BETA
Home MEPs Dossiers Committees Subjects Blog About Dumps

35 Amendments of Fabio Massimo CASTALDO related to 2018/0329(COD)

Amendment 144 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
(8) The need for Union andMember States and the Union should conclude further bilateral readmission agreements with third countries to facilitate the return process is underlined. A lack of these agreements is the main reason why numbers for the return of third-country nationals staying illegally in the Union are low. International cooperation with countries of origin at all stages of the return process is a prerequisite to achieving sustainable return.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 151 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
(11) To ensure clearer and more effective rules for granting a period for voluntary departure and detaining a third- country national, determining whether there is or there is not a risk of absconding should be based on Union- wide objective criteria. Moreover this Directive should set out specific criteria which establish a ground for a rebuttable presumption that a risk of absconding exists.deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 161 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
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, includingthird-country nationals should bye providing the information and elements that ared with the necessary in forder to assess their individual situation. At the same time, it is necessary to ensure that third-comation on the voluntary return process, the period allowed for voluntary nationals are informed of the consequences of not complying wdeparture and the possibilithy those obligations, in relao impose detention toin the determination of the risk of absconding, the granting of a period for voluntary departure and the possibility to impose detention, and to the access to programmes providing logistical, financial and other material or in-kind assistancevent that the third- country national poses a risk to security and public order in cases clearly determined by law, and on access to programmes providing logistical, financial and other material or in-kind assistance. The possibility of voluntary return should be clearly pointed out to third-country nationals applying for international protection right at the start of the asylum procedure.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 166 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
(13) Where there are no reasons to believe that the granting of a period for voluntary departure would undermine the purpose of a return procedure, voluntary return should be preferred over forced return and an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to thirty days, depending in particular on the prospect of return, should be granted. A period for voluntary departure should not be granted where it has been assessed 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. An extension of the period for voluntary departure should be provided for when considered necessary because of the specific circumstances of an individual case.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 218 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
(27) The use of detention for the purpose of removal should be subject to the risk a third-country national poses to security or public order and always be subject to the principle of proportionality with regard to the means used and the objectives pursued. Detention is justified only to and geared towards prepareing the return or to carry out the removal process and if the application of less coercive measures would not be sufficient.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 225 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
(28) Detention should 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 third-country national concerned poses a risk to public policy, public security or national security.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 242 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
(32) Without prejudice to the possibility for Member States not to apply this Directive with regard to the cases referred to in Article 2(2)(a), when a border procedure is applied in accordance with Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation], a specific border procedure should follow for the return of illegally staying third-country nationals whose application for international protection under that asylum border procedure has been rejected in order to ensure direct complementarity between the asylum and return border procedures and prevent gaps between the procedures. In such cases, it is necessary to establish specific rules that ensure the coherence and synergy between the two procedures and preserve the integrity and effectiveness of the whole process.deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 247 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
(33) To ensure effective return in the context of the border procedure, a period for voluntary departure should not be granted. However, a period for voluntary departure should be granted to third- country nationals who hold a valid travel document and cooperate with the competent authorities of the Member States at all stages of the return procedures. In such cases, to prevent absconding, third-country nationals should hand over the travel document to the competent authority until their departure.deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 252 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
(34) For a rapid treatment of the case, a maximum time limit is to be granted to appeal against a return decision following a decision rejecting an application for international protection adopted under the border procedure and which became final.deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 257 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
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 procedure.deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 263 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
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 may 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. 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.deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 324 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. TBy the objective criteria referred to in point 7 of Article 3 shall include at least the following criteriais meant:
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 325 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) lack of documentation proving the identity;deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 329 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) lack of residence, fixed abode or reliable address;deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 333 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) lack of financial resources;deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 340 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) illegal entry into the territory of the Member States;deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 341 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) unauthorised movement to the territory of another Member Stadelete;d
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 344 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) being subject of a return decision issued by another Member State;deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 345 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) non-compliance with a return decision, including with an obligation to return within the period for voluntary departure;deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 346 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) non-compliance with the requirement of Article 8(2) to go immediately to the territory of another Member State that granted a valid residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay;deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 350 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) not fulfilling the obligation to cooperate with the competent authorities of the Member States at all stages of the return procedures, referred to in Article 7;deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 367 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
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 (m), (n), (o) and (p) of paragraph 1 is fulfilled.deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 385 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the duty to provide information on the third countries transideleted;
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 400 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. The elements referred to in point (a) of paragraph 1 shall include the third- country nationals’ statements and documentation in their possession regarding the identity, nationality or nationalities, age, and the country or countries and place or places of previous residence, travel routes and travel documentation.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 433 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
A return decision shall provide for an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to thirty days, without prejudice to the exceptions 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 applicationThe minimum duration of such a period may not be less than 15 days.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 443 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall provide the necessary information on the possibility for third-country nationals to return voluntarily if they have been found to be irregularly staying on national territory or while irregularly crossing an internal or external border or if they have arrived on the territory of a Member State following rescue operations at sea. That information shall cover programmes offering logistical or financial assistance and other types of material assistance, including support for reintegration in countries of origin, the time-frames for the procedure, the related obligations, and the consequences of non-compliance.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 445 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. Certain obligations aimed at avoiding the risk of absconding, such as regular reporting to the authorities, deposit of an adequate financial guarantee, submission of documents or the obligation to stay at a certain place or the submission of documents, may be imposed for the duration of the period for voluntary departure.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 477 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) technical reasons, such as lackthe lack of bilateral readmission agreements or of transport capacity, or failure of the removal due to lack of identification.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 527 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
The granting of such assistance, including its kind and extent, shall be subject to the cooperation of the third- country national concerned with the competent authorities of the Member States as provided for in Article 7 of this Directive.deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 613 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. UFor unaccompanied minors and families with minors shall only be detained as a measure of last resort analternatives to detention shall be provided for the shortest appropriate period of time.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 614 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 2
2. Families detained pending removal shall be provided with separate accommodation guaranteeing adequate privacy.deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 620 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 3
3. Minors in detention shall have the possibility to engage in leisure activities, including play and recreational activities appropriate to their age, and shall have, depending on the length of their stay, access to education.deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 625 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 4
4. Unaccompanied minors shall, as far as possibleappropriate, be provided with faccommodation in institutions provided with personnel and facilities whichilities and assisted by personnel, takeing into account the needs of persons of their age.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 630 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 5
5. The best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration in the context of the detentiontreatment of minors pending removal.
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 633 #
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Proposal for a directive
Article 22
22 [...]deleted
2019/02/11
Committee: LIBE
@parltrack
@parltrack@eupolicy.social
[javascript protected email address]
code AGPLv3.0+
data ODBLv1.0
site content CC-By-Sa-3.0

ParlTrack - 2011-2024

© European Union, 2011 – Source: European Parliament
Hosted by AS250.net Foundation