BETA

Activities of Georgios EPITIDEIOS related to 2016/0408(COD)

Plenary speeches (1)

Establishment, operation and use of the Schengen Information System in the field of border checks - Establishment, operation and use of the Schengen Information System in the field of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Use of the Schengen Information System for the return of illegally staying third-country nationals (debate) EL
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2016/0408(COD)

Amendments (17)

Amendment 8 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
(23) Alerts should not be kept in SIS longer than the time required to fulfil the purposes for which they were issued. In order reduce the administrative burden on the authorities involved in processing data on individuals for different purposes, it is appropriate to align the maximum retention period of refusal of entry and stay alerts with the possible maximum length of entry bans issued in accordance with procedures respecting Directive 2008/115/EC. Therefore, the retention period for alerts on persons should be a maximum of five years. As a general principle, alerts on persons should be automatically deleted from SIS after a period of five years. Decisions to keep alerts on persons should be based on a comprehensive individual assessment. Member States should review alerts on persons within the defined period and keep statistics about the number of alerts on persons for which the retention period has been extendand archived once the purposes for which they were issued are fulfilled.
2017/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 9 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
(24) Entering and extending the expiry date of a SIS alert should be subject to the necessary proportionality requirement, examining whether a concrete case is adequate, relevant and important enough to insert an alert in SIS. In cases of offences pursuant Articles 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA on combating terrorism49 an alert should always be created on third country nationals for the purposes of refusal of entry and stay taking into account the high level of threat and overall negative impact such activity may result in. _________________ 49Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism (OJ L 164, 22.6.2002, p. 3).deleted
2017/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 11 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
(30) Both the Member States and the Agency should maintain security plans in order to facilitate the implementation of security obligations and should cooperate with each other in order to address security issues from a common perspective. They must also have drawn up alternative plans to deal with situations not foreseen by the original plans.
2017/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 12 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
(31) The national independent supervisory authorities should monitor the lawfulness of the processing of personal data by the Member States in relation to this Regulation. The rights of data subjects for access, and rectification and erasure of their personal data stored in SIS, and subsequent remedies before national courts as well as the mutual recognition of judgments should be set out. Therefore, it is appropriate to require annual statistics from Member States.
2017/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 15 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. SIS data shall be entered, updated, deleted and searched via the various N.SIS. A partial or a full national copy shall be available for the purpose of carrying out automated searches in the territory of each of the Member States using such a copy. The partial national copy shall contain at least the data listed in Article 20(2) (a)-(v) of this Regulation It shall not be possible to search the data files of other Member States' N.SIS.
2017/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 16 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Each Member State shall, in relation to its N.SIS, adopt the necessary measures, including a security plan, a business continuity plan and, a disaster recovery plan and an alternative plan, in order to:
2017/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 17 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point ka (new)
(ka) be able to react when required to deal with situations not foreseen in the planning.
2017/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 18 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Agency shall adopt the necessary measures, including of a security plan, a business continuity plan and, a disaster recovery plan and an alternative plan for Central SIS and the Communication Infrastructure in order to:
2017/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 19 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point ka
(ka) be able to react in cases in which it is required to deal with situations not foreseen in the original planning.
2017/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 20 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 4
4. The logs may only be used for the purposes mentioned in paragraph 1 and shall be deleted at the earliest one year, and at the latest three years, after their creation. The logs which include the history of alerts shall be erased after one to three years after deletion of the alerts.
2017/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 21 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 5
5. Logs mayshall be kept longer if they are required for monitoring procedures that are already underwayand archived.
2017/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 27 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point ba (new)
(ba) a third-country national where there are serious grounds to believe that he or she had relations with terrorist organisations or is suspected of committing a terrorist act.
2017/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 28 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1
1. Where a Member State considers granting a residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay to a third-country national who is the subject of an alert for refusal of entry and stay entered by another Member State, it shall first consult the issuing Member State through the exchange of supplementary information and shall take account of the interests of that Member State. The issuing Member State shall provide a definite reply within seven days. Where the Member State considering granting a permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay decides to grant it, the alert for refusal of entry and stay shall be deletarchived.
2017/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 31 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1
1. Alerts entered in SIS pursuant to this Regulation shall be kept active only for the time required to achieve the purposes for which they were entered. After this period, alerts shall be archived.
2017/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 32 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 4
4. In cases where it becomes clear to staff in the SIRENE Bureau, who are responsible for coordinating and verifying of data quality, that an alert on a person has achieved its purpose and should be deleted from SIS, the staff shall notify the authority which created the alert to bring this issue to the attention of the authority. The authority shall have 30 calendar days from the receipt of this notification to indicate that the alert has been or shall be deleted or shall state reasons for the retention of the alert. If the 30-day period expires without such a reply the alert shall be deleted by the staff of the SIRENE Bureau. SIRENE Bureaux shall report any recurring issues in this area to their national supervisory authority.deleted
2017/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 33 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 6
6. Alerts shall automatically be erased after the review period referred to in paragraph 2 except where the Member State issuing the alert has informed CS- SIS about the extension of the alert to CS- SIS pursuant to paragraph 5. CS-SIS shall automatically inform the Member States of the scheduled deletion of data from the system four months in advance.deleted
2017/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 34 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35
1. Alerts on refusal of entry and stay pursuant to Article 24 shall be deleted when the decision on which the alert was entered has been withdrawn by the competent authority, where applicable following the consultation procedure referred to in Article 26. 2. Alerts relating to third-country nationals who are the subject of a restrictive measure as referred to in Article 27 shall be deleted when the measure implementing the travel ban has been terminated, suspended or annulled. 3. Alerts issued in respect of a person who has acquired citizenship of any State whose nationals are beneficiaries of the right of free movement within the Union shall be deleted as soon as the issuing Member State becomes aware, or is informed pursuant to Article 38 that the person in question has acquired such citizenship.Article 35 deleted Deletion of alerts
2017/06/15
Committee: AFET