Activities of Jean-Paul GARRAUD related to 2021/0428(COD)
Plenary speeches (1)
Schengen Borders Code (A9-0280/2023 - Sylvie Guillaume) (vote)
Amendments (21)
Amendment 92 #
Proposal for a regulation
–
–
The European Parliament rejects the Commission proposal.
Amendment 127 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Instrumentalisation of migrants can refer to situations where irregular travel of third country nationals has been actively encouraged or facilitated by a third country onto its own territory to reach the external border of the Member States but can equally refer to the active encouragement or facilitation of irregular travel of third country nationals already present in that third country. Instrumentalisation of migrants may also entail the imposition of coercive measures, intended to prevent the third country nationals from leaving the border areas of the instrumentalising third country, in a direction other than through a Member State. Instrumentalisation of migrants may also apply to action taken by NGOs to facilitate the irregular travel of third country nationals towards the European Union;
Amendment 131 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The Union should mobilise all tools from its toolbox of diplomatic, financial and operational measures to support the Member States confronted with instrumentalisation. Diplomatic efforts by the Union or the Member State concerned, should be given priority as the means of addressing the phenomenon of instrumentalisation. This may be supplemented, where appropriate, by the imposition of restrictive measures by the Union. This includes a ban on EU funding for NGOs instrumentalising migrants;
Amendment 154 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) In an area without internal border controls, persons should be able to move freely, and in security between Member States. In this regard, it should be clarified that the prohibition of controls at internal borders does not affect the competence ofthe possibility for Member States to carry out checks on their territory, including at their internal borders, for purposes other than border controlas well as border controls, should be clarified. It should, in particular, be clarified that national competent authorities, including health or law enforcement authorities, remain, in principle, free to carry out checks in the exercise of public powers provided for under national law.
Amendment 158 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) While the prohibition of internal border controls also extends to checks having equivalent effects, checks by competent authorities should not be considered equivalent to the exercise of border checks where they do not have border control as an objective,Checks by competent authorities must be authorised where they are based on general information and experience of the competent authorities regarding possible threats to public security or public policy, including where they aim to combat irregular stay or residence and cross-border crimes linked to irregular migration, where they are devised and executed in a manner clearly distinct from systematic checks on persons at the external borders, and where they are conducted at transport hubs, such as ports, train or bus stations and airports or directly on board of passenger transport services, and where they are based on risk analysis.
Amendment 166 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) While iIrregular migratory flows should not, per se, be considered to be a threat to public policy or internal security, they may and require additional measures to ensure the functioning of the Schengen area.
Amendment 171 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) The combatting of illegal residence or stay and of cross-border crime linked to irregular migration such as human trafficking, migrant smuggling and document fraud and other forms of cross- border crime could in particular encompass measures allowing the verification of the identity, nationality and residence status of persons provided that such verifications are non-systematic and carried out on the basis of risk analysis.
Amendment 174 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) The use of modern technologies to monitor traffic flows, notably on motorways and other important roads determined by the Member States, can be instrumental in addressing threats to public policy or internal security. The prohibition of iInternal border controls should not be understood as preventing the lawful exercise of police or other public powers to carry out checks in the internal border areas. This includes checks that entail the use of monitoring and surveillance technologies which are generally used in the territory or that are based on a risk assessment for the purpose of protecting internal security. The use of such technologies for checks should therefore not be considered as equivalent to border controls.
Amendment 180 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The prohibition of bBorder controls at internal borders should not limit the carrying out of checks provided for in other instruments of Union law. The rules provided for in this Regulation, should not therefore, affect the applicable rules regarding the carrying out of checks on passenger data against relevant databases in advance of arrival.
Amendment 181 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
Amendment 192 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) The procedure by which a Member State may transfer apprehended illegally staying third country nationals to a Member State from where the person came directly should take place swiftly but be subject to safeguards and carried out in full respect of fundamental rights and the principle of non-discrimination enshrined in Article 21 of the Charter, to prevent racial profiling. It should be possible for the authorities to carry out a verification of relevant information immediately available to the authorities concerning the movements of the persons concerned. Such information may include objective elements that would allow the authorities to conclude that the person had recently travelled from another Member States, such as the possession of documents, including receipts or invoices, evidencing recent travel from another Member State. Third country nationals subject to the transfer procedure should be provided with a reasoned decision in writing. While the decision should be immediately enforceable, the third country national should be afforded an effective remedy to appeal against or seek review of the transfer decision. This remedy should not have suspensive effect.
Amendment 209 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
Amendment 213 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
Amendment 218 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) The establishment of the new Schengen area safeguard mechanism should not affect the right of Member States to have prior recourse to unilateral measures in accordance with the Regulation, where the situation so requires. However, oOnce adopted, the Union measure shcould become the singl the basis for a coordinated response to the threat identified.
Amendment 220 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) In order to ensure compliance with the principle of proportionality, the decision of the Council should be adopted for a limited period of time of up to six months that may be prolonged subject to regular review upon a proposal from the Commission, as long as the threat is found to persist. The initial decision should include an assessment of the expected impact of the measures adopted, including its adverse side-effects, with a view to determining if controls at internal borders are justified or whether less restrictive measures could be applied in their place in an effective manner. Subsequent decisions should take account of the evolution of the identified threatto reintroduce controls should be adopted for as long as the threat persists. The Member States should immediately notify the Commission and the Member States of the reintroduction of internal border controls in accordance with the decision of the Council.
Amendment 227 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
Amendment 243 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) The notification to be provided by the Member States should be decisive when assessing compliance with the criteria and conditions for a temporary reintroduction of internal border controls. In order to ensure a comparable set of information, the Commission should adoptmay propose a template for the notification of reintroduction of border controls at internal borders in an implementing act. Member States should be entitled to classify all or parts of the information provided in the notification, without prejudice to the functioning of appropriate and secure police cooperation channels.
Amendment 248 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
Amendment 255 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
Amendment 266 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) The Commission and Member States should retain the possibility to express any concern as regards the necessity and proportionality of a decision of a Member State to reintroduce internal border controls for reason of urgency or to address a foreseeable threat. In case controls at internal borders are reintroduced and prolonged for foreseeable threats for combined periods exceeding eighteen months, it should be a requirement for the Commission tomay issue an opinion assessing the necessity and proportionality of such internal border controls. Where a Member State considers that there are exceptional situations justifying the continued need for internal border controls for a period exceeding two years, the Commission shouldmay issue a follow-up opinion. Such an opinion is without prejudice to the enforcement measures, including infringement actions, which the Commission may take at any time against any Member State for failure to comply with its obligations under Union law. Where an opinion is issued, the Commission should launch consultations with the Member States concerned.
Amendment 272 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
Recital 45