relevant Union or national law, he will be subject to a take back procedure as defined under Article 20(1)(e) of the Dublin Regulation (EU) no. xxx/xxx. at his or her own expense, deductible from the financial allowances received from the Member State granting the protection. The person subject to a take back procedure shall also be penalised by withdrawal of relevant rights in Section III for a limited period of time.
Amendment 705 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Beneficiaries of international protection shall enjoy equal treatment with nationals ofother third-country nationals residing in the Member State that has granted protection as regards:
Amendment 706 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) advice services afforded by employment offices in the customary languages of such services in the Member State concerned.
Amendment 709 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 1
1. Minors granted international protection shall have full access to the education system, under the same conditions as nationals ofother third-country nationals residing in the Member State that has granted protection. Though Member States should be left the discretion to assign special school facilities for minors, who are granted international protection, in order to safeguard an orderly school environment.
Amendment 712 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. Beneficiaries of international protection shall enjoy equal treatment with nationals ofother third-country nationals residing in the Member State that has granted protection in the context of the existing recognition procedures for foreign diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications.
Amendment 713 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2
Article 32 – paragraph 2
Amendment 714 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3
Article 32 – paragraph 3
3. Beneficiaries of international protection shall enjoy equal treatment with nationals ofother third-country nationals residing in the Member State that has granted protection as regards access to appropriate schemes for the assessment, validation and accreditation of their prior learning and experience.
Amendment 717 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Beneficiaries of international protection shall enjoy equal treatment with nationals ofother third-country nationals residing in the Member State that has granted protection with regard to social security.
Amendment 719 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Beneficiaries of international protection shall enjoy equal treatment with nationals ofother third-country nationals residing in the Member State that has granted protection as regards social assistance.
Amendment 722 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Access to certain social assistance specified in national law mayshall be made conditional on the effective participation and successful conclusion of the beneficiary of international protection and his or her family members as referred to in the Article 2(9) in integration measures.
Amendment 726 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 2
Amendment 730 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1
Article 35 – paragraph 1
1. Beneficiaries of international protection shall have access to healthcare under the same eligibility conditions as nationals ofother third-country nationals residing in the Member State that has granted such protection.
Amendment 733 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. Beneficiaries of international protection who have special needs, such as pregnant women, disabled people, persons who have undergone torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violence or minors who have been victims of any form of abuse, neglect, exploitation, torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or who have suffered from armed conflict shall be providedhall be provided assistance in accessing adequate healthcare, including treatment of mental disorders when needed, under the same eligibility conditions as nationals ofother third- country nationals residing in the Member State that has granted protection.
Amendment 737 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
As soon as possible after international protection is granted and within five working days at the latest, as outlined in Article 22(1) of Regulation EU no xxx/xxx[Procedures regulation], competent authorities shall take the necessary measures to ensure the representation of unaccompanied minors by a legal guardian or, where necessary, by an organisation responsible for the care and well-being of minors, or by any other appropriate representation including that based on legislation or court order.
Amendment 747 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 5
Article 36 – paragraph 5
Amendment 750 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 6
Article 36 – paragraph 6
6. The persons and organisations working with unaccompanied minors shall receive continuous appropriate training concerning the rights and needs of minors and child safeguarding standards will be respected as referred to in Art 22 of Regulation EU No xxx/xxx[Procedures regulation].
Amendment 755 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2
Article 37 – paragraph 2
2. National dispersal practices of beneficiaries of international protection shall be carried out to the extent possible without discrimination of beneficiaries of international protection and shall ensure equal opportunities regarding access to accommodationin an appropriate and cost-effective manner.
Amendment 759 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 1
Article 38 – paragraph 1
1. In order to facilitate the integration of beneficiaries of international protection into society, beneficiaries of international protection and their family members as referred to in the Article 2(9) shall have access to integration measures provided by the Member States, in particular language courses, civic orientation and integration programs and vocational training which take into account their specific needs.
Amendment 766 #
2016/0223(COD)
2. Member States mayshall make participation in integration measures compulsory. Access to the social benefits shall depend on the effective participation and successful conclusion of the beneficiaries of international protection in integration programs.
Amendment 771 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1
Article 39 – paragraph 1
Amendment 773 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1
Article 41 – paragraph 1
Authorities and other organisations applying the provisions of this Regulation shall have received or shall receive the necessary training and shall be bound by the confidentiality principle, as defined in national law, in relation to any information about any individual case that they obtain in the course of their work without prejudice to sufficiently anonymised data for the purposes of public scrutiny.
Amendment 791 #
2016/0223(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 2
Article 44 – paragraph 2
The Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Article 4(3a) of this Directive by [sixone months after the entry into force of this Regulation] at the latest. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof.
Amendment 54 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) A common policy on asylum, including a Common European Asylum System (CEAS), which is based on the full and inclusive application of the Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, as supplemented by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967, is a constituent part of the European Union’s objective of progressively establishing an area of freedom, security and justice open to those who, forced by circumstances, legitimately seek protection in the Union, thus affirming the principle of non-refoulement. Such a policy should be governed by the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, including its financial implications, between the Member Statesaffordability, taking into account the absorption capacities of the receiving societies as well as maximal self-reliance of the seekers of protection.
Amendment 57 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Reception conditions continue to vary considerably between Member States both in terms of how the reception system is organised and in terms of the standards provided to applicants. The persistent problems in ensuring adherevariance toin the reception standards required for a dignified treatment of applicants in someamong Member States has contributed to a disproportionate burden falling on a few Member States with generally high reception standards which are then under pressure to reduce their standards. More equal reception standards set at an appropriate and economically realistic level across all Member States will contribute to a more dignified treatment and fairer distribution of applicants across the EUnion thus contributing to the faster processing of applications.
Amendment 60 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The resources of the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund and of the European Union Agency for Asylum should be sparingly mobilised to provide adequatesupplementary support to Member States’ efforts in implementing the standards set in this Directive, including to those Member States which are faced with specific and disproportionate pressures on their asylum systems, due in particular to their geographical or demographic situation.
Amendment 61 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) In order to ensure equal treatment of applicants throughout the Union, this Directive should apply during all stages and types of procedures concerning applications for international protection, in all locations and facilities hosting applicants and for as long as they are allowed to remain on the territory of the Member States as applicants. This Directive does not apply to persons that have not lodged an application for international protection or are no longer considered to be applicants. It is necessary to clarify that material reception conditions should be made available to applicants as from the moment when the person expresses his or her wish to apply for international protection to officials of the determining authority, as well as any officials of other authorities which are designated as competent to receive and register applications or which assist the determining authority to receive such applications in line with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Procedures Regulation].
Amendment 68 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Standard conditions for the reception of applicants that will suffice to ensure them a dignified standard of living and comparable living conditions in all Member States should be laid down. The harmonisation of conditions for the reception of applicants should help to limit the secondary movements of applicants influenced by the variety of conditions for their reception.
Amendment 73 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Harmonised EUnion rules on the documents to be issued to applicants make it more difficult for applicants to move in an unauthorised manner within the Union. It needs to be clarified that Member States should only provide applicants with a travel document when serious humanitarian or other imperative reasons arise. The validity of travel documents should also be limited to the purpose and duration needed for the reason for which they are issued. Serious humanitarian reasons could for instance be considered when an applicant needs to travel to another State for medical treatment or to visit relatives in particular cases, such as for visits to close relatives who are seriously ill, or to attend marriages or funerals of close relatives. Other imperative reasons could include situations where applicants who have been granted access to the labour market are required to perform essential travel for work purposes, where applicants are required to travel as part of study curricula or where minors are travelling with foster families.
Amendment 97 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Where an applicant has been assigned a specific place of residence but has not complied with this obligation, there needs to be a demonstrated riskit should be considered as being an indication that thean applicant may abscond in order, providing the grounds for the applicant to be detained. In all circumstances, special care must be taken to ensure that the length of the detention is proportionate and that it ends as soon as the obligation put on the applicant has been fulfilled or there are no longer reasons for believing that he or she will not fulfil this obligation. The applicant must also have been made aware of the obligation in question and of the consequences of non- compliance.
Amendment 98 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) With regard to administrative procedures relating to the grounds for detention, the notion of ‘due diligence’ at least requires that Member States take concrete and meaningful steps to ensure that the time needed to verify the grounds for detention is as short as possible, and that there is a real prospect that such verification can be carried out successfully in the shortest possible time. Detention shall not exceed the time reasonably needed to complete the relevant procedures.
Amendment 99 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Applicants who are in detention should be treated with full respect for human dignity and their reception should be specifically designed to meet their needs in that situation. In particular, Member States should ensure that Article 24 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 37 of the 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child is applied.
Amendment 100 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) When deciding on housing arrangements, Member States should take due account of the best interests of the child, as well as of the particular circumstances of any applicant who is dependent on family members or other close relatives such as unmarried minor siblings already present in the Member State.
Amendment 101 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) In applying this Directive, Member States should seek to ensure full compliance with the principles of the best interests of the child and of family unity, in accordance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms respectively. Reception conditions need to be adapted to the specific situation of minors, whether unaccompanied or within families, with due regard to their security, physical and emotional care and provided in a manner that encourages their general development.
Amendment 106 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) An applicant's entitlement to material reception conditions under this Directive mayshould be curtailed in certain circumstances such as where an applicant has absconded to another Member State from the Member State where he or she is required to be present. However, Member States should in all circumstances ensure access to health care and a dignified standard of living for applicants in line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, in particular by providing for the applicant's subsistence and basic needs both in terms of physical safety and dignity and in terms of interpersonal relationships, with due regard to the inherent vulnerabilities of the person as applicant for international protection and that of his or her family or caretaker. Due regard must also be given to applicants with special reception needs. The specific needs of children, in particular with regard to respect for the child's right to education and access to healthcare have to be taken into accountemergency health care for applicants. Due regard must also be given to applicants with special reception needs. When a minor is in a Member State other than the one in which he or she is required to be present, Member States should provide the minor with access to suitable educational activities pending the transfer to the Member State responsible. The specific needs of women applicants who have experienced gender-based harm should be taken into account, including via ensuring access, at different stages of the asylum procedure, to medical care, legal support, and to appropriate trauma counselling and psycho-social care.
Amendment 109 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Recital 33
Amendment 112 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) In order to promote the self- sufficiency of applicants and to limit wide discrepancies between Member States, it is essential to provide clear rules on the applicants’ access to the labour market and to ensure that such access is effective, by not imposing conditions that effectively hinder an applicant from seeking employment. Labour market tests used to give priority to nationals or to other Union citizens or to third-country nationals legally resident in the Member State concerned should not hinder effective access for applicants to the labour market and should be implemented without prejudice to the principle of preference for Union citizens as expressed in the relevant provisions of the applicable Acts of Accession.
Amendment 118 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) The maximum time frame for access to the labour market should be aligned with the duration of the examination procedure on the merits. In order to increase integration prospects and self-sufficiency of applicants, earlier access to the labour market is encouraged where the application is likely to be well-founded, including when its examination has been prioritised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Procedures Regulation]. Member States should therefore consider reducing that time period as much as possible with a view to ensuring that applicants have access to the labour market no later than 3 months from the date when the application was lodged in cases where the application is likely to be well-founded. Member States should however not grant access to the labour market to applicants whose application for international protection is likely to be unfounded and for which an accelerated examination procedure is applied.
Amendment 122 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) Once applicants are granted access to the labour market, they should be entitled to a common set of rights based on equal treatment with nationals. Working conditions should cover at least pay and dismissal, health and safety requirements at the workplace, working time and leave, taking into account collective agreements in force. Applicants should also enjoy equal treatment as regards freedom of association and affiliation, education and vocational training, the recognition of professional qualifications and social security.
Amendment 123 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) A Member State should recognise professional qualifications acquired by an applicant in another Member State in the same way as those of citizens of the Union and should take into account qualifications acquired in a third country in accordance with Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council.25 Special measures also need to be considered with a view to effectively addressing the practical difficulties encountered by applicants concerning the authentication of their foreign diploma, certificates or other evidence of formal qualifications, in particular due to the lack of documentary evidence and their inability to meet the costs related to the recognition procedures. __________________ 25 Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications (OJ L 255, 30.9.2005, p. 22).
Amendment 124 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38
Recital 38
Amendment 130 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) To ensure that the material reception conditions provided to applicants comply with the principles set out in this Directive, it is necessary to further clarify the nature of those conditions, including not only housing, food and clothing but also essential non-food items such as sanitary items. It is also necessary that Member States determine the level of material reception conditions provided in the form of financial allowances or vouchers onand the basis of repossible vant references to ensure adequate standards of living for nationals, such as minimum income benefits, minimum wages, minimum pensions, unemployment benefits and social assistance benefitriation thereof on the basis of relevant references. That does not mean that the amount granted should be the same as for nationals. Member States may grant less but not more favourable treatment to applicants than to nationals as specified in this Directive.
Amendment 132 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) In order to restrict the possibility of abuse of the reception system, Member States should be able to provide material reception conditions only to the extent applicants or their family members as defined in this Directive and when present in the Member State, do not have sufficient means to provide for themselves. When assessing the resources of an applicant and requiring an applicanthis or her family members and requiring them to cover or contribute to the material reception conditions, Member States should observe the principle of proportionality and take into account the individual circumstances of the applicant and the need to respect his or her dignity or personal integrity, including the applicant's special reception needs. Applicants should not be required to cover or contribute to the costs of their necessary health care. The possibility of abuse of the reception system should also be restricted by specifying the circumstances in which accommodation, food, clothing and other essential non-food items provided in the form of financial allowances or vouchers may be replaced with reception conditions provided in kind and the circumstances in which the daily allowance may be reduced or withdrawn while at the same time ensuring a dignified standard of living for all applicants.
Amendment 135 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 45
Recital 45
(45) Experience shows that contingency planning is needed to ensure adequate reception of applicants in cases where Member States are confronted with a disproportionate number of applicants for international protection. National contingency plans should provide the national authorities with the necessary legislative framework to perform push- backs at internal borders in case of a sudden influx of irregular migrants. Whether the measures envisaged in Member States' contingency plans are adequate should be regularly monitored and assessed.
Amendment 136 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) Member States should not have the power to introduce or maintain more favourable provisions for third-country nationals and stateless persons who ask for international protection from a Member State unless when explicitly mentioned in this Directive.
Amendment 137 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) Member States are also invited to apply the provisions of this Directive as a maximum level of reception conditions in connection with procedures for deciding on applications for forms of protection other than that provided for under Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Qualification Regulation].
Amendment 138 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) Since the objective of this Directive, namely to establish common standards for the reception conditions of applicants in Member States, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale and effects of this Directive, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.
Amendment 140 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3
(3) ‘family members’: means family members as defined in Article [2(9)] of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX29 [Qualification Regulation]; __________________ 29 OJ C […], […], p. […]., in so far as the family already existed in the country of origin, the following members of the applicant’s family who are present in the same Member State in relation to the application for international protection: the spouse of the applicant, the unmarried minor children of the applicant and the parents of the unmarried minor applicant;
Amendment 146 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
(13) ‘applicant with special reception needs’: means an applicant who is in need of special guarantees in order to benefit from the rights and comply with the obligations provided for in this Directive, such as applicants who are minors, unaccompanied minors, disabled people, elderly people, pregnant women, single parents with minor children, victims of human trafficking, persons with serious illnesses, persons with mental disorders and persons who have been subjected to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violence, such as victims of female genital mutilation.
Amendment 154 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4
Article 4
Amendment 162 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 169 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Member States shall provide applicants with a travel document only when the identity of the applicant has been verified and when serious humanitarian or other imperative reasons arise that require their presence in another State. The validity of the travel document shall be limited to the purpose and duration needed for the reason for which it is issued. For safety reasons, the travel document cannot be issued for travelling to a conflict area.
Amendment 176 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. Applicants may move freely within the territory of the host Member State or within an area assigned to them by that Member State. The assigned area shall not affect the unalienable sphere of private life and shall allow sufficient scope for guaranteeing access to all benefits under this Directive.
Amendment 183 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) public interest or public order , such as allowing for even distribution of applicants to the area of the Member State;
Amendment 221 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Article 7 – paragraph 6
6. Member States mayshall make provision of the material reception conditions subject to actual residence by the applicants in a specific place.
Amendment 233 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
3. An applicant mayshall be detained only:
Amendment 234 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) in order to determine or verify his or her identity or nationality; or when the information given by the applicant concerning his or her identity or nationality proves to be false;
Amendment 240 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point e
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point e
(e) when he or she is detained subject to a return procedure under Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34, in order to prepare the return and/or carry out the removal process, andor the Member State concerned can substantiate on the basis of objective criteria, including that he or she already had the opportunity to access the asylum procedure, that there are reasonable grounds to believe that he or she is making the application for international protection merely in order to delay or frustrate the enforcement of the return decision; __________________ 34 Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals (OJ L 343, 23.12.2011, p.1).
Amendment 241 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Article 8 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that the rules concerning alternatives to detention, such as regular reporting to the authorities, the deposit of a financial guarantee, the use of electronic ankle monitors, or an obligation to stay at an assigned place, are laid down in national law.
Amendment 242 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Administrative procedures relevant to the grounds for detention set out in Article 8(3) shall be executed with due diligence. Delays in administrative procedures that cannot be attributed to the applicant shall not justify a continuation of detention.
Amendment 244 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Amendment 248 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 5
Article 9 – paragraph 5
5. Detention shall be reviewed by a judicial authority at reasonable intervals of time, ex officio and/or at the request of the applicant concerned, in particular whenever it is of a prolonged duration, relevant circumstances arise or new information becomes available which may affect the lawfulness of detention.
Amendment 249 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
In cases of a judicial review of the detention order provided for in paragraph 3, Member States shall ensure that applicants have access tocan request free legal assistance and representation. This shall include, at least, the preparation of the required procedural documents and participation in the hearing before the judicial authorities on behalf of the applicant.
Amendment 250 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 7 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 7 – introductory part
7. Member States mayshall also provide that free legal assistance and representation are granted:
Amendment 251 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 7 – point a
Article 9 – paragraph 7 – point a
(a) only to those who lack sufficient resources; and/or
Amendment 252 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 7 – point b
Article 9 – paragraph 7 – point b
Amendment 253 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 8 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 8 – introductory part
8. Member States mayshall also:
Amendment 254 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 9
Article 9 – paragraph 9
9. Member States mayshall demand to be reimbursed wholly or partially for any costs granted if and when the applicant’s financial situation has improved considerably or if the decision to grant such costs was taken on the basis of false information supplied by the applicant.
Amendment 255 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that family members, legal advisers or counsellors and persons representing relevant non-governmental organisations recognised by the Member State concernedand counsellors have the possibility to communicate with and visit applicants in conditions that respect privacy. Limits to access to the detention facility may be imposed only where, by virtue of national law, they are objectively necessary for the security, public order or administrative management of the detention facility, provided that access is not thereby severely restricted or rendered impossible.
Amendment 260 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Minors shall be detained only as a measure of last resort and after it having been established that other less coercive alternative measures cannot be applied effectively. Such detention shall be for the shortest period of time and all efforts shall be made to release the detained minors and place them in accommodation suitable for minors.
Amendment 266 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Where minors are detained, their right to education must be secured and they shall have the possibility to engage in leisure activities, including play and recreationaly shall have the possibility to engage in activities appropriate to their age.
Amendment 269 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 274 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Unaccompanied minors shall neverould not be detained in prison accommodation where that can reasonably be avoided.
Amendment 278 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Amendment 281 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 283 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 6
Article 11 – paragraph 6
6. In duly justified cases and for a reasonable period that shall be as short as possible Member States may derogate from the third subparagraph of paragraph 2, paragraph 4 and the first subparagraph of paragraph 5, when the applicant is detained at a border post or in a transit zone, with the exception of the cases referred to in Article 41 of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Procedures Regulation].
Amendment 287 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shallmay grant to minor children of applicants and to applicants who are minors access to the education system under similar conditions as their own nationals for so long as an expulsion measure against them or their parents is not actually enforcedand residents until receiving their asylum decision. Such education may be provided in accommodation centres.
Amendment 291 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 294 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Preparatory classes, including language classes, shallmay be provided to minors where it is necessary to facilitate their access to and participation in the education system as set out in paragraph 1.
Amendment 295 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. Where access to the education system as set out in paragraph 1 is not possible due to the specific situation of the minor, the Member State concerned shallmay offer other education arrangements in accordance with its national law and practice.
Amendment 313 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
For reasons of labour market policies, Member States may verify whether a vacancy could be filled by nationals of the Member State concerned or by other Union citizens, or by third-country nationals lawfully residing in that Member State and give them priority for vacancies.
Amendment 323 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point d
(d) recognition of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications in the context of existing procedures for recognition of foreign qualifications, while facilitating, to the extent possible, full access for those applicants who cannot provide documentary evidence of their qualifications to appropriate schemes for the assessment, validation and accreditation of their prior learning.
Amendment 325 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point e
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point e
Amendment 336 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Article 15 – paragraph 4
4. Access to the labour market shall not be withdrawn during appeals procedures, where an appeal against a negative decision in a regular procedure has suspensive effect, until such time as a negative decision on the appeal is notifiedin order to discourage unfounded appeals with the sole aim of prolonged labour market access.
Amendment 351 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall ensure that material reception conditions provide an adequate minimum standard of living for applicants, which guarantees their subsistence and protects their physical and mental health.
Amendment 352 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 355 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3
Article 16 – paragraph 3
3. Member States mayshall make the provision of all or some of the material reception conditions subject to the condition that applicants do not have sufficient means to have a standard of living adequate for their health or their family members, as defined in Article 2(3) and when present in the Member State, do not have sufficient meands to enable their subsistence.
Amendment 358 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Member States mayshall require applicants or their family members to cover or contribute to the cost of the material reception conditions provided for in paragraph 3, if the applicants or their family members have sufficient resources, for example if they have been working for a reasonable period of time.
Amendment 360 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
If it transpires that an applicant or their family members had sufficient means to cover material reception conditions at the time when those basic needs were being covered, Member States mayshall ask the applicant for a refund.
Amendment 362 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 5
Article 16 – paragraph 5
5. When assessing the resources of an applicant or his or her family members, when requiring an applicantthose to cover or contribute to the cost of the material reception conditions or when asking an applicantthem for a refund in accordance with paragraph 4, Member States shall observe the principle of proportionality. Member States shall also take into account the individual circumstances of the applicant and the need to respect his or her dignity or personal integrity, including the applicant's special reception needs. Member States shall in all circumstances ensure that the applicant is provided with a standard of living which guarantees his or her subsistence and protects his or her physical and mental health.
Amendment 368 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 6
Article 16 – paragraph 6
6. Where Member States provide material reception conditions in the form of financial allowances or vouchers, the amount thereof shall be determined on the basis of the level(s) established by the Member State concerned either by law or by the practice to ensure adequate standards of living for nationals. Member States may grant less favourable treatment to applicants compared with nationals in this respect, in particular where material support is partially provided in kind or where those level(s), applied for nationals, aim to ensure a standard of living higher than that prescribed for applicants under this Directive. Member States shall inform the Commission and the European Union Agency for Asylum of the levels of reference applied by national law or practice with a view to determining the level of financial assistance provided to applicants in accordance with this paragraph.
Amendment 372 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) applicants have the possibility of communicating with relatives, legal advisers or counsellors, persons representing UNHCR and other relevant national, international and non- governmental organisations and bodies;.
Amendment 373 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) family members, legal advisers or counsellors, persons representing UNHCR and relevant non-governmental organisations recognised by the Member State concerned are granted access in order to assist the applicants. Limits on such access may be imposed only on grounds relating to the security of the premises and of the applicants.
Amendment 374 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall take into consideration gender and age-specific concerns and the situation of applicants with special reception needs when providing material reception conditions. However, the treatment of applicants shall not be more favourable than the treatment generally accorded to the residents and nationals of the Member State in comparable situations and matters.
Amendment 377 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 4
Article 17 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall take appropriate measures to prevent assault and gender-based violence, including sexual assault and harassment towards applicants and nationals alike when providing accommodation and leisure possibilities.
Amendment 382 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 7
Article 17 – paragraph 7
7. Persons providing material reception conditions, including those working in accommodation centres, shall be adequately trained and shall be bound by the confidentiality rules provided for in national law in relation to any information they obtain in the course of their work. However, sufficiently anonymised data concerning the material reception conditions provided shall be made publically available on a regular basis by the competent authorities, as defined in Article 26, for public scrutiny.
Amendment 384 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 8
Article 17 – paragraph 8
8. Member States mayshall involve applicants in managing the material resources and non-material aspects of life in the centre through an advisory board or council representing residents.
Amendment 385 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
9. In duly justified cases, Member States may exceptionally set modalities for material reception conditions different frominferior to those provided for in this Article, for a reasonable period which shall be as short as possible, when:
Amendment 386 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 17 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) moderately priced housing capacities normally available are temporarily exhausted.
Amendment 391 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 401 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17a – paragraph 2
Article 17a – paragraph 2
Amendment 404 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17a – paragraph 3
Article 17a – paragraph 3
Amendment 407 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that applicants, irrespective of where they are required to be present in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Dublin Regulation], receive the necessary health care which shall include, at least,only emergency care and essentialacute treatment of severe illnesses, including of serious mental disorders.
Amendment 411 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall provide necessary medical or other assistance to applicants who have special reception needs, including appropriate mental health care where needed and who are present in a Member State in which they are required to be present in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Dublin Regulation], including appropriate mental health care where needed. Such assistance shall not be superior in scope or content to that provided to residents of the Member State in comparable situations.
Amendment 416 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. With regard to applicants who are required to be present on their territory in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Dublin Regulation], Member States mayshall, in the situations described in paragraph 2 :
Amendment 426 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e
(e) has seriously breached the rules of the accommodation centre or behaved in a seriously violent way; or
Amendment 436 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point h
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point h
(h) has been sent back after having absconded to another Member State.; or
Amendment 437 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point h a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point h a (new)
(ha) has travelled to a conflict zone without generally acceptable justification for such travel.
Amendment 440 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
In relation to points (a) and (b), when the applicant is traced or voluntarily reports to the competent authority, a duly motivated decision, based on the reasons for the disappearance, such as a documented serious illness of the applicant, shall be taken on the reinstallation of the grant of some or all of the material reception conditions replaced, withdrawn or reduced.
Amendment 445 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 3
Article 19 – paragraph 3
3. Decisions for replacement, reduction or withdrawal of material reception conditions shall be taken objectively and impartially on the merits of the individual case and reasons shall be given. Decisions shall be based on the particular situation of the person concerned, especially with regard to applicants with special reception needs, taking into account the principle of proportionality. Member States shall under all circumstances ensure access to health care in accordance with Article 18 and shall ensure a dignifiedminimum standard of living for all applicants.
Amendment 468 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 472 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 3
Article 22 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that minors have access to leisure activities, including play and recreational activities appropriate to their age within the premises and accommodation centres referred to in Article 17(1)(a) and (b) and to open- air activities.
Amendment 474 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 4
Article 22 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure access to rehabilitation services for minors who have been victims of any form of abuse, neglect, exploitation, torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, or who have suffered from armed conflicts, and ensure that appropriate mental health care is developed and qualified counselling is are provided when needed and available.
Amendment 476 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 5
Article 22 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall ensure that minor children of applicants or applicants who are minors are lodged with their parents or with the adult responsible for them and their unmarried minor siblings whether by law or by the practice of the Member State concerned, provided it is in the best interests of the minors concerned.
Amendment 479 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 6
Article 22 – paragraph 6
6. Those working with minors, including with unaccompanied minors, shall not have a verified record of child- related crimes or offenses and shall receive continuous and appropriate training concerning the rights and needs of unaccompanied minors, including concerning any applicable child safeguarding standards, and shall be bound by the confidentiality rules provided for in national law, in relation to any information about any individual case they obtain in the course of their work.
Amendment 494 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Member States may place unaccompanied minors aged 16 or over in accommodation centres for adult applicants, if it is in their best interests, as prescribed in Article 22 (2) or in the best interests of others.
Amendment 495 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Amendment 498 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 24 – paragraph 1
Article 24 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that persons who have been subjected to gender-based harm, torture, rape or other serious acts of violence receive the necessary treatment for the damage caused by such acts, in particular access to appropriate medical and psychological treatment or care.
Amendment 502 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 24 – paragraph 2
Article 24 – paragraph 2
2. Those working with victims of torture, rape or other serious acts of violence shall have had and shall continue to receive appropriate training concerning their victims’ needs, and shall be bound by the confidentiality rules provided for in national law, in relation to any information about any individual case they obtain in the course of their work.
Amendment 504 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 506 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
3. Member States may alsoshall provide that free legal assistance and representation are granted:
Amendment 507 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 3 –subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 25 – paragraph 3 –subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) only to those who lack sufficient resources; and/or
Amendment 510 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 512 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 25 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Member States mayshall also:
Amendment 516 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 5
Article 25 – paragraph 5
5. Member States mayshall demand to be reimbursed wholly or partially for any costs granted if and when the applicant’s financial situation has improved considerably or if the decision to grant such costs was taken on the basis of false information supplied by the applicant.
Amendment 526 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 28 – paragraph 1
Article 28 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall draw up a contingency plan setting out the planned measures to be taken to ensure an adequate reception of applicants in accordance with this Directive in cases where the Member State is confronted with a disproportionate number of applicants for international protection. The applicants for international protection are to be understood as those required to be present on its territory, including those for whom the Member State is responsible in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Dublin Regulation], taking into account the corrective allocation mechanism outlined in Chapter VII of that Regulation.
Amendment 528 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
The contingency plan should include a legislative framework for the national authorities to operate in case of a sudden influx of large numbers of irregular migrants. An important tool in countering significant migratory pressures is to perform push-backs at internal borders. Proper guidelines for the use of the push- back mechanism should therefore be included into the contingency plan.
Amendment 536 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 30 – paragraph 1
Article 30 – paragraph 1
By [threewo years after the entry into force of this Directive] at the latest, and at least every fivetwo years thereafter, the Commission shall present a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Directive and shall propose any amendments that are necessary.
Amendment 540 #
2016/0222(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 30 – paragraph 2
Article 30 – paragraph 2
Member States shall at the request of the Commission send the necessary information for drawing up the report by [two year18 months after the entry into force of this Directive] and every fivthree years thereafter.
Amendment 131 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) The European Union Agency for Asylum should provide adequate support in the implementation of this Regulation, in particular by establishing the reference key for the distribution of asylum seekers under the corrective allocation mechanism, and by adapting the figures underlying the reference key annually, as well as the reference key based on Eurostat data.
Amendment 177 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In order to ensure that the aims of this Regulation are achieved and obstacles to its application are prevented, in particular in order to avoid absconding and secondary movements between Member States, it is necessary to establish clear obligations to be complied with by the applicant in the context of the procedure, of which he or she should be duly informed in a timely manner. Violation of those legal obligations should lead to appropriate and proportionate procedural consequences for the applicant and to appropriate and proportionate consequences in terms of his or her reception conditions. In line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the Member State where such an applicant is present should in any case ensure that the immediate material needs of that person are covered.
Amendment 205 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) Proper registration of all asylum applications in the EU under a unique application number should help detect multiple applications and prevent irregular secondary movements and asylum shopping. An automated system should be established for the purpose of facilitating the application of this Regulation. It should enable registration of asylum applications lodged in the EU, effective monitoring of the share of applications of each Member State and a correct application of the corrective allocation mechanism.
Amendment 212 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) In accordance with Article 80 of the Treaty, Union acts should, whenever necessary, contain appropriate measures to give effect to the principle of solidarity. A corrective allocation mechanism should be established in order to ensure a fair sharing of responsibility between Member States and a swift access of applicants to procedures for granting international protection in situations when a Member State is confronted with a disproportionate number of applications for international protection for which it is responsible under this Regulation.
Amendment 220 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
Amendment 233 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
Amendment 242 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
Amendment 249 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
Amendment 264 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) The [General Data Protection Regulation (EU) .../2016] applies to the processing of personal data by the Member States under this Regulation from the date set out in that Regulation; until this date Directive 95/46/EC applies. Member States should implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure and be able to demonstrate that processing is performed in accordance with that Regulation and the provisions specifying its requirements in this Regulation. In particular those measures should ensure the security of personal data processed under this Regulation and in particular to prevent unlawful or unauthorised access or disclosure, alteration or loss of personal data processed. The competent supervisory authority or authorities of each Member State should monitor the lawfulness of the processing of personal data by the authorities concerned, including of the transmission to and from the automated system and to the authorities competent for carrying out security checks.
Amendment 279 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
Amendment 338 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o
Amendment 341 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point p
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point p
Amendment 343 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q
Amendment 366 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Any Member State shall retain the right to send an applicant to a safe third country, subject to the rules and safeguards laid down in Directive 2013/32/EU.
Amendment 776 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34
Article 34
Amendment 815 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35
Article 35
Amendment 847 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36
Article 36
Application of the reference key 1. Where the threshold referred to in Article 34(2) is reached, the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) shall apply the reference key referred to in Article 35 to those Member States with a number of applications for which they are the Member States responsible below their share pursuant to Article 35(1) and notify the Member States thereof. 2. Applicants who lodged their application in the benefitting Member State after notification of allocation referred to in Article 34(5) shall be allocated to the Member States referred to in paragraph 1, and these Member States shall determine the Member State responsible; 3. Applications declared inadmissible or examined in accelerated procedure in accordance with Article 3(3) shall not be subject to allocation. 4. On the basis of the application of the reference key pursuant to paragraph 1, the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) shall indicate the Member State of allocation and communicate this information not later than 72 hours after the registration referred to in Article 22(1) to the benefitting Member State and to the Member State of allocation, and add the Member State of allocation in the electronic file referred to in Article 23(2).rticle 36 deleted
Amendment 872 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37
Article 37
Amendment 924 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38
Article 38
Amendment 934 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39
Article 39
Amendment 941 #
2016/0133(COD)
Amendment 955 #
2016/0133(COD)
Amendment 961 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42
Article 42
Amendment 970 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43
Article 43
Amendment 990 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 1
Article 47 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall notify the Commission without delay of the specific authorities responsible for fulfilling the obligations arising under this Regulation, and any amendments thereto. The Member States shall ensure that those authorities have the necessary resources for carrying out their tasks and in particular for replying within the prescribed time limits to requests for information, requests to take charge, take back notifications and, if applicable, complying with their obligations under the allocation mechanism .
Amendment 995 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 2
Article 50 – paragraph 2
2. The competent supervisory authority or authorities of each Member State shall monitor the lawfulness of the processing of personal data by the authorities referred to in Article 47 of the Member State in question, including of the transmission to and from the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) and to the authorities competent for carrying out checks referred to in Article 40.
Amendment 999 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 2
Article 53 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1007 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 1
Article 58 – paragraph 1
Amendment 1011 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 2
Article 59 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1013 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I
Annex I
Amendment 422 #
2016/0131(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) verify the asylum and reception systems, capabilities, infrastructure, equipment, staff available, including for translation and interpretation in Member States, financial resources and the capacity of Member States' asylum authorities, including theand that there are sufficient financial and human resources for the Member States´ judicial systems, to handle and manage asylum cases efficiently and correctly.
Amendment 496 #
2016/0131(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point b
Amendment 500 #
2016/0131(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point g
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point g
Amendment 534 #
2016/0131(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point h
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point h
(h) regarding assistance with applications for international protection, including as regardwhich excludes the examination of such applications, specific information on the tasks that the asylum support teams or the experts from the asylum intervention pool may perform as well as reference to applicable national and Union law;
Amendment 554 #
2016/0131(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the registration of applications for international protection and, where requested by Member States, the examination of such applications;
Amendment 563 #
2016/0131(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3
Article 22 – paragraph 3
Amendment 569 #
2016/0131(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 4
Article 22 – paragraph 4
4. For the purposes of paragraph 3, the Executive Director shall, within two working days from the date of adoption of the Commissionuncil decision, determine the actions needed to be taken for the practical execution of the measures identified in the Commission decision. In parallel, the Executive Director and the Member State concerned shall agree on the operational plan.
Amendment 587 #
2016/0131(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) when handling applications for international protection from children or vulnerable persons, upon request of Member States, as referred to in Article 13(2) and Article 16(3)(b) and (c);
Amendment 592 #
2016/0131(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 594 #
2016/0131(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – point d
Amendment 614 #
2016/0131(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 5
Article 35 – paragraph 5
5. The Agency shall promote and assist in the swift return of irregular migrants, advocate and participate in the implementation of international agreements concluded by the Union with third countries, within the framework of the external relations policy of the Union and using necessary incentives for compliance, and regarding matters covered by this Regulation.
Amendment 681 #
2016/0131(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 66 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 66 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
No later than three years from the day of entry into force of this Regulation, and every five years thereafter, the Commission shall commission an evaluation to assess, in particular, the Agency's performance in relation to its objectives, mandate and tasks. That evaluation shall cover the Agency's impact on practical cooperation on asylum-related matters and on the CEAS. The evaluation shall take due regard of progress made, within its mandate, including assessing whether additional measures are necessary to ensure effective solidarity and sharing of responsibilities with Member States subject to particular pressure.
Amendment 205 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) Interoperability should be established between the EES and the national Advance Passenger Information systems established in each Member State in accordance with Council Directive 2004/82/EC1a. _________________ 1aCouncil Directive 2004/82/EC of 29 April 2004 on the obligation of carriers to communicate passenger data (OJ L 261, 6.8.2004, p. 24).
Amendment 206 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 b (new)
Recital 12 b (new)
(12b) Carriers should be informed whether or not third-country nationals holding a single or double entry visa have already used the visa through an OK/NOT OK answer conveyed through the Customs Response Message (CUSRES) in the interactive Advance Passenger Information (API) system. The Commission should comply with the standards and recommended practices laid down in Annex 9 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation signed on 7 December 1944 in order to ensure that the EES is compatible with established API systems.
Amendment 277 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) The same retention period of five years would be necessary for data on persons who have not exited the territory of the Member States within the authorised period of stay in order to support the identification and return process and for persons whose entry for a short stay {or on the basis of a touring visa} has been refused. The data should be deleted after the period of five years, unless there are grounds to delete it earlier.
Amendment 426 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. Carriers may use the secure internet access to the web service referred to in paragraph 1 to verifyshall be informed whether or not third country nationals holding a single or double entry visa have already used the visa. The carrier shall provide the data listed in Article 14(1)(d). The web service shall on that basis provide the carriers with an OK/NOT OK answer. Carriers may store the information sent and by an OK/NOT OK answer conveyed through the CUSRES message of an interactive API system. Carriers may store the answer received.
Amendment 435 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Where a previous individual file has been created, the border authority shall, if necessary, update the individual file data, enter an entry/exit record for each entry and exit in accordance with Articles 14 and 15 or, where applicable, a refusal of entry record in accordance with Article 16. That record shall be linked to the individual file of the third country national concerned. Where applicable, the data referred to in Article 17(1) shall be added to the individual file and the data referred to in Article 17(3) and (4) shall be added to the entry/exit record of the third country national concerned. The different travel documents and identities used legitimately by a third country national shall be added to the third country national's individual file. Where a previous file has been registered and the third country national presents a valid travel document which differs from the one which was previously registered, the data referred underto in Article 14(1)(f) shall also be updated if the facial image reccorded in the chip of the new travel document can be extracted electronically.
Amendment 451 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. If a visa holding third country national benefits from the national facilitation programme of a Member State in accordance with Article 8e of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, the Member State concerned may insert a notification in the individual file of that third country national specifying the national facilitation programme concerned.
Amendment 488 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
2. The competent authority shall be given access to search with one or several of the data referred to in Article 14(1)(a), (b), (c) and (f) and Article 15(1).
Amendment 489 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Article 23 – paragraph 3
3. If the search with the data set out in paragraph 2 indicates that data on the third country national are recorded in the EES, the competent authority shall be given access to consult the data of the individual file of that third country national and the entry/exit records and refusals of entry records with justifications linked to it.
Amendment 606 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) the specifications and conditions for the web-service and for interoperability between the EES and national Advance Passenger Information systems referred to in Article 12;
Amendment 608 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
eu-LISA shall be responsible for the development of the Central System, the National Uniform Interfaces, the Communication Infrastructure and the Secure Communication Channel between the EES Central System and the VIS Central System. It shall also be responsible for the development of the web service and interoperability with national Advance Passenger Information systems referred to in Article 12 in accordance with the specifications and conditions adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 61(2).
Amendment 623 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1
Article 37 – paragraph 1
1. A Member State may keep the alphanumeric data which that Member State entered into the EES, in accordance with the purposes of the EES in its national files and national entry exit system in full respect of Union Law.
Amendment 636 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 3
Article 38 – paragraph 3
3. Transfers of personal data to third countries or international organisations pursuant to paragraph 2 shall not prejudice the rights of applicants for and beneficiaries of international protection, in particular as regards non-refoulement.
Amendment 638 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 4
Article 38 – paragraph 4
4. Personal data obtained from the Central System by a Member State or by Europol for law enforcement purposes shall not, as a rule, be transferred or made available to any third country, international organisation or private entity established in or outside the Union. Theis prohibitioninciple shall also apply if those data are further processed at national level or between Member States within the meaning of Article 2(b) of Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA.
Amendment 707 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 1
Article 64 – paragraph 1
1. eu-LISA shall ensure that procedures are in place to monitor the development of the EES in light of objectives relating to planning and costs and to monitor the functioning of the EES in light of objectives relating to the technical output, cost-effectiveness, security and quality of service as well as facilitation of border checks.
Amendment 719 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 8 – point e
Article 64 – paragraph 8 – point e
(e) - the number and type of cases which have ended in successful identifications and subsequent use of biometric data for law enforcement purposes;
Amendment 85 #
2016/0105(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 8d – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 8d – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where a person is granted access to a national facilitation programme established by a Member State pursuant to Article 8e, the border checks carried out through a self-service system on entry may not include examination of the aspects referred to in Article 8(3)(a) (iv) and (v) when crossing the external borders of that Member State or the external borders of another Member States having concluded an agreement with that Member State as referred to in Article 8e(4).
Amendment 94 #
2016/0105(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 8e – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 8e – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Border guards may verify third- country nationals benefiting from the programme on entry pursuant to Article 8(3)(a) and (b) and on exit pursuant to Article 8(3)(g) without electronically comparing biometrics but by comparing a facial image taken from the chip and the facial image of the passenger´s individual EES file with the passenger. Full verification shall be carried out at random and on the basis of a risk analysis.
Amendment 2 #
2015/2121(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes the extra amounts proposed for Frontex, especially for Triton and Poseidon operations regarding the emergency situation faced in the Union; insists that saving lives at sea should be the primary and temporary focus of those operations; however, stresses that the Commission must also examine whether the focus on allocating resources for rescue operations in the Mediterranean is a sustainable and long term solution to the wider challenges faced with regard to migration and the trafficking in human beings;
Amendment 21 #
2015/2121(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a new
Paragraph 5 a new
5a. Stresses that extra allocated resources are also required to support Member States in the efficient and expedient processing of applications through the assistance of EASO; calls upon the Commission to also look at how Union funds can best be allocated to help with an efficient returns programme and the need to tackle the problem of trafficking in countries of origin;
Amendment 25 #
2015/2121(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Concludes that to prevent further loss of life at sea and to further implement the principles of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, and to create a sustainable European Asylum Policy; greater financial resources will be required in the medium and long term.
Amendment 27 #
2015/2121(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a new
Paragraph 7 a new
7a. Urges the Commission to take all the necessary measures to prevent illegal immigration and trafficking in human beings.
Amendment 28 #
2015/2121(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b new
Paragraph 7 b new
7b. Urges the Commission to put pressure on relevant African countries to fight illegal immigration and trafficking in human beings.
Amendment 33 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 20 a (new)
Citation 20 a (new)
- having regard to articles 33 in juncto 35 of the Asylum Procedures Directive 2013/32/EU, and notably the principle of the first country of asylum;
Amendment 112 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the fight against migrant smuggling, trafficking and labour exploitation necessitates both short, medium and long-term responses, including measures to disrupt criminal networks and to bring criminals to justice, the gathering and analysis of data, measures to protect victims and to return irregularly staying migrants, and all asylum seekers who have irregularly crossed the EU's borders, as well as cooperation with third countries and longer-term strategies to address the demand for trafficked and smuggled persons and the root causes of migration which force people into the hands of criminal smugglers;
Amendment 129 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
J a. whereas ineffective management of external borders should invoke automatic sanctions, i.e. the suspension, and where appropriate the loss, of Schengen membership of the EU Member State involved;
Amendment 130 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas the current Visa Code already allows Member States to deviate from the normal admissibility criteria for a vissue visas based ‘on humanitarian grounds’ (Articles 19 and 25); however, notes that there is a application ‘on humanitarian grounds’ (Articles 19 and 25)clear distinction between legal and economic migration, on the one side, and those seeking refuge and asylum, on the other side;
Amendment 133 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
Recital K a (new)
K a. whereas, unless the EU Coast and Border Guard's Return Office systematically performs push-backs to safe harbours, the EU's external borders would not actually be guarded and the influx would not be stemmed;
Amendment 137 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas 86 % of the world’s refugee population is hosted by non-industrialised countries; and whereas criminal networks and smugglers exploit the desperation of people trying to enter the EU while fleeing persecution or war, and of people seeking a better life;
Amendment 142 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas safe and legal routes for refugees to access the EU are limited, and many continue to take the risk of embarking on dangerous routes; and whereas the creation of new safe and lawful routes for asylum seekers and refugees to enter the EU, building on existing legislation and practices, would allow the EU and the Member States to have a better overview of the protection needs and of the inflowmassive and uncontrolled influx of economic migrants and asylum seekers needs to be addressed first, before new legal routes into the EU cand to undermine the business model of the smugglers be explored;
Amendment 155 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
N. whereas EU-third country cooperation is developed through political instruments such as regional dialogues, bilateral dialogues, common agendas for migration and mobility and mobility partnerships, through legal instruments such as migration clauses in ‘global agreements’, readmission agreements, visa facilitation agreements and visa exemption agreements, and through operational instruments such as Regional Protection Programmes (RPP), Regional Development and Protection Programmes (RDPP), Frontex working arrangements and EASO cooperation with third countries; notes that at present readmission agreements with a number of third countries are proving to be ineffective, and the EU should seek to be more ambitious in their implementation and the creation of further agreements following the Valletta Summit;
Amendment 175 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital P a (new)
Recital P a (new)
P a. whereas many Syrian, Eritrean and other asylum seekers had de facto protection in Turkey, before coming to the EU;
Amendment 176 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital P b (new)
Recital P b (new)
P b. whereas, according to articles 33 in juncto 35 of the Asylum Procedures Directive 2013/32/EU, i.e. the principle of the first country of asylum, the application of an asylum seeker who had de jure or de facto protection outside the EU can be declared inadmissible, in order to return this person back to that host country;
Amendment 179 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Recital Q
Q. whereas the working-age population in the EU is projected to decline by 7.5 million by 2020; whereas projecird-country nationals face many difficulties in obtaining recognitions onf the development of labour market needs in the EU points to emerging and future shortages in specific fields; and whereas third-country nationals face many difficulties in obtainingir skills and foreign qualifications, whereas a better recognition of their foreign qualifications, and therefore tend to be over-qualified for their job goes hand in hand with the screening of skills;
Amendment 183 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital R
Recital R
Amendment 192 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital T
Recital T
T. whereas the existing fragmentation of budget lines and responsibilities can make it difficult to provide a comprehensive overview of how funds are used, and even to quantify exactly how much the EU spends on migration; notes that EU funds often can be slow to access for Member States in crisis situations; notes that Member States should look to make contributions through allocating experts and assets on a bilateral basis in order support frontline Member States;
Amendment 200 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital U
Recital U
U. whereas the CEAS includes a set of common rules for a common asylum policy, a uniform asylum status and common asylum procedures valid throughout the Union; whereas, however, many alerts, including the infringement decisions adopted by the Commission, show that the CEAS has not been fully implemented in many Member States; whereas implementation is essential in order to harmonise national laws and promote solidarity among Member States, and to create a system which is fair, effective, and discourages secondary movement across the EU; whereas Member States can seek supporting assistance from EASO to meet the standards required by the CEAS; whereas harmonisation of reception conditions and asylum procedures can avoid stress on countries offering better conditions and are key to responsibility sharing;
Amendment 207 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital V
Recital V
V. whereas the current mechanisms of the Dublin system have failed to be objective, to establish fair criteriaDublin system is the fundamental basis for allocating responsibility for applications for international protection and to provide swift access to protection; whereas the Dublin system is not being applied in practice, and explicit derogations have been adopted with two Council decisions on temporary relocation; and whereas the Commission has announced a proposal for a proper revision of the Dublin III Regulation by March 2016; whereas a good functioning Dublin Regulation with EU Member States being able to take on their responsibilities, is an essential component of the EU's asylum system;
Amendment 214 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Points out that solidarity must be the principle upon which Union action on migration is based; notes thatNotes the principle of solidarity, as set out in Article 80 TFEU, which covers asylum, immigration and border control policies; takes the view that Article 80 provides a legal basis ‘jointly’ with Articles 77-79 TFEU to implement the principle of solidarity in those areastresses that solidarity goes hand in hand with the responsibility of Member States to ensure that all EU rules which have been adopted are efficiently implemented; asks the European Commission to ensure that Member States are applying the EU acquis and asks, when necessary, that the Commission makes swift and effective use of infringement procedures; stresses that good implementation of the entire EU acquis is essential to stabilize the current crisis situation within the EU, and will be more effective than ad hoc decision- making regarding the implementation of EU law, or the creation of any new "magic bullet" laws;
Amendment 232 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Starts from the premise that stabilizing the current crisis and saving lives and must be a firstA priority, and that proper funding, at Union and Member State level, for search and rescue operations is essential is essential in order to carry out search and rescue operations, and operations to combat human traffickers; notes that there has been an increase in the number of irregular arrivals by sea and an alarming increase in the number of deaths at sea, and that a better European response is still required;
Amendment 243 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Takes the view that a permanent,at a robust and effective Union response into search and rescue operations at sea is crucial to preventing an escalating death toll of migrants attempting to cross the Mediterranean Sea;
Amendment 248 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Takes the view that these search and rescue operations should be accompanied by a systematic pushback policy that brings back all intercepted migrants to safe harbours outside the EU's external borders, where their applications will be processed and from where all asylum seekers that had de facto protection outside the EU can be returned to these safe havens, in full respect of EU secondary law, the Geneva Convention 1951, the prohibition of collective expulsion and the principle of non- refoulement;
Amendment 257 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Suggests, in that respect, that search and rescue capacities must be strengthened, and that Member States’' governments mustshould deploy more resources – in terms of financial assistance and assets – in the context of a Union-wide humanitarian operation, dedicated to finding, rescuing and assisting migrants in peril and bringreturning them to the closest place of safety;
Amendment 283 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Holds that any holistic approach to migration must necessarily contain measures aimed at disrupting, preventing, prosecuting and punishing the activities of criminal networks involved in the trafficking and smuggling of people; stresses that a robust EU standard should be established in order to avoid forum shopping on the part of smugglers and traffickers;
Amendment 307 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Calls urgently for progress to be made in order to initiate the third and final phase of EUNAVFOR Med (Operation Sophia);
Amendment 322 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Stresses that the EU must take action in order to disrupt human traffickers; but also the flow of money made as a consequence of this exploitative crime; notes that it is estimated that profits in excess of 20 billion euros are made from trafficking annually which often feeds into other kinds of criminality; notes that it is unfortunate that in a small number of cases, trafficking and smuggling of persons facilitates the entry of criminals; and therefore, it is essential that upon arrival all asylum seekers are fingerprinted under the EURODAC system and processed as soon as possible;
Amendment 346 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Stresses that Member States and the EU should continue to find ways to work with third countries, EUROPOL, and the EEAS in order to identify the modus operandi an routes of criminal groups; encourage third countries to lay down the strongest possible criminal sanctions against human traffickers and smugglers; and find effective ways of patrolling international waters and preventing the departure of trafficked vessels by assisting in their legal destruction;
Amendment 467 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Underlines that there is a need for a permanenta Union-wide resettlement programme, with mandatory participation by Member States, providing resettlement for a meaningfulaximum number of refugees, having regard to the overall number of refugees seeking protection can only be effective if accompanied by a systematic push-back policy in the Union;
Amendment 490 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
Amendment 544 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Observes that the operation of the Dublin III Regulation10 has raised many questions linked to fairness and solidarity in the allocation of the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection; notes that the current system does not take into sufficient consideration the particular migratory pressure faced by Member States situated at the Union’s external borders; believes that the European Union needs to accept the on-going difficulties with the Dublin logic, and to develop options for solidarity both among its Member States and the migrants concernedis under revision in order to increase its effectiveness and practicality during crisis situation; stresses however, that the basic principles of Dublin should not be changed regarding that an asylum seekers should be processed in the first Member State entered; stresses that this is essential in order to ensure proper processing, fingerprinting, the prevention of forum shopping and any possible pull factors; __________________ 10 Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (recast) (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 31).
Amendment 552 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Points out that the pressure placed on the system – as established by the Dublin Regulation – by the rising number of migrants arriving in the Union has shown that, as implemented,some frontline E.U. Member States failed to take responsibility in putting the system – as established by the Dublin Regulation – in practice, and therefore theis system has largely failed to achieve its two primary goals of establishing objective and fair criteria for allocation of responsibility and of providing swift access to international protection;
Amendment 557 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Further points out that, at the same time, the incidence of secondary movements across the Union remains high; views it as self-evident that, since its creation, the Dublin system was not designed to share responsibility among Member States, but that its main purpose was to assign swiftly responsibility for processing an asylum application to a single Member State;
Amendment 582 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Takes the view that the European Union should support thfrontline Member States receiving the most asylum claims with proportionate and adequate financial and technical support; considers that the rationale of using solidarity and responsibility-sharing measures is to enhwith financial and technical support; and that Member States should ensure meaningful and sufficient assets, expertise, and finances the quality and functioning of the CEASo Agencies supporting frontline Member States; such as EASO and FRONTEX, especially in light of FRONTEX's proposed increased mandate;
Amendment 585 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34a. Takes the view that frontline Member States in peril having been offered such support, and refusing it to the disadvantage of other Member States, should be sanctioned;
Amendment 591 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
Amendment 615 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
Amendment 639 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Emphasises that hosting Member States must offer refugees support and opportunities to integrate and build a life in their new society and – as provided for in the Qualifications Directive12 – this should also include effective access to democratic structures in society; emphasises that integration is a two-way process and that respect for the values upon which the EU is built must be an integral part of the integration process; __________________ 12 Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection granted (OJ L 337, 20.12.2011, p. 9).
Amendment 657 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 a (new)
Paragraph 40 a (new)
40 a. Emphasises that reception of asylum seekers in their region of origin could better contribute to their integration in a new community;
Amendment 658 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 b (new)
Paragraph 40 b (new)
40 b. Calls on the Commission to review the Qualifications Directive in line with the Convention of Geneva of 1951, so that EU Member States can establish and conduct effective national activation and integration policies, taking into account inter alia the 'unemployment trap' caused by having to provide refugees with a minimum subsistence allowance;
Amendment 672 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
Amendment 739 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. Understands that the safeStresses that at present the rate of return of s for those people who, following an individual assessment of their asylum application, are determined not to be eligible for protection in the Union is something that must be carried out as part of the proper implementation of the CEASrsons who do not qualify for asylum or refuge in the EU is far too low; thus overburdening the system and preventing genuine asylum seekers from receiving assistance and causing shortages in services and reception facilities in Member States; stresses that the safe return of individuals is part of EU law, as much as any other legal instrument which forms part of the EU acquis; calls for any practical obstacles in place to be removed, in order to better assist returns;
Amendment 784 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
Paragraph 51
51. Suggests that any attempt by Member States to ‘push back’ migrants who have not been given the opportunity to present asylum claims runs contrary toNotes that Member States who return migrants from the EU's external border should do so in compliance with Union and international law, and that the Commission should take appropriate action against any Member State that attempts such ‘push backs’international agreements, which entails inter alia the possibility of push backs to safe harbours where asylum applications can be treated;
Amendment 801 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Acknowledges the recent Commission proposal for a Union list of safe countries of origin, amending the Asylum Procedures Directive13 ; observes that if such a Union list would become obligatory for Member States it could, in principle, be an important tool for facilitatinghaving a common approach to returns and speeding up the asylum process, including return; __________________ 13 Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (OJ L180, 29.6.2013, p. 60).
Amendment 814 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
Paragraph 53
53. Regrets the current situation in which Member States apply different lists, containing different safe countries, hampering uniform application and incentivising secondary movemenWelcomes a uniform approach to safe third countries; but stresses that in addition to an EU list, Member States must also be able to keep national lists;
Amendment 851 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58 a (new)
Paragraph 58 a (new)
58 a. Stresses that EASO and FRONTEX should be able to independently assist in Member States failing to fulfil their legal obligations to ensure a functioning asylum system and external border control, under the instruction and monitoring of the Council and the European Commission, and that failure by the Member State involved to accept such assistance should lead to sanctions;
Amendment 877 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61 b (new)
Paragraph 61 b (new)
61 b. Believes that, in line with the Geneva Convention 1951 and the principle of non-refoulement, the EU Coast and Border Guard's Return Office should focus on returning all intercepted asylum seekers that found de facto or legal protection outside the EU back to these safe havens, effectively applying the first country of asylum principle as inscribed in EU secondary law;
Amendment 944 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 72 a (new)
Paragraph 72 a (new)
72 a. Regrets that the hotspots, called an essential part of the relocation mechanism by the European Commission, are still not fully operational, demonstrating the reluctance by both the European Commission and some front-line EU Member States to tackle secondary movements across the Schengen Area;
Amendment 987 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 78
Paragraph 78
78. Underlines that another crucial step in dismantling criminal smuggling and trafficking networks is to prioritise financial investigations, as tracking and confiscating the profits of those criminal networks is essential if they are to be weakened and eventually dismantled; calls, in this regard, for the Member States to transpose swiftly and effectively the fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive; and calls upon the European Commission to come forward with robust proposals in order to prevent, detect, and interrupt the flow of illicit money;
Amendment 1006 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 81
Paragraph 81
81. Acknowledges that the basic instrument that sets out the objectives of the Union’s external policies on migration, asylum and borders is the GAMM; takes note that various instruments exist under that umbrella, including regional dialogues, bilateral dialogues, mobility partnerships, common agendas for migration and mobility, readmission agreements, visa facilitation agreements, visa exemption agreements, RPPs and RDPPs; notes that the EU must be more ambitious in securing and implementing returns and readmission agreements, and leveraging its resources, such as expenditures under the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), in order to have third countries cooperating in taking back their own nationals who do not qualify for asylum in the EU;
Amendment 1046 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86 a (new)
Paragraph 86 a (new)
86a. Stresses that the EU needs to encourage wealthy countries in conflict regions; and third countries across the globe, to offer resettlement and assist in providing aid and resources to those countries offering refugee in conflict regions; in order to discourage human trafficking; and prevent further loss of life through onward movement;
Amendment 1047 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86 b (new)
Paragraph 86 b (new)
86b. Stresses that the EU needs to act on supporting third countries offering refuge in conflict regions; both in terms of expertise and resources in order to ensure that there is not a "lost generation" of young people with no education or training;
Amendment 1083 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 91
Paragraph 91
91. Highlights that the recent increase in arrivals of refugees and economic migrants into the Union has shown that, on their own, preventive measures are not sufficient for managing the current migration phenomena;
Amendment 1095 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 92
Paragraph 92
92. Understands that, in the long term, greater impetus is needed in solving the geo-political issues that affect the root causes of migration, as war, poverty, corruption, hunger and a lack of opportunities means that people will still feel forced to flee to Europe unless Europe looks at how to help re-build those countries; points out that this means that the Commission and the Member States must put up the money to help build capacity in third countries, such as by facilitating investment and education, strengthening and enforcing asylum systems, helping to manage borders better, and reinforcing legal and judicial systems there; stresses that such investment is important in order to prevent "brain drain" from these countries; and to ensure that there is a young, educated, and ambitious workforce and society in the future;
Amendment 1131 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 97 a (new)
Paragraph 97 a (new)
97a. Stresses that there should be a full and on-going assessment as to the effectiveness of EU funding and aid given to the third countries; and that the Commission should fully assess the impact of the money given in terms of stabilising the migrant crisis; stresses that there must be a clear and objective benefit for the EU and for asylum seekers;
Amendment 1155 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 104
Paragraph 104
Amendment 1162 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 105
Paragraph 105
Amendment 1167 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 106
Paragraph 106
Amendment 1183 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 110
Paragraph 110
Amendment 1191 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 111
Paragraph 111
Amendment 1201 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 111 a (new)
Paragraph 111 a (new)
111a. Takes the view that legal and economic migration and the EU jobs market should be dealt with entirely separately from the instruments intended to deal with asylum seekers and refuges; stresses that in order to have a quick and well-functioning system for both these areas it should be a two layered approach; points out that economic migrants and asylum seekers are two very different categories, which required individual and nuanced responses;
Amendment 1228 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 117
Paragraph 117
117. Reiterates that special procedures to ensure facilitation of complaints foreseen by Directive 2009/52/EC providing for minimum standards on sanctions and measures against employers of illegally staying third-country nationals (the ‘Employers’ Sanctions Directive’) should be fully implemented and correctly applied in practice; believes that increased protection for those victims of trafficking, and for those smuggled into the Union, who cooperate and facilitate prosecution of traffickers and/or criminal smugglers, is necessary; suggests that, in addition, support should be given for the setting up of a European Business Coalition against Trafficking in Human Beings (as mooted in the 2014 Strategy against Trafficking in Human Beings) with the purpose of developing supply chains that do not involve trafficking in human beings;
Amendment 1233 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 120
Paragraph 120
Amendment 1236 #
2015/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 120 a (new)
Paragraph 120 a (new)
120a. Stresses the importance of being respectful of Member States' competences;
Amendment 193 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21 a (new)
Recital 21 a (new)
(21a) Low return rates within an EU Member State shall also constitute ineffective control of the EU’s external borders to the extent that this risks putting in jeopardy the functioning of the Schengen area.
Amendment 243 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
A European Border and Coast Guard is hereby set up to ensure a European integrated border management at the external borders with a view to reducing pressure at the EU’s external border, managing migration effectively and ensuring a high level of internal security within the Union, while safeguarding the free movement of persons therein.
Amendment 288 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) border control, including measures related to the prevention, detection and investigation of cross-border crime and irregular immigration, where appropriate;
Amendment 378 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) deploy European Border and Coast Guard Teams and technical equipment to provide assistance into the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) and/or national authorities in each Member State which are responsible for border control or for other tasks carried out at the external border in terms of screening, identificationying and fingerprinting in the framework of the migration management support teams at hotspot areas;
Amendment 423 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 541 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 6
Article 12 – paragraph 6
6. Where a Member State does not adopt the necessary corrective measures within the time-limit set, the Executive Director shall refer the matter to the Management Board and notify the Commission. The Management Board shall adopt a decision setting out the necessary corrective measures to be taken by the Member State concerned, including the time-limit within which such measures shall be taken. If the Member State does not take the measures within the time-limit foreseen in that decision, further action mayshall be taken by the Commissionuncil in accordance with Article 18.
Amendment 557 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) deploy European Border and Coast Guard Teams in the framework of the migration management support teams at hotspot areas to conduct return operations;
Amendment 593 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – point l
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – point l
(l) procedures setting out a referral mechanism whereby persons in need of international protection, victims of trafficking in human beings, unaccompanied minors and persons in a vulnerable situation are directed to the competent national authorities for appropriate assistance;
Amendment 594 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – point l a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – point l a (new)
(la) procedures setting out a referral mechanism whereby persons in need of international protection are directed to the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) and / or competent national authorities for the application of the Asylum Procedures Directive (APD), inter alia the concept of the first country of asylum and safe country of origin;
Amendment 602 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 6
Article 16 – paragraph 6
6. The Executive Director together with the host Member State shall draw up an operational plan as referred to in Article 15(3) immediately and in any event no later than three working days from the date of the decision., by making use of existing plans and procedures;
Amendment 618 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) providing assistance in the screening of third-country nationals arriving at the external borders, including the identification, registration, and debriefing of those third-country nationals and, where requested by the Member State, the fingerprinting of third- country nationals;
Amendment 622 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – point b
Amendment 644 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Where a Member State does not take the necessary corrective measures in accordance with a decision of the Management Board referred to in Article 12(6) or in the event of disproportionate migratory pressure at the external border, rendering the control of the external borders ineffective to such an extent that it risks putting in jeopardy the functioning of the Schengen area, the Commissionuncil by qualified majority, after consulting the Agency, mayshall adopt a decision by means of an implementing act, identifying the measures to be implemented by the Agency and requiring the Member State concerned to cooperate with the Agency in the implementation of those measures. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 79(2).
Amendment 657 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
On duly justified imperative grounds of urgency relating to the functioning of the Schengen area, the Commission shall adopt immediately applicable implementing acts in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 79(5), only until the Council has taken a decision.
Amendment 684 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. In the event that an EU Member State refuses to comply with the Council decision, all other EU Member States shall immediately have the right to re- establish internal border controls until full compliance is achieved, or the Member State leaves the Schengen Area;
Amendment 698 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Article 20 – paragraph 4
4. Members of the teams shall, in the performance of their tasks and in the exercise of their powers, fully respect fundamental rights, including access to asylum procedures, and human dignity. Any measures taken in the performance of their tasks and in the exercise of their powers shall be proportionate to the objectives pursued by such measures. While performing their tasks and exercising their powers, they shall not discriminate against persons on grounds of sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation.
Amendment 707 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 23 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. If the vulnerability assessment demonstrates that the EU Member State is at fault for deficiencies in guarding the EU's external borders, part of the budget for the Agency's operations shall be covered by that Member State, amounting to what the assessment indicates as the national budget that would have been required additionally for adequate border management.
Amendment 714 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3
Article 24 – paragraph 3
3. The Executive Director shall withdraw the financing of a joint operation or a rapid border intervention, or suspend or terminate, in whole or in part, a joint operation or rapid border intervention if he or she considers that there are violations of fundamental rights or international protection obligations that are of a serious nature or are likely to persist.
Amendment 729 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Return Office shall be responsible for carrying out the return- related activities of the Agency, in accordance with the respect of fundamental rights and general principles of Union law as well as international law, including refugee protection and human rights obligations. The Return Office shall, in particular:
Amendment 739 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) coordinate and / or organise the return-related activities of the Agency as set out in this Regulation;
Amendment 748 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 4
Article 26 – paragraph 4
4. The Agency may make use of the financial means of the Union which are available in the field of return. The Agency shall ensure that in its grant agreements with Member Statesthe authorities of third countries that any financial support is conditional upon the full respect for the Charter of Fundamental Righconclusion of readmission agreements.
Amendment 803 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. The European Border and Coast Guard shall guarantee the protection of fundamental rights in the performance of its tasks under this Regulation in accordance with relevant Union law, in particular the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, relevant international law, including the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and obligations related to access to international protection, in particular the principle of non-refoulement. For that purpose, the Agency shall draw up and further develop and implement a Fundamental Rights Strategy.
Amendment 814 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2
Article 33 – paragraph 2
2. In the performance of its tasks the European Border and Coast Guard shall ensure that no person is disembarked in, forced to enter, conducted to or otherwise handed over or returned to the authorities of a country in contravention of the principle of non-refoulement, or from which there is a risk of expulsion or return to another country in contravention of that principle.
Amendment 815 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 3
Article 33 – paragraph 3
3. The European Border and Coast Guard shall, in the performance of its tasks, take into account the special needs of children, victims of trafficking in human beings, persons in need of medical assistance, persons in need of international protectionpersons in need of medical assistance, persons in distress at sea and other persons in a particularly vulnerable situation.
Amendment 826 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 1
1. The Agency shall draw up and further develop a Code of Conduct applicable to all border control operations coordinated by the Agency except for returns. The Code of Conduct shall lay down procedures intended to guarantee the principles of the rule of law and respect for fundamental rights with particular focus on unaccompanied minors and persons in a vulnerable situation, as well as on persons seeking international protection, applicable to all persons participating in the activities of the Agency.
Amendment 829 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 2
2. The Agency shall develop and regularly update a Code of Conductadhere to the Return Handbook for the return of illegally staying third-country nationals which shall apply during all return operations and return interventions coordinated or organised by the Agency. That Code of Conduct shall describ, ensuring that the common standardises and procedures to simplify the organisation of return operations and return interventions, and assure return in a humane manner and with full respect for fundamental rights, in particular the principles of human dignity, prohibition of torture and of inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the right to liberty and security and the right to the protection of personal data and non-discriminationof Directive 2008/115/EC are implemented.
Amendment 831 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3
Article 34 – paragraph 3
Amendment 834 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. The Agency shall take the necessary initiatives to ensure that all border guards and other relevant staff of the Member States who participate in the European Border and Coast Guard Teams, as well as the staff of the Agency, have received, prior to their participation in operational activities organised by the Agency, training in relevant Union and international law, including on fundamental rights, access to international protection and search and rescue.
Amendment 838 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 3
Article 35 – paragraph 3
3. The Agency shall take the necessary initiatives to ensure training for staff involved in return-related tasks to be part of the pools referred to in Articles 28, 29 and 30. The Agency shall ensure that all staff who participate in return operations and in return interventions, as well as the staff of the Agency, have received, prior to their participation in operational activities organised by the Agency, training in relevant Union and international law, including fundamental rights and access to international protection.
Amendment 843 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 4
Article 35 – paragraph 4
4. The Agency shall establish and further develop common core curricula for the training of border guards and provide training at European level for instructors of the national border guards of Member States, including with regard to fundamental rights, access to international protection and relevant maritime law. The Agency shall draw up the common core curricula after consulting the Consultative Forum. Member States shall integrate the common core curricula in the training of their national border guards and staff involved in return-related tasks.
Amendment 906 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Calls on Member States to ensure the regular and accurate update of EU databases including the Schengen Information System and the European Criminal Records Information System, so that all available information can be utilised by the FRONTEX agency in order to ensure the security of the EU's external border and the good functioning of the Schengen area. The use by the Agency of personal data collected and transmitted to it by the Member States or by its own staff in the context of joint operations, pilot projects and rapid border interventions, and by migration management support teams shall be limited toinclude:
Amendment 921 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 3
Article 50 – paragraph 3
Amendment 927 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 51 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Individuals seeking international protection should be registered, fingerprinted, and debriefed according to existing asylum procedures; background security checks should also be carried out at the EU's external borders, after which the Asylum Procedures Directive (APD) should be applied, inter alia the concepts of first country of asylum and safe country of origin, allowing the Return Office to swiftly exercise return operations. The European Coast and Border Guard (ECBG), Europol, Eurojust, the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) and national competent authorities shall work together to achieve the aim of accelerated procedures in the context of hotspots.
Amendment 955 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 2
Article 53 – paragraph 2
2. The Agency may cooperate with the authorities of third countries competent in matters covered by this Regulation with the support of and in coordination with Union delegations, as well as within the framework of working arrangements concluded with those authorities in accordance with Union law and policy. Those working arrangements shall be related to the management of operational cooperation. Such arrangements shall have received the Commission’uncil's prior approval.
Amendment 980 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 9
Article 53 – paragraph 9
Amendment 992 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 4
Article 54 – paragraph 4
Amendment 1096 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 2
Article 71 – paragraph 2
2. The Fundamental Rights Officer shall be independent in the performance of his or her duties as a Fundamental Rights Officer, he or she shall report directly to the Management Board and cooperate with the Consultative Forum. The Fundamental Rights Officer shall report on a regular basis and as such contribute to the mechanism for monitoring fundamental rights.
Amendment 1107 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 3
Article 71 – paragraph 3
3. The Fundamental Rights Officer shall be consulted on the operational plans drawn up in accordance with Articles 15, 16 and 32(4) and shall have access to all information concerning respect for fundamental rights, in relation to all the activities of the Agency.
Amendment 1112 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 72 – paragraph 1
Article 72 – paragraph 1
1. The Agency, in cooperation with the Fundamental Rights Officer, shall take the necessary measures to set up a complaint mechanism in accordance with this Article to monitor and ensure the respect for fundamental rights, in all the activities of the Agencyf systematic deficiencies for the respect of human rights are reported by the Fundamental Rights Officer.
Amendment 1153 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 72 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 2
Article 72 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 2
The Agency shall ensure that the standardized complaint form is available in most common languagesthe official languages of the European Union and that it shall be made available on the Agency’s website and in hardcopy during all activities of the Agency. Complaints shall be considered by the Fundamental Rights Officer even when they are not submitted in the standardized complaint form.
Amendment 1170 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 80 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 80 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
By threone years from the date of entry into force of this Regulation, and every three years thereafter, the Commission shall carry out an evaluation to assess particularly the impact, effectiveness and efficiency of the Agency’s performance and its working practices in relation to its objectives, mandate and tasks. The evaluation shall, in particular, address the possible need to modify the mandate of the Agency, and the financial implications of any such modification.
Amendment 1172 #
2015/0310(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 80 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 80 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 68 #
2015/0281(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The terrorist threat has grown and rapidly evolved in recent years. Individuals referred to as "foreign terrorist fighters" travel abroad for terrorism purposes. Returning foreign terrorist fighters pose a heightened security threat to all EU Member States. Foreign terrorist fighters have been linked to several recent attacks or plots, including the attacks in Paris on 13 November 2015 and in Brussels on the 22nd of March 2016. In addition, the European Union and its Member States face increased threats from individuals inspired or instructed by terrorist groups abroad but who remain within Europe.
Amendment 108 #
2015/0281(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Considering the seriousness of the threat and the need to in particular stem the flow of foreign terrorist fighters, it is necessary to criminalise the travelling abroad for terrorist purposes, being not only the commission of terrorist offences and providing or receiving training but also to participate in the activities of a terrorist group. Any act of facilitation of such travel should also be criminalised. Member States should seek to create white lists for persons travelling for the purpose of providing humanitarian assistance.
Amendment 189 #
2015/0281(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) This Directive respects the principles recognised by Article 2 of the Treaty on the European Union, respects fundamental rights and freedoms and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, including those set out in Chapters II, III, V and VI thereof which encompass inter alia the right to liberty and security, freedom of expression and, freedom of speech, freedom of information, freedom of association and freedom of thought conscience and religion, the general prohibition of discrimination in particular on grounds of race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, the right to respect for private and family life and the right to protection of personal data, the principle of legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties, covering also the requirement of precision, clarity and foreseeability in criminal law, the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial, the outcome of which is determined on the individual circumstances of the case, as well as freedom of movement as set forth in Article 21(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Directive 2004/38/EC. This Directive has to be implemented in accordance with these rights and principles.
Amendment 252 #
2015/0281(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the distribution, or otherwise making available, of a message to the public, with the intent to incite the commission or encourage the preparation or instigation of one of the offences listed in points (a) to (h) of Article 3(2), where such conduct, whether or not directly advocating terrorist offences, causes a danger that one or more such offences may be committed, is punishable as a criminal offence when committed intentionally.
Amendment 269 #
2015/0281(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – title
Article 8 – title
Receiving and acquiring training for terrorism
Amendment 352 #
2015/0281(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) The offender is a national of a Member State and who has provided training overseas to a foreign national;
Amendment 353 #
2015/0281(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point f – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point f – paragraph 1
the offence is committed against the institutions or people of the Member State in question or against an institution, body, office or agency of the European Union and based in that Member State., or where a foreign national receives training overseas with the intention of carrying out an attack within that Member State;
Amendment 427 #
2015/0281(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 1
Article 26 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall, by [124 months after the deadline for implementation of this Directive], submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council, assessing the extent to which the Member States have taken the necessary measures to comply with this Directive.
Amendment 42 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) BCollectors and bodies concerned with the cultural and historical aspects of weapons and recognised as such by the Member State in whose territory they are established and shoulding in their possession firearms classified in category A acquired before the date of entry into force of this Directive should be able to keep those firearms in their possession subject to authorisation by the Member State concerned and provided that those firearms have been deactivat be able to keep and acquire firearms classified in category A subject to authorisation by the Member State concerned.
Amendment 47 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
Amendment 66 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
Amendment 86 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Furthermore, the risk of alarm weapons and other types of blank firing weapons being converted to real firearms is high, and in some of the terrorist acts converted arms were used. It is therefore essential to address the problem of converted firearms being used in criminal offences, notably by including them in the scope of the Directive. Technical specifications for alarm and signal weapons as well as for salute and acoustic weapons should bare adopted in order to ensure that they cannot be converted into firearms.
Amendment 99 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 1 – paragraph 1b
Article 1 – paragraph 1b
1b. For the purposes of this Directive, "essential component" shall mean the barrel, frame, receiver, slide or cylinder, bolt or breach block and any device designed or adapted to diminish the sound caused by firing a firearm which, being separate objects, are included in the category of the firearms on which they are or are intended to be mounted.
Amendment 101 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 1 – paragraph 1e
Article 1 – paragraph 1e
1e. For the purposes of this Directive, "broker" shall mean any natural or legal person, other than a dealer whose trade or business consists wholly or partly in buying, selling or arranging the transfer within a Member State, from one Member State to another Member State or exporting to a third country or importing to a Member State from a third country fully assembled firearms, their parts and ammunition.
Amendment 104 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 1 – paragraph 1h
Article 1 – paragraph 1h
Amendment 112 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) It should be specified in this Directive that the activities of a dealer include not only the manufacturing but also the modification or conversion a firearm, such as the shortening of a complete firearm, and in addition the commercial modification or conversion of parts of firearms and of ammunition, and that, therefore, only authorised dealers should be permitted to engage in those activities. This Directive should not apply to reloading of ammunition for personal use or making legal modifications and conversions to a firearm for which a person has an authorization.
Amendment 113 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
2. This Directive shall not apply to the acquisition or possession of weapons and ammunition, in accordance with national law, by the armed forces, the police, the public authorities or by collectors and bodies concerned with the cultural and historical aspects of weapons and recognized as such by the Member State in whose territory they are established. Nor shall it apply to commercial transfers of weapons and ammunition of warproducts of the defence industry.
Amendment 122 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that any firearm or parand any essential component placed on the market has been marked and registered in compliance with this Directive.
Amendment 130 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
For the purposes of identifying and tracing each assembled firearm, Member States shall, at the time of manufacture of each firearm or at the time of import to the Union or as soon as possible thereafter, require a unique marking including the name of the manufacturer, the country or place of manufacture, the serial number and the year of manufacture, if not already part of the serial number. This shall be without prejudice to the affixing of the manufacturer's trademark.
Amendment 131 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 152 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) BCollectors and bodies concerned with the cultural and historical aspects of weapons and recognised as such by the Member State in whose territory they are established and shoulding in their possession firearms classified in category A acquired before the date of entry into force of this Directive should be able to keep those firearms in their possession subject to authorisation by the Member State concerned and provided that those firearms have been deactivat be able to keep and acquire firearms classified in category A subject to authorisation by the Member State concerned.
Amendment 155 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) are at least 18 years of age, except in relation to the acquisition, other than through purchase, and possession of firearms for hunting and target shooting, provided that in that case persons of less than 18 years of age have parental permission, or are under parental guidance or the guidance of an adult with a valid firearms or hunting licence, or are within a licenced or otherwise approved training centre;
Amendment 170 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall provide for standard medical tests for issuing or renewing authorisations as referred to in paragraph 1 and shall withdraw authorisations if any of the conditions on the basis of which it was granted is no longer met.
Amendment 172 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
Amendment 173 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
(2a) This Directive is without prejudice to the ownership of firearms and ammunition acquired through inheritance; Member States shall restrain the possession of such firearms by owners who are not duly authorised.
Amendment 181 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Member States shall take all appropriate steps to prohibit the acquisition and the possession of the firearms and ammunition classified in category A and to destroy those. In exceptional and duly reasoned cases, the competent authorities may grant authorisations for the acquisition and possession of such firearms and ammunition wheld in violation of this provision and seizedre this is not contrary to public security or public order.
Amendment 188 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Member States may authorise persons or bodies concerned with the cultural and historical aspects of weapons and recognised as such by the Member State in whose territory they are established to keep in theiracquire and possession firearms classified in category A acquired before [the date of entry into force of this Directive] provided they have been deactivated in accordance with the provisions that implement Article 10(b)when this is not contrary to public security or public order.
Amendment 198 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
The acquisition of firearms and their paressential components and ammunition concerning categories A, B and C by means of distance communication, as defined in Article 2 of Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(*), shall be authorised only with respect to dealers and brokers and shall be subject to the strict control of the Member States.
Amendment 204 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Amendment 220 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
Amendment 225 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 a (new)
(8a) In addition to the necessary registration system for weapons held by private individuals or other entities, in accordance with the law, each Member State shall keep a register ensuring that weapons seized by the authorities or forfeited to the State will be traceable from the moment when they are handed over or seized until such time as they are destroyed or put to use by the authorities or again placed on the market.
Amendment 231 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall submit every five years a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Directive, including a fitness check of the new provisions, accompanied, if appropriate, by proposals in particular as regards the categories of firearms of Annex I and the issues related to new technologies such as 3D printing. The first report shall be submitted two years after the entry into force of this Directive."
Amendment 237 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a – point i
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a – point i
Directive 91/477/EEC
Annex I – part II – point A – Category A – point 6
Annex I – part II – point A – Category A – point 6
Amendment 244 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a – point i
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a – point i
Directive 91/477/EEC
Annex I – part II – point A – Category A – point 7
Annex I – part II – point A – Category A – point 7
Amendment 247 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a – point i
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a – point i
Directive 91/477/EEC
Annex I – part II – point A – Category A – point 8
Annex I – part II – point A – Category A – point 8
Amendment 258 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a – point iii
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a – point iii
Directive 91/477/EEC
Annex I – part II – point A – Category C – point 5
Annex I – part II – point A – Category C – point 5
5. Alarm and signal weaponsFirearms under categories A, B and points 1 to 4 of category C, after having been converted to alarm, signal, salute and, acoustic weapons as well as replicas;, gas, paintball or airsoft, Flobert, or percussion lock weapons.
Amendment 260 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a – point iii
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a – point iii
Directive 91/477/EEC
Annex I – part II – point A – Category C – point 6
Annex I – part II – point A – Category C – point 6
Amendment 263 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point a
Amendment 269 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point c
Amendment 279 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Furthermore, the risk of alarm weapons and other types of blank firing weapons being converted to real firearms is high, and in some of the terrorist acts converted arms were used. It is therefore essential to address the problem of converted firearms being used in criminal offences, notably by including them in the scope of the Directive. Technical specifications for alarm and signal weapons as well as for salute and acoustic weapons should be adopted in order to ensure that they cannot be converted into firearms.
Amendment 316 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point a
Article 1 – point 1 – point a
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 1 – paragraph 1b
Article 1 – paragraph 1b
1b. For the purposes of this Directive, "essential component" shall mean the barrel, frame, receiver, slide or cylinder, bolt or breaech block and any device designed or adapted to diminish the sound caused by firing a firearm which, being separate objects, are included in the category of the firearms on which they are or are intended to be mounted.
Amendment 330 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 1 – point 1 – point b
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 1 –paragraph 1e
Article 1 –paragraph 1e
1e. For the purposes of this Directive, "broker" shall mean any natural or legal person, other than a dealer whose trade or business consists wholly or partly in buying, selling or arranging the transfer within a Member State, from one Member State to another Member State or exporting to a third country or importing into a Member State from a third country fully assembled firearms, their parts and ammunition.
Amendment 361 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point c
Article 1 – point 1 – point c
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 1 – paragraph 1h
Article 1 – paragraph 1h
Amendment 406 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 2
Article 1 – point 2
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 2
2. This Directive shall not apply to the acquisition or possession of weapons and ammunition, in accordance with national law, by the armed forces, the police, the public authorities or by collectors and bodies concerned with the cultural and historical aspects of weapons and recognised as such by the Member State in whose territory they are established. Nor shall it apply to commercial transfers of weapons and ammunition of warproducts of the defence industry.
Amendment 434 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that any firearm or parand any essential component placed on the market has been marked and registered in compliance with this Directive.
Amendment 452 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
For the purposes of identifying and tracing each assembled firearm, Member States shall, at the time of manufacture of each firearm or at the time of import into the Union or as soon as possible thereafter, require a unique marking including the name of the manufacturer, the country or place of manufacture, the serial number and the year of manufacture, if not already part of the serial number. This shall be without prejudice to the affixing of the manufacturer's trademark.
Amendment 460 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 519 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6
Article 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 536 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The acquisition and possession of firearms shall only be permitted if, inter alia, there is good cause. Member States, whilst not being under any obligation in that regard, may decide that the acquisition and possession of firearms for the purpose of, for example, hunting, target shooting, self-defence, reservist training, various scientific, technical and testing activities and re-enactment of historical events, filmmaking or historical study constitutes good cause.
Amendment 549 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6
Article 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall provide for standard medical tests for issuing or renewing authorisations as referred to in paragraph 1 and shall withdraw authorisations if any of the conditions on the basis of which it wasthey were granted is no longer met.
Amendment 578 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6
Article 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. This Directive is without prejudice to the ownership of firearms and ammunition acquired through inheritance. Member States shall prohibit the possession of such firearms by owners who are not duly authorised.
Amendment 590 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6
Article 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Member States shall take all appropriate steps to prohibit the acquisition and the possession of the firearms and ammunition classified in category A and to destroy those. In exceptional and duly reasoned cases, the competent authorities may grant authorisations for the acquisition and possession of such firearms and ammunition wheld in violation of this provison and seizedre this is not contrary to public security or public order.
Amendment 620 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6
Article 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Member States may authorise persons or bodies concerned with the cultural and historical aspects of weapons and recognised as such by the Member State in whose territory they are established to keep in theiracquire and possession firearms classified in category A acquired before [the date of entry into force of this Directive] provided they have been deactivated in accordance with the provisions that implement Article 10(b)when this is not contrary to public security or public order.
Amendment 660 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 7
Article 1 – point 7
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 (new)
Amendment 731 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 12
Article 1 – point 12
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall submit every five years submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Directive, including a fitness check of the new provisions, accompanied, if appropriate, by proposals in particular as regards the categories of firearms of Annex I and the issues related to new technologies such as 3D printing. The first report shall be submitted by ... [two years after the date of entry into force of this Amending Directive].
Amendment 748 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 13 – point a – point i
Article 1 – point 13 – point a – point i
Directive 91/477/EEC
Annex I – part II – point A – category A – point 6
Annex I – part II – point A – category A – point 6
Amendment 751 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 13 – point a – point i
Article 1 – point 13 – point a – point i
Directive 91/477/EEC
Annex I – part II – point A – category A – point 6
Annex I – part II – point A – category A – point 6
6. Automatic firearms which have been converted into semi-automatic firearms; which have not been authorised in accordance with Article 10ba, with the exception of firearms converted prior to ... [the date of entry into force of this Amending Directive1a]; __________________ 1a In this case, Article 10ba shall be amended as follows: "Member States shall take measures to ensure that long semi-automatic firearms which have been converted from originally automatic firearms cannot be reconverted into automatic firearms. Mechanical design of any particular type of long semi- automatic firearms including conversions of any particular type of originally automatic firearms into semi-automatic firearms must be authorised for civilian use by a competent public authority before being placed on the market."
Amendment 755 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 13 – point a – point i
Article 1 – point 13 – point a – point i
Directive 91/477/EEC
Annex I – part II – point A – category A – point 6
Annex I – part II – point A – category A – point 6
6. AComponents with which a semi- automatic firearms which have can been converted into semi-an automatic firearm without sophisticated skills and tools;
Amendment 762 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 13 – point a – point i
Article 1 – point 13 – point a – point i
Directive 91/477/EEC
Annex I – part II – point A – category A – point 7
Annex I – part II – point A – category A – point 7
Amendment 778 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 13 – point a – point i
Article 1 – point 13 – point a – point i
Directive 91/477/EEC
Annex I – part II – point A – category A – point 8
Annex I – part II – point A – category A – point 8
Amendment 811 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 13 – point a – point iii
Article 1 – point 13 – point a – point iii
Directive 91/477/EEC
Annex I – part II – point A – category C – point 5
Annex I – part II – point A – category C – point 5
5. Alarm and signal weaponsFirearms under categories A, B and points 1 to 4 of category C, after having been converted to alarm, signal, salute and, acoustic weapons as well as replicas;, gas, paintball or airsoft, Flobert, or percussion lock weapons.
Amendment 822 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 13 – point a – point iii
Article 1 – point 13 – point a – point iii
Directive 91/477/EEC
Annex I – part II – point A – category C – point 6
Annex I – part II – point A – category C – point 6
Amendment 830 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 14 – point a
Article 1 – point 14 – point a
Directive 91/477/EEC
Annex I – part III – point a
Annex I – part III – point a
Amendment 838 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 14 – point c
Article 1 – point 14 – point c
Directive 91/477/EEC
Annex I – part III – paragraph 2
Annex I – part III – paragraph 2
Amendment 843 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive [36 months after publication toin the OJ]. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions.
Amendment 39 #
2015/0211(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) In light of the very sharp increase that has been experienced since 2014 in the number of applications for international protection made in the Union, and the very low rate of returns of those individuals who do not qualify for international protection, and the resulting unprecedented pressure on Member States’ asylum systems the Union acknowledged the need to strengthen the application of the safe country of origin provisions of Directive 2013/32/EU, as an essential tool to support the swift processing of applications that are likely to be unfounded. In particular, in its conclusions of 25 and 26 June 2015, the European Council referred, in relation to the need to accelerate the treatment of asylum applications, to the intention of the Commission as set out in its Communication on a European Agenda on Migration8 to strengthen these provisions, including the possible establishment of an EU common list of safe countries of origin. Moreover, the Justice and Home Affairs Council in its conclusions on safe countries of origin of 20 July 2015 welcomed the intention of the Commission to strengthen the safe countries of origin provisions in Directive 2013/32/EU, including the possible establishment of an EU common list of safe countries of origin. __________________ 8 COM (2015) 240 final, 13.5.2015. COM (2015) 240 final, 13.5.2015.
Amendment 65 #
2015/0211(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The Commission should regularly review the situation in third countries that are onin order to provide for both removing and adding third countries to the EU common list of safe countries of origin. In case of sudden change for the worse in the situation of a third country on the EU common list, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of suspending the presence of this third country from the EU common list for a period of one yearsix months where it considers, on the basis of a substantiated assessment, that the conditions set by Directive 2013/32/EU for regarding a third country as safe country of origin are no longer met. For the purpose of this substantiated assessment, the Commission should take into consideration a range of sources of information at its disposal including in particular, itsinformation from the Annual Progress Reports for third countries designated as candidate countries by the European Council, regular reports from the European External Action Service (EEAS) and the information from Member States, the European Asylum Support Office (EASO), the FRONTEX agency, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the Council of Europe and other relevant international organisations. The Commission should be able to extend the suspension of the presence of a third country from the EU common list for a period of maximum one year, where it has proposed an amendment to this Regulation in order to remove this third country from the EU common list of safe countries of origin. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council.
Amendment 80 #
2015/0211(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall regularly review the situation in third countries that are on the EU common list of safe countries of origin in order to add and remove third countries from this list, based on a range of sources of information, including in particular regular reporting from the EEAS and information from Member States, EASO, FRONTEX, the UNHCR, and the Council of Europe and other relevant international organisations.
Amendment 86 #
2015/0211(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3
Article 2 – paragraph 3
3. Any amendment of the EU common list of safe countries of origin shall be adopted in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure.
Amendment 87 #
2015/0211(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Article 2 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 3 to suspend and add the presence of a third country from the EU common list of safe countries of origin on a temporary and emergency basis for a period of six months, in order to allow for the Council and the European Parliament to take action through the ordinary legislative procedure.
Amendment 90 #
2015/0211(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – title
Article 3 – title
Removal and addition of a third country from the EU common list of safe countries of origin in case of sudden change of situation
Amendment 95 #
2015/0211(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. In case of sudden changes in the situation of a third country that is on the EU common list of safe countries of origin, the Commission shall conduct a substantiated assessment of the fulfilment by that country of the conditions set in Annex I of Directive 2013/32/EU and, if those conditions are no longer met, shall adopt, in accordance with Article 290 TFUE, a Decision suspending the presence of that third country from the EU common list for a period of one yearsix months.
Amendment 97 #
2015/0211(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. Where the Commission has proposed an amendment to this Regulation in order to remove or add a third country from the EU common list of safe countries of origin, it can on the basis of a substantial assessment referred to in paragraph 2 extend the validity of the delegated decision adopted pursuant to paragraph 2 for a period of maximum one year.
Amendment 123 #
2015/0211(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5a Review Whereas the European Commission shall examine the possibility to replace national lists with a harmonised European list of safe third countries, based on a full assessment of the impact of this Regulation on the rate of returns to safe third countries, and the difference between national lists in all Member States and the common European list of safe third countries. Whereas this review should be carried out three years after the entry into force of this Regulation. Whereas the Commission shall submit a report to the Council and the European Parliament.
Amendment 30 #
2015/0125(NLE)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The recent crisis situation in the Mediterranean prompted the Union institutions to immediately acknowledge the exceptional migratory flows in this region and call for concrete measures of solidarity towards the frontline Member States. In particular, at a joint meeting of Foreign and Interior Ministers on 20 April 2015, the European Commission presented a ten-point plan of immediate actions to be taken in response to this crisis, including a commitment to consider options for an emergency relocation mechanism. Considering the magnitude of economic and humanitarian migration, the proposed ERS does not offer an effective or sustainable solution to this problem.
Amendment 41 #
2015/0125(NLE)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Among the Member States witnessing situations of particular pressure and in light of the recent tragic events in the Mediterranean, Italy and Greece in particular have experienced unprecedented flows of migrants, including applicants for international protection who are in clear need of international protection, arriving on their territories, generating a significant pressure on their migration and asylum systems. However, many irregular migrants and asylum seekers flee poverty in their home countries and do not fulfil the criteria of a refugee.
Amendment 127 #
2015/0125(NLE)
Proposal for a decision
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. 24 000As many applicants shall be relocated from Italy to the territory of the other Member States as set out in Annex Ithe Member States voluntarily accept.
Amendment 130 #
2015/0125(NLE)
Proposal for a decision
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. 16 000As many applicants shall be relocated from Greece to the territory of the other Member States as set out in Annex IIthe Member States voluntarily accept.
Amendment 158 #
2015/0125(NLE)
Proposal for a decision
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. If Italy or Greece does not comply with the obligation referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission may decide to suspends this Decision with regard to that Member State for a period of up to threesix months. The Commission may decide once to extends such suspension for a further period of up to three monthssix months as many times as necessary.
Amendment 1 #
2014/2059(INI)
Draft opinion
Citation 3 a (new)
Citation 3 a (new)
– having regard to Article 125 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Amendment 6 #
2014/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) The provisions of this Regulation should not negate the responsibilities of the first Member State where the application is lodged to be in charge of initially processing the application of the minor in question, and should not remove the obligations of the first Member State to be responsible for the welfare of the minor during his/her presence.
Amendment 7 #
2014/0202(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 b (new)
Recital 4 b (new)
(4b) This Regulation is intended to minimise the movement of minors across the Union; it is not intended to replace the requirements and obligations as set out in Regulation (EU) No 604/2013.
Amendment 45 #
2013/0409(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
Amendment 63 #
2013/0409(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Member States should be able to provide that the costs relating to provisional legal aid for suspects or accused persons deprived of liberty and costs relating to provisional legal aid for requested persons can be recovered from those persons if, in the subsequent assessment of the competent authority of whether they have a right to legal aid, they are found to not meet the criteria to benefit from legal aid under national law.
Amendment 67 #
2013/0409(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) To ensure that requested persons can effectively exercise their right to appoint a lawyer in the issuing Member State to assist the lawyer in the executing Member State, iIn accordance with Directive 2013/48/EU, the issuing Member State should ensure that requested persons have access to legal aid for the purpose of the European arrest warrant proceedings in the executing Member State. This right may be subject to an assessment of the means of the requested person and/or whether it is in the interests of justice to provide legal aid, according to the applicable eligibility criteria in the issuing Member State in question.
Amendment 76 #
2013/0409(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
Amendment 82 #
2013/0409(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) This Directive sets minimum rules. Member States may extend the rights set out in this Directive in order to provide a higher level of protection. Such higher level of protection should not constitute an obstacle to the mutual recognition of judicial decisions that those minimum rules are designed to facilitate. The level of protection should never fall below the standards provided by the Charter or the ECHR, as interpreted in the case-law of the Court of Justice and of the ECtHR.;
Amendment 96 #
2013/0409(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a In respect of minor offences, and provided this is in conformity with the right to a fair trial, this Directive shall not apply: a. where the law of a Member State provides for the imposition of a sanction by an authority other than a court having jurisdiction in criminal matters, and the imposition of such a sanction may be appealed or referred to such a court; or b. where deprivation of liberty cannot be imposed as a sanction.
Amendment 118 #
2013/0409(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Article 4 – paragraph 2a (new) Without prejudice to the right to a fair trial, in case of short term deprivation of liberty and when this is not proportionate taking account the interests of justice, paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not apply.
Amendment 142 #
2013/0409(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. The issuing Member State shall ensure thatfully assess whether it is proportionate and in the interests of justice, for the requested persons, that are exerciseing their right to appoint a lawyer in the issuing Member State to assist the lawyer in the executing Member State, according to Article 10 of Directive 2013/48/EU, have the right toto be eligible for legal aid in that Member State for the purpose of the European arrest warrant proceedings in the executing Member State.;
Amendment 150 #
2013/0409(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Amendment 154 #
2013/0409(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Amendment 186 #
2013/0407(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Exercise of the right to remain silent shall not be used against a suspect or accused person at a later stage in the proceedings and shall not be considered as a corroboration of factsevidence that the person concerned has committed the offence which he is suspected or accused of having committed.
Amendment 199 #
2013/0407(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i
(i) either was summoned in person and thereby informed of the scheduled date and place of the trial, or by other means actually received official information of the scheduled date and place of that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the scheduled trial;
Amendment 206 #
2013/0407(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) being aware of the scheduled trial, had given a mandate to a legal counsellor, who was either appointed by the person concerned or by the State, to defend him or her at the trial, and was indeed defended by that counsellor at the trial.