35 Amendments of Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA related to 2018/0329(COD)
Amendment 147 #
(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, provide. This should always be under the condition that the full scope of the principle of non-refoulement under European and international law is individually assessed in the asylum procedure and that the return procedure is automatically suspended until that rejection becomes final and pending the outcome of an appeal against that rejection.
Amendment 168 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
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 existsa closed, harmonized and exhaustive list of proven, Union-wide objective criteria defined by law.
Amendment 180 #
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 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 should be granted. Exceptionally, a period for voluntary departure of no less than 15 days could also be granted, after an individual assessment of the prospect of voluntary return. A period of less than 15 days can only be granted where it has been individually assessed, in line with the exhaustive list of objective criteria as outlined in this Directive, that third- country nationals pose a risk of absconding, have or 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.
Amendment 188 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) In order to promote voluntary return, Member States should have operational programmes providing for enhanced return assistance and counselling, which mayshould include support for reintegration in third countries of return tailored to the individual circumstances and prospects of the returnee, with particular attention for unaccompanied minors, taking into account the common standards on Assisted Voluntary Return and Reintegration Programmes developed by the Commission in cooperation with Member States and endorsed by the Council.
Amendment 203 #
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 fivebetween ten and fifteen days should be granted to appeal against a return decision. This provision should only apply following a decision rejecting an application for international protection which became final, including after a possible judicial review.
Amendment 216 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) An appeal against a return decision should always have an automatic suspensive effect only in cases where there is a risk of breach of the principle of non-refoulementexcept where judicial authorities have fully assessed the principle of non-refoulement and have found that this principle does not risk to be breached.
Amendment 224 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) In cases where the principle of non- refoulement is not at stakejudicial authorities have fully assessed the principle of non- refoulement and have found that this principle does not risk to be breached, appeals against a return decision should not have an automatic suspensive effect. The judicial authorities should be able to temporarily suspend the enforcement of a return decision in individual cases for other reasons, either upon request of the third- country national concerned or acting ex officio, where deemed necessary. Such decisions should, as a rule, be taken within 48 hours. Where justified by the complexity of the case, judicial authorities should take such decision without undue delay.
Amendment 232 #
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 full assessment of the risk to breach the principle of non- refoulement under European and international law 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 265 #
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, a maximum period of detention between three and six months, which may be prolonged,A maximum period of detention of three months 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. This period may not be prolonged, except for twice for a period of up to three months each, each after judicial review, and only in cases where, regardless of all the reasonable efforts by the Member State authorities, the removal operation is likely to last longer owing to a lack of cooperation by the third-country national concerned.
Amendment 322 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) The Union provides financial and operational support in order to achieve an effective implementation of this Directive. Member States should make best use of the available Union financial instruments, programmes and projects in the field of return, in particular under Regulation (EU) …/… [Regulation establishing the Asylum and Migration Fund], as well as of the operational assistance by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency according to Regulation (EU) …/… [EBCG Regulation]. Such support should be used in particular for establishing return management systems and programmes for providing logistical, financial and other material or in-kind assistance to support the return – and where relevant the reintegration – of illegaland post- return monitoring of irregularly staying third- country nationals.
Amendment 365 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7
7. ‘risk of absconding’ means the proven existence of specific reasons in an individual case which are based on objective criteriaand specific criteria strictly defined by law to believe that a third- country national who is the subject of return procedures may abscond;
Amendment 372 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9
9. ‘vulnerable persons’ means minors, unaccompanied minors, disabled people, elderly people, pregnant women, single parents with minor children, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex persons, persons belonging to religious minorities, non-believers, and persons who have been subjected to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual and gender based violence.
Amendment 381 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) respect the principle of non- refoulement., best interest of the child, family life and state of health (Article 5)
Amendment 383 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the best interests of the child as the primary consideration in all decisions concerning minors;
Amendment 478 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall inform the third-country nationals aboutin writing in a concise, transparent, intelligible and easily accessible form, using clear and plain language on the basis of a standard template which shall be developed by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, and in a language that the applicant understands. Where necessary, this information shall, in addition, be supplied orally and in a visual form through videos or pictograms, and shall take into account the individual circumstances, especially for vulnerable persons. This information shall include, at least, a clear overview of the return procedure, the rights and obligations during the procedure, the consequences of not complying with thean obligation referred to in paragraph 1. to return following a return decision, and the contacts of non-governmental and international organisations that can provide advice, and the options for sustainable returns, such as support and reintegration measures.
Amendment 507 #
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 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], only where the full scope of the principle of non- refoulement under European and international law is individually assessed in the asylum procedure.
Amendment 521 #
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 thirty 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 followingAs a general rule, Member States shall grant such a period, without an application byfrom the third- country national concerned. In such a case,being required. Member States shall inform the third-country nationals concerned of the possibility of submitting such an applicationof this period for voluntary departure.
Amendment 533 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Member States shall not grant aIn exceptional cases, a shorter period for voluntary departure inof no less than 15 days could also be granted, after an individual assessment of the prospect of return. A period of less than 15 days can only be granted if an individual assessment has found that the following cases are applicable:
Amendment 573 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. Before deciding to issue a return decision in respect of an unaccompanied minor, assistance by appropriate bodies other than the authorities enforcing return shall be granted with due consideration being given to the best interests of the chiland the best interests of the child shall be the primary consideration and the guardian or legal representative who is appointed to assist the unaccompanied minor shall be consulted.
Amendment 603 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall set up, operate, maintain and further develop a national return management system, which shall process all the necessary information for implementing this Directive, in particular as regards the management of individual cases as well as of any return- related procedure, including post-return monitoring and support to ensure sustainable returns.
Amendment 609 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. The national system shall be set up in a way which ensures technical compatibility allowing for communication with the central system established in accordance with Article 50 of Regulation (EU) …/… [EBCG Regulation]. and in full compliance with all relevant EU data protection law, in particular the GDPR and the Law Enforcement Directive. The Commission shall adopt a delegated act to establish the specific legal framework for this central system and the communication with this system, including clearly identifying the purposes of the processing via this centralised system and of the categories of personal data to be processed for each of these purposes.
Amendment 614 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Such assistance mayshall include support for reintegration in the third country of return which follow up on personal reintegration plans of returnees where legally and practically possible, to ensure sustainable returns, especially taking into account the specific circumstances of each third country national, and giving full attention to the cases of vulnerable persons. Member States shall ensure a follow up of these plans by dedicated and independent monitoring bodies.
Amendment 634 #
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 authority. Member states shall allocate to judicial authorities the capacity required for the proper implementation of this directive, including human resources and training, so as to guarantee the quality and expediency of judicial review
Amendment 643 #
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 thean appeal at first instance and, where that appeal has been lodged within the set period, during the examination of the appeal, where there is a risk to breachgainst that decision during the examination of the appeal and until the decision on appeal has been notified to the third country national. An appeal against a return decision shall have an automatic suspensive effect except in cases where judicial authorities have assessed the full scope of the principle of non- refoulement. Should a further appeal against a first or subsequent appeal decision be lodged, and in all other cases, t under European and international law and have found that this principle does not risk to be breached. The enforcement of the return decision shall notcan also be suspended unlesswhen a court or tribunal decides otherwiseto do so, taking into due account the specific circumstances of the individual case upon the applicant’s request or acting ex officio.
Amendment 656 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Member States shall grant a period not exceeding fivebetween ten and fifteen 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].
Amendment 672 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Unless other sufficient but less coercive measures can be applied effectively in a specific case, Member States may only keep in detention a third-country national who is the subject of return procedures in order to prepare the return and/or carry out the removal process, in particular when:
Amendment 696 #
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 maximumlimited period of detention of not less than three months and not more than sixwhich may not exceed three months.
Amendment 699 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
Article 18 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. Member States may not extend the period referred to in paragraph 5 except for two consecutive times of each a limited period not exceeding each a further twelve3 months in accordance with national law, and always after judicial review, in cases where regardless of all their reasonable efforts the removal operation is likely to last longer owing to:
Amendment 715 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Unaccompanied minors and families with minors shall onlynot be detained as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of timend will be provided with adequate, humane and non-custodial alternatives to detention when in the best interest of the child and where necessary to guarantee their protection.
Amendment 721 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
2. Families detained pending removal shall be provided with separate accommodation guaranteeing adequate privacyMember States shall therefore establish appropriate care arrangements and accommodate minors and families with minor children. Appropriate care arrangements and reception measures for minor children and their families shall be community based, the least intrusive possible and respect the right to privacy and family life. These care arrangements should provide for personnel and facilities which take into account the needs of persons their age. Minors 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. Unaccompanied minors shall as far as possible be provided with accommodation in institutions provided with personnel and facilities which take into account the needs of persons of their age.
Amendment 726 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 3
Article 20 – paragraph 3
Amendment 728 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Amendment 735 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 5
Article 20 – paragraph 5
5. The best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration in the context of thealternatives to detention ofor minors pending removal.
Amendment 738 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. In situations where an exceptionally large number of third-country nationals to be returned places an unforeseen heavy burden on the capacity of the detention facilities of a Member State or on its administrative or judicial staff, such a Member State may, as long as the exceptional situation persistfor a period of maximum three months, decide to allow for periods for judicial review longer than those provided for under the third subparagraph of Article 18(2) and to take urgent measures in respect of the conditions of detention derogating from those set out in Articles 19(1) and 20(2). The Member States shall, within three months, and under coordination by the Commission and EU Agencies, take all necessary measures to ensure adequate capacity.
Amendment 752 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall report every three years to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Directive in the Member States and, if appropriate, propose amendments. Such report shall be accompanied by a full Commission impact assessment of the transposition and implementation of this Directive by each Member States.