779 Amendments of Tom VANDENDRIESSCHE
Amendment 10 #
2024/2030(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes with satisfaction the strongthe collaboration with the Justice and Home Affairs Agencies, notably the conclusion of a new working arrangement with European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), the opening of 15 new cases where Eurojust supported European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) as well as the cooperation on 42 cases with European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) including on a pilot project for the systematic and structural exchange of data for link detection purposes;
Amendment 25 #
2024/2030(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Commends the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights’ (Acknowledges the FRA)’s assistance to policymakers implementing existing EU law and policies in the field of equality and anti-discrimination, such as EU law and policies combating racism and antisemitism, supporting the collection of equality data and the implementation of national Roma strategic frameworks, and providing input for to the mid-term review of the 2020–2025 LGBTIQ equality strategy, the protection of civil society and of human rights defenders at risk, as well as supporting the revision of the victims’ rights directive, and advising on the implementation of the horizontal enabling conditions related to fundamental right for the use of EU fund; emphasizes the importance of addressing all forms of discrimination, including anti-European discrimination, to ensure a balanced approach that reflects the diversity of challenges faced by EU citizens; regrets however that the FRA was not able to elaborate more precisely on the reasons triggering a skyrocketing rise of antisemitism in EU Member States;
Amendment 28 #
2024/2030(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises FRA’s guidance and engagement in the area of asylum and migration, including cooperatioUrges FRA to enhance transparency and accountability in with the European Union Asylum Agency (EUAA) to enhancing the understanding of guardians and legal representatives assisting unaccompanied children seeking international protection within the Union and the training provided to staff of Europol enhancing awareness and understanding of fundamental rights considerations in relevant operational contexts; welcomes FRA’s timely input on the temporary protection directive implementation in the context of refugees fleeing from Ukraine, as well as os reporting mechanisms, ensuring that its activities provide clear and measurable outcomes that directly benefit EU citizens; calls for an indentifying the challenges with regard to the implementation of Union law on long- term residence, and the list of actions the Union and its Member States can take to reduce fatalities at seapendent evaluation of FRA’s added value in areas where its mandate overlaps with other EU agencies or national bodies;
Amendment 39 #
2024/2030(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes FRA's contribution toQuestions the competence of FRA in the evaluation of the European Border and Coast Guard Regulation (‘the EBCG Regulation’)3 , participation in European Border Coast Agency (Frontex) Management Board meetings and co- chairing the Frontex Consultative Forum on Fundamental Rights, and cooperation with the Fundamental Rights Office at Frontex; _________________ 3 Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2019 on the European Border and Coast Guard and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1052/2013 and (EU) 2016/1624 (OJ L, 2019/1896, 14.11.2019, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2019/1896/oj ).considering that the agency already has Fundamental Rights monitoring;
Amendment 40 #
2024/2030(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 47 #
2024/2030(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes with dismay that in 2023, over 1,1 million applications for international protection (+18 % compared to 2022) were submitted, and more than 1 million decisions granting temporary protection were issued in 29 EU+ countries; highlights the substantial support EUAA has provided tostresses the urgent need for the EUAA to assist Member States ion that context;4 _________________ 4 EU+ countries include the Member States of the European Union (EU) as well as Schengen associated countrmeasures to prevent illegal migration and processing returns efficiently, in line with their national policies.;
Amendment 55 #
2024/2030(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the fact thatQuestions the competence of the EUAA’s first fundamental rights officer (FRO) took office on 16 May 2023; appreciates the concept of a visible and easily accessible complaints mechanism developed by the FRO in consultation with the Commission and the Consultative Forumconsidering that the FRA is already providing expertise to the agency;
Amendment 61 #
2024/2030(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes with satisfaction that 1 000 training sessions were organised by EUAA, and that there is a constant increase in terms of the number of asylum and reception officials and civil society actors trained (+6 % compared to 2022); welcomes the further development of the European asylum curriculum, with training modules such as the ones addressing gender-based violence and the situation of children in the asylum process in an attempt to offset the constant increase in the unstoppable migratory influx encouraged by the European Commission for almost 10 years now;
Amendment 73 #
2024/2030(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes the significantWelcomes the increase in returns, with Frontex exceeding its target of 20 000 by assisting 39 239 returns in total, including an impressive 87% increase in voluntary returns and a 20% rise in forced returns compared to 2022; welcomes the enhanced support provided to Member States in post-return and post- arrival assistance, with Frontex exceeding its target of 5 000 cases in the Joint Reintegration System, successfully managing 6 438 cases in 2023notes, however, that the overall return rate in the European Union remained below 30%, indicating that current initiatives remain insufficient in the light of scale of illegal migration flows; emphasizes the need for Frontex to further prioritize and expand its return operations as a central element of its mandate and to work closely with Member States to enhance the effectiveness of return and reintegration programs;
Amendment 82 #
2024/2030(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Acknowledges the essential role Frontex plays in Search and Rescue (SAR) operations, with maritime and aerial assets deployed in joint operations responding to 785 incidents involving 43 508 migrants, underscoring the critical contribution of Frontex to humanitarian efforts; recalls that in line with expectations expressed by many Member States, a sustainable EU border management policy should effectively explore the possibilities for Frontex to disembark rescued migrants in coastal third countries of departure;
Amendment 89 #
2024/2030(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights the positive progress in implementing Fundamental Rights targets, including the ongoing execuAcknowledges the implementation of the Fundamental Rights Action Plan and the independent evaluation of the Agency’s compliance with the Fundamental Rights Framework, in line with the EBCG Regulation; welcomes the proactive follow-up by Frontex on complaints related to fundamental rights, with the majority being dismissed for non- admissibility; welcomes Frontex's reinforced commitment to transparency and accountabilitynotes, however, that the emphasis on fundamental rights must not divert resources from Frontex’s core operational tasks, particularly its mandate to manage returns effectively; calls for a balanced approach where fundamental rights compliance supports, rather than hinders, the execution of operational priorities;
Amendment 93 #
2024/2030(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. SupportNotes Frontex’s continued efforts to strengthen its FRO, notincluding the employment of 46 Fundamental Rights Monitors (FRM) in 2023; stresses the importance of ensuring that all FRMs are recruited in AD grade, to further enhance their capacity and independence; recognises that Frontex has taken significant steps in responding to the opinions of the FRO, particularly on issues such as gender mainstreaming and human trafficking, however, that these efforts must not detract from Frontex’s primary mission to safeguard Europe’s borders and increase the efficiency of its return operations; encourages Frontex to develop a clearer division of responsibilities between the FRO and operational units, ensuring that fundamental rights monitoring enhances, rather than impedes, the effectiveness of border management and return operations;
Amendment 119 #
2024/2030(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Commission, in light of the challenging migration crisis, to follow up on Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s statement of July 2024 declaring that Frontex is well-positioned to further increase its staff to up to 30 000 agents; underlines that this expansion would significantly enhance Frontex’s capacity to manageaddress migration flows and ensure security at the Union’s external borders, reinforcing its vital role in the Union’s broader migration strategy.
Amendment 124 #
2024/2030(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes with regret that the training activities in the area of fundamental rights and data protection decreased in 2023 (when 19 activities were implemented with 2063 participants) in comparison to 2022 (30 activities with 4 014 participants); underlines that the core objective of CEPOL is to support, develop, implement and coordinate training for law enforcement officials, while putting particular emphasis on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the context of law enforcement; acknowledges at the same time that the total number of participants increased to 46 431.
Amendment 152 #
2024/2030(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Further acknowledges the Commission's efforts towards a stronger and more secure Europe, as outlined by President Ursula von der Leyen in her statement of 2024; cCalls on the Commission to double Europol's staff and recognise Europol’s central role in ensuring security across the Union and its capacity to respond to emerging threats; further underlines that this expansion will further enhance Europol's ability to support Member States in combating serious and organised crime, both online and offline, thereby contributing to a safer and more secure Europe for all.
Amendment 10 #
2024/2029(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the increase in appropriations for the EPPO’s budget in 2023, amounting to EUR 64,6 million in total, which allowed for an 11 % increase in staff in that year; acknowledgeregrets that the acceleration of the disbursement of NextGenerationEU funding and the increase in the EPPO’s membership are projected to put further strain on the EPPO’s resources; underline instead of acknowledging the EC's responsibility for the negligent management of NextGenerationEU; questions the importance of additional funding for the EPPO’s budget in order for it to have the necessary means to carry out its tasks;
Amendment 16 #
2024/2029(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Acknowledges the importance of taking a holistic approach to combating white-collar crime, such as fraud and corruption, and more conventional types of crime, such as drug trafficking and human trafficking, as they are often linked; recalls the fact that, in its upcoming evaluation report, the Commission should carefully analyse whether and to which categories of crimes the EPPO’s mandate needs to be extended in order for it to be best equipped to fulfil its role; regrets that this is being done to the detriment of, and instead of, strengthening controls and criteria for the allocation of funds by the EC;
Amendment 20 #
2024/2029(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Emphasises the importantcomplementary role of the EPPO in the Union approach to combating corruption and the misuse of Union funds; expresses its satisfactionnotes that 24 Member States participate in the EPPO and encourages the remaining Member States to do so as well; calls on the Commission to continue engaging in an active dialogue with non-participating Member States to effectively facilitate the EPPO in carrying out its tasks; emphasises the fact that such a dialogue could also be of value to Member States that already participate in the EPPO as regards tackling difficulties in fighting rule of law violations and corruptio; underlines the importance of letting Member States decide whether or not to join;
Amendment 2 #
2024/2028(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the 2023 operating budget of the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) amounted to EUR 22 711 559 and compared to the 2022 final budget, is concerned that the operating budget increased by 12 %; welcomes that, in 2023, the implementation rate of the commitment appropriations by the EDPS was 96 %;
Amendment 13 #
2024/2028(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Expresses concern about the significant increase in EDPS staff mission costs, from EUR 28 789 in 2021 and EUR 176 903 in 2022, to EUR 284 580 in 2023; calls on the EDPS to assess whether the resources spent on missions are being used appropriately and effectively; notesexpresses deep concern that the EDPS ceased making public the number of missions funded by organisers, as well as information on which unit or sector participated in each mission, thus reducing transparency regarding mission expenses; calls on the EDPS to, even though transparency is the cornerstone of its mission; calls on the EDPS to retroactively and sustainably reinstate this practice.
Amendment 1 #
2024/2019(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomNotes the progress in the implementation of Member States' national programmes in 2023; notes with concern that, despite the requirement to spend all funds for the programming period 2014- 2020 by June 2024, 18% of AMIF funds and 25% of ISF funds allocated to Member States for that period remain undeclared; is concerned about the improper use of some funds, and calls on the Commission to account for them;
Amendment 9 #
2024/2019(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. WelcomStrongly opposes the Commission’s timely proposal to increase the ceilings of Headings 4 and 6 as part of the Multiannual Financial Framework mid- term revision with a view to ensuring sufficient funding for the implementation of the New Pact on Migration and Asylum; stresses the need to ensure adequate and timely Union funding for Member States and Union agencies to facilitate the smooth implementation of Union law in the areas of asylum and migration; calls on the Commission to monitor and assist in the timely progress of the administrative, operational and legal steps required by Member States and Union agencies for the full implementation of the New Pact on Migration and Asylum by Summer 2026; reiterates that the New Pact on Migration and Asylum will only exacerbate migration flows into Europe; calls instead for a redirection of resources toward stricter border controls, effective returns, and measures to address root causes of migration in cooperation with third countries;
Amendment 18 #
2024/2019(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes with concern that the number of migrants arriving irregularly in the Union increased again in 2023 as compared to previous years; further notes the Commisshighlights that Search and Rescue (SAR) operation’s ongoing efforts to assist Member States in addressing irregular arrivals and in successfully integin the Mediterranean, while vital for saving lives, may act as a pull factor encouratging legally residing third-country nationals; recalls that, while the Commission should continue to take action on migration andfurther dangerous crossings; stresses that the current framework, which combines the right to asylum within the framework of external action, the functioning of the ‘Team Europe’ approach must be clarified while safeguarding the role of Parliament; calls on the Commission to increase the transparency and accountability of the programming and implementation of the Union home affairs funds right to residence in Europe, incentivizes perilous journeys, leading to increased deaths at sea; warns that the New Migration Pact, by facilitating pathways to Europe, risks exacerbating third countries; renews its call on the Commission to support the Union agencies and the Member States in coordinating effective search-and-rescue operations in the Mediterranean,ese trends, resulting in more dangerous crossings, higher mortality rates, and a rise in illegal migration; calls for a thorough reassessment of the Pact to ensuringe that such actions are carried out in accordance with international and Union lawit does not unintentionally encourage irregular migration or undermine Member States’ control over their borders;
Amendment 22 #
2024/2019(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Acknowledges the Commission’s continuous monitoring of rule of law benchmarks through the rule of law toolbox, including the annual rule of law report, while remaining concerned that, by adopting an overly diplomatic approach and failing to distinguish between individual and systemic issues, the annual rule of law report risks trivialising some of the most serious breaches of the rule of law; repolitical and arbiterates its regret and serious concern with respect to the lawfulness of the Commission’s decision concluding that, in Hungary, the horizontal enabling condition of the Charter had been fulfilled in relation to judicial independence which decision enabled the Hungarian authorities to start claiming reimbursements of up to approximately EUR 10,2 billion from Union funds; calls on the Commission to take steps towards the full implementation of Parliament’s recommendations on the establishment of an EU mechanism for democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, contained in its resolution of 25 October 20161 , and to ensure that assessments of rule of law benchmarks are more precise and qualitative than is presently the case, relying not only on legislative changes, but also on real and independent evidence of their implementation in practice; _________________ 1 European Parliament resolution of 25 October 2016 with recommendations to the Commission on the establishment of an EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights (2015/2254(INL)) (OJ C 215, 19.6.2018, p. 162).ry monitoring of rule of law benchmarks through the rule of law toolbox;
Amendment 32 #
2024/2019(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Reiterates its great concern over the persistent delays in the Commission’s procedures for granting access to documents; urges the Commission to address these deficiencies promptly, in line with Parliament’s recommendations, and to apply first and foremost the rules of transparency it imposes on others entities;
Amendment 3 #
2023/2087(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 15
Citation 15
Amendment 12 #
2023/2087(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas according to Regulation 2019/1896, in which the Commission recommends that the Council authoon 20 September, Frontex, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, and Mauritanian authorities opened a risk analysis cell in Nouakchott within the framework of the Africa-Frontex Intelligence Community (AFIC); whereas cooperation between Frontex and 32 African countries in the AFIC community is a key element in fighting cross-border crisme and preventing security to negotiate a status agreement, it should asses the fundamental rights situation relevant to the areas covered by the status agrehreats affecting African countries and the EU; whereas currently eight risk analysis cells are part of the AFIC network, which are run by local analysts trained by Frontex, in order to collect and analyse data on cross- border crime and support authorities involved in border management; whereas such an assessment has not been performed yet;ith information on illegal border crossings, documenting fraud, trafficking in human beings and other types of cross-border crime.
Amendment 25 #
2023/2087(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas Mauritania has no national legal asylum system in place; whereas the Office of theaccording to United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) grants de facto protection with the issuance ofMauritania has decades-old open-door policy towards refugee cards and certificates on the basis of a memorandum with the authorities; whereas people deemed ineligible for protection are structurally deported by the authorities without further procedure; whereas this has included deportations of people whose cases have not been assessed by the UNHCR; whereas Mauritania’s current legal framework does not allow for effective protection of women and children, or of LGBTIQ+ persons; whereas same-sex activity is illegal in Mauritaniahosts over 71,000 Malian refugees in the southeast Hodh Chargui region; whereas more than 11,000 refugees and asylum- seekers comprising 40 different nationalities live in Nouakchott and Nouadhibou;
Amendment 37 #
2023/2087(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas refugees and migrants in Mauritania continuously face systemic and serious human rights violations and ill treatment such as refoulement, arbitrary arrests and detention, (gender-based) violence, including cases of torture, exploitation, abusive detention conditions, extortion and theft, and abusive collective expulsionsaccording to the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) due to its geographical position, Mauritania has become an important transit site for migratory movements, including for irregular migrants journeying to Europe ;
Amendment 41 #
2023/2087(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas Mauritania only formally abolished slavery in 1981, and was the last country in the world to do so; whereas slavery has only been criminalised since 2015; whereas the UN Special Rapporteur concluded in 2022 that the country had taken significant steps but theand continued existence of slavery and slavery-like practices, including practices of forced labour, remains a concern and has an impact on both migrants and Mauritanian citizenss to work on improving its political system in that regard;
Amendment 54 #
2023/2087(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Expresses its deep concern about the situation of fundamental rights in Mauritania, particularly for migrants and refugees, and considers that the deployment of Frontex executive powers in Mauritania entails a high risk of becoming complicit in serious and most likely persistent violations of fundamental rights or international protection obligations;Considers that the status agreement between the European Union and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania on operational activities carried out by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) in the Islamic Republic of Mauritania is a positive step towards fighting cross-border crime and preventing security threats to Europe.
Amendment 62 #
2023/2087(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that if the Model Status Agreement fawills short of addressing the above-mentioned concerns, this could lead to accountability gaps in the event of fundamental rights violations committed either by the third country’s authorities and/or by Frontex’s deployed personnelpecifically help prevent irregular departures towards the Canary Islands and increase cooperation on border management and anti-smuggling activities;
Amendment 71 #
2023/2087(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – introductory part
Paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Strongly urges the Commission and the Agency to: continue works on the status agreement between the European Union and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania.
Amendment 72 #
2023/2087(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1
Amendment 104 #
2023/2087(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2
Amendment 80 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The assessment made to substantiate explicit environmental claims needs to consider the life-cycle of the product or of the overall activities of the trader and should not omit any relevant environmental aspects or environmental impacts, such as the environmental impact of a product imported from a third country. The benefits claimed should not result in an unjustified transfer of negative impacts to other stages of the life cycle of a product or trader, or to the creation or increase of other negative environmental impacts.
Amendment 113 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) While unfair commercial practices, including misleading environmental claims, are prohibited for all traders pursuant to Directive 2005/29/EC84, an administrative burden linked to substantiation and verification of environmental claims on the smallest companies could be disproportionate and should be avoided. To this end, microenterprises should be exempted from the requirements on substantiation of Article 3 and 4 unless these enterprises wish to obtain a certificatean alternative to third-party certification should be provided for micro, small and medium-sized enterprises on the basis of a declaration of conformity of explicit environmental claims that will be recognised by the competent authorities across the Union. _________________ 84 Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to- consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Unfair Commercial Practices Directive) (OJ L 149, 11.6.2005, p. 22) as amended.
Amendment 138 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) In order to avoid potential disproportionate impacts on the micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, the smallest companies should be exempted from the requirements of Article 5 linked to information on the substantiation of explicit environmental claims unless these enterprises wish to obtain a certificate of conformity of explicit environmental claim that will be recognised by the competent authorities across the Union.
Amendment 166 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 54
Recital 54
(54) Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) should be ablegiven sufficient support to benefit from the opportunities provided by the market for more sustainable products but, as they couldgenerally face proportionately higher costs and difficulties with some of the requirements on substantiation and verification of explicit environmental claims. The Member States should provide adequate information by means of easily accessible information portals or similar means and raise awareness of the ways to comply with the requirements of this Directive, ensure targeted and specialised training free of charge, and provide specific and sufficient assistance and support, including financial, so thato SMEs wishing to make explicit environmental claims on their products or as regards their activities are able to do so. Member States actions should be taken in respect of applicable State aid rules.
Amendment 332 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) identify whether improving environmental impacts, environmental aspects or environmental performance subject to the claim leads to significant harm in relation to environmental impacts on climate change, resource consumption and circularity, sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources, pollution, biodiversity, public well-being and health, animal welfare and ecosystems;
Amendment 370 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point j a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point j a (new)
(ja) provide relevant information on the environmental impact of the transport of products, in particular in the context of imports.
Amendment 381 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. The requirements set out in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not apply to traders that are micro, small or medium- sized enterprises within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC110 unless they request the verification with the aim of receiving the certificate of conformity in accordance with Article 10. _________________ 110 Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium- sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).
Amendment 431 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The requirements laid down in this Article shall not apply to traders that are micro, small or medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC111 unless they request the verification with the aim of receiving the certificate of conformity in accordance with Article 10. _________________ 111 Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium- sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).
Amendment 503 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 7
Article 5 – paragraph 7
7. The requirements set out in paragraphs 2, 3 and 6 shall not apply to traders that are micro, small or medium- sized enterprises within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC unless they request the verification with the aim of receiving the certificate of conformity in accordance with Article 10.
Amendment 555 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 621 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. The verification and certification requirements shall apply to traders that are micro, small or medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC only if they so request.
Amendment 624 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. When they set up the procedures referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, Member States shall encourage verifiers to take into account the complexity of the substantiation of the claim and the size and turnover of traders requesting verification and certification when calculating their pricing for the cost of verification and certification, paying particular attention to micro, small and medium-sized enterprises.
Amendment 700 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Member States shall take appropriate measures to help micro, small and medium sized enterprises apply the requirements set out in this Directive. Those measures shall at least include guidelinaccessible guidelines containing clear examples or similar mechanisms to raise awareness of ways to comply with the requirements on explicit environmental claims. In addition, wWithout prejudice to applicable state aid rules, such measures may include one or more of the following elements:
Amendment 706 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) access to specialised information portals.
Amendment 732 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16
Article 16
Amendment 760 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)
(ga) the size of the company;
Amendment 761 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Amendment 812 #
2023/0085(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
They shall apply those measures from [OP please insert the date = 2436 months after the date of entry into force of this Directive].
Amendment 110 #
2022/2026(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges the forthcoming Council to unblock the horizontal directive on equal treatment and ensure that discrimination in all aspects on the grounds of disability is prohibited, including multiple and intersectional discrimination;
Amendment 126 #
2022/2026(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Denounces the fact that some groups of persons with disabilities are at greater risk of being the victim of any kind of violence, such as women and girls, children, elderly people, homeless people, detainees, migrants and refugees, Roma people and LGBTIQ+ people; calls on the Commission and the Member States to address the specific challenges, rights and needs of these people through specialised measures to ensure access to victim support services and protection and to remove barriers to reporting violencediscrimination, such as those who do not have a migrant background and non- LGBTIQ+ people; calls on the Commission to prohibit positive discrimination on grounds of non- disability-related personal characteristics;
Amendment 134 #
2022/2026(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Draws attention to the fact that persons with disabilities often do not receive appropriate care and resources in a timely manner, and can be faced with long waiting lists and insufficient financial support; draws attention to the fact that this is caused by the large influx of refugees; calls on the Commission always to give persons with disabilities who are nationals of a Member State priority over third-country nationals; calls for this principle to be codified in EU law;
Amendment 34 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities, as set out in Article 2 of the TEU; whereas the right to equal treatment and non-discrimination is aand the right to freedom of expression are fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter and must be fully respected;
Amendment 39 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the EU Action Plan is the first EU policy instrument to recognise the structural dimensionrecognises the link between slavery and racism; whereas Europeans were the first to abolish slavery; whereas slavery ofr racism, which has historical roots dating back to colonialism is not an exclusively European story; whereas the Arab slave trade was the longest-running slave trade in history and sclaveryimed millions of victims;
Amendment 51 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas according to the FRA, racial discrimination and harassment remain normalised throughout the EU10; whereas racism and extreme righleft-wing sentiments and ideology and the associated belief that every white person is inherently racist continue to pose serious challenges in our Union; _________________ 10 https://fra.europa.eu/en/news/2019/rising- inequalities-and-harassment-fundamental- rights-protection-falters
Amendment 62 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas structural and institutionalised racism is also mirrored in socioeconomic inequality and poverty, and whereas these factors interact and reinforce each otheroriginate from the Marxist school of thought, and whereas these terms hamper the fight against individual expressions of discrimination;
Amendment 87 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas there are barriers to access justice for victims of racial discrimination; whereas equality bodies in the Member States lack the human and financial resources and/or political will and independence to bridge this gapare politically motivated and only tackle certain forms of discrimination; whereas anti-white racism is forgotten and/or ignored;
Amendment 115 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the Racial Equality Directive has been insufficientlyshould be implemented by the Member States within their own national context;
Amendment 124 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the EU institutions need to take concrete steps to ensure sustainable changes towards a fully inclusive and respectful workplace; whereas discrimination is often multidimensional and only an intersectional approach can pave the way to sustainable changescan affect any group within society, irrespective of ethnic or cultural background;
Amendment 143 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises the urgent need for the Union to develop a robust and comprehensive agenda for effectively combating racism and discrimination on all grounds and inby all areas in the EU; insists that the Union and its institutions must lead by example in the fight against structural and institutional racism and anti-discriminationpersons or groups in the EU;
Amendment 152 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 171 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 183 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Member States to ensure the full implementation of the Racial Equality Directive; condemns the fact that racial, ethnic, linguistic and religious minorities face structural racism, discrimination, hate crime and hate speech, a lack of access to justice, and sustained socioeconomic inequalities in areas such as housing, healthcare, employment and education, which need to be acknowledged as major barriers to full enjoyment of fundamental rights and key barriers to inclusion and equalitydiscrimination; condemns all forms of ethnic discrimination, including anti-white discrimination;
Amendment 196 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. RegretNotes that 14 years after the adoption of the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia, several Member States have not yet fully and correctly transposed its provisions into national law; calls on the Member States to put measures in place that encourage victims and witnesses to come forward and report hate crime, and strengthen the ability of national law enforcement systems to correctly identify and record it;
Amendment 214 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Demands that the Member States end racial Recognises that all personal characteristics may be relevant for ethnic profiling in all forms, encompassing artificial intelligence (AI) tools and including in criminal law enforcement, counter-terrorism measures and immigration controls, and to officially recognise and combat practices of unlawful discrimination and violence through anti-racism and anti-bias training for the authoritiee police and intelligence services in criminal law enforcement, counter-terrorism measures and immigration controls;
Amendment 229 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Member States to monitor racial bias, including in AI datasets, in criminal justice, education systems and social services, and to take proactive steps to ensure equal justice ; points out that it is not only min order to improve relations between authorities and minority communities; calls, furthermore, for the creation of independent complaint mechanisms for all administrative, judiciary and executive branches of the state, in particular law enforcementities who are victims of racial bias;
Amendment 238 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 253 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Emphasises the need to ensure meaningful participation of all groups affecteat all groups are affected by discrimination and that ethnic background should bye intersectional discriminrrelevant for the purposes of participationg in policymaking at EU, national and local levels, especially racialised groups;
Amendment 261 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses the importance of collecting comparable and robust disaggregated equality data to document discrimination and to tackle inequadata relating to ethnic background as critical policy information, to allow the debate to be conducted and politcy holisticallycoordinated dispassionately in a factual manner, based on voluntary participation, self-identification and informed consent, while protecting anonymity and confidentiality, respecting the key principles of EU data protection legislation and fundamental rights and complying with national legislation; calls on the Commission to continue developing a common methodology on this with Member States in order to ensure the comparability, accuracy and reliability of the data collected; supports the FRA’s work on analysing this data and welcomes further developments in this field, in line with its new mandate;
Amendment 264 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 280 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Underlines the importance of representation and diversity as a tool for the development of inclusive societies; recalls that the media have a responsibility to reflect societies in all their diversity, and regrets the current lack of diversity at all levelsat competence should always take precedence over diversity characteristics at all levels; regrets the use of positive discrimination; stresses that discrimination based on any skin colour or background whatsoever contravenes the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
Amendment 284 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 301 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls for structural and institutionalised racism, discrimination and the underrepresentation of minorities within the structures of the European institutions to be addressed and for the adoption of a workforce diversity and inclusion strategyReminds the Commission of the words of Martin Luther King; stresses that the nature of a person’s character should always take precedence over the colour of their skin; stresses that these words should serve as a guide for any policy intended to combat racism and discrimination;
Amendment 304 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Reminds the Commission of the words of Nelson Mandela; stresses that it is not diversity or ethnicity that divides us; stresses that the only division that exists at present is between those who cherish democracy and those who do not;
Amendment 311 #
2022/2005(INI)
15. WelcomesIs concerned about the Commission’s appointment of the first anti-racism coordinator in 2021 and the continuous re-appointment since 2015 of the coordinator on combating antisemitism and fostering Jewish life; but deplores that the position of anti-Muslim hatred coordinator has been left vacant since July 2021; stresses that the coordinator should treat all forms of discrimination seriously and in an apolitical manner;
Amendment 326 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 335 #
2022/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 303 #
2022/0269(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. This Regulation shall apply to economic operators as defined in Article 2 of the Directive (EU) [XXX/XXX] on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence.
Amendment 8 #
Amendment 9 #
Amendment 11 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Regulation (EU) 2021/953 of the European Parliament and of the Council1 lays down a framework for the issuance, verification and acceptance of interoperable COVID-19 vaccination, test and recovery certificates (EU Digital COVID Certificate) for the purpose of facilitating the holders’ exercise of their right to free movement during the COVID- 19 pandemic, even though there have been operational issues with the digital certificate that have reduced its effectiveness, particularly involving fraudulent use of secret cryptographic keys. It is also to contribute to facilitating the gradual lifting of restrictions to free movement put in place by the Member States, in accordance with Union law, to limit the spread of SARS- CoV-2, in a coordinated manner. _________________ 1 Regulation (EU) 2021/953 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2021 on a framework for the issuance, verification and acceptance of interoperable COVID-19 vaccination, test and recovery certificates (EU Digital COVID Certificate) to facilitate free movement during the COVID-19 pandemic, OJ L 211, 15.6.2021, p. 1.
Amendment 17 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) Notes a blind spot in the application of Regulation (EU) 2021/953 regarding the validity period of the COVID certificate after the booster dose (3rd dose).
Amendment 23 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Since the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2021/953, the epidemiological situation with regard to the COVID-19 pandemic has evolved considerably. On the one hand, by 31 January 2022, more than 80% of the adult population in the Union have completed their primary vaccination cycle, and more than 50% have received a booster dose, despite significant differences between Member States6. Increasing vaccine uptake remains a crucial objective in the fight against the pandemic, given the increased protection against hospitalisation and severe disease afforded by vaccination, and thus plays an important role in ensuring that restrictions to the free movement of persons can be lifted. It would be appropriate to review the legitimacy of the COVID Certificate in the light of the number of vaccinated people in the EU and the lower risk presented by the new variants, as restricting the free movement of persons within the Union should remain an exception. _________________ 6 https://vaccinetracker.ecdc.europa.eu/publi c/extensions/COVID-19/vaccine- tracker.html
Amendment 24 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Since the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2021/953, the epidemiological situation with regard to the COVID-19 pandemic has evolved considerabimproved substantially. On the one hand, by 31 January 2022, more than 80% of the adult population in the Union have completed their primary vaccination cycle, and more than 50% have received a booster dose, despite significant differences between Member States6. Increasing vaccine uptake remains a crucial objective in the fight against the pandemic, given the increased protection against hospitalisation and severe disease afforded by vaccination, and thus plays an important role in ensuring that restrictions to the free movement of persons can be lifted. Nine Member States do not require incoming travellers to provide any kind of COVID- 19 certificates to access their national territory. _________________ 6 https://vaccinetracker.ecdc.europa.eu/publi c/extensions/COVID-19/vaccine- tracker.html
Amendment 28 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
Amendment 36 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 b (new)
Recital 8 b (new)
(8b) The EU Digital COVID Certificate has been conceived only as a tool to facilitate free movement within the Union during the COVID-19 pandemic, taking into account the principles of proportionality and non-discrimination. However, in contravention of the objective of Regulation (EU) 2021/953, the EU Digital COVID Certificate has been used by many national, regional and local authorities in the Member States, as well as by the Union institutions, to impose restrictions for internal and domestic purposes. Without prejudice to Member States’ competence to introduce national restrictions on grounds of public health this Regulation and the EU Digital COVID Certificate should not be intended as a tool for Member States to impose unjustified, disproportionate or discriminatory restrictions for domestic purposes.
Amendment 49 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a – point i a (new) Regulation (EU) 2021/953
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a – point i a (new) Regulation (EU) 2021/953
(ia) point (c) is replaced by the following: (c) a certificate confirming that, following a positive result of a NAAT test, or a rapid antigen test listed in the EU common list of COVID-19 antigen tests agreed by the Health Security Committee, or an antibody test listed in the EU common list of COVID-19 antibody tests agreed by the Health Security Committee, carried out by health professionals or by skilled testing personnel, the holder has recovered from a SARS-CoV-2 infection (certificate of recovery). Or. en (Regulation (EU) 2021/953)
Amendment 60 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point –a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point –a (new)
Regulation (EU) 2021/953
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
(-a) In Article 7, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: "1. Each Member State shall issue, upon request, certificates of recovery referred to in point (c) of Article 3(1) following a positive result of a NAAT test carried out by health professionals or by skilled testing personnel. A Member State may also issue, upon request, certificates of recovery referred to in point (c) of Article 3(1) following a positive result of a rapid antigen test listed in the EU common list of COVID-19 antigen tests agreed by the Health Security Committee carried out by health professionals or by skilled testing personnel. Member States may issue certificates of recovery based on rapid antigen tests carried out by health professionals or by skilled testing personnel on or after 1 October 2021, provided that the rapid antigen test used was included in the EU common list of COVID-19 antigen tests agreed by the Health Security Committee at the time the positive test result was produced. A Member State may also issue certificates of recovery referred to in point (c) of Article 3(1) following a positive result of an antibody test carried out by health professionals or by skilled testing personnel, provided that the antibody test used was included in the EU common list of COVID-19 antibody tests agreed by the Health Security Committee at the time the positive test result was produced. Certificates of recovery shall be issued at the earliest 11 days after the date on which a person was first subject to a NAAT test or rapid antigen test that produced a positive result, or the day after the date on which a person was subject to an antibody test that produced a positive result. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 12 to amend the number of days after which a certificate of recovery is to be issued, on the basis of guidance received from the Health Security Committee in accordance with Article 3(11) or on scientific evidence reviewed by ECDC."
Amendment 68 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 d (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 d (new)
Regulation (EU) 2021/953
Article 11 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 4 a (new)
(5d) In Article 11, the following paragraph is added: “4a. Member States shall not make use of the EU Digital COVID Certificate as a tool to implement domestic restrictions.”;
Amendment 70 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2021/953
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Amendment 76 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 e (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 e (new)
Regulation (EU) 2021/953
Article 16 – paragraph 3 (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 3 (new)
Amendment 77 #
2022/0031(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Regulation (EU) 2021/953
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1 #
Amendment 3 #
2021/2146(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 4 #
2021/2146(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Deeply regrets that the obligation included in Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 to recruit at least 40 fundamental rights monitors by 5 December 2020 has still not been fulfilled; urges the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (the ‘Agency’) to swiftly recruit the remaining fundamental rights monitors and to appoint them at AD level, asStates that the recruitment of 40 fundamental rights monitors by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (the ‘Agency’), under pressure from the European Parliament and the European Commission have repeatedly called for; reminds the Agency that that is one of seven conditions set by the Parliament in its previous discharge reports; recognises the progress made by the Agency in that respect; highlights however that the lack of fulfilment of those conditions increases the risk of, only serves to transform it into a committee to help migrants, whereas its role is to protect the European borders; affirms that the absence of recruitment of monitors or the attribution of a grade to them cannot be a reason for refusaling to grant discharge for the financial year 2020;
Amendment 9 #
2021/2146(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 10 #
2021/2146(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. RegretNotes that the call to suspend the Agency’s support for return-related operations from Hungary for as long as, and as concluded by the Court of Justice of the European Union, the return decisions issued by the Hungarian authorities are incompatible with Directive 2008/115/EC and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has not been fulfilled; is deeply concerned that the Agency’s management board has still not adopted a detailed procedure for the implementation of Article 46 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1896, especially in the light of developments in Greeceaccording to the document "Reflection on the current legal and operational developments" released by the Agency in July 2022, no complaint or serious incident report has been received by Frontex in any of the returns by Hungary supported by Frontex so far, neither from individuals or from any organisation; congratulates Hungary and Greece for their vital work in protecting Europe's borders to combat the flood of migrants; urges the EU to support these Member States;
Amendment 22 #
2021/2146(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 23 #
2021/2146(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. WelcomesNotice the decision to partially grant access to the report of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) on the investigation conducted with respect to the activities of the Agency,into the Agency's activities to the members of Parliament’'s Committee on Budgetary Control and Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs; regretdenounces the lcong delay taken towards grantclusions of this investigation; requests, ing that access; is profoundly concerned about the findings of that investigation; expresses its utter disappointment in the behaviour and actions described in the findings presented; recommends, given those findings, toe interests of transparency and impartiality, that the answers given by the former Executive Director, Mr. Leggeri, at his hearing before the Frontex Management Board in connection with this investigation also has to be published; pending these answers, recommends that Parliament’'s Committee on Budgetary Control not to grant discharge for the financial year 2020;
Amendment 24 #
2021/2146(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the decision to partially grant access to the report of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) on the investigation conducted with respect to the activities of the Agency, to the members of Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control and Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs; regrets the long delay taken towards granting that access; is profoundly concerned about the findings of that investigation; expresses its utter disappointment in the behaviour and actions described in the findings presented; recommends, given those findings, to Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control not to grant discharge for the financial year 2020Requests that the former Executive Director of Frontex, who claims that the mandate of the Agency is unclear - to be a European border police force or a body verifying how Member States apply fundamental rights at borders - has to be heard in the European Parliament;
Amendment 31 #
2021/2146(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the appointment of the interim executive director on 1 July 2022Regrets that the Strategic Risk Analysis 2022 report published by the Executive Director ad interim of the Agency proposes the future development of legal pathways for migration to Europe in response to possible future global geographic imbalances; condemns this promotion of migration by the Agency;
Amendment 36 #
2021/2146(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 37 #
2021/2146(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the acknowledgeCondemns the harassment byof the acting eformer Executive dDirector of the standing problems of the Agency and the commitments she madeAgency and countries in ther presentation in Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs on 30 May 2022, which included commitments to ensure that the Agency fully implements its mandate and operates in full respect of the rule of law and fundamental rights, to change the organisational culture of the Agency, including to make sure people are not afraid to speak up about possible wrongdoings, to organise a dialogue with the members of staff, to encourage delegation of powers and to build relationships of trust with other institutions and the public; expects decisive steps to fulfil those commitments; notes with concern the statements of the acting executive director about the demotivation and distress of the staff; expects a detailed strategy to tackle that issue front line of the flood of migrants, such as Hungary, Poland or Greece, which are protecting the continent; states that this harassment is the work of the European Commission and the European Parliament; demands that it cease; expects the Agency to be able to carry out its work of defending the borders of the European Union with the support of the European institutions;
Amendment 38 #
2021/2146(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the acknowledgement by the acting executive directRecalls that the annual report ofn the standing problems of the Agency and the commitments she made in her presentation in Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs on 30 May 2022, which included commitments to ensure that the Agency fully implements its mandate and operates in full respect of the rule of law and fundamental rights, to change the organisational culture of the Agency, including to make sure people are not afraid to speak up about possible wrongdoings, to organise a dialogue with the members of staff, to encourage delegation of powers and to build relationships of trust with other institutions and the public; expects decisive steps to fulfil those commitments; notes wimplementation of Regulation (EU) No 656/2014, establishing rules for the surveillance of the external sea borders in the context of operational cooperation coordinated by the Agency on activities carried out in 2021, indicates that the Agency has ensured the application of provisions of this Regulation in iths concern the statements of the acting executive director about the demotivation and distress of the staff; expects a detailed strategy to tackle that issueordinated maritime operations;
Amendment 48 #
2021/2146(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the management board and Commission to recruit as soon as possible a new eExecutive dDirector as soon as possible.whose priority is the protection of the European Union's external borders;
Amendment 9 #
2021/2145(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 14 #
2021/2145(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 18 #
2021/2145(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 7 #
2021/2026(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. Whereas the existence of CBI/RBI schemes affects all Member States; whereas the operation of a CBI/RBI scheme by an individual Member State thus generates significant externalities on other Member States; whereas those externalities warrant regulation by the Union; whereas this does not, however, warrant any exceeding or extension of EU competence; whereas nationality law remains entirely a Member State competence;
Amendment 11 #
2021/2026(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. Whereas the operation of CBI schemes lead to the commodification of Union citizenship; whereas such commodification of rights is not compatible with Union values, in particular equality;
Amendment 28 #
2021/2026(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 31 #
2021/2026(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that the advantageous conditions and fast-track procedures set for investors under CBI/RBI schemes, when compared to the conditions and procedures for other third-country nationals wishing to obtain international protection, residence or citizenship, are discriminatory, lack fairness and undermine the integrity of the Union asylum and migration acquis;
Amendment 26 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the annual rule of law review cycle is a welcome addition to the tools available to preserve the Union’s values, by addressing the situation in all EU Member States based on four pillars, with a direct bearing on respect for the rule of law; whereas it is intended as a yearly cycle to ensure the rule of law and to prevent problems from emerging or deepeninghas been turned into a political tool and serves as a threat targeting Member States that may refuse to fall into line with the Commission's societal projects;
Amendment 33 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
Amendment 54 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomNotes the Commission’'s first annual Rule of Law Report awhich forms part of the wider European rule of law monitoring and enforcement architecture, as it adds an important, potentially preventive tool to the Union’s rule of law toolboxpolitical instrumentalisation of the concept of the rule of law, the intention of which is to standardise lifestyles within the EU by means of the law;
Amendment 71 #
2021/2025(INI)
3. Stresses the potential preventive benefits of the annual Rule of Law Report; considers that a more thorough evaluation is needed to assess whether the report has had a preventive effect; considers that in any event this is clearly not the case as regards the Member States under the Article 7(1) TEU procedure; believes that the 2020 report should have provided more in-depth assessments, stating whether there is a risk of or actual breach of the Union values; considers these assessments necessary to identify follow-up actions and remedial measures and toolsConsiders that the Article 7(1) TEU procedure is the only one that may lawfully be used to manage allegations of breach of the rule of law;
Amendment 111 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 119 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. DecriNotes the fact that the initiation of preliminary ruling proceedings before the Court of Justice of the EU has been declared unlawful in Member States subject to Article 7 of the TEU; is appalled bytakes into account the growing resistance of some Member States to comply with CJEU rulings on the legitimate grounds of sovereignty or unconstitutionality; believes that these developments pose a systemic threat to the Union; considers, therefore, that forthcoming annual reports should consider challenges to the Union’s legal architecture and principles as serious violaconstitute a protest against a change in direction by the Union which seeks to impose one single view of the rule of law and the EU model of society regardless of the legal, constitutional and cultural traditions inof the assessmentMember States;
Amendment 137 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Welcomes the dedication of a specific chapter to anti-corruption efforts in each country report; points out that while the existence of national anticorruption strategies can be considered progress, their effectiveness on the ground must also be assessed; notes that an assessment of the resilience of the anti-corruption framework to tackle corruption-related risks in the area of public procurement remains largely absent from the 2020 report; invites the Commission to place greater emphasis on the misuse of EU funds, particularly in view of the new conditionality mechanism;
Amendment 167 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Is concerned by the worsening state of affairs as regards freedom of expression and the acceptance of a wide variety of opinions on certain social networks; considers that their monopoly position makes them essential to modern political life and that the arbitrary censorship of legally-held opinions has a serious impact on citizens' freedom of expression; urges the Commission to propose a penalty system for platforms exercising censorship without a court order;
Amendment 195 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 213 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 232 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission to strengthen the regular, inclusive and structured dialogue with governments and national parliaments, NGOs, professional associations and other stakeholders; notes that three Member States refused to make public their submissions for the 2020 report; calls for transparency in the process and for all submissions to be made public;
Amendment 240 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
Amendment 248 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 255 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 268 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Strongly regrets the inability of the Council to make meaningful progress in enforcing Union values in ongoing Article 7 TEU procedures; notes that the Council’s hesitance to apply Article 7 of the TEU effectively is enabling continued divergence from the values provided for in Article 2 of the TEU; calls for a reflection at the Conference on the Future of Europe on a revision of the Article 7 TEU procedure in order to realign the majority requirements of paragraphs 1 and 2 with a view to having super-majorities of four or five for bothHighlights the fact that henceforth the Council is alone in being able to act in ongoing Article 7 TEU procedures;
Amendment 275 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
Amendment 283 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
Amendment 300 #
2021/2025(INI)
28a. Reiterates that the people are sovereign in a democracy and that the issue of respect for the rule of law shall not be used to restrict the exercise of power nor to influence the policy stance of democratically elected governments of the Member States when the rule of law is not being seriously and systematically breached, which the Council alone is able to determine through the procedure laid down in Article 7 TEU;
Amendment 43 #
2021/0393(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) As the register has been set up after Regulation (EU) 2018/1727 had already been adopted, the European Judicial Counter-Terrorism Register is neither technically well integrated at Eurojust nor legally well integrated in Regulation (EU) 2018/1727. Therefore, it is necessary to remedy that by adopting a consistent approach to the verification of identified potential links between terrorism cases and the effective follow-up of these links. The management of the information in the European Judicial Register and the follow-up of potential links must be carried out in full respect of confidentiality and data ownership.
Amendment 48 #
2021/0393(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) As terrorist organisations are increasingly involved in other forms of seriousserious and sophisticated forms of financial and organised crimes, such as trafficking in human beings, drug trafficking or money laundering, it is also necessary to cross- check judicial proceedings against such serious crimes.
Amendment 53 #
2021/0393(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The competent authorities need to know exactly what kind of information they have to transmit to Eurojust, at what stage of the national proceedings, in accordance with national law, and in which cases, in order to provide such data. This is expected to increase the information Eurojust receives significantly.
Amendment 60 #
2021/0393(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) For the identification of cross-links between terrorism investigations and judicial proceedings against suspects of terrorist offences, reliable identification data is crucial. Due to the uncertainties regarding alphanumerical data especially for third country nationals, it should be possible to exchange biometric data, provided that such data are collected and stored and can be transmitted to the competent national authorities in accordance with the national law of each Member State. Due to the sensitive nature of biometric data and the impact processing of biometric data has on the respect for private and family life and the protection of personal data, as enshrined in Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, a strict necessity test should be applied by the competent authorities and Eurojust in each case.
Amendment 66 #
2021/0393(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) As information about existing cross-links to other judicial proceedings is most useful at an early stage of the investigation, it is necessary that the competent authorities provide information to Eurojust as soon as judicial authorities are involvedthe opportunity arises, in accordance with the national law of each Member State. If the competent national authorities are already aware of cross-links, they should inform Eurojust accordingly.
Amendment 71 #
2021/0393(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Given the sensitive nature of judicial proceedings against suspects of terrorist offences, it is not always possible for the competent national authorities to share the information on terrorist offences at the earliest stage. Such derogations from the obligation to provide informationIf the transmission of information could jeopardise ongoing investigations or the security of the person or the Member State concerned, the competent national authorities should not be obliged to provide Eurojust with information on terrorist offences at the initial stage of the proceedings. Information sharing should remain an exceptional measure.
Amendment 86 #
2021/0393(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21 a (new)
Recital 21 a (new)
(21a) The transnational dimension of cross-border terrorism investigations poses several practical problems for the national authorities involved. For this reason, Eurojust should play an important role, in particular as regards constraints related to travel, limited access to operational equipment and language barriers.
Amendment 87 #
2021/0393(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21 b (new)
Recital 21 b (new)
(21b) The free movement of people in the European Union strengthens terrorism. Eurojust's operational missions should support the actions taken by Member States in the fight against this movement of criminals by strengthening police and judicial cooperation.
Amendment 93 #
2021/0393(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22 a (new)
Recital 22 a (new)
(22a) The competent national authority, in accordance with its domestic legislation, may decide whether to retain the data of persons who have been acquitted or refused prosecution after final judgements.
Amendment 98 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The need to ensure transparency is a legitimate public goal, in conformity with the values shared by the EU and its Member States pursuant to Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (‘TEU’). It is not always easy for citizens to recognise political advertisements and exercise their democratic rights in an informed manner. A high level of transparency is necessary, among others, to support an open and fair political debate and free and fair elections or referendums and to combat disinformation and unlawful interference including from abroad. Political advertising can be a vector of disinformation in particular where the advertising does not disclose its political nature, and where it is targeted. Transparency of political advertising contributes to enabling voters to better understand when they are being presented with a political advertisement on whose behalf that advertisement is being made, and how they are being targeted by an advertising service provider, so that voters are better placed to make informed choices.
Amendment 99 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) Transparency for publishers of political advertising, such as social media firms, is of fundamental importance for honest political debate and free elections. Those publishers should be transparent about ensuring equal access for political messages, and the reach of those messages, in order to maintain a level playing field.
Amendment 105 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Political advertising is currently regulated heterogeneously in the Member States, which in many cases tends to focus on traditional media forms. Specific restrictions exist including on cross- border provisions of political advertising services. Some Member States prohibit EU service providers established in other Member States from providing services of a political nature or with a political purpose during electoral periods. At the same time, gaps and loopholes in national legislation are likely to exist in some Member States resulting in political advertising sometimes being disseminated without regard to relevant national rules and thus risking undermining the objective of transparency regulation for political advertisIn any case, Member States themselves assess the impact of political advertising on their national democracy and regulate accordingly.
Amendment 106 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) To provide enhanced transparency of political advertising including to address citizens' concerns, some Member States have already explored or are considering additional measures to address the transparency of political advertising and to support a fair political debate and free and fair elections or referendums. These national measures are in particular considered for advertising published and disseminated online and may include further prohibitions. These measures vary from soft to binding measures and imply different elements of transparencyprohibitions should always respect the right to free and pluralistic information.
Amendment 109 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
Amendment 111 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
Amendment 119 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Political views expressed in the programmes of audiovisual linear broadcasts or published in printed media without direct payment or equivalent remunerationdisproportionately favour those who hold political power. To guarantee pluralism, they too should not be covered by this Regulation.
Amendment 121 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) It is necessary to define political advertisement as any instance of political advertising. Advertisements include the means by which the advertising message is communicated, including in print, by broadcast media, through participation in current-affairs and entertainment programmes or via an online platforms service.
Amendment 127 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Freedom of expression as protected by Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights covers an individual’s right to hold political opinions, receive and impart political information and share political ideas. Every limitation to it has to comply with Article 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and that freedom can be subject to modulations and restrictions where they are justified by the pursuit of a legitimate public interest and comply with the general principles of EU law, such as proportionality and legal certainty. That is inter alia the case where the political ideas are communicated through advertising service providers.
Amendment 132 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
Amendment 156 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
Amendment 179 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) The publication or dissemination by other actors of a message that is liable to influence the outcome of an election or referendum, legislative or regulatory process or voting behaviour should also constitute political advertising. In order to determine whether the publication or dissemination of a message is liable to influence the outcome of an election or referendum, a legislative or regulatory process or voting behaviour, account should be taken of all relevant factors such as the content of the message, the language used to convey the message, the context in which the message is conveyed, the objective of the message and the means by which the message is published or disseminated. Messages on societal or controversial issues may, as the case may be, be liable to influence the outcome of an election or referendum, a legislative or regulatory process or voting behaviour.
Amendment 207 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) The transparency requirements should also not apply to the sharing of information through electronic communication services such as electronic message services or telephone calls, as long as no political advertising service is involved.
Amendment 239 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) Information about the amounts spent on and the value of other benefits received in part or full exchange for political advertising services can usefully contribute to the political debate. It is necessary to ensure that an appropriate overview of political advertising activity can be obtained from the annual reports prepared by relevant political advertising publishers. To support oversight and accountability, such reporting should include information about expenditure on the targeting of political advertising in the relevant period, aggregated to campaign or candidate. To avoid disproportionate burdens, those transparency reporting obligations should not apply to enterprises qualifying under Article 3(1), (2) and (3) of Directive 2013/34/EU.
Amendment 256 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) For the oversight of those aspects of this Regulation that do not fall within the competence of the supervisory authorities under Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Regulation (EU) 2018/725 Member States shouldmay designate competent authorities. To support the upholding of fundamental rights and freedoms, the rule of law, democratic principles and public confidence in the oversight of political advertising it is necessary that such authorities are structurally independent from external intervention or political pressure and are appropriately empowered effectively monitor and take the measures necessary to ensure compliance with this Regulation, in particular the obligations laid down in Article 7. Member States may designate, in particular, the national regulatory authorities or bodies under Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council13. _________________ 13 Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) (OJ L 95, 15.4.2010, p. 1).
Amendment 264 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 66
Recital 66
Amendment 270 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) the reach of the political message;
Amendment 301 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9
Article 9
Amendment 302 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Amendment 304 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Amendment 341 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9
9. ‘electoral period’ means the period preceding or during or immediately after an election or referendum in a Member State and during which the campaign activities are subject to specific rules;
Amendment 468 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 8
Article 7 – paragraph 8
Amendment 482 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to undertakings that qualifying under as micro, small or medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of Article 3(3) of Directive 2013/34/EU.
Amendment 547 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Any information provided pursuant to this article may only be used in the context for which it was requested i.e. for the purpose specified in the request made to the provider of political advertising services by the entity referred to in paragraph 2.
Amendment 566 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 8
Article 12 – paragraph 8
Amendment 584 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall designate competent authorities to monitor the compliance of providers of intermediary services within the meaning of Regulation (EU) 2021/xxx [DSA] with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 to 11 and 14 of this Regulation, where applicable. The competent authorities designated under Regulation (EU) 2021/xxx [Digital Services Act] may also be one of the competent authorities designated to monitor the compliance of online intermediaries with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 to 11 and 14 of this Regulation. The Digital Services Coordinator referred to in Article 38 of Regulation (EU) 2021/xxx in each Member State shall be responsible for ensuring coordination at national level in respect of providers of intermediary services as defined by Regulation (EU) 2021/xxx [Digital Services Act]. Article 45(1) to (4) and Article 46(1) of Regulation (EU) 2021/xxx [Digital Services Act] shall be applicable for matters related to the application of this Regulation as regards providers of intermediary services.
Amendment 592 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. Each Member State shallmay designate one or more competentther authorities to be responsible for the application and enforcement of the aspects of this Regulation not referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2. Each competent authority designated under this paragraph shall structurally enjoy full independence both from the sector and from any external intervention or political pressure. It shall in full independence effectively monitor and take the measures necessary and proportionate to ensure compliance with this Regulation.
Amendment 598 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Article 15 – paragraph 4
4. Competent authorities referred to in paragraph 3, where exercising their supervisory tasks in relation to this Regulation, shall have the power to request to access data, documents or any necessary information from providers of political advertising services for the performance of their supervisory tasks.
Amendment 600 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 15 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. Competent authorities referred to in paragraph 3, where exercising their enforcement powers in relation to this Regulation, shall have the power to:
Amendment 617 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – introductory part
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – introductory part
8. Where a provider of political advertising services is providing services in more than one Member State, or has its main establishment or a representative in a Member State but provides its main activities in another Member State, theeach competent authority of the Member State of the main establishment or other establishment or of the represenwhere the services are being provided shall be considered competent for applying supervisory or enforcement measures. The authorities of the different Member States shall cooperate and provide each other with support if necessary. Unless already provided for under EU law, a competent authority may request, via the contact point referred to in paragraph 7, in a substantive, and ated, justified and proportionate manner, that another competent authorities of those other Member States shall cooperate with and assist each other as necessary. Unless already regulated by Union law,y, where it is better placed, take the supervisory or enforcement measures referred to in paragraphs 4 and 5; The relevant competent authority so requested shall, via the contact points referred to in paragraph 7 and within a time frame proportionate to the urgency of the request, provide a response or inform that it does not consider that the conditions for requesting assistance under this Regulation have been met. Any information exchanged in thate cooperation shall entail, at least, the following: ntext of the request for assistance and provided under this article shall only be used in the context of the matter for which it was requested.
Amendment 618 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – point a
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – point a
Amendment 622 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – point b
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – point b
Amendment 625 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – point c
Article 15 – paragraph 8 – point c
Amendment 631 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 9
Article 15 – paragraph 9
9. Contact points shall meetexchange information periodically at Union level in the framework of the European Cooperation Network on Elections to facilitate the swift and secured exchange of information on issues connected to the exercise of their supervisory and enforcements tasks pursuant to this Regulation.
Amendment 637 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. In relation to Articles 5 to 11, 13 and 14 Member States shall lay down rules on sanctions including administrative fines and financial penalties applicable to providers of political advertising services under their jurisdiction and under the applicable data protection legislation, where appropriate, for infringements of the present Regulation, which shall in each individual case be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.
Amendment 31 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) It should likewise be possible for pParticipation by elected municipal officers in the election of a parliamentary assembly toshould likewise be reserved exclusively for own nationals. Otherwise, differing rules would apply to non- nationals, with a distinction being made between those who would have the right to vote, following their election, and those who would not. That would furthermore undermine a sense of belonging to a national community.
Amendment 34 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
Amendment 42 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) In order to improve the accessibility of eElectoral information, such information should be made available in at least one other official language of the Union than that or those of the host Member State, broadly understood by the largest possible number of Union citizens residing on its territory. Member States may use different official languages of the Union in specific parts of their territory or their regions depeUnion language of the host Member State so that nationals living on its territory and wishing to participate in the electoral process demonstrate their assimilation through an understanding onf the language understood by the largest group of Union citizens residing thereinofficial language of the State concerned.
Amendment 55 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
Recital 23
Amendment 69 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 72 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. If, in order to vote or to stand as candidates, nationals of the Member State of residence must have spent a certain minimum period as a resident in the territory of that State, voters and persons entitled to stand as candidates pursuant to Article 3 shall be deemed to have fulfilled that condition where they have resided for an equivalent period in other Member Statesalso be subject to that condition.
Amendment 86 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Having regard to the Treaty and to general legal principles, Member States may take appropriate, necessary and proportional measures to ensure that the offices referred to in the first subparagraph can only be held and the interim functions referred to in the second subparagraph can be performed only by their own nationals.
Amendment 103 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Amendment 111 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Amendment 125 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12
Article 12
Amendment 157 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Amendment 171 #
2021/0373(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16
Article 16
Amendment 227 #
2021/0250(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) This new instrument is part of a comprehensive package aiming at strengthening the Union’s AML/CFT framework. Together, this instrument, Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for Anti-Money Laundering Regulation - COM/2021/420 final], Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for a recast of Regulation (EU) 2015/847 - COM/2021/422 final] and Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for establishment of an Anti- Money Laundering Authority - COM/2021/421 final] will form the legal framework governing the AML/CFT requirements to be met by obliged entities and underpinning the Union’s AML/CFT institutional framework, including the establishment of an Authority for anti- money laundering and countering the fina widening of the remit of the existing European Banking Authority (‘EBA’), an independent EU body that aims to ensure an effective and consistent level of prudential regulation and supervision across the European bancking of terrorism (‘AMLA’)sector.
Amendment 229 #
2021/0250(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Specific money laundering and terrorist financing threats, risks and vulnerabilities affecting certain economic sectors at national level diminish in distinct manners Member States ability to contribute to the integrity and soundness of the Union financial system. As such, it is appropriate to allow Member States, upon identification of such sectors and specific risks to decide to apply AML/CFT requirements to additional sectors than those covered by Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for Anti-Money Laundering Regulation]. With a view to preserving the effectiveness of the internal market and the Union AML/CFT system, the Commission should be able, with the support of AMLA,EBA, as an independent authority, should be able to assess whether the intended decisions of the Member States to apply AML/CFT requirements to additional sectors are justified. In cases where the best interests of the Union would be achieved at Union level as regards specific sectors, the Commission should inform that Member State that it intends to take action at Union level instead and the Member State should abstain from taking the intended national measures.
Amendment 236 #
2021/0250(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The CommissionABE is well placed to review specific cross-border threats that could affect the internal market and that cannot be identified and effectively combatted by individual Member States. It should therefore be entrusted with the responsibility for coordinating the assessment of risks relating to cross-border activities. Involvement of the relevant experts, such as the Expert Group on Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing and the representatives from the FIUs, as well as, where appropriate, from other Union-level bodies, is essential for the effectiveness of the process of the assessment of risks. National risk assessments and experience are also an important source of information for that process. Such assessment of the cross- border risks by the CommissionABE should not involve the processing of personal data. In any event, data should be fully anonymised. National and Union data protection supervisory authorities should be involved only if the assessment of the risk of money laundering and terrorist financing has an impact on the privacy and data protection of individuals.
Amendment 244 #
2021/0250(COD)
(15) To be able to review the effectiveness of their systems for combating money laundering and terrorist financing, Member States should maintain, and improve the quality of, relevant statistics. With a view to enhancing the quality and consistency of the statistical data collected at Union level, the Commission and the AMLAABE should keep track of the Union-wide situation with respect to the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing and should publish regular overviews.
Amendment 252 #
2021/0250(COD)
(19) With a view to enhancing transparency in order to combat the misuse of legal entities, Member States should ensure that beneficial ownership information is stored in a central register located outside the company, in full compliance with Union law. Member States can, for that purpose, use a central database, which collects beneficial ownership information, or the business register, or another central register. Member States may decide that obliged entities are responsible for filling in the register. Member States should make sure that in all cases that information is made available to competent authorities and FIUs and is provided to obliged entities when they take customer due diligence measures.
Amendment 286 #
2021/0250(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) Directive (EU) 2018/843 achieved the interconnection of Member States’ central registers holding beneficial ownership information through the European Central Platform established by Directive (EU) 2017/1132 of the European Parliament and of the Council30. Continued involvement of Member States in the functioning of the whole system should be ensured by means of a regular dialogue between the Commission and the representatives of Member States on the issues concerning the operation of the system and on its future development. _________________ 30 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 relating to certain aspects of company law (OJ L 169, 30.6.2017, p. 46).
Amendment 320 #
2021/0250(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) The Union has witnessed on occasions a lax approach to the supervision of the obliged entities' duties in terms of anti-money laundering and counter- terrorist financing duties. Therefore, it has become of utmost importance that competent national supervisors, as part of the integrated supervisory mechanism put in place by this Directive and Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for establishment of an Anti-Money Laundering Authority - COM/2021/421 final],(EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority), amending Decision No 716/2009/EC and repealing Commission Decision 2009/78/EC] obtain clarity as to their respective rights and obligations.
Amendment 322 #
2021/0250(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 63
Recital 63
(63) Where an obliged entity operates establishments in another Member State, including through a network of agents, the supervisor of the home Member State should be responsible for supervising the obliged entity's application of group-wide AML/CFT policies and procedures. This could involve on-sitethe-spot visits in establishments based in another Member State. The supervisor of the home Member State should cooperate closely with the supervisor of the host Member State and should inform the latter of any issues that could affect their assessment of the establishment's compliance with the host AML/CFT rules.
Amendment 334 #
2021/0250(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 80
Recital 80
(80) To facilitate such cooperation in relation to credit institutions, AMLA, in consultation with the European Banking Authority,the EBA should issue guidelines specifying the main elements of such cooperation including how information should be exchanged.
Amendment 338 #
2021/0250(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 89
Recital 89
(89) Regulatory technical standards should ensure consistent harmonisation across the Union. As the body with highly specialised expertise in the field of AML/CFT, it is appropriate to entrust AMLthe EBA with the elaboration, for submission to the Commission, of draft regulatory technical standards which do not involve policy choices.
Amendment 352 #
2021/0250(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, Member States shall notify to the CommissionEBA their intention to apply of requirements of Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for Anti-Money Laundering Regulation - COM/2021/420 final] to entities in additional sectors, accompanied by:
Amendment 353 #
2021/0250(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Before the end of the period referred to in paragraph 3, the Commission, having consulted the Authority for anti-money laundering and counteringEuropean Banking Authority (EBA) [(EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the finaCouncingl of terrorism established by Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for establishment of an Anti-Money Laundering Authority - COM/2021/421 final] (AMLA),24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority), amending Decision No 716/2009/EC and repealing Commission Decision 2009/78/EC] shall issue a detailed opinion regarding whether the measure envisaged:
Amendment 372 #
2021/0250(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. By [two years after the date of entry into force of this Directive], AMLthe EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards and submit them to the Commission for adoption. Those draft regulatory technical standards shall set out the criteria for determining the circumstances in which the appointment of a central contact point pursuant to paragraph 1 is appropriate, and the functions of the central contact points.
Amendment 443 #
2021/0250(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) data measuring the sizeactivity and importance of the different sectors which fall within the scope of this Directive, including the number of natural persons and entities and the economic importance of each sector;
Amendment 838 #
2021/0250(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 33 – paragraph 5
Article 33 – paragraph 5
5. Where the supervisors of the home and host Member State disagree on the measures to be taken in relation to an obliged entity, they may refer the matter to AMLthe EBA and request its assistance in accordance with Articles 5 and 10 of Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for establishment of an Anti- Money Laundering Authority - COM/2021/421 final]. AML. The EBA shall provide its advice on the matter of disagreement within one month.
Amendment 959 #
2021/0250(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. In order to facilitate and promote effective cooperation, and in particular the exchange of information, Member States shall communicate to the Commission and AMLEBA:
Amendment 962 #
2021/0250(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 3
Article 46 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that the information provided to the Commission and AMLEBA pursuant to paragraph 1 is updated as soon as a change takes place.
Amendment 200 #
Amendment 129 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) This new instrument is part of a comprehensive package aiming at strengthening the Union’s AML/CFT framework. Together, this instrument, Directive [please insert reference –- proposal for 6th Anti-Money Laundering Directive - COM/2021/423 final], Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for a recast of Regulation (EU) 2015/847 - COM/2021/422 final] and the Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for establishment of an Anti- Money Laundering Authority - COM/2021/421 final] will form the legal framework governing the AML/CFT requirements to be met by obliged entities and underpinning the Union’s AML/CFT institutional framework, including the establishment of an Authority for anti- money laundering and countering the finrevising the powers of the European Banking Authority (EBA) [please insert reference - ] will form the legal framework governing the AML/CFT requirements to be met by obliged entities, in addition to a single regulatory and supervisory framework for the entire EU bancking of terrorism (‘AMLA’)sector.
Amendment 131 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) Currently, it is estimated that about 1.5% of the European Union's GDP is subject to money laundering and about 1% of the money is ultimately confiscated.1a _________________ 1a https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/FR/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52021 SC0190
Amendment 159 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) A consistent set of rules on internal systems and controls that applies to all obliged entities operating in the internal market will strengthen AML/CFT compliance and make supervision more effective. In order to ensure adequate mitigation of money laundering and terrorist financing risks, obliged entities should have in place an internal control framework consisting of risk–based policies, controls and procedures and clear division of responsibilities throughout the organisation. In line with the risk-based approach of this Regulation, those policies, controls and procedures should be proportionate to the nature and sizeactivity of the obliged entity and respond to the risks of money laundering and terrorist financing that the entity faces.
Amendment 171 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) The consistent implementation of group-wide AML/CFT policies and procedures is key to the robust and effective management of money laundering and terrorist financing risks within the group. To this end, group-wide policies, controls and procedures should be adopted and implemented by the parent undertaking. Obliged entities within the group should be required to exchange information when such sharing is relevant for preventing money laundering and terrorist financing. Information sharing should be subject to sufficient guarantees in terms of confidentiality, data protection and use of information. AMLThe EBA should have its powers extended to include the task of drawing up draft regulatory standards specifying the minimum requirements of group-wide procedures and policies, including minimum standards for information sharing within the group and the role and responsibilities of parent undertakings that are not themselves obliged entities.
Amendment 173 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) In addition to groups, other structures exist, such as networks or partnerships, in which obliged entities might share common ownership, management and compliance controls. To ensure a level playing field across the sectors whilst avoiding overburdening it, AMLthe EBA should identify those situations where similar group-wide policies should apply to those structures.
Amendment 175 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) There are circumstances where branches and subsidiaries of obliged entities are located in third countries where the minimum AML/CFT requirements, including data protection obligations, are less strict than the Union AML/CFT framework. In such situations, and in order to fully prevent the use of the Union financial system for the purposes of money laundering and terrorist financing and to ensure the highest standard of protection for personal data of Union citizens, those branches and subsidiaries should comply with AML/CFT requirements laid down at Union level. Where the law of a third country does not permit compliance with those requirements, for example because of limitations to the group's ability to access, process or exchange information due to an insufficient level of data protection or banking secrecy law in the third country, obliged entities should take additional measures to ensure the branches and subsidiaries located in that country effectively handle the risks. AMLThe EBA should be tasked with developing draft technical standards specifying the type of such additional measures.
Amendment 179 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) Obliged entities should not be required to apply due diligence measures on customers carrying out occasional or linked transactions below a certain value, unless there is suspicion of money laundering or terrorist financing. Whereas the EUR 10 000 threshold applies to most occasional transactions, obliged entities which operate in sectors or carry out transactions that present a higher risk of money laundering and terrorist financing should be required to apply customer due diligence for transactions with lower thresholds. To identify the sectors or transactions as well as the adequate thresholds for those sectors or transactions, AMLthe EBA should develop dedicated draft regulatory technical standards.
Amendment 185 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) To ensure the effectiveness of the AML/CFT framework, obliged entities should regularly review the information obtained from their customers, in accordance with the risk-based approach. Obliged entities should also set up a monitoring system to detect atypical transactions that might raise money laundering or terrorist financing suspicions. To ensure the effectiveness of the transaction monitoring, obliged entities’ monitoring activity should in principle cover all services and products offered to customers and all transactions which are carried out on behalf of the costumer or offered to the customer by the obliged entity. However, not all transactions need to be scrutinised individually. The intensity of the monitoring should respect the risk- based approach and be designed around precise and relevant criteria, taking account, in particular, of the characteristics of the customers and the risk level associated with them, the products and services offered, and the countries or geographical areas concerned. AMLThe EBA should develop guidelines to ensure that the intensity of the monitoring of business relationships and of transactions is adequate and proportionate to the level of risk.
Amendment 186 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) In order to ensure consistent application of this Regulation, AMLthe EBA should have the task of drawing up draft regulatory technical standards on customer due diligence. Those regulatory technical standards should set out the minimum set of information to be obtained by obliged entities in order to enter into new business relationships with customers or assess ongoing ones, according to the level of risk associated with each customer. Furthermore, the draft regulatory technical standards should provide sufficient clarity to allow market players to develop secure, accessible and innovative means of verifying customers’ identity and performing customer due diligence, also remotely, while respecting the principle of technology neutrality. The Commission should be empowered to adopt those draft regulatory technical standards. Those specific tasks armust be in line with the role and responsibilities of AMLA as provided in Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for establishment of an Anti- Money Laundering Authority - COM/2021/421 finalspecified by the Regulation revising the powers of the EBA [please insert reference – These specific tasks should be included in Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010, defining the EBA's competences].
Amendment 187 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
Recital 45
(45) In low risk situations, obliged entities should be able to apply simplified customer due diligence measures. This does not equate to an exemption or absence of customer due diligence measures. It rather consists in a simplified or reduced set of scrutiny measures, which should however address all components of the standard customer due diligence procedure. In line with the risk-based approach, obliged entities should nevertheless be able to reduce the frequency or intensity of their customer or transaction scrutiny, or rely on adequate assumptions with regard to the purpose of the business relationship or use of simple products. The regulatory technical standards on customer due diligence should set out the specific simplified measures that obliged entities may implement in case of lower risk situations identified in the Supranational Risk Assessment of the Commission. When developing draft regulatory technical standards, AMLthe EBA should have due regard to preserving social and financial inclusion.
Amendment 193 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
(50) Third countries “subject to a call for action” by the relevant international standard-setter (the FATF) present significant strategic deficiencies of a persistent nature in their legal and institutional AML/CFT frameworks and their implementation which are likely to pose a high risk to the Union’s financial system. The persistent nature of the significant strategic deficiencies, reflective of the lack of commitment or continued failure by the third country to tackle them, signal a heightened level of threat emanating from those third countries, which requires an effective, consistent and harmonised mitigating response at Union level. Therefore, obliged entities should be required to apply the whole set of available enhanced due diligence measures to occasional transactions and business relationships involving those high-risk third countries to manage and mitigate the underlying risks. Furthermore, the high level of risk justifies the application of additional specific countermeasures, whether at the level of obliged entities or by the Member States. Such approach would avoid divergence in the determination of the relevant countermeasures, which would expose the entirety of Union’s financial system to risks. Given its technical expertise, AMLthe EBA can provide useful input to the Commission in identifying the appropriate countermeasures.
Amendment 194 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51
Recital 51
(51) Compliance weaknesses in both the legal and institutional AML/CFT framework and its implementation of third countries which are subject to “increased monitoring” by the FATF are susceptible to be exploited by criminals. This is likely to represent a risk for the Union’s financial system, which needs to be managed and mitigated. The commitment of these third countries to address identified weaknesses, while not eliminating the risk, justifies a mitigating response, which is less severe than the one applicable to high-risk third countries. In these cases, Union’s obliged entities should apply enhanced due diligence measures to occasional transactions and business relationships when dealing with natural persons or legal entities established in those third countries that are tailored to the specific weaknesses identified in each third country. Such granular identification of the enhanced due diligence measures to be applied would, in line with the risk-based approach, also ensure that the measures are proportionate to the level of risk. To ensure such consistent and proportionate approach, the CommissionABE should be able to identify which specific enhanced due diligence measures are required in order to mitigate country- specific risks. Given AMLA’s technical expertise, it can provide useful input to the Commission to identify the appropriate enhanced due diligence measures.
Amendment 200 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) Countries that are not publicly identified as subject to calls for actions or increased monitoring by international standard setters might still pose a threat to the integrity of the Union’s financial system. To mitigate those risks, it should be possible for the CommissionABE to take action by identifying, based on a clear set of criteria and with the support of AMLA, third countries posing a specific and serious threat to the Union’s financial system, which may be due to either compliance weaknesses or significant strategic deficiencies of a persistent nature in their AML/CFT regime, and the relevant mitigating measures. Those third countries should be identified by the CommissionEBA. According to the level of risk posed to the Union’s financial system, the CommissionEBA should require the application of either all enhanced due diligence measures and country-specific countermeasures, as it is the case for high-risk third countries, or country-specific enhanced customer due diligence, such as in the case of third countries with compliance weaknesses.
Amendment 203 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54
Recital 54
(54) Potential external threats to the Union’s financial system do not only emanate from third countries, but can also emerge in relation to specific customer risk factors or products, services, transactions or delivery channels which are observed in relation to a specific geographical area outside the Union. There is therefore a need to identify money laundering and terrorist financing trends, risks and methods to which Union’s obliged entities may be exposed. AMLThe EBA is best placed to detect any emerging ML/TF typologies from outside the Union, to monitor their evolution with a view to providing guidance to the Union’s obliged entities on the need to apply enhanced due diligence measures aimed at mitigating such risks.
Amendment 204 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55
Recital 55
(55) Relationships with individuals who hold or who have held important public functions, within the Union or internationally, and particularly individuals from countries where corruption is widespread, may expose the financial sector to significant reputational and legal risks. The international effort to combat corruption also justifies the need to pay particular attention to such persons and to apply appropriate enhanced customer due diligence measures with respect to persons who are or who have been entrusted with prominent public functions and with respect to senior figures in international organisations. Therefore, it is necessary to specify measures which obliged entities should apply with respect to transactions or business relationships with politically exposed persons. To facilitate the risk- based approach, AMLthe EBA should be tasked with issuing guidelines on assessing the level of risks associated with a particular category of politically exposed persons, their family members or persons known to be close associates.
Amendment 206 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) When customers are no longer entrusted with a prominent public function, they can still pose a higher risk, for example because of the informal influence they could still exercise, or because their previous and current functions are linked. It is essential that obliged entities take into consideration those continuing risks and apply one or more enhanced due diligence measures until such time that the individuals are deemed to pose no further risk, and in any case for not less than 12 months following the time when they are no longer entrusted with a prominent public function. At the end of the 12- month period, an assessment will be made to determine if the person still poses a risk.
Amendment 208 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 59
Recital 59
(59) Close private and professional relationships can be abused for money laundering and terrorist financing purposes. For that reason, measures concerning politically exposed persons should also apply to their family members and persons known to be close associates. Properly identifying family members and persons known to be close associates may depend on the socio-economic and cultural structure of the country of the politically exposed person. Against this background, AMLthe EBA should have the task of issuing guidelines on the criteria to use to identify persons who should be considered as close associate.
Amendment 216 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 63
Recital 63
(63) In order for third party reliance and outsourcing relationships to function efficiently, further clarity is needed around the conditions according to which reliance takes place. AMLThe EBA should have the task of developing guidelines on the conditions under which third-party reliance and outsourcing can take place, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the respective parties. To ensure that consistent oversight of reliance and outsourcing practices is ensured throughout the Union, the guidelines should also provide clarity on how supervisors should take into account such practices and verify compliance with AML/CFT requirements when obliged entities resort to those practices.
Amendment 232 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 78
Recital 78
(78) Differences in suspicious transaction reporting obligations between Member States may exacerbate the difficulties in AML/CFT compliance experienced by obliged entities that have a cross-border presence or operations. Moreover, the structure and content of the suspicious transaction reports have an impact on the FIU’s capacity to carry out analysis and on the nature of that analysis, and also affects FIUs’ abilities to cooperate and to exchange information. In order to facilitate obliged entities’ compliance with their reporting obligations and allow for a more effective functioning of FIUs’ analytical activities and cooperation, AMLthe EBA should develop draft regulatory standards specifying a common template for the reporting of suspicious transactions to be used as a uniform basis throughout the Union.
Amendment 314 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 32
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 32
(32) ‘supervisor’ means the body entrusted with responsibilities aimed at ensuring compliance by obliged entities with the requirements of this Regulation, including the Authority for anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (AMLA) when performing the tasks entrusted on it in Article 5(2) of Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for establishment of an Anti- Money Laundering Authority - COM/2021/421 final]European Banking Authority (EBA) in accomplishing the tasks relating to anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism;
Amendment 316 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 35
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 35
(35) ‘targeted financial sanctions’ means both asset freezing and confiscation and prohibitions to make funds or other assets available, directly or indirectly, for the benefit of designated persons and entities pursuant to Council Decisions adopted on the basis of Article 29 of the Treaty on European Union and Council Regulations adopted on the basis of Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;
Amendment 318 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 36 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 36 a (new)
(36a) ‘AML Compliance Entity’, means an entity or digital platform that fully complies with General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and contributes to effective compliance with the objectives and obligations set out in this Regulation.
Amendment 382 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Amendment 384 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Amendment 386 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Amendment 388 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Article 6 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall publish every year in the Official Journal of the European Union the list of exemptions granted pursuant to this Article.
Amendment 398 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Those policies, controls and procedures shall be proportionate to the nature and sizeactivity of the obliged entity.
Amendment 405 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. By [2 years after the entry into force of this Regulation], AMLthe EBA shall issue guidelines on the elements that obliged entities should take into account when deciding on the extent of their internal policies, controls and procedures.
Amendment 411 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Obliged entities shall take appropriate measures, proportionate to their nature and sizeactivity, to identify and assess the risks of money laundering and terrorist financing to which they are exposed, as well as the risks of non- implementation and evasion of proliferation financing- related targeted financial sanctions, taking into account:
Amendment 446 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Obliged entities shall have in place appropriate procedures for their employees, or persons in a comparable position, to report breaches of this Regulation internally through a specific, independent and anonymous channel, proportionate to the nature and sizeactivity of the obliged entity concerned.
Amendment 454 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. By [2two years after the date of entry into force of this Regulation] AMLDirective], the EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards and submit them to the Commission for adoption. Those draft regulatory technical standards shall specify the minimum requirements of group-wide policies, including minimum standards for information sharing within the group, the role and responsibilities of parent undertakings that are not themselves obliged entities with respect to ensuring group-wide compliance with AML/CFT requirements and the conditions under which the provisions of this Article apply to entities that are part of structures which share common ownership, management or compliance control, including networks or partnerships.
Amendment 458 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. By [2two years after the date of entry into force of this Regulation] AMLDirective], the EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards and submit them to the Commission for adoption. Those draft regulatory technical standards shall specify the type of additional measures referred to in paragraph 2, including the minimum action to be taken by obliged entities where the law of a third country does not permit the implementation of the measures required under Article 13 and the additional supervisory actions required in such cases.
Amendment 471 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 15 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. By [2two years after the date of entry into force of this Regulation] AMLDirective], the EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards and submit them to the Commission for adoption. Those draft regulatory technical standards shall specify:
Amendment 474 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 15 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
When developing the draft regulatory technical standards referred to in the first sub-paragraph, AMLthe EBA shall take due account of the following:
Amendment 493 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3
Article 16 – paragraph 3
3. By [2 years after the date of application of this Regulation], AMLthe EBA shall issue guidelines on the risk variables and risk factors to be taken into account by obliged entities when entering into business relationships or carrying out occasional transactions.
Amendment 565 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 4
Article 21 – paragraph 4
4. By [2 years after the entry into force of this Regulation], AMLthe EBA shall issue guidelines on ongoing monitoring of a business relationship and on the monitoring of the transactions carried out in the context of such relationship.
Amendment 568 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. By [2two years after the date of entry into force of this Regulation] AMLDirective], the EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards and submit them to the Commission for adoption. Those draft regulatory technical standards shall specify:
Amendment 572 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3
Article 22 – paragraph 3
3. AMLThe EBA shall review regularly the regulatory technical standards and, if necessary, prepare and submit to the Commission the draft for updating those standards in order, inter alia, to take account of innovation and technological developments.
Amendment 619 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3
Article 25 – paragraph 3
3. For the purposes of determining the level of threat referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission may request AMLA to adopt an opinion aimed atEBA may assessing the specific impact on the integrity of the Union’s financial system due to the level of threat posed by a third country.
Amendment 632 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1
Article 26 – paragraph 1
1. By [3 years from the date of entry into force of this Regulation], AMLthe EBA shall adopt guidelines defining the money laundering and terrorist financing trends, risks and methods involving any geographical area outside the Union to which obliged entities are exposed. AMLThe EBA shall take into account, in particular, the risk factors listed in Annex III. Where situations of higher risk are identified, the guidelines shall include enhanced due diligence measures that obliged entities shall consider applying to mitigate such risks.
Amendment 633 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2
Article 26 – paragraph 2
2. AMLThe EBA shall review the guidelines referred to in paragraph 1 at least every two years.
Amendment 636 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 3
Article 26 – paragraph 3
3. In issuing and reviewing the guidelines referred to in paragraph 1, AMLthe EBA shall take into account evaluations, assessments or reports of international organisations and standard setters with competence in the field of preventing money laundering and combating terrorist financing.
Amendment 643 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) apply any other relevant simplified due diligence measure identified by AMLthe EBA pursuant to Article 22.
Amendment 646 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The measures referred to in the first subparagraph shall be proportionate to the nature and sizeactivity of the business and to the specific elements of lower risk identified. However, obliged entities shall carry out sufficient monitoring of the transactions and business relationship to enable the detection of unusual or suspicious transactions.
Amendment 649 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 4
Article 27 – paragraph 4
4. Obliged entities shall verify on a regular basis that the conditions for the application of simplified due diligence continue to exist. The frequency of such verifications shall be commensurate to the nature and sizeactivity of the business and the risks posed by the specific relationship.
Amendment 653 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3
Article 28 – paragraph 3
3. With the exception of the cases covered by Section 2 of this Chapter, when assessing the risks of money laundering and terrorist financing posed by a business relationship or occasional transaction, obliged entities shall take into account at least the factors of potential higher risk set out in Annex III and the guidelines adopted by AMLthe EBA pursuant to Article 26.
Amendment 656 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 4 – point c
Article 28 – paragraph 4 – point c
(c) obtain additional information on the source of funds, and source of wealth of the customer, the members of his family and of the beneficial owner(s);
Amendment 660 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 28 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Amendment 661 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 28 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Where the risks identified by the Member States pursuant to the first subparagraph are likely to affect the financial system of the Union, AMLthe EBA shall, upon a request from the Commission or of its own initiative, consider updating the guidelines adopted pursuant to Article 26.
Amendment 692 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 32 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. By [3 years from the date of entry into force of this Regulation], AMLthe EBA shall issue guidelines on the following matters:
Amendment 696 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Amendment 699 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 3
Article 33 – paragraph 3
3. The CommissionEBA shall assemble, based on the lists provided for in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article, a single list of all prominent public functions for the purposes of Article 2, point (25). The Commission shall publish that single list shallEBA shall send that single list to the Commission for publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. AMLThe EBA shall make the list public on its website.
Amendment 700 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. Obliged entities shall apply one or more of the measures referred to in Article 28(4) to mitigate the risks posed by the business relationship, until such time as that person is deemed to pose no further risk, but in any case for not less than 12 months following the time when the individual is no longer entrusted with a prominent public function. At the end of the 12-month period, an assessment shall be made to determine if the person still poses a risk.
Amendment 710 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 2
Article 38 – paragraph 2
2. When deciding to rely on other obliged entities situated in third countries, obliged entities shall take into consideration the geographical risk factors listed in Annexes II and III and any relevant information or guidance provided by the Commission, or by AMLthe EBA or other competent authorities.
Amendment 743 #
2021/0239(COD)
By [3 years after the entry into force of this Regulation], AMLthe EBA shall issue guidelines addressed to obliged entities on:
Amendment 801 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. For the purpose of this Regulation, beneficial ownership information shall be adequate, accurate, and current and sufficiently detailed and include the following:
Amendment 863 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 3
Article 50 – paragraph 3
3. By [two years after entry into force of this Regulation], AMLthe EBA shall develop draft implementing technical standards and submit them to the Commission for adoption. Those draft implementing technical standards shall specify the format to be used for the reporting of suspicious transactions pursuant to paragraph 1.
Amendment 867 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 5
Article 50 – paragraph 5
5. AMLThe EBA shall issue and periodically update guidance on indicators of unusual or suspicious activity or behaviours.
Amendment 869 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 50 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. The EBA shall introduce a provision establishing an annual reporting mechanism on the use of beneficial ownership registers to combat money laundering and terrorist financing.
Amendment 870 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 51 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. By way of derogation from Article 50(1), Member States may allow obliged entities referred to in Article 3, point (3)(a), (b) and (d) to transmit the information referred to in Article 50(1) to a self- regulatory body designated by the Member State for the sole purpose of combating money laundering and the funding of terrorism.
Amendment 896 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 55 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) the obliged entities have procedures in place that allow the distinction, in the processing of such data, between allegations, investigations, proceedings and convictions, taking into account the fundamental right to a fair trial, the right of defence and the presumption of innocence.
Amendment 39 #
Amendment 40 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The Schengen area without border control at internal borders relies on the effective and efficient application by the Member States of the Schengen acquis. That acquis comprises measures in the area of external borders, compensatory measures for the absence of controls at internal borders and a strong monitoring framework, which together facilitate free movement andntrols at internal borders, which together ensures a high level of security, and justice and protection of fundamental rights, including the protection of personal data.
Amendment 42 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) In order to increase its effectiveness and efficiency, the Schengen evaluation and monitoring mechanism should be enhanced. The revised evaluation and monitoring mechanism should aim at maintaining a high level of mutual trust among Member States by guaranteeing that Member States apply the Schengen acquis effectively following the agreed common standards, fundamental principles and norms, thereby contributing to a well- functioning Schengen areaeffectively border controls.
Amendment 44 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) The evaluation and monitoring mechanism should achieve these goals through objective and impartial evaluations that are able to quickly identify deficiencies in the application of the Schengen acquis that could disrupt the correct functioning of the Schengen area, ensure that these deficiencies are swiftly addressed, and provide the basis for a dialogue on the functioning of the Schengen area as a whole. This requires close cooperation between the Member States and the Commission, a balanced distribution of shared responsibilities and maintaining the peer review nature of the system. It also requires a closer involvement of the European Parliament. Given the extent of the changes, Regulation (EU) No 1053/2013 should be repealed and replaced by a new Regulation.
Amendment 50 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Evaluation and monitoring activities should be targeted, taking into account the results of previous evaluations and the results of national quality control mechanisms. They should be supported by reinforced cooperation with Union bodies, offices and agencies, their systematic involvement in Schengen evaluations and by improved risk analyses and information sharing. This cooperation and involvement concerns in particular the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (‘Frontex’), the European Union Agency for the Operational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems (eu-LISA), the Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol), the European Agency for Fundamental Rights and the European Data Protection Supervisor. The cooperation should also become more reciprocal and the agencies should not only be contributors, but also benefit from being involved in the evaluation and monitoring mechanism.
Amendment 53 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Amendment 59 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
Amendment 67 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Evaluation and monitoring activities should be carried out by teams consisting of Commission representatives and experts designated by Member States. These and Commission representatives and expert. These experts and representatives should have appropriate qualifications, including a solidven theoretical knowledge and practical experience. In order to ensure the participation of sufficient number of experienced experts in a faster and less burdensome way, a pool of experts should be established and maintained by the Commission in close cooperation with the Member States. The pool should be the primary source of experts for evaluation and monitoring activities.
Amendment 69 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) More flexibility should be provided as regards the size of the evaluation and monitoring teams in order to increase the efficiency and to reduce administrative burden. Therefore, the Commission should define and adapt the size of the teams depending on the needs and challenges related to each evaluation and monitoring activity. When setting up the teams, geographical balance and rotation should, to the extent possible, be ensured by the Commission and account should be taken of the capacity of national administrations and the need for a variety of profiles. The principle of shared responsibility, predictability and the commitment taken when nominating experts to the pool implies that the experts invited for specific evaluations and their national authorities should respond positively to invitations; turning the invitations down should be duly justified ononly be for serious professional or personal grounds only.
Amendment 73 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Evaluation reports should, as a rule, contain recommendations on how to remedy deficiencies identified (including fundamental rights violations) and be adopted in a single act by the Commission by means of implementing acts through the examination procedure in accordance with Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 182/201136 . The consolidation of the report and recommendations within a single document and subject to a single adoption procedure reinforces the intrinsic connection between the evaluation findings and recommendations. In addition, tare adopted by the Commission and recommendations by the Council. The accelerated publication of the recommendations should enable Member States to address the deficiencies faster and more efficiently. At the same time, the use of the examination procedure should ensure Member State’s engagement in the decision-making process leading to the adoption of the recommendations. _________________ 36 OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13.
Amendment 75 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Nevertheless, gGiven the crucial role of the Council in exerting peer-pressure and the need for political discussion, the Council should adopt recommendations in cases of political importance and general interest for the functioning of the Schengen area. Such cases should be considered to arise where an evaluation concludes that there exists a serious deficiency, in cases of thematic evaluations, or in cases where an evaluation take places for the purposes of verifying whether a Member State bound by the Schengen acquis and for which internal border controls have not been lifted fulfils the conditions to apply the Schengen acquis in full or, in the case of a Member State not bound by the Schengen acquis and that has opted in to apply parts of the Schengen acquis, to verify whether the Member State fulfils the conditions to apply the Schengen acquis in partcontinue to be able to adopt recommendations in all cases.
Amendment 81 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) The evaluation and monitoring mechanism should comprise a robust follow-up and monitoring component which should be ensured by the Commission, in close cooperation with the Council and the European Parliament, without creating a disproportionate burden for the actors involved. Evaluations should be followed up by action plans. While drawing up the action plans, the evaluated Member States should fully take into consideration the funding possibilities provided by the Union and make the best use of these resources. To speed up the process, the Commission should provide observations on the adequacy of the action plans for example in the form of a letter. In order to ensure a timely follow up, if the Commission services do not consider the action plan adequate, the Member State concerned should be required to submit a revised action plan within one month from the receipt of the observations. The frequency of the follow- up reporting by the Member State to the Commission and the Council on the implementation of the action plans should, as a rule, be six months.
Amendment 86 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) It is essential and desirable that the European Parliament and the Council regularly hold discussions at political level in order to raise awareness of the importance of the implementation of the Schengen acquis, hold Member States who persistently breach the common rules accountable, and increase pressure on them to remedy the deficiencies identified. The Commission should provide adequate input to facilitate these discussions including through the adoption of a comprehensive annual report covering the evaluations carried out during the previous year and state of implementation of recommendations, which would be part of the ‘State of Schengen’ report. The European Parliament is encouraged to adopt resolutions and the Council should adopt conclusions to increase pressure on Member States making insufficient progress. The ‘Schengen Forum’, as a unique stage to discuss Schengen at high level with representatives of the European Parliament, Member States and the Commission should provide a platform for informal discussions aiming at better implementation of the Schengen acquied, inter alia, at ensuring the existence and effectiveness of internal border controls.
Amendment 88 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) The evaluation and monitoring mechanism established by this Regulation should fulfil a complementary function of monitoring the effectiveness of the practical implementation of Union policies through peer review. The general power of the Commission to oversee the application of Union law under the control of the Court of Justice of the European Union through infringement procedures should not be affectedon internal border controls.
Amendment 91 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) In view of the particular role entrusted to the European Parliament and to the national parliaments under the last sentence of Article 70 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), as underlined in Article 12, point (c), of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) as regards the national parliaments, the Council and the Commission should fully inform the European Parliament and the national Parliaments of the content and results of the evaluations. In addition, should the Commission submit a proposal to amend this Regulation, the Council would, in accordance with Article 19(7), point (h), of its Rules of Procedure39 , consult the European Parliament in order to take into consideration its opinion, to the fullest extent possible, before adopting a final text. _________________ 39 Council Decision 2009/937/EU of 1 December 2009 adopting the Council's Rules of Procedure (OJ L 325 11.12.2009, p. 35).
Amendment 93 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
Amendment 94 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
Amendment 96 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation establishes an evaluation and monitoring mechanism for the purpose of ensuring that Member States apply the Schengen acquis effectively, thereby contributing to a well-functioning area withouteffectively internal border controls.
Amendment 99 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) verifying the application of the Schengen acquis, i.e. the existence and effectiveness of border controls, in the Member States to which it applies in full as well as in Member States to which, in accordance with the relevant Protocols annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, the Schengen acquis applies in part;
Amendment 103 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) ‘first time evaluation’ means an evaluation to verify whether a Member State bound by the Schengen acquis and for which internal border controls have not been lifted fulfils the conditions to apply the Schengen acquis in full or, in the case of a Member State not bound by the Schengen acquis and that has opted in to apply parts of the Schengen acquis, to verify whether the Member State fulfils the conditions to apply the Schengen acquis in part;
Amendment 118 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall be responsible for the establishment of the annual and multiannual evaluation programmes, the drafting of questionnaires, the setting of schedules of visits, the conducting of visits and the drafting of evaluation reports and recommendations. It shall also ensure the follow-up and monitoring activities.
Amendment 123 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. The Commission shall be responsible for making the necessary travel arrangements to and from the visited Member State for the Commission representatives and Member State experts in the teams and, in collaboration with the latter, the necessary on-site visits.
Amendment 126 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 137 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) when it has grounds to consider that a Member State is seriously neglecting its obligations under the Schengen acquis including allegations of serious fundamental rights violations at the external borders.
Amendment 144 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission shall cooperate with relevant Union bodies, offices and agencies which are involved in the implementation of the Schengen acquis as well as with the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights.
Amendment 159 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall use the results of relevant mechanisms and instruments, including evaluation and monitoring activities of Union bodies, offices and agencies which are involved in the implementation of the Schengen acquis and of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights as well as of independent national monitoring mechanisms and bodies and others well as national quality control mechanisms in preparing the evaluation and monitoring activities, to improve awareness on the functioning of the Schengen area and to avoid the duplication of efforts and conflicting measures.
Amendment 164 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Amendment 168 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
In the programming and implementation of the evaluations and monitoring activities, the Commission shallcan take into account information provided by third parties, including independent authorities, non- governmental organisations and international organisations.
Amendment 188 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. The Member State experts participating in evaluation and monitoring activities shall have appropriate qualifications, including a solid theoretical knowledge and practical experience in the areas covered by the evaluation and monitoring mechanism, along with sound knowledge of evaluation principles, procedures and techniques, and shall be able to communicate effectively in a common language.
Amendment 208 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
It may include visits to and meetings with national authorities and bodies, non- governmental and international organisations as well as other entities, agencies and bodies involved in, participating in or concerned by the implementation of the Schengen acquis while cooperating with the Member State subject to the evaluation or monitoring activity.
Amendment 215 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 19 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Unannounced visits shall take place without prior notification to the Member State concerned. By way of exception, tThe Commission may notify the Member State concerned at least 24 hours before such visit is to take place when the main purpose of the unannounced visit is a random verificationcheck ofn the implementation of the Schengen acquieffectiveness of internal border controls.
Amendment 227 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 5
Article 21 – paragraph 5
5. The evaluation report shall contain recommendations for remedial actions aimed at addressing the deficiencies and areas for improvement identified during the evaluation and give an indication of the priorities for implementing them. The evaluation report may set deadlines for the implementation ofIt is for the Council to adopt these recommendations. Where the evaluation identifies a serious deficiency, the specific provisions set out in Article 23 shall apply.
Amendment 230 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 6
Article 21 – paragraph 6
6. The Commission shall transmit the draft evaluation report to the evaluated Member State within four weeks of the end of the evaluation activity. The evaluated Member State shall provide its comments on the draft evaluation report within twofour weeks of its receipt. A drafting meeting shall be held at the request of the evaluated Member State, no later than five working days from the receipt of the comments from the evaluated Member State. The comments of the evaluated Member State may be reflected in the draft evaluation report.
Amendment 234 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 1
1. Within two months of the adoption of the evaluation report, the evaluated Member State shall submit to the Commission and the Council an action plan to implement all thethe Council's recommendations included in the evaluation report.
Amendment 238 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 22 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The evaluated Member State shall reportpresents to the Commissionuncil and the Councilmmission on the implementation of its action plan every six months from the adoption of the evaluation report until the Commission considers the action plan is fully implemented. Depending on the nature of the deficiencies and the state of implementation of the recommendations, the Commission may require the evaluated Member State a different reporting frequency.
Amendment 239 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 243 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The evaluated Member State shall take immediate remedial actions including, where necessary, mobilising all available operational and financial means. The evaluated Member State shall inform without delay the Commission and the Member States about the immediate remedial actions taken or planned. In parallel, the Commission shall inform the respective Union bodies, offices and agencies referred to in Article 7 of the serious deficiency in view of their possible support to the evaluated Member State. The Commission shall also inform the Council and the European Parliamentto re-establish effective internal border controls.
Amendment 246 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The evaluated Member State shall provide its comments on the draft evaluation report within fivefteen working days of its receipt.
Amendment 267 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 10
Article 23 – paragraph 10
10. If the serious deficiency is deemed to constitute a serious threat to public policy or internal security within the area without internal border controls, or a serious and systematic fundamental rights violation, the Commission, on its own initiative or at the request of the European Parliament or of a Member State, shall immediately inform thereof the European Parliament and the Council.
Amendment 47 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Where the Commission examines a foreign subsidy on its own initiative, it should have the power to impose redressive measures on an undertaking to remedy any distortion caused by a foreign subsidy in the internal market. Redressive measures should be proportionate and suitable to remedy the distortion at stake. They should include behavioural or structural remedies or the repayment of the foreign subsidy. This process should be transparent for the public;
Amendment 48 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The undertaking concerned should have the possibility to offer commitments in order to remedy the distortion caused by the foreign subsidy. If the Commission considers that the commitments offered fully and effectively remedy the distortion, it could accept them and make them binding by public decision.
Amendment 52 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) The Commission should close the in-depth investigation by adopting a publicly accessible decision.
Amendment 114 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 6 a (new)
(6a) If an undertaking does not make commitments or take redressive measures, this may lead to exclusion from the market.
Amendment 136 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2
Article 27 – paragraph 2
(2) For the purpose of Article 28, a notifiable foreign financial contribution in an EU public procurement procedure shall be deemed to arise where the estimated value of that public procurement is equal or greater than EUR 25100 million.
Amendment 145 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2
Article 28 – paragraph 2
(2) The obligation to notify foreign financial contributions under this paragraph shall extend to economic operators, groups of economic operators referred to in Article 26(2) of Directive 2014/23/EU, Article 19(2) of Directive 2014/24/EU and Article 37(2) of Directive 2014/25/EU, main subcontractors and main suppliers. A subcontractor or supplier shall be deemed to be main where their participation ensures key elements of the contract performance and in any case where the economic share of their contribution exceeds 320% of the estimated value of the contract.
Amendment 158 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2
Article 29 – paragraph 2
(2) The Commission shall carry out a preliminary review no later than 630 days after it received the notification.
Amendment 163 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 4
Article 29 – paragraph 4
(4) The Commission may adopt a decision closing the in-depth investigation no later than 200 days after it received the notification. In exceptional circumstances, this time limit may be extended for 60 days after consultation with the concerned contracting authority or contracting entity.
Amendment 3 #
2020/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Calls for the effective implementation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, in particular with regard to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, in key areas of life for persons with disabilities; recalls that this implementation should be accompanied by proper national integration strategies;
Amendment 4 #
2020/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 a (new)
Paragraph -1 a (new)
-1. Calls on the Member States to mount information campaigns drawing attention to the disability-related issues;
Amendment 20 #
2020/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Regrets that while exercising the right of free movement for work, studies, or other reasons, persons with disabilities may experience difficulties due to a lack of a mutual recognition of disability status between Member States; therefore, calls on the Member States to ensure mutual recognition and to set up harmonised rules for disability assessments;2a _________________ 2a Petition no 1262-19
Amendment 37 #
2020/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that good education for persons with disabilities must be prioritised; encourages the Member States to promote high-quality education and lifelong learning.4a _________________ 4a Petitions No 2582/2013, 0371/2018
Amendment 9 #
2020/2196(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10
Citation 10
Amendment 32 #
2020/2196(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. ConsiderNotes that in the very concept of Schengen cooperation, that of ensuring the absence of controls at internal borders, has been further challenged by the COVID-19 pandemic, which has been added to the grounds invoked since 2015 for the persistent retention of internal border controls by some Member States; reiterates its condemnation of the maintenance of internal border checks and its view that many of the prolongations are not in line with the rules pertaining to their extension, necessity or proportionality, and arebeginning of the pandemic, rather than recommending the reintroduction of internal border checks by Member States, the Commission has deplored such measures of, and sought to delay restrictions at the external borders of the Schengen area until there were already thousands of confirmed cases on EU therefore unlawfulritory;
Amendment 40 #
2020/2196(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes that at the beginning of 2020, just before the pandemic emergency, illegal immigration flows were increasing considerably compared to the same period last year, thereby significantly increasing the health risk within the EU; whereas despite the commonly agreed decision to completely close the external borders of the Schengen area, some Member States have scaled back their efforts to tackle illegal immigration, even carrying out mass regularisations; According to Europol, a ‘loosening of travel and movement restrictions is likely to result in an increasing movement of irregular migrants’, thereby putting the management of the EU’s external borders under pressure;
Amendment 49 #
2020/2196(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Deplores the fact that internal border controlRecalls that Member States are continuing to be introduced by some Member States as a unilateral response to new challenges, before they have given proper consideration to the common European interest in maintaining Schengen as an area without internal border controls; reiterates its call on the Commission to exercise appropriate scrutiny over the application of the Schengen acquis, including through the use of infringement procedures, and underlines the urgent need to enhance mutual trust and cooperation among the Schengen states and appropriate governance for the Schengen areatain sovereignty over border management; recognises, at the same time, that urgent measures are needed to resume national, European and international travel in order to revive the tourism industry;
Amendment 72 #
2020/2196(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 89 #
2020/2196(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Deeply regrets the fact that there have been persistent and serious reports about violence and pushbacks at the external border, as well as the lack of adequate monitoring mechanisms to ensure respect for fundamental rights and the rule of law at the external borders; considers that the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) must be given an enhanced operational role with regard to the monitoring of respect for fundamental rights at the external borderReiterates that an efficient external border management system is closely linked to strict external border control and swift return procedures for illegal third country nationals; Stresses the need for external borders to be managed rigorously as any weaknesses may result in the loss of control over basic public safety management, including health threats;
Amendment 149 #
2020/2196(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Considers that the Commission and the Council have seriously neglected their obligations following the detection of serious deficiencies in the UK’s use of the Schengen Information System during the 2017 evaluation; reminds all actors of its request to immediately disconnectUK, like any non-Schengen country, had no direct access to the Schengen Information System, but limited access; it lost this latter with Brexit, creating risks for all parties because the UK, as expressed in the letters to the Commission and to the Council Presidency of 15 June 2020; recalls its position that ‘as a thirdlso provided a lot of relevant information to its partners; it is therefore in the interest of all parties to country, the UK cannot have access to SIS’inue to cooperate;
Amendment 8 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recognises that the Industrial Strategy, prepared prior to the outbreak and published at an early stage of the pandemic in Europe, will require substantial revision, to reflect the change in fundamentals and; calls on the new Commission of the Von Der Leyen Commission:to develop realistic strategies to return economies across the EU to growth and therefore to strengthen all economies, both north and south and east and west, to the benefit of citizens and businesses; stresses that the Green Deal is an inappropriate and unaffordable approach for this;
Amendment 20 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls for the Commission to undertake, together with Members States, a comprehensive and cross-sectoral analysis of the economies within the EU, in order to understand the depth of impacts felt by the COVID-19 pandemic; considers this an essential evidence base in order for the Commission to issue updated recommendations and determine the key policies that will act to strengthen the collective long-term recovery within the Single Market; welcomes the fourteen coherent industrial ecosystems identified by the Commission, whose strategic independence is to be ensured;
Amendment 28 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Calls on the Commission to focus on domestic productivity on the basis of research and innovation within Europe, in order to establish a strategic autonomy and less dependence on vulnerable supply chains in core industry sectors such as the tech and telecommunications, medical products, pharmaceuticals and agricultural sectors, especially in times of global crisis, to remain competitive on the global markets and to provide European consumers with essential goods;
Amendment 42 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that EU industrial competitiveness relies on a fully functioning Single Market in Services; underlines that the Commission must consider how to address barriers to cross- border services as part of any revised set of priorities;
Amendment 49 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines the importance of a prudent and not rushed sustainability strategy, which is central to plans to develop European industry; recalls in this regard the European Council conclusions of 12 December 2019, highlighting the need to establish a framework for actions that benefits all Member State and which does not jeopardise the global competitiveness of European industry and SMEs;
Amendment 56 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recognises that the public and private sector will encounter significant financial constraints in the coming years, impacting their ability to support a programme of investment, particularly with regard to the Green Deal objectives; expresses concern about an unequal pace of development, particularly in less developed parts of the EU, where achieving transformation demands far more significant adisproportionately high Green Deal objectionves; strongly calls on the Commission in its revised Industrial Strategy to adopt a model with flexibility and support, in order that no one is lefto leave the Green Deal behind;
Amendment 101 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls that the automotive sector is touched by many of the transformations expected in the future economy and has been deeply affected by the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic; considers that the revised Industrial Strategy should foresee particular actions for this economic core sector, including appropriate financial support., independent of the orientation of production towards electric motor or combustion engine;
Amendment 46 #
2020/2045(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is concerned about the governance of the EUTF: the composition of its board and regional operational committees, the opacity of the process for approving projects, the lack of dialogue with local and human rights CSOs, and the lack of ex ante and ongoing impact assessments on fundamental rightsinstitutional dialogue on the EU level;
Amendment 57 #
2020/2045(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights that the EUTF is part of a trend ofsupposed to contribute to the securitisationy and externalisation of EU border management aimed at reducing irregular migration to the EU; stresses the risks to development objectives and fundamental rights associated with this approach.
Amendment 1 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas climate change and consequential natural disasters have become common driveare vague and unrealistic criteria for acceptance of migration; whereas, the first of migration, which will be further exacerbated as the climate crisis worsensbjective must be individual adaptation to local settings and, where appropriate, local or regional resettlement; whereas resettlement within a familiar culture and climate is preferable to migration to an area in which the culture and climate are totally different; consequently, migration must not automatically equate to migration to the EU;
Amendment 21 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas climate-induced migration is strongly related to other factors, including poverty, since when a country lacks the appropriate resources to adapt to climate change, this can aggravate poverty and force people to move; whereas climate change is an important risk multiplier for conflict, drought, famine and migrationpoverty and other problematic living conditions must not and cannot automatically mean migration to Europe; whereas the various social security systems of the EU Member States are unable to offer equal or equivalent protection to all people in the world who are less well placed; whereas further unbridled migration will simply undermine existing social security systems with disastrous consequences for the economy and the citizens of the EU Member States;
Amendment 37 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 53 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Deplores the fact that, while climate migration is a reality that is set to intensify, people who move for long-term, climate change-related reasons have no effective access to protection in the EU; calls on the Member States and the Commission to put in place protection pathways, which include promoting humanitarian visas, temporary protection, authorisation to stay, and regional and bilateral free movement agreements; proposesPoints out that ‘climate’ as a new justification for migration creates a fresh possibility for uncontrolled migration to Europe; takes the view that a climate passpormust not be missused to persons coming from a country, or part of it, that will become uninhabitable due to climate change as a way to offer them protection from vulnerability and statelessness; proposes that any changeas a pretext to further undermine the already highly permissive immigration policy in the EU; observes that it ins the environment due to climate change be explicitly listed among eligibility criteria for humanitarian protection; calls on the Commission and Member States to put forward such proposals in international forums, in parallel to oime for the EU to recognise that not every problem in the world must and can be solved by means of migration to one of ther EU initiativMember States;
Amendment 67 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 76 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 89 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to enhance and better coordinate less restrictive legal channels for third- country workers and their families, which would include mobility schemes and preferential access for workers coming from a country, or part of it, affected by climate changeReiterates that, aside from any discussion of the desirability and modalities of labour migration, climate should not be a criterion that lowers the threshold triggering this phenomenon;
Amendment 108 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines the ruling of the UN Human Rights Committee of 20 January 2020, which states that countries may not deport individuals facing climate change- induced conditions that violate the right to life; calls on the Member Stat the right to life is not the same as the right to migrates to consider the risk of violations of the right to life due to climate change as part of their return decisions, notably triggering non-refoulement obligatione of the EU Member States;
Amendment 116 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that, as part of the reform of the Union’s Migration and Asylum Policy, a comprehensive framework should be established, which includes climate-induced migration and displacement as core part of this process. the EU should primarily focus on the well-being and prosperity of EU citizens;
Amendment 23 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the right to a fair trial is a fundamental right which must be upheld in all circumstances, including in the context of the use of AI;
Amendment 25 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas, through the use of statistical data analytics in crime analysis and prevention, technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and related technologies may contribute to the reducing of crime rates;
Amendment 108 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Emphasises the need to draw up strict rules to govern the use of facial recognition technologies in connection with criminal matters; suggests that a recommendation be issued banning their use temporarily pending the drafting of those rules;
Amendment 199 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 201 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Warns against the temptation to delegate to AI the power to take decisions under criminal law, and stresses the need to develop codes of conduct for the design and use of AI to help law enforcers and judicial authorities;
Amendment 203 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17b. refers to the ongoing work in the Committee on Legal Affairs
Amendment 140 #
2020/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights the irreplaceable role of public service media and stresses that it is essential to ensure and maintain their independence from political interference; highlights that in some Member States the mainstream media only conveys a subjective leftist narrative; condemns attempts by Member State governments to silence critical media and undermine media freedom and pluralism, in particular attempts to control public service media; deplores the fact that in some Member States public broadcasting has become an example of single political party propaganda, which often excludes opposition and minority groups from society and even incites violence; stresses that safeguarding independent authorities and ensuring strong independent oversight of audiovisual media against undue state and commercial intervention is crucial;
Amendment 145 #
2020/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Encourages Member States to adopt effective and clear legislation that ensures the transparency of media ownership and to pay particular attention to the funding, transparency and objectives of mainstream media outlets; to encourage social media platforms to promote a level playing field for all political, philosophical and religious beliefs in accordance with the right to freedom of expression; to condemn the practise by social media platforms of demoting, banning or demonetising social media users on the sole basis of expressing their opinion;
Amendment 248 #
2020/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls that political profiling, disinformation and manipulation of information may be used by political parties and private or public entities, and reiterates its concern aboutthe EU should avoid imposing self-censorship on EU citizens by creating the factear that evidence of interference is continuously coming to light, often with indications of foreign influence, in the run-up to all major national and EU elections, with much of this interference benefiting anti- EU, extreme right-wingany form of criticism against the EU will be silenced and/or sanctioned; emphasises that the strategies against disinformation and propulist candidates and targeting specific minorities and vulnerable groupsaganda should not be used as a tool to prevent or stifle criticism being levelled against the EU;
Amendment 258 #
2020/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Points out that different forms of misinformation and disinformation, as well as other forms of information manipulation relating to the COVID-19 pandemic, continue to proliferate around the world and have potentially harmful consequences for public security, health and effective crisis management; specifically notes that China wilfully withheld information regarding the COVID-19 pandemic, and has spread disinformation during the course of the outbreak, whilst the EEAS bowed before Chinese pressure instead of truthfully stating the extent of China's actions; recalls that all measures to combat disinformation, including those taken in the context of the COVID-19 emergency, need to be necessary, proportionate and subject to regular oversight, and may under no circumstances prevent journalists and media actors from carrying out their work or lead to content being unduly blocked on the internet;
Amendment 276 #
2020/2009(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Reminds the Commission and the Member States as well as the private sector, in particular online platforms, and civil society as a whole of the need for joint action when it comes to the fight against disinformation, and acknowledges the positive impact of the voluntary actions taken by service providers and platforms to counter disinformation; warns against the EU becoming a self-proclaimed “Ministry of Truth” and thereby limiting the freedom of expression and the right to impart information and ideas without interference by public authority; and calls on the EU to heed against the EU becoming a (counter)propaganda machine silencing all forms of opposition against its narrative;
Amendment 93 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Amendment 98 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. A provider of core platform services shall be presumed to satisfydesignated as gatekeeper:
Amendment 100 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the requirement in paragraph 1 point (a) whereif the undertaking to which it belongs achieves an annual EEA turnover equal to or above EUR 6.5 billion in the last three financial years, or where the average market capitalisation or the equivalent fair market value of the undertaking to which it belongs amounted to at least EUR 65 billion in the last financial year, and it provides a core platform service in at least three Member States;
Amendment 101 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – introductory part
(b) the requirementand if int paragraph 1 point (b) where it providerovides for each of the last three financial years a core platform service that has more than 45 million monthly active end users established or located in the Union and more than 10 000 yearly active business users established in the Union in the last financial year;
Amendment 103 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 104 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6
Article 3 – paragraph 6
Amendment 105 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 107 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3
Where the provider of a core platform service that satisfies the quantitative thresholds of paragraph 2 fails to comply with the investigative measures ordered by the Commission in a significant manner and the failure persists after the provider has been invited to comply within a reasonablesix months time-limit and to submit observations, the Commission shall be entitled to designate that provider as a gatekeeper.
Amendment 167 #
2020/0279(COD)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set outRejects the Commission's proposal;
Amendment 176 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The Union, in constituting an area of freedom, security and justice, should ensure the absence of internal border controls for persons and frame a common policy on asylum, immigration and management of the external borders of the Union, based on solidarity between Member States, which is fair towards third-country nationalscitizens of the Member States and support Member States to coordinate and cooperate to stop illegal immigration and protect the integrity of the external borders to ensure the safety of the citizens in the Member States and to protect the European way of life.
Amendment 182 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
Amendment 190 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) This Regulation should contribute to that comprehensive approach by setting out a common framework for the actions of the Union and ofa proposal for cooperation between the Member States inof the field of asylum and migration management policies, by elaborating on the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility in accordance with Article 80 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Member States should therefore take all necessary measures, inter alia, to provide access to international protection and adequate reception conditions to those in need, to enable the effective application of the rules on determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection,Union in the field of illegal migration control. Member States should therefore consider to take measures to return illegally staying third-country nationals, to prevent irregularllegal migration and unauthorised movements between them, and to provide support to other Member States in the form of solidarity contributo combat illegal migrations, as ylum fraud and otheir contribution to the comprehensive approachnected criminal acts.
Amendment 203 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The common framework should bring together the management of the Common European Asylum System and thatimprove cooperation between the Member States ofn migration policy. The objective of migration policy should be to ensure the efficient management of migration flows, the fair treatment of third-country nationals residing legally in Member States and the prevention of, and enhanced measures toprevent and combat, illegal migration and migrant smuggling.
Amendment 214 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) The common framework is needed in order to effectively address the increasing phenomenon of mixed arrivals of personA policy of non-interference with the right of Member States to protect their borders ins need of international protection and those who are not anded. This will ensure an ability to effectively address the in crecognition that the challenge of irregular arrivals of migrants in the Union should not have to be assumed by individual Member States alone, but by the Union as a whole. To ensure that Member States have the necessary tools to effectively manage this challenge in addition to applicants for international protection, irregular migrants should also fall within the scope of this Regulation. The scope of this Regulation should also include beneficiaries of international protection, resettled or admitted persons as well as persons granted immediate protectionasing levels of illegal mass-migration and hybrid warfare waged against the Member States. To ensure that Member States have the necessary tools to effectively manage this threat this Regulation shall ensure that the Commission and the European Parliament do not interfere with the sovereign rights of the Member States.
Amendment 219 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
Amendment 231 #
2020/0279(COD)
Amendment 237 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) National strategies of the Member States should include information on contingency planning and on the implementation of the principles of integrated policy-making and of solidarityto combat illegal migration and asylum fraud should include strict and practical measures to deter illegal migration and ensure that Europe can hit at the heart of the illegal migration industry. Furthermore, Member States shall be encouraged to ensure that andy fair sharing of responsibility of this Regulation and legal obligations stemming therefrom at national levelcilities for asylum claims are located in third countries, preferably in stable parts of the developing world so as to benefit both the applicants as well as the host nation that can benefit from providing this service to the asylum applicants.
Amendment 242 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) The regulation sets out how the Commission may (1) provide support to the Member States, as warranted, thereby ensuring to stop illegal mass-migration, (2) curtail third-countries' ability to aggress against the Member States by weaponising third country nationals and labelling them migrants and refugees, (3) ensure to combat asylum fraud, (4) restore the sanctity of the concept of asylum, (5) resolutely support a Member State with regard to migratory movements and incursions, and (6) ensure not to interfere with the internal affairs of the Member States dealing with all threats and consequences linked to migration;
Amendment 243 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
Amendment 246 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Bearing in mind the importance of ensuring that the Union is prepared and able to adjust to the developing and evolving realities of asylum and migration management, the Commission should annually adopt a Migration Management Report setting out the likely evolution of the migratory situation and the preparedness of the Union and the Member States to respond and adapt to it. The Report should also include the results of the reporting on monitoring foreseen in the national strategies and should propose improvements where weaknesses are apparentMember States are prepared to stop all illegal migration, the Commission should support Member States by providing a monthly update on possible illegal flows of third country nationals and asylum fraud trends.
Amendment 252 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
Amendment 274 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) An effective robust and swift return policy is an essential element of a well- functioning system of Union asylum and migration management, whereby those who do not have the right to stay on Union territory should return. Given that a significant share of applications for international protection may be considered unfounded, it is necessary to reinforce the effectiveness of the return policy. By increasing the efficiency of returns and reducing the gaps between asylum and return procedures, thprotection for any nation state. Thus it is encouraged that all Member States ensure to arrange for processing of any asylum claims of third country nationals outside European soil; applicants who have registered within the Union could be detained, if deemed necessary; when there are pressure on the asylum system would decrease, facilitating the application of the rules on determining the Member State responsible for examiningasonable grounds to consider the applicant a danger to national security or public order, those applications as well as contributing to effective access to international protection for those in neednt shall be detained without delay.
Amendment 282 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) To strengthen cooperation with third countries in the area of return and readmission of illegally staying third- country nationals, it is necessary to develop a new mechanism, including all relevant EU policies and tools, to improve the coordination of the different actions in various policy areas other than migration that the Union and the Member States may take for that purpose. That mechanism should build on the analysis carried out in accordance with Regulation (EU) 810/2019 of the European Parliament and of the Council38 or of any other information available, and take into account the Union’s overall relations with the third country. That mechanism should also serve to support the implementation of return sponsorship. _________________ 38Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 establishing a Community Code on Visas (Visa Code), OJ L 243, 15.9.2009, p. 1of illegal migrants it is necessary to focus funding and manpower at the disposal of the Commission on ensuring such migrants' prompt return.
Amendment 291 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
Amendment 305 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
Amendment 319 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Given the specific characteristics of disembarkations arising in the context of search anrisk posed by so- called rescue operations conducted by Member States or private organisations whether under instruction from Member States or autonomously in the context of migration, this Regulation should provide for a specific process applicable to people disembarked following those operations irrespective of whether there is a situation of migratory pressure, Member States shall be encouraged to criminalize these organizations and combat illegal search and rescue operations.
Amendment 329 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
Amendment 340 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
Amendment 349 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Persons disembarked should be distributed in a proportionate manner among the Member StateAny illegal migrants that are disembarked should be detained and processed as soon as possible for return to their homeland by the Member State that allowed the disembarkation to take place. Member States that allow disembarkation should be made aware of the fact that they themselves will have to take the burden for allowing illegal migrants to enter into the EU area and it is their responsibility to prevent that the illegal migrants move to other the Member States at their own will. Member States failing this will have to face responsibility to take back illegal migrants for processing and return to their homelands.
Amendment 355 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
Amendment 372 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
Amendment 376 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
Amendment 390 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
Amendment 420 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) The voluntary solidarity mechanism should include measures to promote a fair sharing of responsibility and a balance of effort between Member States also in the area of return. Through return sponsorship, a Member State should commit to support a Member State under migratory pressure in carrying out the necessary activities to return illegally staying third-country nationals, bearing in mind that the benefitting Member State remains responsible for carrying out the return while the individuals are present on its territory. Where such activities have been unsuccessful after a period of 8 months, the sponsoring Member States should transfer these persons in line with the procedures set out in this Regulation and apply Directive 2008/115/EC; if relevant, Member States may recognise the return decision issued by the benefitting Member State in application of Council Directive 2001/4039 . Return sponsorship should form part of the common EU system of returns, including operational support provided through the European Border and Coast Guard Agency and the application of the coordination mechanism to promote effective cooperation with third countries in the area of return and readmission. _________________ 39Council Directive 2001/40/EC of 28 May 2001 on the mutual recognition of decisions on the expulsion of third country nationals, OJ L 149, 2.6.2001, p. 34.
Amendment 426 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
Amendment 438 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
Amendment 447 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29 a (new)
Recital 29 a (new)
(29a) Member States should be able to make voluntary contributions if a Member State experiences migratory pressure, for example by providing assistance for protecting their external borders.
Amendment 450 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
Amendment 461 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
Amendment 468 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) A Member State should be able to takemay, at its own initiative or at the request of another Member State, other solidarity measures on a voluntary basidecide to take measures to assist that Member State in addressing the migratory situation or to prevent migratory pressure. Those contributions should include measures aimed at strengthening the capacity of the Member State under pressure or at responding to migratory trends through cooperation with third countries. In addition, such solidarity measures should include relocation of third-country nationals that are in the border procedure as well as illegally staying third-country nationals. In order to incentivise voluntary solidarity, wherass-migratory threat, however the principal responsibility shall always remain with the Member States make voluntary contributions in the form of relocation or return sponsorship, those contributions should be taken into account in the implementing act provided for in respect of situations of migratory pressure affected.
Amendment 479 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
Amendment 493 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
Amendment 499 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
Amendment 504 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
Amendment 512 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) In order to limit unauthorised movements and to ensure that the Member States have the necessary tools to ensure transfers of beneficiaries of international protection who entered the territory of another Membe, all third country nationals with no legal rights to enter or Sstate thay in the Member State responsible without fulfilling the conditions of stay in that other Member State to the Member State responsible, and to ensure effective solidarity between Member States, this Regulation should also apply to beneficiaries of international protection. Likewise, this Regulation should apply to persons resettled or admitted by a Member State in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Union Resettlement Framework Regulation] or who are granted international protection or humanitarian status under a national resettlement schemes should be detained until they can be returned to their country of origin or transferred to an asylum center in a third country.
Amendment 519 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
Amendment 523 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
Amendment 532 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) In accordance with the 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the best interests of the child should be a primaryn important consideration of Member States when applying this Regulation. In assessing the best interests of the child, Member States should, in particular, take due account of the minor’s well-being and social development, safety and security considerations and the views of the minor in accordance with his or , this entails a swift reunification with their age and maturity, including his or her background. In addition, specific procedural guarantees for unaccompanied minors should be laid down on account of their particular vulnerabilitfamily and/or representative in or near their home country.
Amendment 541 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) In accordance with the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, respect for family life should be athe safety of the Member States citizens, their family life and their European way of life, as well as for right to self-determination of the peoples of the Member States, should be the primary considerations of Member States when applying this Regulation.
Amendment 552 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
Recital 45
(45) In order to prevent that persons who represent a security risk are transferred among the Member States, it is necessary to ensure that the Member State where an application is first registered does not apply the responsibilty criteria or the benefitting Member State does not apply the relocation procedure where there are reasonable grounds to consider the person concerned a danger to national security or public orderfree to travel within the EU, they should be promptly apprehended by the Member State concerned and placed in a high security facility awaiting deportation to their home country.
Amendment 556 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
Amendment 564 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) The definition of a family member in this Regulation should include the sibling or siblings of the applicant. Reuniting siblings is of particular importance for improving the chances of integration of applicants and hence reducing unauthorised movements. The scope of the definition of family memberis recommended to include one legal shpould also reflect the reality of current migratory trends, according to which applicants often arrive to the territory of the Member States after a prolonged period of time in transit. The definition should therefore include families formed outside the country of origin, but before their arrival on the territory of the Member State. This limited and targeted enlargement of the scope of the definition is expected to reduce the incentive for some unauthorised movements of asylum seekers within the EUse and the children (biological or adopted), at the discretion of each Member State.
Amendment 571 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
Amendment 580 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
Amendment 589 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
Amendment 601 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51
Recital 51
(51) Considering that a Member State should remain responsible for a person who has irregularllegally entered its territory, it is also necessary to include the situation when the person enters the territory illegally following a search and rescue operation. A derogation from this responsibility criterion should be laid down for the situation where a Member State has relocated persons having crossed the external border of another Member State irregularly or following a search and rescue operation. In such a situation, the Member State of relocation should be responsibile if the person applies for international protectionn operation by states or third parties at sea due to coercion from the illegal migrants and/or smugglers.
Amendment 603 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
Amendment 618 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54
Recital 54
Amendment 631 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56
Recital 56
(56) In order to guarantee effective protection of the rights of the persons concerned, legal safeguards and the right to an effective remedy in respect of decisions regarding transfers to the Member State responsible should be established, in accordance, in particular, with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In order to ensure that international law is respected, an effective remedy against such decisions should cover both the examination of the application of this Regulation and of the legal and factual situation in the Member State to which the applicant is transferred. The scope of the effective remedy should be limited to an assessment of whether applicants' fundamental rights to respect of family life, the rights of the child, or the prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment risk to be infringed uponcitizens of the Member States it is proposed that the Member State concerned ensures that all third country nationals who illegally enter are detained in safe facilities awaiting their removal from the Member State.
Amendment 637 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
Recital 57
Amendment 641 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
Amendment 649 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 59
Recital 59
(59) The detention of applicants should be applied in accordance with the underlying principle that a person should not be held in detention for the sole reason that he or she is seeking international protection. Detention should be for as short a period as possible and subject to the principles of necessity and proportionality thereby only being allowed as a measure of last resort. In particular, the detention of applicants must be in accordance with Article 31 of the Geneva Convention. The procedures provided for under this Regulation in respect of a detained person should be applied as a matter of priority, within the shortest possible deadlines. As regards the general guarantees governing detention, as well as detention conditions, where appropriate, Member States should apply the provisions of Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Reception Conditions Directive] also to persons detained on the basis of this Regulationillegal migrants and/or applicants should be applied in accordance with the underlying principle that a person should be detained for as short a period as possible.
Amendment 657 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 60
Recital 60
Amendment 660 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 61
Recital 61
Amendment 663 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 62
Recital 62
Amendment 672 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 63
Recital 63
(63) To support Member States who undertake relocation as a solidarity measure, financial support from the Union budget should be provided. In order to incentivise Member States to give prioritexperience large volumes of illegal border crossings, other Member States may, if they tso the relocation of unaccompanied minors a higher incentive contribution should be providewish, support with funds, personnel or material the effort to stop illegal migration and asylum fraud.
Amendment 683 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 65
Recital 65
Amendment 685 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 66
Recital 66
Amendment 691 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 68
Recital 68
(68) The operation of the Visa Information System, as established by Regulation (EC) No 767/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council46 , and in particular the implementation of Articles 21 and 22 thereof, should facilitate the application of this Regulationshould facilitate the important work of securing the borders for the Member States. _________________ 46Regulation (EC) No 767/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 July 2008 concerning the Visa Information System (VIS) and the exchange of data between Member States on short-stay visas, OJ L 218, 13.8.2008, p. 60.
Amendment 693 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 69
Recital 69
(69) With respect to the treatment of persons falling within the scope of this Regulation, Member States are bound by their obligations primarily to their own citizens to ensure rule of law, a safe and secure environment, protection of their culture and the European way of life under instruments of international law, including the relevant case-law of the European Court of Human Rights.
Amendment 699 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 71
Recital 71
Amendment 700 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 72
Recital 72
Amendment 709 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 73
Recital 73
Amendment 721 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 77
Recital 77
(77) This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles which are acknowledged, in particular, in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In particular, this Regulation seeks to ensure full observance of the right to asylum guaranteed by Article 18 of the Charterself- determination of the citizens of the Member States, as well as their rights recognised under Articles 1, 4, 7, 24 and 47 thereof. This Regulation should therefore be applied accordingly to a secure and safe environment and the preservation of their cultures and way of life.
Amendment 722 #
2020/0279(COD)
Amendment 735 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Amendment 739 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) sets out a common framework for the management of asylum andpplications in the Union and the prevention of illegal migration into the Union;
Amendment 747 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) establishes a mechanism for voluntary solidarity;
Amendment 749 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) lays down the criteria and mechanismsdetermines that the Member State responsible for examining an application for deintermining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protectionnational protection is ordinarily the Member State of first entry; provides guidelines for Commission support, if requested by a Member State, by ensuring that all funds allocated are used to prevent illegal mass-migration; facilitates the prompt return of illegal migrants.
Amendment 752 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) ‘third-country national’ means any person who is not a citizen of the Uniona Member State within the meaning of Article 20(1) of the Treaty and who is not a person enjoying the right to free movement under Union law as defined in Article 2, point (5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council53 ; _________________ 53Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code), OJ L 77, 23.3.2016, p. 1.
Amendment 753 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) ‘illegal migrant’ means any third- country national who enters the territory of the Member States without prior approval in the form of a visa or residence permit or who enters a Member State by force, or a person who enters a Member State and does not apply for protection at the first opportunity. A person who wishes to apply for international protection, must do so in a peaceful manner and at the first possible opportunity (at a border post, disembarkation point, or asylum processing facility). Should the third- country national enter a Member State by force or travel through a Member State without applying for protection, any application that is lodged will be denied, the person will be considered as an illegal migrant, and will be detained and returned to his or her country of origin.
Amendment 756 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) ‘application for international protection’ or ‘application’ means a request for protection made to a Member State by a third-country national or a stateless person, who can be understood as seeking refugee status, or a person seeking subsidiary protection status but only in cases where protection could not be granted in the region, 'international protection' as defined in this Regulation does not include humanitarian visas issued by a Member State on a discretionary basis;
Amendment 768 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) ‘applicant’ means a third-country national or a stateless person who has made an application for international protection in respect of which a decision has not been takenwithout illegally entering a Member State, or has been taken and is either subject to or can still be subject to a remedy in the Member State concerned, irrespective of whether the applicant has a right to remain or is allowed to remain in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedure Regulation], including a person who has been granted immediate protection pursuant to Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Regulation addressing situations of crisis and force majeure in the field of asylum and migration];
Amendment 769 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) 'child' means a minor under the age of 13,
Amendment 770 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) ‘examination of an application for international protection’ means examination of the admissibility or the merits of an application for international protection in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedure Regulation] and Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Qualification Regulation], excluding procedures for determining the Member State responsible in accordance with this Regulationapplicable United Nation conventions currently in force;
Amendment 776 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) ‘beneficiary of international protection’ means a third-country national or a stateless person who has been granted international protection as defined in Article 2(2) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Qualification Regulation]by the respective Member State;
Amendment 781 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – introductory part
(g) ‘family members’ means, insofar as the family already existed before the applicant or the family member arrived on the territory of the Member States, the following members of the applicant’s family who are present on the territory of the Member States, and with whom there is a well-proven family link:
Amendment 787 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point i
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point i
(i) the spouse of the applicant or his or her unmarried partner in a stable relationship, where the law or practice of, only where the country of origin and the Member State concerned treats unmarried couples in a way comparable to married couples under its law relating to third-country ncognises the marriage in accordance with its national legislationals,
Amendment 795 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point iii
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point iii
(iii) where the applicant is a minor and unmarried, the father, mother or another adult legally responsible for the applicant, whether by law or by the practice of the Member State where the adult is present,
Amendment 806 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point v
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point v
Amendment 820 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) ‘minor’ means a third-country national or a stateless person below the age of 18 years but over the age of 13;
Amendment 821 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
(ia) 'unaccompanied child' means a minor under the age of 13 who arrives on the territory of the Member States unaccompanied by an adult responsible for him or her, whether by law or by the practice of the Member State concerned, and for as long as he or she is not effectively taken into the care of such an adult; it includes a minor under the age of 13 who is left unaccompanied after he or she has entered the territory of Member States;
Amendment 826 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) ‘representative’ means a person or an organisation appointed by the competent bodies in order to assist and represent an unaccompanied minor or child in procedures provided for in this Regulation with a view to ensuring the best interests of the child and exercising legal capacity for the minor or child where necessary;
Amendment 832 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point n
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point n
Amendment 841 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point p
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point p
(p) ‘absconding’ means the action by which an applicant does not remain available to the competent administrative or judicial authorities, such as by repeatedly failing to respond to official requests or by leaving the territory of the Member State without authorisation from the competent authorities for reasons which are not beyond the applicant’s control;
Amendment 857 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point s
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point s
(s) ‘contributing Member State’ means a Member State that contributes or is obliged to contribute to the solidarity measures to a benefitting Member State set out in Chapters I-III of Part IV of this Regulation;
Amendment 888 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point w a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point w a (new)
(wa) ‘massive illegal migration threat’ means a situation where there is a large number of illegal migrants, or a risk of such individuals appearing, in a Member State and the specific developments in third countries which generate mass illegal migration flows;
Amendment 893 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point aa
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point aa
(aa) ‘illegally staying third-country national’ means a third-country national who does not fulfil or no longer fulfils the conditions of entry as set out in Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 or other conditions for entry, stay or residence in a Member State, and who must be returned to his or her country of origin without delay.
Amendment 912 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Amendment 916 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) mutually-beneficial partnerships and close cooperation with relevant third countries, including on legal pathways for third-country nationals in need of international protection and for those otherwise admitted to reside legally in the Member States addressing the root causes of irregular migration, supporting partners hosting large numbers of migrants and refugees in need of protection and building their capacities in border, asylum and migration management, preventing and combatting irregular migration and migrant smuggling, and enhancing cooperation on readmission;addressing illegal migration with relevant third countries, supporting countries hosting large numbers of migrants and refugees in need of protection and building their capacities in border, asylum and migration management, preventing and combatting illegal migration and migrant trafficking and smuggling, and enhancing cooperation on readmission, including making development aid to third countries conditional upon the effective implementation of readmission agreements1a; the Commission shall, in this regard, ensure that, in all its dealings with the authorities of third countries, it supports all initiatives and policies of the Member States aimed at combatting illegal immigration, returning illegal migrants, countering the weaponisation of illegal migrants, and preventing asylum fraud; _________________ 1aParticularly in accordance with resolution of the European Parliament of 25 November 2020 on improving development effectiveness and the efficiency of aid.
Amendment 924 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) close cooperation and mutual partnership among Union institutions and bodies, Member States andbetween Member States, and if so requested, assisted where necessary by the Commission; the Commission shall ensure that it supports the Member States' efforts in all international forganisationsa such as, but not limited to, the United Nations and the OSCE;
Amendment 931 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) full implementarespect for the sovereignty of Member States and recognition that border protection ofand the common visa policydecision to grant or refuse visas for third country nationals is a national competence;
Amendment 935 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) effective management and prevention of irregularprevention of illegal migration and support from the Commission to ensure that any funds received including development and/or emergency aid is strictly conditioned on full compliance with all requests from Member States in their work to end illegal migration;
Amendment 944 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) effective management of the Union’s external borders, based on the European integrated border management which includes support to Member States that face severe migratory pressure and, as a result, need to erect physical barriers at the external border of the Union;
Amendment 953 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) full respect of the obligations laid down in international and European lawlegally binding international instruments concerning persons rescued at sea;
Amendment 958 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) access to procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection on Union territory and recognition of third- country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or beneficiaries of subsidiary protection;
Amendment 962 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) determination of the Member State responsible for the examination of an application for international protection, based on shared responsibility and rules and mechanism; if a Member State fails in their primary duty to uphold the integrity of the national border, any and all third country nationals that enter the EU zone for the first time will be that Member Sate's responsibility. If other Member States would like to show solidarity in the defence of that Member State's border, they are encouraged to do so; Member States are especially encouraged to provide support if that Member State's fbor solidarityder coincides at any distance with the external border, and that Member State has applied active and robust preparatory measures against illegal migration, the weaponisation of illegal migration, and asylum fraud;
Amendment 969 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point i
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) access for applicants to adequate reception conditions; Member States are encouraged to outsource and locate any asylum reception facilities to an appropriate third country; preferably, the third country shall be located geographically so that the carbon footprint of the facility used is as light as possible and that the investment can benefit the development of the hosting nation; where possible, the location should also be in the proximity of the country of origin to facilitate their return home;
Amendment 980 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point j
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) effective management of thed swift return of illegally staying third-country nationals;
Amendment 982 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point k
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) effective measures to provide incentives for and support to the integration of beneficiaries of international protection in the Member Statesensure that refugees are hosted in the region close to their country of origin, and in cases where refugees have been granted asylum in a Member State, effective measures to ensure that those who have been granted international protection can return to their country of origin once it is safe to do so;
Amendment 989 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point l
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point l
(l) measures aimed at reducing and tackling the enabling and pull factors of irregularllegal migration to and illegal stay in the Union, including illegal employment, asylum fraud, as well as conditions that enable third countries to weaponise migration;
Amendment 992 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point m
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point m
(m) full deployment and use of the operational tools set up at Union level, notably the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, the Asylum Agency, EU- LISA and Europol, as well as large-scale Union Information Technology systems to offer any assistance requested by the Member States to combat illegal migration, asylum fraud and hybrid attacks on the Member States;
Amendment 1003 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. The Union and Member States shall, as far as possible and within the limits of proportionality and subsidiarity, with full respect for the sovereignty of Member States, ensure coherence of asylum and migration management policies, including both the internal and external components of those policies.
Amendment 1007 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall ensure the protection of their external borders against any and all foreign incursions, including illegal migration, hybrid attacks and asylum fraud.
Amendment 1011 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. The Union and Member States, acting within their respective competencissisted by the Union and in full respect of the sovereignty of the Member States, shall be responsible for the implementation of the asylum and migration management policies.
Amendment 1015 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. Member States, with the support of Union Agencies, shall ensure that they have the capacity to effectively implement asylum and migration management policies, taking into account the comprehensive approach referred to in Article 3, including the necessary human and financial resources and infrastructure.prevent illegal migration, as well as to deter asylum fraud and the weaponisation of migration;
Amendment 1020 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – title
Article 5 – title
Principle of svolidarity and fair sharing of responsibiluntary solidarity
Amendment 1022 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. In implementing their obligations, the Member States shall observe the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility and shall take into account the shared interest in the effective functioning of the Union’s asylum and migration management policies. Member States shall:
Amendment 1038 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) establish and maintain national asylum and migration management systems that provide access to international protectionasylum procedures, grant such protection to those who are in need and ensure the effective and immediate return of those who are illegally staying;
Amendment 1045 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) take all measures necessary and proportionate to reduce and prevent irregularllegal migration to the territories of the Member States, in close cooperation and partnership with relevant third countries by making development aid conditional upon the effective implementation of readmission agreements, including as regards the prevention and fight against migrant smuggling, particularly by NGOs operating under the guise of "search and rescue";
Amendment 1054 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) remove any pull factors that attract more illegal migration to the Union or that create migratory pressure on another Member States ' external borders by adapting their domestic law as appropriate;
Amendment 1066 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) provide voluntary support to other Member States in the form of solidarityfinancial or other contributions on the basis of needs set out in Chapters I-III of Part IV;
Amendment 1089 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall adopt a European Asylum and Migration Management Strategy setting out the strategic approach to managing asylum and preventing illegal migration at Union level and on the implementation of asylum and migration management policies in accordance with the principles set out in this Part. The Commission shall transmit the Strategy to the European Parliament and the Council.
Amendment 1095 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 1103 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) relevant reports and analyses from Union agencies;nd other international agencies; in this regard the Member States shall consider setting up a migratory observatory as a permanent function within the OSCE in order to have a better understanding of illegal flows of third country nationals and hybrid warfare preparations that weaponise third country nationals through asylum fraud and other methods in relation to illegal migration.
Amendment 1117 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall have national strategies in place to ensure sufficient capacity for the implementation of an effective asylum and migration management system in accordance with the principles set out in this Part. Those strategies shall include contingency planning at national level, taking into account the contingency planning pursuant to Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [European Union Asylum Agency], Regulation (EU) 2019/189656 (European Border and Coast Guard Agency) and Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Reception Conditions Directive] and the reports of the Commission issued within the framework of the Migration Preparedness and Crisis Blueprint. Such national strategies shall include information on how the Member State is implementing the principles set out in this Part and legal obligations stemming therefrom at national level. They shall take into account other relevant strategies and existing support measures notably under Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Fund] and Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [European Union Asylum Agency] and be coherent with and complementary to the national strategies for integrated border management established in accordance with Article 8(6) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1896. The results of the monitoring undertaken by the Asylum Agency and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, of the evaluation carried out in accordance with Council Regulation No 1053/2013 as well as those carried out in line with Article 7 of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Screening Regulation], should also be taken into account in these strategies. _________________ 56Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2019 on the European Border and Coast Guard and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1052/2013 and (EU) 2016/1624, OJ L 295, 14.11.2019, p. 1to protect their borders and for a robust response to illegal migration.
Amendment 1124 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission shall adopt a Migration Management Report each year setting out the anticipated evolution of the migratory situation and the preparedness of the Union and the Member States. In the case of migratory flows generated by search and rescue operations, the Commission shall consult the concerned Member States and the Report shall set out the total number of projected disembarkations in the short term and the solidarity response that would be required to contribute to the needs of the Member States of disembarkation through relocation and through measures in the field of capacity building, operational support and measures in the field of the external dimension. The Report shall also indicate whether particular Member States are faced with capacity challenges due to the presence of third-country nationals who are vulnerable and include the results of the reporting on monitoring listed in paragraph 3 including the information gathered within the framework of the Migration Preparedness and Crisis Blueprint and propose improvements where appropriate.
Amendment 1130 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Amendment 1160 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Where the Commission considers it appropriate, it shall also identify in its report measures designed to promote cooperation among the Member States to facilitate the return of illegal staying third- country nationals, including withholding development aid and other forms of financial and non-financial assistance from a third country as long cooperation is lacking.
Amendment 1166 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. On the basis of the report referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission and the Council, within their respective competencies, shall consider the appropriate actions taking into account the Union’s overall relations with the third country including withholding development aid or other forms of funding.
Amendment 1176 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Only a Member States shall is competent to decide and examine any application for international protection by a third-country national or a stateless person who applies on the territory of any one of them, including at the border or in the transit zones. The application shall be examined by a single Member State, which shall be the one which the criteria set out in Chapter II of Part III indicate is responsibleand it shall be done in line with that particular Member State's laws and policies with no interference from the Commission, the European Parliament or any other EU institution.
Amendment 1182 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Where no Member State responsible can be designated on the basis of the criteria listed in this Regulation, tThe first Member State in which the application for international protection was registered shall be responsible for examining it.
Amendment 1191 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3
Article 8 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1214 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Where the security check carried out in accordance with Article 11 of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Screening Regulation] or in accordance with the first and second subparagraphs of this paragraph shows that there are reasonable grounds to consider the applicant a danger to national security or public order of the Member State carrying out the security check, that Member State shall be the Member State responsiblemay return the applicant to the country of origin without delay.
Amendment 1221 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 5
Article 8 – paragraph 5
5. Each Member State shall retain the right to send an applicant to a safe third country, subject to the rules and safeguards laid down inif he or she has entered the territory of any Member State illegally or by using force, as well as under Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedure Regulation].
Amendment 1222 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Each Member State shall retain the right to deny entry and push back any potential applicant attempting to enter and to push back any applicant having entered its territory from a safe third country or by having traversed a safe third country;
Amendment 1227 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Where a third-country national or stateless person intends, after legally entering the territory of a Member State of the Union, to make an application for international protectionasylum, the application shall be made and registered in the Member State of first entry.
Amendment 1231 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. By derogation from paragraph 1, where a third-country national or stateEach Member State may determine ruless person is in possession of a valid residence permit or a valid visa, the application shall be made and registered in the Member State that issued the residence permit or visataining to illegal migrants and/or asylum applicants as they see fit.
Amendment 1242 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. The applicant shall fully cooperate with the competent authorities of the Member States in matters covered by this Regulation, in particular by submitting as soon as possible and at the latest during the interview referred to in Article 12, all the elements and information available to him or her relevant for determining the Member State responsible. Where the applicant is not in a position at the time of the interview to submit evidence to substantiate the elements and information provided, the competent authority may set a time limit within the period referred to in Article 29(1) for submitting such evidenceprocessing his or her application.
Amendment 1248 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4
Article 9 – paragraph 4
Amendment 1259 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. The applicant shall not be entitled to the reception conditions set out in Articles 15 to 17 of Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Reception Conditions Directive] pursuant to Article 17a of that Directive in any Member State other than the one in which he or she is required to be present pursuant to Article 9(4) of this Regulation if he or she entered the territory of a Member State illegally or by using force, and pursuant to Article 9(4) of this Regulation from the moment he or she has been notified of a decision to transfer him or her to the Member State responsible, provided that the applicant has been informed of that consequence pursuant to Article 8(2), point (b) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Screening Regulation]. This shall be without prejudice to the need to ensure a standard of living in accordance with Union law, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and international obligations.
Amendment 1262 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Any applicant, who has entered the territory of a Member State illegally, shall not be entitled to the reception conditions set out in Articles 15 to 17 of Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Reception Conditions Directive] pursuant to Article 17a of that Directive in any Member State. This shall be without prejudice to the need to ensure a standard of living in accordance with Union law, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and international obligations.
Amendment 1271 #
Amendment 1329 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
(ka) where applicable, of an age assessment, including by established medical methods, of an applicant or a DNA-test to prove a family-link;
Amendment 1335 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1362 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. In order to facilitate the process of determining the Member State responsible, the determining Member State of first entry shall conduct a personal interview with the applicant. The interview shall also allow the proper understanding of the information supplied to the applicant in accordance with Article 11.
Amendment 1366 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) the applicant fails to produce identification and there are reasonable grounds to believe that such failure has been caused by the applicant;
Amendment 1376 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3
Article 12 – paragraph 3
3. The personal interview shall take place in a timmmediately manner and, in any event, before any take charge request is made pursuant to Article 29d close to where the applicant entered the territory of a Member State.
Amendment 1378 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4
Article 12 – paragraph 4
4. The personal interview shall be conducted in a language that the applicant understands or is reasonably supposed to understand and in which he or she is able to communicate. Interviews of unaccompanied minorschildren shall be conducted in a child-friendly manner, by staff who are appropriately trained and qualified under national law, in the presence of the representative and, where applicable, the minorchild’s legal advisor. Where necessary, Member States shall have recourse to an interpreter, and where appropriate a cultural mediator, who is able to ensure appropriate communication between the applicant and the person conducting the personal interview. The applicant may request to be interviewed and assisted by staff of the same sex.
Amendment 1395 #
Amendment 1396 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. The best interests of the child shall be a primaryand minor shall be an important consideration for Member States with respect to all procedures provided for in this Regulation, as long as the minor did not engage in acts of violence towards other persons or property in the Member State(s). If such violent acts are committed, any special treatment due to age might be revoked at the discretion of the responsible Member State.
Amendment 1401 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 1402 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Member States are encouraged to ensure the swift and appropriate safe placement of children while awaiting family reunification and the return to their home countries or placement in the region close to their home.
Amendment 1408 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Each Member State where an unaccompanied minorchild is present shall ensure that he or she is represented and assisted by a representative with respect to the relevant procedures provided for in this Regulation. The representative shall have the qualifications, training and expertise to ensure that the best interests of the minor are taken into consideration during the procedures carried out under this Regulation. Such representative shall have access to the content of the relevant documents in the applicant’s file including the specific information material for unaccompanied minors.children
Amendment 1409 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Where an organisation is appointed as a representative, it shall designate a person responsible for carrying out its duties in respect of the minorchild. The first subparagraph shall apply to that person.
Amendment 1420 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. The representative of an unaccompanied minorchild shall be involved in the process of establishing the Member State responsible under this Regulation. The representative shall assist the unaccompanied minorchild to provide information relevant to the assessment of his or her best interests in accordance with paragraph 4, including the exercise of the right to be heard, and shall support his or her engagement with other actors, such as family tracing organisations, where appropriate for that purpose.
Amendment 1441 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) the minorchild’s well-being and social development, taking into particular consideration the minorchild’s background;
Amendment 1450 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point c
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point c
(c) safety and security considerations, in particular where there is a risk of the minor or child being a victim of any form of violence and exploitation, including trafficking in human beings;
Amendment 1457 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point d
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point d
(d) the views of the minor or child, in accordance with his or her age and maturity;
Amendment 1462 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point e
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point e
(e) where the applicant is an unaccompanied minorchild, the information provided by the representative in the Member State where the unaccompanied minorchild is present.
Amendment 1466 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 5
Article 13 – paragraph 5
Amendment 1476 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
Article 13 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. For the purpose of applying Article 15, the Member State where the unaccompanied minor or child’s application for international protection was registered shall, as soon as possible, take appropriate action to identify the family members or relatives of the unaccompanied minor or child on the territory of Member States, whilst protecting the best interests of the child.
Amendment 1490 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 7
Article 13 – paragraph 7
7. With a view to facilitating the appropriate action to identify the family members or relatives of the unaccompanied minor or child living in the territory of another Member State pursuant to paragraph 6, the Commission shall adopt implementing acts including a standard form for the exchange of relevant information between Member States. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2).
Amendment 1496 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. The Member State responsible in accordance with the criteria set out in this Chapter shall be determined on the basis of the situation obtaining when the application for international protection was first registered with a Member Stateshall be the Member State of first entry.
Amendment 1504 #
Amendment 1523 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 6
Article 15 – paragraph 6
Amendment 1532 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16
Article 16
Amendment 1539 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17
Article 17
Amendment 1542 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18
Article 18
Amendment 1545 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19
Article 19
Amendment 1555 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 5
Article 19 – paragraph 5
Amendment 1557 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20
Article 20
Amendment 1574 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. Where it is established, on the basis of proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists referred to in Article 30(4) of this Regulation, including the data referred to in Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation], that an applicant has irregularllegally crossed the border into a Member State by land, sea or air having come from a third country, the first Member State thus entered shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection. That responsibility shall cease if the application is registered more than 3 years after the date on which that border crossing took placeapplicant can be returned to the third country in question or the applicant's country of origin. Member States are under no obligation to consider an application for asylum where the applicant illegally entered the Member State in question.
Amendment 1577 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 3
Article 21 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1584 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22
Article 22
Amendment 1654 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2
Article 26 – paragraph 2
2. For the purposes of this Regulation, the situation of a minor or child who is accompanying the applicant and meets the definition of family member shall be indissociable from that of his or her family member and the minor or child shall be taken charge of or taken back by the Member State responsible for examining the application for international protection of that family member, even if the minor is not individually an applicant, unless it is demonstrated that this is not in the best interests of the child. The same principle shall be applied to children born after the applicant arrives on the territory of the Member States, without the need to initiate a new procedure for taking charge of them.
Amendment 1673 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 28 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The process of determining the Member State responsible takes place, in case the applicant has crossed the border by land, in facilities close to the point of entry or close to the border, which are equipped to register and process applications without delay; in case the applicant has entered by land or by the sea the determination shall take place at the port or the airport;
Amendment 1682 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 28 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. An applicant who is present in another Member State without a residence document or who there makes an application for international protection during the process of determining the Member State responsible, shall be taken back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 31 and 35, by the Member State with which that application was first registeredcan be returned to his or her country of origin. Freedom of movement within the EU does not apply to applicants for asylum.
Amendment 1684 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 28 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1686 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 5
Article 28 – paragraph 5
Amendment 1688 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. If, after having established the identity of the applicant, a Member State where an application for international protection has been registered considers that another Member State is responsible for examining the application, it shall, without delay and in any event within two months of the date on which the application was registered, request that other Member State to take charge of the applicant.
Amendment 1708 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Where the applicant is an unaccompanied minorchild, the determining Member State may, where it considers that it is in the best interest of the minorchild, continue the procedure for determining the Member State responsible and request another Member State to take charge of the applicant despite the expiry of the time limits laid down in the first and second subparagraphs.
Amendment 1713 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 29 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. In the cases referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, the take charge request by another Member State shall be made using a standard form and including documents confirming the identity of the applicant as well as proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists referred to in Article 30(4) and/or relevant elements from the applicant’s statement, enabling the authorities of the requested Member State to check whether it is responsible on the basis of the criteria laid down in this Regulation.
Amendment 1805 #
Amendment 1855 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 1
1. Member States other than the Member State of first entry shall not hold a person in detention for the sole reason that he or she is subject to the procedure established by this Regulation.
Amendment 1867 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 2
2. Where there is a risk of absconding, or when an applicant fails to produce documents proving his or her identity, Member States may detain the person concerned in order to secure transfer procedures in accordance with this Regulation, on the basis of an individual assessment and only in so far as detention is proportional and other less coercive alternative measures cannot be applied effectively, based on an individual assessment of the person’s circumstances.
Amendment 1957 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. For the sole purpose of the provision of medical care or treatment, in particular concerning disabled persons, elderly people, pregnant women, minors, children and persons who have been subject to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical and sexual violence, the transferring Member State shall, in so far as it is available to the competent authority in accordance with national law, transmit to the Member State responsible information on any special needs of the person to be transferred, which in specific cases may include information on that person’s physical or mental health. That information shall be transferred in a common health certificate with the necessary documents attached. The Member State responsible shall ensure that those special needs are adequately addressed, including in particular any essential medical care that may be required.
Amendment 1975 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 3
Article 40 – paragraph 3
3. Provided it is necessary for the examination of the application for international protection, the Member State responsible may request another Member State to let it know on what grounds the applicant bases his or her application and, where applicable, the grounds for any decisions taken concerning the applicant. The other Member State may refuse to respond to the request submitted to it, if the communication of such information is likely to harm its essential interests or the protection of the liberties and fundamental rights of the person concerned or of others. In any event, communication of the information requested shall be subject to the written approval of the applicant for international protection, obtained by the requesting Member State. In that case, the applicant must know for what specific information he or she is giving his or her approval.
Amendment 2018 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Solidarity cContributions for the benefit of a Member State under migratory pressure or subject to disembarkations following search and rescue operations shallmay consist of the following types:
Amendment 2035 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) assistance to protect the external border of the Union;
Amendment 2083 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46
Article 46
Article 46 deleted Solidarity Forum shall comprise all Member States. The Commission shall convene and preside the Solidarity Forum in order to ensure the smooth functioning of this Part.
Amendment 2099 #
Amendment 2119 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 4
Article 47 – paragraph 4
Amendment 2123 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 47 – paragraph 4 – point a
Amendment 2125 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 47 – paragraph 4 – point b
Amendment 2128 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 4 – point c
Article 47 – paragraph 4 – point c
Amendment 2133 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 5
Article 47 – paragraph 5
Amendment 2143 #
Amendment 2178 #
Amendment 2252 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point k
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point k
(k) the number of unaccompanied minors and children.
Amendment 2306 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – title
Article 52 – title
Solidarity Response Plans in situations of migratory pressure
Amendment 2313 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 1
Article 52 – paragraph 1
1. Where the report referred to in Article 51 indicates that a Member State is under migratory pressure, the other Member States which are not themselves benefitting Member States shallcan contribute by means of the svolidarituntary contributions referred to in Article 45(1), points (a), (b) and (c). Member States shall prioritise the relocation of unaccompanied minors.
Amendment 2316 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 2
Article 52 – paragraph 2
Amendment 2323 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 3
Article 52 – paragraph 3
Amendment 2337 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 4
Article 52 – paragraph 4
Amendment 2342 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 5
Article 52 – paragraph 5
Amendment 2353 #
Amendment 2375 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54
Article 54
Amendment 2417 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 55 – paragraph 4 – point a
Amendment 2439 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 3
Article 56 – paragraph 3
3. Member States which have contributed or plan to contribute with solidarity contributions in response to a request for solidarity support by a Member State, or on its own initiative, shall notify the Commission, thereof by completing the Solidarity Support Plan form set out in Annex IV. The Solidarity Response Plan shall include, where relevant, verifiable information, including on the scope and nature of the measures and their implementation.
Amendment 2461 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 57 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Where relocation is to be applied, the benefitting Member State shall identify the persons who could be relocated. Where the person concerned is an applicant for or a beneficiary of international protection, that Member State shall take into account, where applicable, the existence of meaningful links between the person concerned and the Member State of relocation. Where the identified person to be relocated is a beneficiary for international protection, the person concerned shall be relocated only after that person consented to relocation in writing.
Amendment 2565 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 71
Article 71
Directive 2003/109/EC
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Amendments to the Long Term Residence 1. as follows: Article 4 is amended as follows: (a) paragraph is added: ‘With regard to beneficiaries of international protection, the required period of legal and continuous residence shall be three years.rticle 71 deleted Directive Directive 2003/109/EC is amended in paragraph 1, the following sub- (This amendment applies throughout the text.)
Amendment 159 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The rules governing border control of persons crossing the external borders of the Member States of the Union are laid down in Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Schengen Borders Code)21 as adopted under Article 77(2)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). To further develop the Union’s policy with a view to carrying out checks on persons and efficiently monitoring the crossing of external borders referred to in the first paragraph of Article 77 TFEU, additional measures should address situations where third-country nationals manage to avoid, whether purposely or not, border checks at the external borders, or where third-country nationals are disembarked following search and rescue operations as well as where third-country nationals request international protection at a border crossing point without fulfilling entry conditions. The present regulation complements and specifies Regulation (EU) 2016/399 with regard to those three sets of situations. _________________ 21 Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code), OJ L 77, 23.3.2016, p.1.
Amendment 164 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) It is essential to ensure that in those three sets of situations, the third country nationals are screened, in order to facilitate a proper identification and to allow for them being referred efficientlyefficiently and promptly refer them to the relevant procedures which, depending on the circumstances, can be procedures for international protection or procedures respecting Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (the “Return Directive”)22 . The screening should seamlessly complement the checks carried out at the external border or compensate for the fact that those checks have been circumvented by the third country nationals when crossing the external border. _________________ 22 Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals, OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 98.
Amendment 170 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Border control is in the interest not only of the Member States at whose external borders it is carried out but of all Member States which have abolished internal border control. Border control should help toprimarily combat illegal migration and trafficking of human beings and to prevent any threat to the Member States’ internal security, public policy, public health and international relations. As such, measures taken at the external borders are important elements of a comprehensive approach to migration, allowing to address the challenge of mixed flows of migrants and persons seeking international protectionensuring safety of the Member States.
Amendment 176 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) In accordance with Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, border control consists of border checks carried out at the border crossing points and border surveillance, which is carried out between the border crossing points, in order to prevent third-country nationals from illegally circumventing border checks. In accordance with Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 a person who has crossed a border in an unauthorised manner and who has no right to stay on the territory of the Member State concerned shall be apprehended and made subject to procedures respecting Directive 2008/115/EC. In accordance with Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, border control should be carried out without prejudice to the rights of refugees and persons requesting international protection, in particular as regards non- refoulement.
Amendment 184 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Border guards are often confronted with third-country nationals who are requesting international protection without travel documents or any other documents supporting their claims, both following apprehension during border surveillance and during checks at the border crossing points. Moreover, at some border sections the border guards are confronted with large numbers of arrivals at the same time. In such circumstances, it is particularly difficult to ensure that all relevant databases are consulted and to immediately determine the appropriate asylum or return procedure.
Amendment 191 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) In order to ensure a swift and efficient handling of third-country nationals who try to avoid border checks or who request international protection at a border crossing point without fulfilling the entry conditions or who are disembarked following a search and rescue operation, it is necessary to provide a stronger framework for cooperation between the different national authorities responsible for border control, the protection of public health, the examination of the need for international protection and the application of return procedures.
Amendment 194 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In particular, the sScreening should help to ensure that the third-country nationals concerned are referred to the appropriate procedures at the earliest stage possible and that the procedures are continued without interruption and delay. At the same timeIn particular, the screening should help to counter the practice whereby some applicants for international protection abscond after having been authorised to enter the territory of a Member State based on their request for international protection, in order to pursue such requests in another Member State or not at all.
Amendment 198 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) With regard to those persons who apply for international protection, the screening shouldmay be followed by an examination of the need for international protection. It shouldmay allow to collect and share with the authorities competent for that examination any information that is relevant for the latter to identify the appropriate procedure for the examination of the application, thusif that would allow for speeding up that examination. The screening should also ensure that persons with special needs are identified at an early stage, so that any special reception and procedural needs are fully taken into account in the determination of and the pursuit of the applicable procedure.
Amendment 202 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The obligations stemming from this Regulation should be without prejudice to the provisions concerning responsibility for examining an application for international protection regulated in Regulation (EU) No XX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management Regulation] if it is not hampering the security of the external borders.
Amendment 204 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) This Regulation should apply to third-country nationals and stateless persons who are apprehended in connection with the unauthorised or illegal crossings of the external border of a Member State by land, sea or air, except third country nationals for whom the Member State is not required to take the biometric data pursuant to Article 14(1) and (3) of the Eurodac Regulation for reasons other than their age, as well as to persons who have been disembarked following search and rescue operations, regardless of whether they apply or not for international protection. This Regulation should also apply to those who seek international protection at the border crossing points or in transit zones without fulfilling the entry conditions
Amendment 211 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) The screening should always be conducted at or in proximity to the external border, before the persons concerned are authorised to enter the territory. The Member States should apply measures pursuant to national law to prevent the persons concerned from entering the territory during the screening. In individual cases, wWhere required, this may include detention, subject to the national law regulating that matter.
Amendment 221 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Wherever it becomes clear beyond any doubt during the screening that a third- country national subject to it fulfils the conditions of Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, the screening should end and the third-country national concerned should be authorised to enter the territory, without prejudice to the application of penalties as referred to in Article 5(3) of that regulation.
Amendment 233 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
Amendment 240 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) In accordance with Article 12 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, the fulfilment of entry conditions and the authorisation of entry are expressed in an entry stamp in a travel document. The absence of such entry stamp or the absence of a travel document mayshould therefore be considered as an indication that the holder does not fulfil the entry conditions. With the start of the operation of the Entry/Exit System leading to substitution of the stamps with an entry in the electronic system, that presumption will become even more reliable. Member States should therefore apply the screening to third-country nationals who are already within the territory and who are unable to prove that they fulfilled the conditions of entry into the territory of the Member States. The screening of such third-country nationals is clearly necessary in order to compensate for the fact that they presumably managed to evade entry checks upon arrival in the Schengen area and therefore could have not been either refused entry or referred to the appropriate procedure following screening. Applying the screening could also help in ascertaining, through the consultation of the databases referred to in this Regulation, that the persons concerned do not pose a threat to internal security. By the end of the screening within the territory, the third- country nationals concerned should be subject to a return procedure or, where they apply for international protection, to the appropriate asylum procedure. Submitting the same third-country national to repeated screenings should be avoided to the utmost extent possible.
Amendment 246 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) The screening should be completed as soon as possible, and should not exceed 5 days where it is conducted at the external border and 3 days where it is conducted within the territory of a Member State. Any extension of the 5 days’ time limit should be reserved forIn exceptional situations at, the external borders, where the capacities of the Member State to handle screenings are exceeded for reasons beyond its control such as crisis situations referred to in Article 1 of Regulation XXX/XXX [crisis proposal]limit can be extended if it is necessary for the proper conducting of the screening procedure.
Amendment 251 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) The Member States should determine appropriate locations for the screening at or in close proximity to the external border taking into account geography and existing infrastructures, ensuring that apprehended third-country nationals as well as those who present themselves at a border crossing point can be swiftly submitted to the screening. In any case, the persons under the screening procedure shall not be deemed to be on the territory of a Member State. The tasks related to the screening may be carried out in hotspot areas as referred to in point (23) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and of the Council23 . _________________ 23 Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2019 on the European Border and Coast Guard, OJ L 295, 14.11.2019, p. 1.
Amendment 255 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) In order to achieve the objectives of the screening, close cooperation should be ensured between the competent national authorities referred to in Article 16 of Regulation 2016/399, those referred to in Article 5 of the [Asylum Procedures Regulation] as well as those responsible for carrying out return procedures respecting Directive 2008/115. Child protection authorities shouldmay also be closely involved in the screening wherever necessary to ensure that the best interests of the child are duly taken into account throughout the screening. Member States should be allowed to avail themselves of the support of the relevant agencies, in particular the European Border and Coast Guard Agency and the [European Union Agency for Asylum], within the limits of their mandates. Member States should involve the national Rapporteurs for Anti- trafficking wherever the screening reveals facts relevant for trafficking in line with Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council24 . _________________ 24 Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims, OJ L 101, 15.4.2011, p. 1.
Amendment 257 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
Amendment 264 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
Amendment 277 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) By the end of the screening, the authorities responsible for the screening should fill in a de-briefing form. The form should be transmitted to the authorities examining applications for international protection or to the authorities competent for return – depending on whom the individual is referred to. In the former case, the authorities responsible for the screening should also indicate any elements which may seem to be relevant for determining whether the competent authorities should submit the application of the third-country national concerned to an accelerated examination procedure or to the border procedure.
Amendment 287 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) A preliminary health examination should be carried out on all persons submitted to the screening at the external borders with a view to identifying persons in need of immediate care or requiring other measures to be taken, for instance isolation on public health grounds. The specific needs of minors and vulnerable persons should be taken into account. If it is clear from the circumstances that such examination is not needed, in particular because the overall condition of the person appears to be very good, the examination should not take place and the person concerned should be informed of that fact. The preliminary health examination should be carried out by the health authorities of the Member State concerned. With regard to third-country nationals apprehended within the territory, the preliminary medical examination should be carried out where it is deemed necessary at first sightThe preliminary health examination should be carried out by the health authorities of the Member State concerned.
Amendment 294 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
Amendment 302 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Since third-country nationals subject to the screening may not carry or disclose the necessary identity and travel documents required for the legal crossing of the external border, an identification procedure should be provided for as part of the screening.
Amendment 305 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) The Common Identity Repository (“CIR”) was established by Regulation (EU) 2019/817 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Interoperability Regulation)25 to facilitate and assist in the correct identification of persons registered in the Entry/Exit System (“EES”), the Visa Information System (“VIS”), the European Travel Information and Authorisation System (“ETIAS”), Eurodac and in the European Criminal Records Information System for third country nationals (“ECRIS-TCN”), including of unknown persons who are unable to identify themselves. For that purpose, the CIR contains only the identity, travel document and biometric data recorded in EES, VIS, ETIAS, Eurodac and ECRIS-TCN, logically separated. Only the personal data strictly necessary to perform an accurate identity check is stored in the CIR. The personal data recorded in the CIR is kept for noas longer than strictly as it is necessary for the purposes of the underlying systems and should automatically be deleted where the data are deleted from the underlying systems. Consultation of the CIR enables a reliable and exhaustive identification of persons, by making it possible to consult all identity data present in the EES, VIS, ETIAS, Eurodac and ECRIS-TCN in one go, in a fast and reliable manner, while ensuring a maximum protection of the data and avoiding unnecessary processing or duplication of data. _________________ 25 Regulation (EU) 2019/817 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2019 on establishing a framework for interoperability between EU information systems in the field of borders and visa and amending Regulations (EC) No 767/2008, (EU) 2016/399, (EU) 2017/2226, (EU) 2018/1240, (EU) 2018/1726 and (EU) 2018/1861 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Decisions 2004/512/EC and 2008/633/JHA, OJ L 135, 22.5.2019, p. 27.
Amendment 313 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) Given that many persons submitted to the screening may not carry or disclose any travel documents, the authorities conducting the screening should have access to any other relevant documents held by the persons concerned in cases where the biometric data of such persons are not usable or yield no result in the CIR. The authorities should also be allowed to use data from those documents, other than biometric data, to carry out checks against the relevant databases.
Amendment 315 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) The identification of persons during border checks at the border crossing point and any consultation of the databases in the context of border surveillance or police checks in the external border area by the authorities who referred the person concerned to the screening should be considered as part of the screening and should not be repeated, unless there are special circumstances justifying such repetition.
Amendment 324 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) The screening should alsoprimarily assess whether the entry of the third- country nationals into the Union could pose a threat to internal security or to public policy.
Amendment 336 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) Where justified for the purpose of the security check, the screening could also include verification of objects in the possession of third-country nationals, in accordance with national law. Any measures applied in this context should be proportionate and should respect the human dignity of the persons subject to the screening. The authorities involved should ensure that the fundamental rights of the individuals concerned are respected, including the right to protection of personal data and freedom of expression.
Amendment 359 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Regulation establishes the screening at the external borders of the Member States of all third-country nationals who have crossed the external border illegally in an unauthorised manner, of those who have applied for international protection during border checks without fulfilling entry conditions, as well as those disembarked after a search and rescue operation, before they are referred to the appropriate procedure.
Amendment 371 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3
Article 1 – paragraph 3
The object of the screening shall be the identification of all third-country nationals subject to it and the verification against relevant databases that the persons subject to it do not pose a threat to internal security. The screening shall also entailinclude health checks, to identify persons posing a threat to public health, and where appropriate, to identify persons vulnerable and in the need of health care as well the ones posing a threat to public health. Those checks shall contribute to referring such persons to the appropriate procedure.
Amendment 428 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. During the screening, the persons referred to in Article 3, paragraphs 1 and 2 shall notin no circumstances be authorised to enter the territory of a Member State.
Amendment 450 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. In the cases referred to in Article 3, the screening shall be conducted at locations situated at or in proximity to the external borders. However, in any case the persons under the screening procedure shall not be deemed to be on the territory of a Member State.
Amendment 463 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. In the cases referred to in Article 3, the screening shall be carried out without delay and shall in any case be completed within 5 days from the apprehension in the external border area, the disembarkation in the territory of the Member State concerned or the presentation at the border crossing point. In exceptional circumstancesituations, wthere a disproportionate number of third-country nationals needs to be subject to the screening at the same time, making it impossible in practice to conclude the screening within that time- limit, the period of 5 days may be extended by a maximum of an additional 5 days limit can be extended, if it is necessary for the proper conducting of the screening procedure.
Amendment 471 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shallmay notify the Commission without delay about the exceptional circumstances referred to in paragraph 3. They shall also inform the Commission as soon as the reasons for extending the screening period have ceased to exist.
Amendment 476 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Article 6 – paragraph 5
5. The screening referred to in Article 5 shall be carried out without delay and in any case shall be completed within 3 days from apprehension. This limit can be extended, if the screening procedure requires it.
Amendment 505 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7
Article 7
Amendment 608 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the applicable rules on the conditions of entry for third-country nationals in accordance with Regulation (No) 2016/399 [Schengen Border Code], as well as on other conditions of entry, stay and residence of the Member State concerned, to the extent this information has not been given already;
Amendment 611 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point e
Amendment 614 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3
Article 8 – paragraph 3
3. The information provided during the screening shall be given in a language which the third-country national understands or is reasonably supposed to understand. The information shall be given in writing and, in exceptional circumstances, where necessary, orally using interpretation services. It shall be provided in an appropriate manner taking into account the age and the gender of the person.
Amendment 627 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Article 8 – paragraph 4
4. Member States may authorise relevant and competent national, international and non-governmental organisations and bodies to provide third country nationals with information under this article during the screening according to the provisions established by national law.
Amendment 634 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Third-country nationals submitted to the screening referred to in Article 3 shall be always subject to a preliminary medical examination with a view to identifying any needs for immediate care or isolation on public health grounds, unless, based on the circumstances concerning the general state of the individual third-country nationals concerned and the grounds for directing them to the screening, the relevant competent authorities are satisfied that no preliminary medical screening is necessary. In that case, they shall inform those persons accordingly.
Amendment 638 #
2020/0278(COD)
2. Where relevant, it shall be checked whether persons referred to in paragraph 1 are in a vulnerable situation, victims of torture or have special reception or procedural needs within the meaning of Article 20 of the [recast] Reception Conditions Directive.
Amendment 644 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. Where there are indications of vulnerabilities or special reception or procedural needs, the third-country national concerned shallmay receive timely and adequate support in view of their physical and mental health. In the case of minors, support shall be given by personnel trained and qualified to deal with minors, and in cooperation with child protection authorities.
Amendment 664 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) biometric data, including DNA testing for age;
Amendment 84 #
2020/0277(COD)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set outRejects the Commission's proposal;
Amendment 95 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) TIn situations of crisis, the Union, in constituting an area of freedom, security and justice, should ensure the absence of internal border controls for persons and frame a common policy on asylum, immigration and external border control, based on solidarity between Member States, which is fair towards third-country nationalnot stand in the way of internal border controls for persons.
Amendment 104 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The comprehensive approach should bring together policies in the areas of asylum, migration management, returns, external border protection and partnership with relevant third countries, recognising that the effectiveness of the overall approach depends on all components being jointly addressed and in an integrated manner. The comprehensive approach should ensure that the Union has at its disposal specific rules to effectively manage migration including the triggering of a compulsory solidarity mechanism and that all the necessary measures are put in place to prevent crisis to happen.
Amendment 115 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Notwithstanding tThe putting in place of the necessary preventive measures, it cannot be can excluded that a situation of crisis or force majeure in the field of migration and asylum arises due to circumstances beyond the control of the Union and its Member States.
Amendment 121 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) This Regulation should contribute to and complete the comprehensive approach by setting out the specific procedures and mechanisms in the field of international protection and return that should apply in the exceptional circumstances of a situation of crisis. It should ensure, in particular, the effective application of the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility and the adaptation of the relevant rules on asylum and return procedures, so that the Member States and the Union have the necessary tools at their disposal including sufficient time to carry out those procedures.
Amendment 133 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) A mass influxlarge number of persons trying to crossing the border irregularly and within a short period of time may lead to a situation of crisis in a particular Member State. That may also have consequences for the functioning of the asylum and migration system, not only in that Member State but in the Union as a whole, due to unauthorised movements and the lack of capacity in the Member State of first entry to process the applications for international protection of such third- country nationals and must be prevented. It is necessary to lay down specific rules and mechanisms that should enable effective action to address such situationssupport in defence of the border of said Member State.
Amendment 142 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
Amendment 154 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
Amendment 161 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
Amendment 164 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) In order to quickly help alleviate the pressure faced by a Member State in a situation of crisis, the scope of relocation should include all categoriesimmediate assistance in border protection should be given, thus avoiding the need for relocation of applicants for international protection, including persons granted immediate protection, as well as beneficiaries of international protection and irregular migrants. Furthermore, a Member State that provides return sponsorship should transfer the illegally staying third-country national from the benefitting Member State if the person concerned does not return or is not removed within four months, instead of eight months as provided for by Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management]This will avoid creating a pull factor for uncontrolled mass immigration.
Amendment 181 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In situations of crisis, Member States might need a wider set of measures in order to manage a mass influx of third- country nationals in an orderly fashion and contain unauthorised movements. Such measures should include the application of an asylum crisis management procedure and a return crisis management procedureorganise an efficient border protection and prevent the entering of a large number of third-country nationals in unauthorised movements.
Amendment 187 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) In order to alleviate pressure on the Member States with external borders, the Union will support effective border protection against illegal migration. An illegal migrant is any third-country national who enters the territory of the Member States without prior approval in the form of a visa or residence permit or who enters a Member State by force, or a person who enters a Member State and does not apply for protection at the first opportunity. A person who wishes to apply for international protection, must do so in a peaceful manner and at the first possible opportunity (at a border post, disembarkation point, or asylum processing facility). Should the third- country national enter a Member State by force or travel through a Member State without applying for protection, any application that is lodged will be denied, the person will be considered as an illegal migrant, and will be detained and returned to his or her country of origin.
Amendment 192 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 b (new)
Recital 12 b (new)
(12b) In order to alleviate pressure on the Member States with external borders, the Union will financially support the building of a physical barrier on those external borders. Physical barriers will help to manage a mass influx of third- country nationals and contain unauthorised movements.
Amendment 217 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) In order to allow Member States to deal with large numbers of applications for international protection in situations of crisis, a longer time limitmore resources should be setapplied for registering the applications for international protection made during such situations of crisis. Such an extension should be without prejudice to the rights of asylum applicants guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
Amendment 219 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
Amendment 231 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 a (new)
Recital 15 a (new)
(15a) In a situation of crisis, in view of the possible strain on the asylum system, Member States should prevent entry in their territory of applicants trying to enter from a neighbouring safe third country. The Union can be called upon to support such prevention of entry.
Amendment 236 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) In a situation of crisis, in view of the possible strain on the asylum system, Member States should have the possibility not to authorise the entry in their territory of applicants subject to a border procedure for a longer period of time than the ones set in Article 41 (11) and (13) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures Regulation]. However, tThe procedures should be completed as soon as possible and in any event the periods of time should only be prolonged by an additional period not exceeding eight weeks; if those procedures cannot be completed by the expiry of that prolonged period, applicants should be authorised to enter the territory of a Member State for the purpose of completing the procedure for international protectionthoroughly and expeditiously.
Amendment 253 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
Amendment 261 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
Amendment 272 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) In order to provide Member States with additional time needed to deal with the situation of crisis and at the same time ensure an effective and as quick as possible access to the relevant procedures and rights, the Commission should authorise the application of the asylum crisis management procedure and the return crisis management procedure for a period of six months, which could be extended up to a period not exceeding one year. After the expiry of the relevant period, the extended deadlines provided for in the asylum and return crisis management procedures should not be applied to new applications for international protections long as needed.
Amendment 279 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) For the same reasons, the Commission should authorise the application ofMember States can apply derogatory rules as regards the registration deadline for a period not exceeding four weeks, which should be renewable upon a new reasoned request submitted by the Member State concerned. The total period of application should nonetheless not exceed twelve weeks.
Amendment 296 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) In a crisis situation, Member States should have the possibility to suspend the examination of applications for international protection made by displaced persons from third countries who are unable to return to their country of origin, where they would face a high degree of risk of being subject to indiscriminate violence, in exceptional situations of armed conflict. In such a case, immediate protection status should be granted to those persons. Member States should resume the examination of their application one year at the latest from its suspensio. Member States should organise the return to a safe country in the region of origin.
Amendment 303 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
Amendment 322 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) In order to carry out a proper assessment of applications for international protection submitted by beneficiaries of immediate protection, the asylum procedures should resume at the latest after one year from the suspension of such proceduresnot be suspended.
Amendment 355 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) In such situations of force majeure, the Member State concerned shouldmay notify the Commission and, where applicable, the other Member States, of its intention to apply the respective derogations from those time limits, as well as the precise reasons for their intended application, as well as the period of time during which they will be applied.
Amendment 365 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) Where a Member State is no longer facing a situation of force majeure, it should, as soon as possible,may notify the Commission, and where applicable, the other Member States, of the cessation of the situation. The time limits derogating from Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management] should not be applied to new applications for international protection made or for third- country nationals or stateless persons found to be illegally staying after the date of that notification. Upon such notification, the time limits laid down in Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures Regulation] should start to apply.
Amendment 366 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
Amendment 379 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
Amendment 390 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) The examination procedure should be used for the adoption of solidarity measures in situations of crisis for authorising the application of derogatory procedural rules, and for triggering the granting of immediate protection status.
Amendment 397 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular respect for human dignity, the right to life, the prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the right to asylum and the protection in the event of removal, expulsion or extraditioncluding the right to safety of European citizens. The Regulation should be implemented in compliance with the Charter and general principles of Union law as well as international law, including refugee protection, human rights obligation and the prohibition of refoulement.
Amendment 417 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) an exceptional situation of mass influx, where a large number of third-country nationals or stateless persons arrivinges irregularly in a Member State or disembarked on its territory following search and rescue operationsat the external border of a Member State and requests to enter, being of such a scale, in proportion to the population and GDP of the Member State concerned, and nature, that it renders the Member State’s asylum, reception or return system non-functional and can have serious consequences for the functioning the Common European Asylum System or the Common Framework as set out in Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management], or
Amendment 430 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. This Regulation does not apply when either the Commission or the Council has taken a decision that finds that a third country is engaging in hybrid warfare against the Union by employing migration as a weapon in order to destabilise a Member State or the Union.
Amendment 439 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2
Article 2
Amendment 484 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Where a Member State considers that it is facing a crisis situation as referred to in Article 1(2), that Member State shall submit a reasoned request to the Commission for the purpose ofmay applying the rules laid down in Articles 4, 5 or 6 as necessary.
Amendment 488 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Amendment 492 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Amendment 497 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission may authorise the application of the rules laid down in Articles 4 and 5 for six months. That period may be extended for a period not exceeding one yearmay take as long as needed.
Amendment 499 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5
Article 3 – paragraph 5
Amendment 505 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 7
Article 3 – paragraph 7
Amendment 509 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 8
Article 3 – paragraph 8
Amendment 530 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4
Article 4
Asylum crisis management procedure 1. In a crisis situation as referred to in Article 1(2), and in accordance with the procedures laid down in Article 3, Member States may, as regards applications made within the period during which this Article is applied, derogate from Article 41 of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures Regulation] as follows: (a) By way of derogation from Article 41(2)(b) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures Regulation], Member States may in a border procedure take decisions on the merits of an application in cases where the applicant is of a nationality, or, in the case of stateless persons, a former habitual resident of a third country, for which the proportion of decisions granting international protection by the determining authority is, according to the latest available yearly Union-wide average Eurostat data, 75% or lower, in addition to the cases referred to in Article 40(1) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures Regulation]; (b) By way of derogation from Article 41(11) and (13) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures Regulation], the maximum duration of the border procedure for the examination of applications set out in that Article may be prolonged by an additional period of maximum eight weeks. Following this period, the applicant shall be authorised to enter the Member State’s territory for the completion of the procedure for international protection.rticle 4 deleted
Amendment 549 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) By way of derogation from Article 41a(2) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures Regulation], the maximum period during which third- country nationals or stateless persons shall be kept at the locations referred to in that Article may be prolonged by an additional period of maximum eight weekto secure swift and proper returns;
Amendment 559 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) In addition to the cases provided for by Article 6(2) of Directive XXX [recast Return Directive], Member States shall establish that a risk of absconding is presumed in an individual case, unless proven otherwise, when the criterion referred to in Article 6(1), point (f) of Directive XXX [recast Return Directive] is fulfilled or when the applicant, third- country national or stateless person concerned is manifestly and persistently not fulfilling the obligation to cooperate established by Article 7 of that Directive.
Amendment 609 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10
Article 10
Amendment 611 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – title
Article 10 – title
10 Granting of immediateThe need for enhanced border protection status.
Amendment 618 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. In a crisis situation as referred to in Article 1(2)(a), and on the basis of an implementing act adopted by the Commission in accordance with paragraph 4 of this Article, Member States may suspend the examination of applications for international protection in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures Regulation] and Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Qualification Regulation] in respect of displaced persons from third countries who are facing a high degree of risk of being subject to indiscriminate violence, in exceptional situations of armed conflict, and who are unable to return to their country of orihave travelled through multiple safe countries or left protection facilities in the own region. In such a case, Member States shall grant immediate protection status to the persons concerned, unless they represent a danger to the national security or public order of the Member State. Such status shall be without prejudice to their ongoing application for international protection in the relevantprotect their borders and ensure no such illegal applicant enters the Member State.
Amendment 627 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Amendment 631 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Amendment 636 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Amendment 670 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Amendment 678 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Amendment 685 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Amendment 691 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12
Article 12
Amendment 74 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point iii – paragraph 1
Paragraph 4 – point iii – paragraph 1
In addition to the fight against racism, xenophobia and related intolerance, the fight against antisemitism should be specifically mentioned in the areas of activities of the FRA, and not only in the recital; this would be very much in line with the activities carried out by the FRA in relation to antisemitic incidents since 2009, with yearly updates on the situation in each Member Statethe field of activity of a Fundamental Rights Agency, by definition, no distinction can be made between different fundamental rights; the hierarchisation of fundamental rights is at odds with the very definition of fundamental rights; hatred of indigenous populations is no less important than hatred of foreigners;
Amendment 93 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point i – paragraph 1
Paragraph 5 – point i – paragraph 1
As is the case with many other EU agencies, the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs should have the right to nominate one additional member of the FRA Management Board; members of the Management Board should have the right to be reappointed once, and the restriction on non-consecutive terms is unnecessary;
Amendment 99 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point iii – paragraph 1
Paragraph 5 – point iii – paragraph 1
Amendment 22 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the twofoldprimary objective of the directive is effective return in line with fundamental rights and the principle of proportionality; whereas in its recommendation on making returns more effective,; welcomes the Commission's focuses on the rate of returns as the primary indicator of the directive’s effectiveness;
Amendment 32 #
2019/2208(INI)
Da. whereas, according to IOM data, around 81,000 African migrants returned to their home nation with the aid of the UN’s International Organization for Migration (IOM) and that such Joint initiative which costed the European Union €357 million was to be considered largely a failure1a; _________________ 1a https://www.euronews.com/2020/06/19/pa ying-for-migrants-to-go-back-home-how- the-eu-s-voluntary-return-scheme-is- failing-the-de
Amendment 45 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Reiterates the importance of an evidence-based approach to guide coherent policy-making and well-informed public discourse and calls on the Commission to encourage and support Member States to collect and publish qualitative and quantitative data on the implementation of the directive;
Amendment 47 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes also that, based on figures provided by the EPRS, there were, for example, 511047 illegal border crossings in 2016 and 204734 in 2017; considers that given the nature of illegal border crossings, the real figure is presumably much higher; notes that according to EUROSTAT figures from 2019 only a fraction of those ordered to leave actually returned; notes further that the potential repeated counting of persons ordered to leave several times, whether by different Member States or not, does nothing to reduce the problem but rather illustrates the problems with the current return policy;
Amendment 49 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Notes that in the period November 2017 to 2019, FRONTEX repatriated only 171 people with charter flights at a total cost of EUR 1 380 7541 a; notes further that these figures show that a return policy is virtually non-existent at EU level; _________________ 1a figures based on the reply by Frontex of 12 May 2020 to parliamentary question E-1507/2020 by Filip De Man MEP
Amendment 54 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the Commission’s statement that the return rate decreased from 46 % in 2016 to 37 % in 2017 may not present the full picture, as people who received a return decision were not necessarily returned within the same year, some Member States issue more than one return decision to one person, or to people whose whereabouts are unknown, and return decisions are not withdrawn if the return does not take place owing to difficulties in cooperation with third countries or for humanitarian reasons; recognises, on the other hand, that potential double counting in relation to several return decisions does not reduce the problem, but merely illustrates the problems with the return policy;
Amendment 57 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. StExpresses thaconcerns about the Commission’s statement that the return rate decreased from 46 % in 2016 to 37 % in 2017 may not present the full picture, as people who received a return decision were not necessarily returned within the same year, some Member States issue more than one return decision to one person, or to people whose whereabouts are unknown, and return decisions are not withdrawnas the effective return of third- country nationals who do not have a right to stay ifn the return does not take place owing to difficulties in cooperation with third countries or for humanitarian reasonsUnion is an essential component of an effective asylum policy;
Amendment 64 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses the importance of improving the effective implementation of the directive; highlights that such effectiveness should not only be measured in quantitative terms by referring to the return rate, but also in qualitative terms, such as the sustainability of returns and fundamental rights;
Amendment 81 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the importance of ensuring compliance with return decisions and recalls the key principle enshrined in the directive that voluntary returns should be prioritised over forced returns; stresses equally that an effective return policy is essential to keep migration manageable;
Amendment 86 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the importance of ensuring compliance with return decisions and recalls the key principle enshrined in the directive that voluntary returns should be prioritised over forced returnsat voluntary returns should be proposed as a way to avoid unnecessary retention or detention period;
Amendment 96 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Highlights that under Article 7 of the directive, a return decision shall provide for an appropriate period for voluntary departure, which Member States have to extend where necessary, taking into account the specific circumstances of the individual case; stresses that a relatively short period for voluntary departure may hinder or altogether prevent voluntary departure;
Amendment 115 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that a broad definition of the risk of absconding may lead tohelp Member States frequently refraining from granting a period for voluntary departureto manage returns more efficiently; recalls that lifting the voluntary departure period also leads to the imposition of an entry ban, which may further undermine voluntary departure;
Amendment 124 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that return and entry-ban decisions on removal should be individualised, clearly justified with reasons in law and in fact, issued in writing, and complete with information about available remediesshould be swift and effective;
Amendment 131 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Highlights that the directive allows for the temporary suspension of the enforcement of a removal, pending a decision relating to return; underlines the importance of such suspensive effect in cases where there is a risk of refoulement; notes that in most countries, appeal against return is not automatically suspensive, which may diminish protection and increase administrative burdens; notes, however, that most countries only attempt to enforce returns in the event of imminent danger to public order; points out that the procedure is often exhausted or repeated endlessly so as to obtain a residence permit after all; notes that children are conceived during on-going procedures and are subsequently used to invoke humanitarian grounds to obtain a residence permit.
Amendment 133 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Highlights that the directive allows for the temporary suspension of the enforcement of a removal, pending a decision relating to return; underlines the importance of such suspensive effect in cases where there is a risk of refoulement; notes that in most countries, appeal against return is not automatically suspensive, which may diminish protection and increase administrative burdens;
Amendment 141 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 153 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Regrets, however, that once a safe return becomes possible, most Member States often do not replace provisional residence permits with mandatory orders to return; regrets further that, as a result, a temporary residence permit is, de facto, often assimilated to a permanent residence permit;
Amendment 156 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 160 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Notes with concernWelcomes the widespread automatic imposition of entry bans, which in some Member States are enforced alongside voluntary departure; stresses that this approach risks reducing incentives to comply with a return decision;
Amendment 164 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Is aware that imposing entry bans is necessary in order to stop a carousel of applications, refusals and orders to leave the territory in the different Member States; notes that this results in an enormous administrative burden for the Member States concerned and perpetuates the legal uncertainty of those concerned; considers that the persons concerned are thus not encouraged to build a future in their country of origin;
Amendment 169 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses that although the threat of imposition of an entry ban may serve ais an incentive to leave a country within the time period of voluntary departure, once imposed, entry bans actually reduce the incentive to comply with a return decision and may increase the risk of absconding;
Amendment 174 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Recognises that the imposition of entry bans together with orders to leave the territory constitute a necessary two- pronged approach; recognises further that that where this would discourage the person concerned from returning voluntarily, their forced return would be in accordance with Article 16 of Directive 2008/115/EC of 16 December 2008;
Amendment 175 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 185 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 191 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 201 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Considers that the failure to comply with an order to leave the territory voluntarily in and of itself constitutes an objective criterion to decide that there is a risk of absconding;
Amendment 203 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. NoteRecalls that the directive establishes that returnees may lawfully be detained where other less coercive measures cannot be applied; expresses regret that despite the obligation to apply detention as a measure of last resort, in practice, very few viable alternatives to detention are developed and applied by Member States; calls on Member States, as a matter of urgency, to offer viable community-based alternatives to detention;
Amendment 205 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that the directive establishes that returnees may lawfully be detained where other less coercive measures cannot be applied; expresses regret that despite the obligation to apply detention as a measure of last resort, in practice, very few viablecriticises the fact that, even after repeated failures to comply with an order to leave the territory, only in extremely exceptional circumstances are such orders enforced; notes that, given that those concerned have no prospect of a permanent residence permit, reception in the community is no alternatives to detention are developed and applied by Member States; calls on Member States, as a matter of urgen; notes that this last option is only chosen by returnees in order to demonstrate by means of sheer obduracy, to offer viable community-based alternatives to detentionhat they are integrated into the community, for example because they have children in school, and so ultimately obtain a permanent residence permit;
Amendment 215 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Notes that a significant number of children are still detained in the European Union as part of return procedures, which constitutes a direct violation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, as the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child has clarified that children should never be detained for immigration purposes, and detention can never be justified as in a child’s best interests; is aware that these rights have a perverse effect in that parents are encouraged to send their children in advance to the desired country of migration; considers that as a result minors are exposed to greater danger during their journey to and stay in the country of arrival; maintains that it is in the interest of all children to discourage this form of child abuse by parents as much as possible; is also aware that adults often pretend to be minors in order to invoke children's rights;
Amendment 216 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Notes that a significant number of alleged children are still detained in the European Union as part of return procedures, which constitutes a direct violation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, as the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child has clarified that children should never be detained for immigration purposes, and detention can never be justified as in a child’s best interests; stresses that there should be mandatory procedures to detect adults pretending to be children, such as bone age assessments or dental age assessments, in order to be able to put more focus on real children’s best interest;
Amendment 226 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on Member States to ensure the proper implementation of the directive in all its aspects; calls on the Commission to continue monitoring this implementation and take action in the event of non- compliance;
Amendment 228 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
Amendment 232 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Commission to ensureonsiders that is the responsibility of thate Member States and Frontex have monitoring bodies in place that are supported by a proper mandate, capacity and competence, a high level of independence and expertise, and transparent procedures; urges the Commission to ensure the establishment of a post-return monitoring mechanism to understand the fate of returned persons, with particular attention for unaccompanied minto enforce the legislation and to ensure the actual return of persons who have been ordered to leave the territorsy;
Amendment 237 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Maintains that after arrival in their home countries, returnees are no longer the responsibility of the EU and the Member States but of their countries of origin; maintains further that development aid should be withheld from countries which refuse to take responsibility for their subjects;
Amendment 1 #
2019/2096(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 10 #
2019/2096(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 13 #
2019/2096(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. RegretNotes EASO’s strong reliance on interim workers to compensate for the lack of seconded national experts which Member States are obliged to send under the EASO Regulation; encourages the Office to follow up on the Court’s recommendation to analyse, together with the budgetary authorities, the cost- efficiency of external staff in relation to statutory staff and whether the applicable legal framework is fully complied with, especially as regards working conditions; considers in any case that the staffing of EASO should be increased to allow the Office toOffice is to perform properly perform its entrusted duties; welcomes, in this regard, the ambitious recruitment plan put in place in the meantime and its positive impact on the filling of vacant positions;
Amendment 2 #
2019/2083(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the important role of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (‘the Agency’), commonly referred to as Frontex, in promoting, coordinating and developing European integrated border managementprotection;
Amendment 9 #
2019/2083(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Nnotes the continuously high level of carry-overs to 2019 (EUR 83 million EUR or 29 %) and cancelled budget carry- overs (EUR 11 million or 12 %), which were linked to the challenges in meeting the establishment plan, the delay in the launch of the building of the new premises and the multi-annual nature of ICT projects and the overestimation of the scale and cost of activities by cooperating countries; expects the Agency and the cooperating states to improve their budget estimates with a view to decrease the carry-overs in 2019; welcomes the fact that the Agency has adopted new rules on whistleblowing, launched a new simplified financing scheme, introduced an ex-post control system covering all types of expenditure and modified its system of ex-ante checks; regrets, however, that the Agency has still not addressed the problem reported by the Court since 2014 with regard to insufficient proof of actual costs for equipment-related expenditure claimed by cooperating Member States; notes the steps taken by the Agency to address this issue but urges the Agency to adequately respond to the comments of the Court given that equipment-related expenditure amounted to EUR 60 million or 35 % of the Agency’s operational expenditure in 2018;
Amendment 17 #
2019/2083(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 22 #
2019/2083(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that the Agency should proactively provide information regarding its operational activities in order to protect it from unfounded accusations; invites the Agency to come to the LIBE committee to fulfil its specific reporting duties towards Members of the European Parliament by providing regular detailed briefings, where necessary in a non-public setting; calls on the Agency to make the report on the practical application of Regulation (EU) No 656/20142 for the year 2018 available, as it is legally obliged to do, and to provide more tangible information in the future to allow for a proper assessment of the Agency’s activities at sea. _________________ 2 Regulation (EU) No 656/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 establishing rules for the surveillance of the external sea borders in the context of operational cooperation coordinated by the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (HL L 189, 27.6.2014, p. 93).
Amendment 7 #
2019/2074(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Takes note of the Court’s finding that all payments pertaining to a three-year IT framework contract as well as related specific contracts (EUR 40,821 in 2018) are irregular since the contract worth EUR 450,000 with a company that had provided the same services under a previous framework contract was signed following a negotiated procedure but without prior publication of a contract notice; reminds that the Financial Regulation only allows for the use of a simplified procedure under specific circumstances which were not substantiated here; acknowledgedeems the answer of Eurojust, stressing the need to use a negotiated procedure given that a change of supplier would have resulted in technical and operational difficulties;, to be unsatisfactory and calls on Eurojust to take actions to prevent an over-dependency on a single IT supplier with a view to award future contracts in line with procedures foreseen by the Financial Regulation;
Amendment 1 #
2019/2068(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 130 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
Amendment 133 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) That European return policy should be based on common standards, for persons to be returned in a humane manner and with full respect for their fundamental rights and dignity , as well as international law, including refugee protection and human rights obligations. Clear, transparent and fair rules need to be established to provide for an effective return policy which serves as a deterrent to irregular migration and ensures coherence with and contributes to the integrity of the Common European Asylum System and the legal migration system. These common standards cannot, however, infringe in any way Member States’ sovereign right and obligation, in accordance with Article 15 of the ECHR amongst others, to defend and safeguard their territories and populations against the nefarious consequences of unfettered legal or illegal migration.
Amendment 139 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) That European return policy should be based on common standards, for persons to be returned in a humane manner and with full respect for their fundamental rights and dignity , as well as international law, including refugee protection and human rights obligations. Clear, transparent and fair rules need to be established to provide for an effective return policy which serves as a deterrent to irregularllegal migration and ensures coherence with and contributes to the integrity of the Common European Asylum System and the legal migration system. (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
Amendment 140 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) This Directive should establish a horizontal set of rules, applicable to all third-country nationals who do not or who no longer fulfil the conditions for entry, stay or residence in a Member State. These horizontal rules should not impede sovereign Member States from imposing stricter rules on third country citizens as befits each Member State’s particular social and economic situation.
Amendment 141 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Member States should ensure that the ending of illegal stay of third-country nationals is carried out through a fair and, final, transparent, and swift procedure. According to general principles of EU law, decisions taken under this Directive should be adopted on a case-by-case basis and based on objective criteria, implying that consideration should go beyond the mere fact of an illegal stay. When using standard forms for decisions related to return, namely return decisions and, if issued, entry-ban decisions and decisions on removal, Member States should respect that principle and fully comply with all applicable provisions of this Directive. Member States should not limit themselves to taking decisions but should also implement them, using all legal means at their disposal, including temporary detention preceding repatriation without delay.
Amendment 148 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The link between the decision on ending of the legal stay of a third-country national and, the issuing of a return decision and its actual execution 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 immand executedi ately after the same time as 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, provided that the return procedure is suspended until that rejection becomes final and pending the outcome of an appeal against that rejection. There should be only one possibility of appeal, and there should be prima facie procedural reasons for declaring an appeal admissible.
Amendment 154 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) The need for Union and bilateral readmission agreements with third countries to facilitate the return process is underlined. International cooperation with countries of origin at all stages of the return process is a prerequisite to achieving sustainable return. Third countries that refuse to readmit their own nationals should bear the financial consequences of that decision.
Amendment 157 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) It is recognised that it is legitimate for Member States to return illegally staying third-country nationals, provided that fair and efficient asylum systems are in place which fully respect the principle of non-refoulement. In the interests of fairness and efficiency, asylum systems should be limited to applications by nationals of (allegedly) unsafe countries.
Amendment 167 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) To ensure clearer anda 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 greturn policy, the Member States will take sovereign decisions on a case-by-case basis, determining whether there is or there is not a risk of absconding based on objective criteria. Since Member States’ social and economic situations can differ substantially, this Directive shounld for a rebuttable presumption that abe limited to providing examples of criteria to allow the risk of absconding existsto be determined.
Amendment 176 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Where there are no reasons to believe that the granting of a period for volIn the interests of legal certainty, the equal treatment of all third-countary 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 grantednationals awaiting repatriation and the efficiency of asylum systems, forced return should be preferred over voluntary return. In exceptional individual circumstances, a sovereign Member State may opt for a period for voluntary departure. 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.
Amendment 185 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
Amendment 193 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
Amendment 200 #
2018/0329(COD)
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 five 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 207 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) The appeal against a return decision that is based on a decision rejecting an application for international protection which was already subject to an effective judicial remedy should take place before a single level of jurisdiction only, since the third-county national concerned would have already had his or her individual situation examined and decided upon by a judicial authority in the context of the asylum procedurbe declared inadmissible.
Amendment 215 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) An appeal against a return decision should have an automatic suspensive effect only in cases where there is a risk of breach of the principle of non-refoulement. An appeal against a return decision is only admissible if the appellant has voluntarily entered secure detention pending the outcome of the appeal.
Amendment 229 #
2018/0329(COD)
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 assessment of the risk to breach the principle of non- refoulement already took place andor 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 237 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) The situation of third-country nationals who are staying illegally but who cannot yet be removed should be addressed. Their basic conditions of subsistence should be defined according to national legislation. In order to be able to demonstrate their specific situation in the event of administrative controls or checks, such persons should be provided with written confirmakept in secure detention awaiting repatriation, so that their basic conditions of their situation. Member States should enjoy wide discretion concerning the form and format of the written confirmation and should also be able to include it in decisions related to return adopted under this Directivesubsistence can be met, and the asylum system can be run fairly and efficiently.
Amendment 242 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) The effects of national return measures should be given a European dimension by establishing an entry ban prohibiting entry into and stay on the territory of all the Member States. The length of the entry ban should be determined with due regard to all relevant circumstances of an individual case and should not normally exceed five, with a minimum duration of 20 years. In this context, particular account should be taken of the factaggravating circumstances, i.e. that the third-country national concerned has already been the subject of more than one return decision or removal order or has entered the territory of a Member State during an entry ban.
Amendment 262 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Detention should be imposed, following an individual assessment of each case,the default option, especially 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 country national concerned poses a risk to public policy, public security or national security.
Amendment 292 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
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 shouldA period for voluntary departure may in exceptional circumstances 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.
Amendment 300 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) For a rapid treatment of the case, a maximum time limit is to be granted to appeal against a return decision followingat the latest together with a decision rejecting an application for international protection adopted under the border procedure and which became final.
Amendment 302 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
Recital 35
Amendment 320 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) Cooperation between the sovereign Member States, cooperation between the institutions involved at all levels in the return process and the exchange and promotion of best practices, including by taking into account and regularly updating the Return Handbook to reflect legal and policy developments, should accompany the implementation of this Directive and provide European added value.
Amendment 326 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
Recital 42
Amendment 327 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) In line with the 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, the ‘best interests of the child’ should be a primary consideration of Member States when implementing this Directive. In line with the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, respect for family life should be a primary consideration of Member States when implementing this Directive. However, these rights should not be abused in order to circumvent or weaken the asylum system.
Amendment 369 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7
7. ‘risk of absconding’ means the existence of reasons in an individual case which are based on objective criteria defined by law to believe that a third- country national who is the subject of return procedures may abscond;
Amendment 374 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. This Directive shall be without prejudice to more favourable provisions of:
Amendment 375 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Amendment 376 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. This Directive shall be without prejudice to the right of the Member States to adopt or maintain provisions that are more favourable or more stringent to persons to whom it applies provided that such provisions are compatible with this Directive.
Amendment 385 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(c a) the rights of their own population
Amendment 490 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall issue a return decision and a detention order to any third-country national staying illegally on their territory, without prejudice to the exceptions referred to in paragraphs 2 to 5.
Amendment 497 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Amendment 501 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 5
Article 8 – paragraph 5
5. If a third-country national staying illegally on the territory of a Member State is the subject of a pending procedure for renewing his or her residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay, that Member State shall consider refraining from issuing a return decision, until the pending procedure is finisheda return decision shall terminate that procedure.
Amendment 522 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 525 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 529 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Amendment 550 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall take all necessary measures to enforce the return decision if no period for voluntary departure has been granted in accordance with Article 9(4) or if the obligation to return has not been complied with within the period for voluntary departure granted in accordance with Article 9. Those measures shall include all measures necessary. Those measures shall include all measures necessary for the detention of the person of illegally staying third- country nationals and to confirm the identity of illegally staying third-country nationals who do not hold a valid travel document and to obtain such a document.
Amendment 554 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. Member States may adopt a separate administrative or judicial decision or act ordering the removalshould also order removal in the return decision.
Amendment 556 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. Where Member States use — as a last resort — coercive measures to carry out the removal of a third-country national who resists removal, such measures shall be proportionate and shall not exceed reasonable force. They shall be implemented as provided for in national legislation in accordance with fundamental rights and with due respect for the dignity and physical integrity of the third-country national concerned.
Amendment 563 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 565 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 569 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Amendment 577 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Amendment 595 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. The length of the entry ban shall be determined with due regard to all relevant circumstances of the individual case and shall not in principle exceed fivebe at least twenty years. It may however exceed fivetwenty years if the third- country national represents a serious threat to public policy, public security or national security.
Amendment 596 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 598 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 600 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 5
Article 13 – paragraph 5
5. Where aA Member State is consideringcan not issuinge a residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay to a third-country national who is the subject of an entry ban issued by another Member State, it shall first consult the Member State having issued the entry ban in accordance with Article 27 of Regulation (EU) 2018/XXX 29 . _________________ 29Regulation (EU) 2018/… of the European Parliament and of the Council of […] on the establishment, operation and use of the Schengen Information System (SIS) in the field of border checks, and amending the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement, and amending and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 [has yet to be adopted].
Amendment 610 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall decide for themselves whether to establish programmes for providing logistical, financial and other material or in-kind assistance, in accordance with national legislation, for the purpose of supporting the return of illegally staying third-country nationals who are nationals of third countries listed in Annex I to Council Regulation 539/200130. _________________ 30Council Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 of 15 March 2001 listing the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are exempt from that requirement (OJ L 81, 21.3.2001, p. 1).
Amendment 631 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Member States shall make available generalised information sheets explaining the main elements of the standard form in at least five of those languages which are most frequently used or understood by illegal migrants entering the Member State concernedmajor world languages.
Amendment 632 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – title
Article 16 – title
Amendment 638 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The third-country national concerned shall be granted the right to appeal before no more than one level of jurisdiction only against the return decision,with no possibility of resumption of proceedings, where that decision is based on a decision rejecting an application for international protection taken in accordance with Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation] that was subject to an effective judicial review in accordance with Article 53 of that Regulation.
Amendment 642 #
2018/0329(COD)
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 the 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 breach the principle of non- refoulement. Should aThe possibility of further appeal against a first or subsequent appeal decision be lodged, and in all other cases, the enforcement of the return decision shall not be suspended unless a court or tribunal decides otherwise taking into due account the specific circumstances of the individual case upon the applicant’s request or acting ex officion appeal decision is not necessary.
Amendment 662 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 6
Article 16 – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall ensure that the necessary legal assistance and/or representation is granted on request free of charge in accordance with relevant national legislation or rules regarding legal aid, and may provide that such free legal assistance and/or representation is subject to conditions as set out in Article 15(3) to (6) of Directive 2005/85/EC. Recognised refugees may be asked to reimburse the cost of legal and linguistic assistance to the Member State.
Amendment 667 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The principles underpinning 1 a. to d. do not exclude this being achieved in police custody.
Amendment 688 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Detention shall be ordered by administrative or judicial authorities at the same time as the return decision.
Amendment 709 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 4
Article 19 – paragraph 4
4. Relevant and competent national, international and non-governmental organisations and bodies shall have the possibility to visit detention facilities, as referred to in paragraph 1, to the extent that they are being used for detaining third- country nationals in accordance with this Chapter. Such visits may be subject to authorisation.
Amendment 719 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Unaccompanied minors and families with minors shall only be detained as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriatbe repatriated as a matter of priority in order to reduce the period of timedetention.
Amendment 745 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 4
Article 22 – paragraph 4
4. A period for voluntary departure shall not be granted. Member States shall however in exceptional circumstances grant an appropriate period for voluntary departure in accordance with Article 9 to third-country nationals holding a valid travel document and fulfilling the obligation to cooperate with the competent authorities of the Member States at all stages of the return procedures established in accordance with paragraph 7. Member States shall require the third-country nationals concerned to hand over the valid travel document to the competent authority until departure.
Amendment 746 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 5
Article 22 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall grant a period of time not exceeding 48 hours to lodge an appeal against the return decisions based on a, which shall always be issued at the same time as the final decision rejecting an application for international protection taken by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation] at the border or in transit zones of the Member States.
Amendment 749 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 22 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) sufficiently serious new elements or findings have arisen or have been presented by the third -country national concerned after a decision rejecting an application for international protection taken by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation], which significantly modify the specific circumstances of the individual case and which could not in any way have already been brought to the knowledge of the third-country national concerned; or
Amendment 42 #
2016/0132(COD)
(4a) Moreover, for the purposes of effectively applying Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management] and in accordance with the rules thereof, it is necessary to clearly mark in Eurodac the fact that there has been a shift of responsibility between Member States, including in cases of relocation. Furthermore, in order to reflect accurately the obligations Member States have to conduct search and rescue operations and to help these Member States with the specific challenges they face as they cannot apply to persons disembarked following such operations the same tools as for irregularllegal crossings by land or air, it is also necessary to register third-country nationals or stateless persons disembarked following search and rescue operations as a separate category in Eurodac.
Amendment 46 #
2016/0132(COD)
(4ba) This proposal is to be seen as a step towards a necessary DNA database in order to establish unequivocally the identity of migrants.
Amendment 47 #
2016/0132(COD)
Amendment 48 #
2016/0132(COD)
(4bc) In addition to this deliberate mutilation, fingerprints also become less accurate due to the ageing process of the skin. The elasticity of the skin decreases, the edges become harder, the fingertip becomes thinner. The quality of the fingerprint therefore deteriorates. 1a __________________ 1a https://www.scientificamerican.com/articl e/lose-your-fingerprints/
Amendment 49 #
2016/0132(COD)
(4bd) Third country nationals and stateless persons, as well as their representatives and interest organisations, are obliged to act in accordance with the objectives of this requirement. In case of proof of fraud, fraudsters shall lose present and future substantive and procedural rights relating to asylum, migration, residence, family reunification and acquisition of nationality, without prejudice to the possible application of criminal law by the Member State concerned.
Amendment 59 #
2016/0132(COD)
(5c) Likewise, for the purpose of managing irregularllegal migration, it is necessary to allow eu-LISA to produce cross-system statistics using data from Eurodac, the Visa Information System, ETIAS and the Entry/Exit System. In order to specify the content of these cross-system statistics, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by the Member States of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers.’;
Amendment 66 #
2016/0132(COD)
(14) Moreover, in order for Eurodac to effectively assist with the control of irregularllegal migration and with the detection of secondary movements within the EU, it is necessary to allow the system to count applicants in addition to applications by linking all sets of data corresponding to one person, regardless of their category, in one sequence.’;
Amendment 78 #
2016/0132(COD)
(c) assist with the control of irregularllegal immigration to the Union and with the detection of secondary movements within the Union and with the identification of illegally staying third-country nationals and stateless persons for determining the appropriate measures to be taken by Member States ;