47 Amendments of Jean-Luc SCHAFFHAUSER related to 2015/0307(COD)
Amendment 7 #
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 1
Citation 1
Amendment 8 #
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 1
Citation 1
Having regard to the TreatyArticle 3 onf the FuncUniversal Declarationing of the European Union, and in particular Article 77(2)(b) thereofHuman Rights,
Amendment 9 #
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 2
Citation 2
Amendment 10 #
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 2
Citation 2
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commissioninciple of subsidiarity under which it is the Member States that have competence in principle and decide whether or not competence is conferred on the European Union if its coordinating action brings real added value to policies that are a national competence,
Amendment 11 #
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 2
Citation 2
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commissioninciple of proportionality under which the EU shall provide proof of its means and results vis- à-vis the Member States, to which it must report on policies for which it has been delegated competence for a short while,
Amendment 12 #
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 2
Citation 2
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commissioncase law of the International Court of Justice on the obligation on a State to maintain and guard its borders,
Amendment 13 #
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 2
Citation 2
Having regard to the proposal from the European CommissionArticle 21(3) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
Amendment 14 #
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 2
Citation 2
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commissionreality principle under which a policy is judged on its results,
Amendment 15 #
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 2
Citation 2
Having regard to the proposal from the European CommissArticle 2(4) of the Charter of the United Nations,
Amendment 16 #
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 2
Citation 2
Having regard to the proposal from the European CommissionUnited Nations resolution 2625,
Amendment 17 #
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 3
Citation 3
Amendment 18 #
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 4
Citation 4
Amendment 19 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
Amendment 20 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Control at external borders remains one of the main safeguards of the area without controls at internal borders. It is carried out in the interest of all Member States. One of the purposes of such controls is to prevent any threat to the Member States' internal security and public policy, irrespectively of the origin of such threat.Whereas States have a fundamental duty to protect their population;
Amendment 29 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
Amendment 32 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) TWhe phenomenon of foreign terrorist fighters, many of whomreas duly-ratified international treaties are subject to a re Union citizens, demonstrates the necessity to strengthen the checks at external borders with regard to Union citizens.ciprocity requirement and failure to observe this shall render the agreements null and void;
Amendment 35 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
Amendment 36 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) TWhe documents of persons enjoyreas, ing the right of free movement under Union law should therefore be checked systematically against relevant databases related to stolen, misappropriated, lost and invalidated travel documents in order to avoid that persons hide their real identity.se circumstances, countries have full responsibility in the areas referred to in agreements or treaties;
Amendment 38 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
Amendment 39 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Border guards should for the same reason also systematically check persons enjoying the right of free movement under Union law against relevant natWhereas under international law a large-scale, illegal population intrusion, whether peaceful or not, is equivalent to an invasional, and European databases in order to ensure that they do not represent a threat to internal security or public policy.whereas controlling borders is a sovereign task which countries cannot be deprived of;
Amendment 43 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
Amendment 44 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Technological developments allow in principle to consult relevant databases without delaying the process of crossing the border, as the controls on documents and persons can be carried out in parallel. It is therefore possible without negative effect on persons travelling in good faith, to strengthen checks at external borders to better identify those persons who intend to hide their real identity or who are subject to relevant alerts for security reasons or for arrest. Systematic checks should be carried out at all external borders. However, if systematic checks at land and sea borders were to have a disproportionate impact on the flow of traffic at the border, Member States should be allowed not to carry out systematic checks against databases but only if based on a risk analysis assessing that such a relaxation would not lead to a security risk. Such risk assessment should be transmitted to the Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union established by Council Regulation (EC) No 2007/20048 and be the subject of regular reporting both to the Commission and to the Agency. __________________ 8Council Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004 of 26 October 2004 establishing a European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (OJ L 349, 25.11.2004, p.1).Whereas, as reported by experts commissioned by the EU at a recent meeting of Parliament's Subcommittee on Security and Defence of 20 April 2016, the current flow of migrants is not in fact dealt with under the aegis of the Office of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees but instead passes through criminal networks, with 90% of the illegal immigrants involved with people- smuggling networks;
Amendment 48 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
Amendment 49 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) With Council Regulation (EC) No 2252/20049, the Union introduced the facial image and fingerprints as security elements in the passport of Union citizens. These security features have been introduced in order to render the passports more secure and establishhereas, under international law, the migrants in question a reliable link between the holder and the passport. illegal and Member States shouldare therefore verify these biometric identifiers, in case of doubts on the authenticity of the passport or on the identity of its holder. __________________ 9Council of 13 December 2004 on standards for security features and biometrics in passports and travel documents issued by Member States (OJ L 385, 29.12.2004, p.1).regaining full control of their borders, also by virtue of the principles of non-interference in internal affairs and the right of peoples to self-determination; Regulation (EC) No 2252/2004
Amendment 52 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
Amendment 53 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) This Directive is without prejudice toWhereas also the repeated breaches of the appoblicgation of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council10. __________________ 10Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States (OJ L 158, 30.4.2004, p. 77).iprocity mentioned above have resulted, in the framework of the Schengen agreements, in one Member State imposing its policy on all the others, as Italy did in 2011 and as Greece has done in relinquishing its border controls since January 2015;
Amendment 54 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
Amendment 56 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Member States are obliged to check systematically third country Whereas, more specifically, Germany has taken the rest of Europe hostage by imposing its contingency policy on immigration in denial of internationals against all databases on entry. It should be ensured that such checks are also carried out systematically on exit.reements and the cooperative principles of the EU and the Schengen agreements;
Amendment 57 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
Amendment 58 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Since the objective of this Regulation, namely reinforcing the checks against databases at external borders in reply in particular to the increase of the terrorist threat concerns one of the safeguards of the area without internal border control and as such concerns the proper functioning of the Schengen area, it cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, but can rather be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measuWhereas the Schengen system today exposes every Member State to Turkish blackmail over migration, the result of a unilateral policy of negotiations led by Germany without consultation or coordination with the other Member States of the Schengen aresa, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.thereby in effect forcing them either to follow this policy or to withdraw from the Schengen agreements;
Amendment 61 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
Amendment 62 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, as annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application. Given that this Regulation builds upon the Schengen acquis, Denmark should, in accordance with Article 4 of that Protocol, decide within a period of six months after the Council has decided on this Regulation whether it will implement it in its national law.Whereas the Turkish authorities are linked to the human trafficking networks and the blackmail to which Turkey has subjected the Union in the context of association agreements has exposed us to the mass entry of terrorists into the territories of the Schengen area States;
Amendment 63 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
Amendment 64 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) This Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis, in which the United Kingdom does not take part, in accordance with Council Decision 2000/365/EC11; the United Kingdom is therefore not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application. __________________ 11Council Decision 2000/365/EC of 29 May 2000 concerning the requWhereas the Schengen Code is an instrument dating from 1985 and is now obsolete, ineffective and harmful given the challengest of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to take part in some of the provisions of the Schengen acquis (OJ L 131, 1.6.2000, p. 43).errorism, mass migration and the fight against organised crime;
Amendment 65 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
Amendment 66 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) This Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis, in which Ireland does not take part, in accordance with Council Decision 2002/192/EC12, Ireland is therefore not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application. __________________ 12Council Decision 2002/192/EC of 28 February 2002 concerning Ireland's request to take part in some of the provisions of the Schengen acquis (OJ L 64, 7.3.2002, p. 20).Whereas the key principle of the Schengen Agreement, set out in Article 2 of the CISA: 'Internal borders may be crossed at any point without any checks on persons being carried out' is no longer a reality on the ground because 13 States have already reinstated identity checks in one form or another;
Amendment 67 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
Amendment 68 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) As regards Iceland and Norway, this Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Agreement concluded by the Council of the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the latters’ association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis13 , which fall within the area referred to in point A of Article 1 of Council Decision 1999/437/EC 14. __________________ 13 14 May 1999 on certain arrangements for the application of the Agreement concluded by the Council of the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the association of those two States with the implementation,Whereas the marginal adjustments and reforms the Commission is proposing and the regulations that have been presented to Parliament do not alter the fact that it would be irresponsible to retain a federal-like structure whose unsuitability to manage a crisis has been apmplication and development of the Schengen acquis (y demonstrated; OJ L 176, 10.07.1999, p.31). 36 Council Decision 1999/437/EC of 17
Amendment 69 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
Amendment 70 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) As regards Switzerland, this Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis 15 which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A of Decision 1999/437/EC read in conjunction with Article 3 of Council Decision 2008/146/EC 16. __________________ 16Council Decision 2008/146/EC of 28 January 2008 on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Community, of the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s association with the implementation, applicWhereas the only viable system would be a voluntary coordinating agency which brings together those Member States which have similar immigration and reception policies so that no one Member State can hold the others hostage and impose its own policies, in keeping with the principle of a Europe of Nations and development of the Schengen acquis (OJ L 53, 27.2.2008, p. 1).Freedoms;
Amendment 71 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
Amendment 72 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
Amendment 73 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
Amendment 74 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
Amendment 75 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – title
Article 1 – title
The Schengen area shall be abolished, in keeping with the desire of all European peoples for security
Amendment 82 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c
Amendment 83 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2
Article 2