Activities of Damien CARÊME related to 2019/2206(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the implementation of the Dublin III Regulation
Amendments (30)
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 3
Citation 3
— having regard to Articles 1, 2, 3, 4, and 18, 19 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4
Citation 4
— having regard to Articles 2, 3, 5, 8 and 813 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR),
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)
Citation 6 a (new)
— having regard to the UN Global Compact on Refugees,
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas 2.5 million people applied for asylum in the European Union in the period 2015-2016, a fourfold increase676 300 people or 0.13% of the total population of the EU applied for asylum in the European Union in 2019, an increase of 1.2% compared to 2018 and a decrease of 420% compared to 2012-20135;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas one-third of the Member States currently play host to 90% of asylum seek, as a consequence of implementation of Article 13, according to which it is the responsibility of the Member State of first entry to examine an asylum application, responsibilities are not distributed fairly among the Member States; whereas one-third of the Member States currently play host to 90% of asylum seekers; whereas some Member States have transferred roughly the same number of asylum seekers as they have received from other Member States, in practice thereby largely negating the redistributive effect of Dublin transfers;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas in the case of most asylum applications the provisions on the hierarchy of criteria and the deadlines laid down as part of the Dublin procedures are not metproperly implemented and transfers are not carried out; whereas in situations involving children and families, these shortcomings are particularly harmful to the best interests of the child and the right of asylum seekers to family reunification;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas data on the implementation of the Dublin Regulation demonstrate a systematic inability to correctly apply the provisions on families and the principle of the primacy of the best interests of the child, which results in pointless, unreasonable transfer procedures; whereas effective implementation of Articles 16 and 17 of the Regulation might ensure the effectiveness of asylum seekers' right to family life and family unity;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas only very limited use has been made by the Member States of the humanitarian and discretionary clauses in the Regulation;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that the Dublin system places a significant burden on a minority of Member States, in particular when influxes of migrants occurcurrent Dublin Regulation imposes a disproportionate responsibility on a minority of Member States; takes the view that the EU therefore needs a sustainable solidarity mechanism which makes for fair sharing of burdens and responsibility among Member States, including through relocation on the basis of objective criteria of asylum seekers who are manifestly eligible for asyluma fair distribution of asylum seekers;
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that ad hoc agreements are no substitute for a harmonised and sustainable policy at EU level; deplores the fact that efforts to overhaul the Dublin III Regulation have been blocked in the Council, in spite of the well-documented failings of the Regulation; takes the view that the blocking might be interpreted as a violation of the principle of mutual sincere cooperation between the EU institutions as set out in Article 13(2) TEU, also in view of the fact that the Council has always sought unanimous agreement even though a qualified majority would suffice; draws attention to the adoption by the European Parliament on 6 November 2017 of the report on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (recast) and calls on the Commission and the Council to take up Parliament's call, as a matter of urgency, for a sustainable, human and solidarity- based policy for the distribution of responsibilities at EU level, in line with the aforementioned report;
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. CNotes the very infrequent application of Article 17(2) and calls on the Member States to make better use of the discretionary clause in Article 17 when exceptional circumstances so warrant, for example to relocate asylum seekers currently living in the Greek hotspots in an atmosphere of extreme tension and to provide decentignified reception conditions;
Amendment 135 #
4a. Urges the Member States, with the support of the Commission, to structure the Dublin units efficiently and to boost their human resources with the aim of improving the Dublin procedures, particularly those dealing with family reunification;
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Highlights the significant operational backmany challenges involved with implementing forthe Dublin procedures provided byRegulation and notes that the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) in the hotspotprovides crucial support to Member States' authorities in implementing the Dublin procedures; calls on the Commission and the Member States to facilitate the work of EASO staff by allowingensure that interviews take place in a language other than that of the country in which they are conductewhich asylum seekers understand; calls for the establishment of a European Asylum Agency, with sufficient financial and human resources;
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Points out that the protection of fundamental rights must be at the heart of the measures taken to implement the Dublin III Regulation, including the protection of children, victims of trafficking and the mostall other vulnerable people;
Amendment 168 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Notes that, as set out in Article 28, detention of asylum seekers under the Dublin procedures may take place only as a last resort, only if it complies with the proportionality principle and no alternative and less coercive measure can be efficiently applied in order to ensure the transfer procedures can be carried out, and if there is a serious risk of absconding;
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Commission to monitor compliance with the hierarchy of criteria more closely; regards it as essential to clarify the conditions for applying the family reunification criterion and to harmonisegive priority, as set out in Article 7, to the application of Articles 8, 9 and 10 as the main criteria for determining the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application, in order to ensure the effectiveness of the right to family unity and reunification and to harmonise and increase the flexibility of the standard of proof required; calls on the Member States and the Commission to always prioritise and protect the best interests of children and to clarify the criteria for keeping children in detentionnotes that, in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and the recommendations of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, detaining children in the context of migration management is never in their best interests;
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Stresses that transfers under the Dublin Regulation must never expose people to the risk of refoulement;
Amendment 204 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that the number of transfer procedures has increased significantly, generating considerable human, material and financial costs; deplorespoints out, however, the fact that in only 11% of cases are transfers actually carried out, a further factor in the permanent overloading of asylum systemsat transfers are carried out in only 11% of cases, which clearly demonstrates the inefficiency of the Dublin Regulation; stresses the lack of cooperation and information-sharing between Member States; regards efforts to combat secondary movements as essentialguarantee access to in forder to reduce the number of transfer requests; proposes that the conditions which trigger transfer procedures be clarified and harmonisedmation and swift procedures for family reunification and the transfer of asylum seekers as essential;
Amendment 215 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers that in some cases the rules on transfer of responsibility under Dublin III undermine the efficiency of asylum procedures and the carrying-out of transfers and contribute to the increase in the number of secondary movements by encouraging asylum-seekers to remain outside the system, incorrect application of the rules on the hierarchy of criteria, particularly regarding family reunification and the situation of unaccompanied children, puts the efficiency of asylum procedures at risk and helps increase the danger of absconding; stresses that requests for transfers are rarely successful, which leaves asylum seekers in an unnecessarily uncertain situation and runs counter to the objective of the Dublin Regulation, which aims to ensure efficient, effective access to asylum procedures; calls on the Commission to revistackle the rules, main failing order to give Member States sufficient time to carry out transfers and do away with transfer of responsibility in casesf the Dublin Regulation, namely the automatic assigning of the responsibility for examining asylum applications to the country of first entry, and to propose a system where anby asylum seeker abscondss' existing connections to some Member States are duly taken into consideration;
Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Considers thatUrges the Member States, with the support of the Commission and the European Asylum Support Office, to providinge asylum seekerapplicants with clegal assistance in connecar and accessible information wion the Dublin procedures, inwith particular in the hotspots, would simplify the process of obtainregard to family reunification, ing asylum and improve decision-making; calls on thccordance with Articles 4 and 26 of the Regulation, and access to an effective Mrember States to improve the information made available to asylum seekers on the complex Dublin procedures, to ensure that it is clear and accessible to everyedy and legal assistance, in accordance with Article 27; considers that providing asylum seekers with legal assistance in connection with Dublin procedures would facilitate the proper functioning of the Dublin Regulatione;
Amendment 234 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 4
Subheading 4
Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses that the principle of a single asylum application in the EU is consistently flouted, a state of affairs at odds with the very purposeIs particularly preoccupied by incorrect application of the Dublin Regulation, especially in terms of the hierarchy of criteria and the use of humanitarian and discretionary clauses, which partly explains the irregular movements of asylum applicants, as the system takes no account of the family and social links of applicants with some Member States or of preoccupations linked to protection or health when responsibility for examining an asylum application is designated to a particular Member State; considers that, in accordance with Recital 30, the Eurodac system, set up by Regulation (EU) No 603/2013, should facilitate the proper application of the Dublin III Regulation; consider and regrets that, on the competent national authorities should share their relevant information on a European database such as Eurodac, in order to speed up procedures and prevent multiple asylum applications, while protecting personal datantrary, the facts show that the Member States often pay no heed to the hierarchy of criteria set out in Article 7 of the Regulation, preferring the more automatic application of the 'positive results' of Eurodac to determine a responsible Member State, without conducting a prior assessment of the applicability of criteria which should normally take priority, such as family unity; stresses that this gap aggravates failings in the proper application of the Dublin Regulation as a whole;
Amendment 243 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 256 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Takes the view thatUrges closer cooperation between national asylum authorities is needed, in order to share information and streamline transferharmonise best practices; proposes that EASO be given the task of drawing up enhanced governance arrangements for the application of the Dublin III Regulation, including a monthly operational dialogue between national authorities, and a platform for the exchange and sharing of information and best practices;
Amendment 258 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to include, among the sources used to monitor implementation of the Regulation, reliable, up-to-date information provided by international organisations and NGOs, particularly in order to identify possible illegal practices;
Amendment 260 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 272 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 283 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Urges the Commission and the Council to work towards convergence in the bilateral agreements concluded between Member States and with third countries, in orderMember States to take measures to optimise effective implementation of the Dublin III Regulation and the related guarantees;