41 Amendments of Emil RADEV related to 2016/0224(COD)
Amendment 239 #
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.
Amendment 287 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) This Regulation should provide for the possibility that applicants lodge an application on behalf of their spouse, partner in a stable and durable relationship, dependant adults and children who are minors. This option allows for the joint examination of those applications. The right of each individual to seek international protection is guaranteed by the fact that if the applicant does not apply on behalf of the spouse, partner, dependant adult or minor within the set time-limit for lodging an application, the spouse or partner may still do in his or her own name, and the dependant adult or minor should be assisted by the determining authority. However, if a separate application is not justified, it should be considered as inadmissible.
Amendment 309 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
Amendment 328 #
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 obligatiowhere there are serious national security or public concerns. Furthermore, an accelerated examination procedure may be applied to unaccompanied minors only within the limited circumstances set out in this Regulation.
Amendment 403 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55
Recital 55
(55) As regards Albania, the legal basis for protection against persecution and mistreatment is adequately provided by substantive and procedural human rights and anti-discrimination legislation, including membership of all major international human rights treaties. In 2014, the European Court of Human Rights found violations in four out of 150 applications. There are no indications of any incidents 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. In 2014, Member States considered that 7,8 % (1040) of asylum applications of citizens from Albania were well-founded. At least eight Member States have designated Albania as a safe country of origin. Albania has been designated as a candidate country by the European Council. At the time of designation, the assessment was that Albania fulfilled the criteria established by the Copenhagen European Council of 21- 22 June 1993 relating to the stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities and Albania will have to continue to fulfil those criteria, for becoming a member in line with the recommendations provided in the Annual Progress Report.
Amendment 406 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56
Recital 56
(56) As regards Bosnia and Herzegovina, its Constitution provides the basis for the sharing of powers between the country's constituent peoples. The legal basis for protection against persecution and mistreatment is adequately provided by substantive and procedural human rights and anti-discrimination legislation, including membership of all major international human rights treaties. In 2014, the European Court of Human Rights found violations in five out of 1196 applications. There are no indications of any incidents 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. In 2014, Member States considered that 4,6 % (330) of asylum applications of citizens from Bosnia and Herzegovina were well- founded. At least nine Member States have designated Bosnia and Herzegovina as a safe country of origin.
Amendment 409 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) As regards the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the legal basis for protection against persecution and mistreatment is adequately provided by principle substantive and procedural human rights and anti-discrimination legislation, including membership of all major international human rights treaties. In 2014, the European Court of Human Rights found violations in six out of 502 applications. There are no indications of any incidents 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. In 2014, Member States considered that 0,9 % (70) of asylum applications of citizens of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia were well-founded. At least seven Member States have designated the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia as a safe country of origin. The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia has been designated as a candidate country by the European Council. At the time of designation, the assessment was that the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia fulfilled the criteria established by the Copenhagen European Council of 21-22 June 1993 relating to the stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities. The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia will have to continue to fulfil those criteria, for becoming a member in line with the recommendations provided in the Annual Progress Report.
Amendment 412 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) As regards Kosovo*, the legal basis for protection against persecution and mistreatment is adequately provided by substantive and procedural human rights and anti-discrimination legislation. The non-accession of Kosovo* to relevant international human rights instruments such as the ECHR results from the lack of international consensus regarding its status as a sovereign State. There are no indications of any incidents 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. In 2014, Member States considered that 6,3 % (830) of asylum applications of citizens of Kosovo* were well-founded. At least six Member States have designated Kosovo* as a safe country of origin.
Amendment 418 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 60
Recital 60
(60) As regards Montenegro, the legal basis for protection against persecution and mistreatment is adequately provided by substantive and procedural human rights and anti-discrimination legislation, including membership of all major international human rights treaties. In 2014, the European Court of Human Rights found violations in one out of 447 applications. There are no indications of any incidents 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. In 2014, Member States considered that 3,0 % (40) of asylum applications of citizens of Montenegro were well-founded. At least nine Member States have designated Montenegro as a safe country of origin. Montenegro has been designated as a candidate country by the European Council and negotiations have been opened. At the time of designation, the assessment was that Montenegro fulfilled the criteria established by the Copenhagen European Council of 21-22 June 1993 relating to the stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities. Montenegro will have to continue to fulfil those criteria, for becoming a member in line with the recommendations provided in the Annual Progress Report.
Amendment 421 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 61
Recital 61
(61) As regards Serbia, the Constitution provides the basis for self-governance of minority groups in the areas of education, use of language, information and culture. The legal basis for protection against persecution and mistreatment is adequately provided by substantive and procedural human rights and anti-discrimination legislation, including membership of all major international human rights treaties. In 2014, the European Court of Human Rights found violations in 16 out of 11 490 applications. There are no indications of any incidents 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. In 2014, Member States considered that 1,.8 % (400) of asylum applications of citizens from Serbia were well- founded. At least nine Member States have designated Serbia as a safe country of origin. Serbia has been designated as a candidate country by the European Council and negotiations have been opened. At the time of designation, the assessment was that Serbia fulfilled the criteria established by the Copenhagen European Council of 21-22 June 1993 relating to the stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities. Serbia will have to continue to fulfil those criteria, for becoming a member in line with the recommendations provided in the Annual Progress Report.
Amendment 424 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 62
Recital 62
(62) As regards Turkey, the legal basis for protection against persecution and mistreatment is adequately provided by substantive and procedural human rights and anti-discrimination legislation, including membership of all major international human rights treaties. In 2014, the European Court of Human Rights found violations in 94 out of 2 899 applications. There are no indications of any incidents 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. In 2014, Member States considered that 23,1 .1% (310) of asylum applications of citizens of Turkey were well-founded. One Member State has designated Turkey as a safe country of origin. Turkey has been designated as a candidate country by the European Council and negotiations have been opened. At the time, the assessment was that Turkey sufficiently meets fulfilled the political criteria established by the Copenhagen European Council of 21-22 June 1993 relating to stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities, and Turkey will have to continue to fulfil those criteria, for becoming a member in line with the recommendations provided in the Annual Progress Report.
Amendment 532 #
The following authorities shallmay have the task of receiving and/or registering applications for international protection as well as informing applicants as to where and how to lodge an application for international protection:.
Amendment 564 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Amendment 571 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. TWhe applicantn a person applies for international protection, he or she shall cooperate with the responsible authorities for them to establish his or her identity as well as to register, enable the lodging of and examine the application by:
Amendment 594 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Article 7 – paragraph 6
6. The applicant shall comply with obligations to report regularly to the competent authorities or to appear before them in person without delay or at a specified time or to remain in a designated area on its territory in accordance with Directive XXX/XXX/EU (Reception Conditions Directive), as imposed by the Member State in which he or she is required to be present in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX (Dublin Regulation).
Amendment 612 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point в
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point в
(c) their rights and obligations during the procedure, including the obligation to remain in the territory of the Member State in which they are required to be present in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX (Dublin Regulation);
Amendment 661 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point б a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point б a (new)
б (а) a person represents or becomes a threat to the Member State's national security or commits an offence.In such a case the person should be extradited immediately to his or her country of origin or transit.
Amendment 702 #
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 707 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 2
Where requested by the applicant, the determining authority shallmay ensure that the interviewers and interpreters are of the same sex as the applicant provided that this is possible and the determining authority does not have reasons to believe that such a request is based on grounds which are not related to difficulties on the part of the applicant to present the grounds of his or her application in a comprehensive manner.
Amendment 821 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The personnel of the authorities responsible for receiving and registering applications shall, when registering the application, indicate whether or not an applicant presents firstobvious indications of vulnerability which may require special procedural guarantees and may be inferred from physical signs or from the applicant's statements or behaviour.
Amendment 824 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The information that an applicant presents firstobvious signs of vulnerability shall be included in the applicant's file together with the description of the signs of vulnerability presented by the applicant that could require special procedural guarantees.
Amendment 827 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Member States shall ensure that the personnel of the authorities referred to in Article 5 is trained to detect firstobvious signs of vulnerability of applicants that could require special procedural guarantees and that it shall receive instructions for that purpose.
Amendment 983 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 3
Article 29 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1017 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – title
Article 31 – title
Applications on behalf of a spouse, partner, minor or dependent adult
Amendment 1023 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 1
1. An applicant may lodge an application on behalf of his or her spouse or partner in a stable and durable relationship, minorschildren under the age of legal responsibility or dependent adults children without legal capacity.
Amendment 1029 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1035 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 3
Article 31 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1049 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 5
Article 31 – paragraph 5
5. Where a person has lodged an application on behalf of his or her spouse or partner in a stable and durable relationship or dependent adultsdependent adult children without legal capacity, each of those persons shall be given the opportunity of a personal interview.
Amendment 1065 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 10 – subparagraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 10 – subparagraph 1
For the purpose of taking a decision on the admissibility of an application in case of a separate application by a spouse, partner or minor pursuant to Article 36(1)(d), an application for international protection shall be subject to an initial examination as to whether there are facts relating to the situation of the spouse, partner or minor which justify a separate application.
Amendment 1069 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 10 – subparagraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 10 – subparagraph 2
Where there are facts relating to the situation of the spouse, partner or minor which justify a separate application, that separate application shall be further examined to take a decision on its merits. If not, that separate application shall be rejected as inadmissible, without prejudice to the proper examination of any application lodged on behalf of the spouse, partner or minor.
Amendment 1074 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2
Article 32 – paragraph 2
2. In the case of an unaccompanied minor, the ten working-day period for the lodging the application provided for in Article 28(1) shall only start to run from the moment a guardian of the unaccompanied minor is appointed and has met with him or her. Where his or her guardian does not lodge an application on behalf of the unaccompanied minor within those ten working days, the determining authority shall lodge an application on behalf of the unaccompanied minor if, on the basis of an individual assessment of his or her personal situation, it is of the opinion that the minor may need international protection.
Amendment 1086 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point г
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point г
(d) the individual position and personal circumstances of the applicant, including factors such as background, gender, age, sexual orientation and agender 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 1138 #
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 1155 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – point г
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – point г
г) a spouse or partner orn accompanied minor lodges an application after he or she had consented to have an application lodged on his or her behalf, and there are no facts relating to the situation of the spouse, partner or minor which justify a separate application.
Amendment 1184 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point б
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point б
б) a spouse, partner or minor has not lodged his or her application after the applicant failed to lodge the application on his or her own behalf as referred to in Article 31(3) and (8);
Amendment 1256 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – point з
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – point з
з) the application is a subsequent application, including where the person has already been refused protection or has been the subject of a return decision, where the application is so clearly without substance or abusive that it has no tangible prospect of success.
Amendment 1277 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The determining authority may, in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees provided for in Chapter II, take a decision, at its own discretion and depending on its capacity, on an application at the border or in transit zones of the Member State on:
Amendment 1450 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 47 – paragraph 3 – point b
b) 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 1531 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 53 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point b
b) within twoone weeks in the case of a decision rejecting an application as inadmissible or in the case of a decision rejecting an application as explicitly withdrawn or as abandoned, or in the case of a decision rejecting an application as unfounded or manifestly unfounded in relation to refugee or subsidiary protection status following an accelerated examination procedure or border procedure or while the applicant is held in detention;
Amendment 1536 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 53 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point c
c) within one monthweek 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 1574 #
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 three month-period.