10 Amendments of Emil RADEV related to 2018/2092(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
Citation 7 a (new)
- having regard to the study by the European Parliament Research Service on 'The Cost of Non Schengen': Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs aspects' of 26 September 2016,
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
- having regard to the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th annual reports by the European Commission on the functioning of the Schengen area,
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital А
Recital А
A. whereas the completion of the Schengen evaluation process for Bulgaria and Romania and the state of preparedness of the two countries to implement all the provisions of the Schengen acquis were confirmed by the Council in its conclusions of 9 and 10 June 2011; whereas in its draft decision of 8 July 2011, the Council verified that the necessary conditions for the application of the Schengen acquis had been met in all areas, namely data protection, air borders, land borders, police cooperation, the Schengen Information System, sea borders and visas; whereas Bulgaria and Romania’s state of preparedness to apply the Schengen acquis in full has been acknowledged many times by the Commission and Parliament, - in the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th annual reports on the functioning of the Schengen area, and most recently in the Commission communication of 27 September 2017 and Parliament’s resolution of 30 May 2018;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital В a (new)
Recital В a (new)
Ca. whereas at the European Council of 1-2 March 2012 the heads of state and government emphasised that all legal conditions had been met for the decision on the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the Schengen area to be taken, and called on the Justice and Home Affairs Council to adopt such a decision in September 2012;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Г
Recital Г
D. whereas in its conclusions the Justice and Home Affairs Council confirmed on multiple occasions its commitment to base any future decision on the abolition of checks at internal borders for Bulgaria and Romania on a two-step approach; and whereas the adoption of that decision by the Justice and Home Affairs Council has been repeatedly deferred;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Е a (new)
Recital Е a (new)
Fa. whereas Bulgaria and Romania police one of the most sensitive stretches of the EU's external border (measuring a combined 3264 km) аnd the 'Kapitan Andreevo' crossing point on the Bulgarian-Turkish border is the largest in the EU;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that all the necessary conditions for the full application of the Schengen acquis were met by Bulgaria and Romania in 2011; points out that this has entailed both countries fundamentally restructuring their border surveillance systems and investing significantly in increasing the capacities of their law enforcement agencies in order to meet EU requirements;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines the fact that the free movement of persons across internal borders and the incorporation of the Schengen acquis into the EU legal framework is one of the main achievements of the EU; stresses that the enlargement of the Schengen area should not be negatively impacted by shortcomings in other EU policies, such as the Common European Asylum System;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Emphasises that the Schengen acquis was not designed to accommodate Member States with different legal statuses; draws attention to the fact that the Council’s prolonged inaction has created the need for making a clear distinction in EU legislation, relating to information and border management systems, between those Member States applying the Schengen acquis in full and those applying it partially; voices its concern that this legally codifies a de facto parallel existence of a Schengen area with free movement and a Schengen area without free movement; expresses its concern also that this differentiation will hinder interconnectivity between European information systems, thus undermining rather than strengthening EU security;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that with regard to the full application of the Schengen acquis, the criteria applicable to all Member States are clearly defined in the European legislative framework; also emphasises that no additional criteria should be introduced or links to other Union mechanisms and policies made, other than the specified prerequisites laid down in the 2005 Act of Accession; calls on the Member States to take a decision on the enlargement of the Schengen area solely on the basis of fulfilment of the relevant conditions for applying the Schengen acquis following the completion of the Schengen evaluation process;