[ParlTrack]

Proposal for a regulation
–

The European Parliament rejects the Commission proposal.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20a (new)

(20a) In applying this Regulation, Member States must respect their international obligations towards stateless persons, including under the Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, signed in New York on 28 September 1954, and in accordance with other international human rights law instruments, and take into account their particular protection needs and circumstances.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20 b new

(20b) In order to guarantee a fair procedure, applicants should be have the right to free legal assistance at all stages of the procedure, as soon as the application for international protection is made. In case of individuals residing or being held in facilities operated by Member States, there should be immediate and unhindered access of legal practitioners to individuals in such facilities, including in quarantine sites. Free legal aid should also be guaranteed to challenge any detention order or restriction of movement restrictions. The information handled in these cases must be processed in accordance with the relevant data protection legislation.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31a

(31a) In order to increase the efficiency of procedures and to reduce the risk of absconding and the likelihood of unauthorised movements, there should be no procedural gaps between the issuance of a negative decision on an application for international protection and of a return decision. A return decision should immediately be issued to applicants whose applications are rejected. Without prejudice to the right to an effective remedy, the return decision should either be part of the negative decision on an application for international protection or, if it is a separate act, be issued at the same time and together with the negative decision.’deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31a a (new)

(31a a)In the interest of a full examination of the specific situation of each applicant, in the case of a final rejection of an application for international protection, Member States should check whether the applicant fulfils the conditions to apply for a residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay for compassionate, humanitarian or other grounds under the applicable national legal framework. Particular attention should be paid to vulnerable persons including victims of torture and inhumane and degrading treatment, gender-based violence, minors when it is not in their best interest to be returned, persons with PTSD symptoms and stateless persons.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39a

(39a) ‘In the interest of swift and fair procedures for all applicants, whilst also ensuring that the stay of applicants who do not qualify for international protection in the Union is not unduly prolonged, including those who are nationals of third countries exempt from the requirement to be in a possession of a visa pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 2018/1806, Member States should accelerate the examination of applications of applicants who are nationals or, in the case of stateless persons, formerly habitual residents of a third country for which the share of decisions granting international protection is lower than 20% of the total number of decisions for that third country. Where a significant change has occurred in the third country concerned since the publication of the relevant Eurostat data and taking into account the guidance note pursuant to Article 10 of Regulation XX/XX on the European Asylum Agency, or where the applicant belongs to a specific category of persons for whom the low recognition rate cannot be considered as representative of their protection needs due to a specific persecution ground, examination of the application should not be accelerated. Cases where a third country may be considered as a safe country of origin or a safe third country for the applicant within the meaning of this Regulation should remain applicable as a separate ground for respectively the accelerated examination procedure or the inadmissible procedure.deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40

(40) ‘Many applications for international protection are made at the external border or in a transit zone of a Member State~~, often~~ including by persons apprehended in connection with unauthorised crossings of the external border or disembarked following a search and rescue operation. In order to conduct identification, security and health screening at the external border and direct the third-country nationals and stateless persons concerned to the relevant procedures, a screening is necessary. There should be seamless and efficient links between all stagescompliance with the principle of non- refoulement, upon a claim to ask for international protection, the applicants shall be allowed entry to the territory of the Member State and apply for international protection ofn the ~~relevant procedures for all irregular arrivals. After the screening, third- country nationals and stateless pers~~territory of the Member State. When a minor is concerned, a return decisions should ~~be channelled to the appropriate asylum or return procedure, or refused entry. A pre-entry phase consisting of screening and border procedures for asylum and return should therefore be established.’~~only be adopted if the return is found to be in the best interests of the child according to a best interests procedure.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40a

(40a) ‘ The purpose of the border procedure for asylum ~~and return~~ should be to quickly assess at the external borders wthe Member State responsible for ther applications are unfounded or inadmissible and to swiftly return those with no right to stay, while ensuring that those with well-founded claims are channelled into the regular procedure and provided quick access to international protection. Member States should therefore be able to require applicants for international protection to stay at the external border or in a transit zone for international protection. After the determination of the Member State responsible, applicants should be channelled into the regular procedure and provided quick access to international protection. In situations of crisis, the border procedure should be expanded to grant prima facie international protection to applicants of a specific country of origin or part(s) of it or with regard to specific groups of applicants in order to fas~~sess the admissibility of~~t-track their well-founded applications. In well-defined circumstances, Member States ~~should be able to provide~~may provide exceptionally for the examination of the merits of an application ~~and, in the event of rejection of the application, for the return~~of the third-country nationals concerned at the external borders. During the examination period of asylum applications subject to a border procedure, liberty should be the norm. If a Member State would restrict the movement of ~~the~~ third- country nationals ~~and stateless persons concerned at the external borders.~~ in a border procedure, it must be determined to be necessary, reasonable and proportionate to a legitimate purpose and a measure of last resort. The decision of a Member State to restrict movement or place in detention must be reviewed with the least possible delay by a judicial or other independent authority and be subject to the right to appeal. The necessity to restrict movements or maintain in detention must be reviewed periodically. Individuals should have access to free legal aid to challenge any decision concerning their detention or any restriction of movements.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40b

(40b) Member State ~~should~~may assess applications in a border procedure where the applicant is a danger to national security ~~or public order, where the applicant has misled the authorities by presenting false information or documents or by withholding relevant information or documents with respect to his~~. The applicant should be able to challenge this decision and their legal representative be able to access the key elements from their files in or hder ~~identity or nationality that could have had a negative impact on the decision and where it is likely that the application is unfounded be~~to guarantee the right to effective remedy of the applicant. In causes when the applicant is of a nationality for whom decisions granting international protection is lower than 20% of the total number of decisions for that third country. In other cases, such as when the applicant is from a safe country of origin or a safe third country, the use of the border procedure should be optional fassessed by the Member state as being from a safe country of origin or a safe third country, the border procedure should not be applied by the Member State. A border procedure should never be applied to minors or othe ~~Member States~~r applicants in a vulnerable situation.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40c

(40c) When applying the border procedure for the examination of an application for international protection, Member States should ensure that the necessary arrangements are made to accommodate the applicants ~~at or close to the external border or transit zones,~~ in accordance with Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Reception Conditions Directive]. Member States may process the applications at a different location at the external border than that where the asylum application is made by transferring applicants to a specific location at or in the proximity of the external border of that Member States where appropriate facilities exist. Member States should retain discretion in deciding at which specific locations at the external borders such facilities should be set up. However, Member States should seek to limit the need for transfewhere appropriate facilities exist. Vulnerable groups and applicants with special procedural guarantees, especially children, should be immediately referred to adequate accommodation. Member States should notify the Commission of the specific locations where the border procedures will be carried out. Member States should ensure that the necessary arriang ~~applicants for this purpose, and therefore aim at setting up such facilities with sufficient capacity~~ements are made to accommodate the applicants at bor~~der~~ crlos~~sing points, or sections of the external border, where the majority of the number of applications for international protection are made, also taking into account the length of~~e to the external border or transit zones, in accordance with article 7 of the Reception Conditions Directive, which states that applicants may move freely within the exter~~nal border and the number of border crossing points or transit zones. They should notify the Commission of the specific locations at the external border, transit zones or proximity of the extern~~ritory of the host Member State or within an area assigned to them by that Member State. The assigned area shall not affect the unalienable sphere of private life and shall allow sufficient scope for guaranteeing access to all b~~order where the border procedures will be carried out~~enefits under this Directive. In cases where the border procedure is applied ~~and the capacity of the locations~~ at or in proximity of the external border a~~s notified by a Member State~~nd that the capacity of the locations is temporarily exceeded, Member States ~~may~~should process those applications at another location within its territory~~, for the shortest time possible~~.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40d

(40d) ~~In case where the use of the border procedure is an obligation, Member States should by way of exception not be required to apply it~~Member States should not apply the border procedure for the examination of applications for international protection from nationals of a third country or a “safe” third country that does not cooperate sufficiently on readmission, since a swift return of the persons concerned, following rejection of their applications, would be unlikely in that case. The determination of whether a third country is cooperating sufficiently on readmission should be based on the procedures set out in Article 25a of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40e

(40e) The duration of the border procedure for examination of applications for international protection should be as short as possible while at the same time guaranteeing a complete and fair examination of the claims. It should in any event not exceed 12 weeks. This deadline should be understood as a stand-alone deadline for the asylum border procedure, encompassing both the decision on the examination of the application as well as the decision of the first level of appeal, if applicable. Within this period, Member States are entitled to set the deadline in national law both for the administrative and for the appeal stage, but should set them in a way so as to ensure that the examination procedure is concluded and that subsequently, if relevant, the decision on the first level of appeal is issued within this maximum 12 week. After that period, if the Member State nevertheless failed to take the relevant decisions, the applicant should ~~in principle~~ be authorised to enter the territory of the Member State. Entry into the territory should however not be authorised where the applicant has no right to remain, where he or she has not requested to be allowed to remain for the purpose of an appeal procedure, or where a court or tribunal has decided that he or she should not be allowed to remain pending the outcome of an appeal procedure. In such cases, to ensure continuity between the asylum procedure and the return procedure, the return procedure should also be carried out in the context of a border procedure for a period not exceeding 12 weeks. This period should be counted starting from the moment in which the applicant, third- country national or stateless person no longer has a right to remain or is no longer allowed to remain.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40f

(40f) While the border procedure for the examination of an application for international protection ~~can~~should be applied without recourse to detention, Member States ~~should nevertheless be able to~~may exceptionally apply the grounds for detention during the border procedure in accordance with the provisions of the [Reception Conditions] Directive (EU) XXX/XXX in order to decide on the right of the applicant to enter the territory, based on an individualised assessment of its necessity and proportionality and if no other sufficient but less coercive measures can be applied effectively in a specific case. Minors and individuals in a situation of vulnerability should never be detained. If detention is used during such procedure, the provisions on detention of the [Reception Conditions] Directive (EU) XXX/XXX should apply, including the guarantees for detained applicants and the fact that an individual assessment of each case is necessary, judicial control and conditions of detention. A decision to detain an applicant during a border procedure should never be automatic. Such decisions should always be based on an individual assessment of each case that shows that detention is necessary and proportionate, that detention would not disproportionately harm the applicant and that less coercive measures would not be effective in the individual case. Such decisions should be subject to judicial oversight. Applicants should be granted access to free legal aid to challenge the detention decision.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40 g

(40g) When an application is rejected in the context of the border procedure, the applicant, third-country national or stateless person concerned should be immediately subject to a return decision or, where the conditions of Article 14 of Regulation (EU) No 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council10 are met, to a refusal of entry. To guarantee the equal treatment of all third-country nationals whose application has been rejected in the context of the border procedure, where a Member State has decided not to apply the provisions of Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Return Directive] by virtue of Article 2(2), point (a), of that Directive and does not issue a return decision to the third-country national concerned, the treatment and level of protection of the applicant, third- country national or stateless person concerned should be in accordance with Article 4(4) of Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Return Directive] and be equivalent to those applicable to persons subject to a return decision. _________________ 10Regulation (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 077 23.3.2016, p. 1).deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40 h

(40h) When applying the border procedure for carrying out return, certain provisions of the [recast Return Directive] should apply as these regulate elements of the return procedure that are not determined by this Regulation, notably those on definitions, more favourable provisions, non-refoulement, best interests of the child, family life and state of health, risk of absconding, obligation to cooperate, period for voluntary departure, return decision, removal, postponement of removal, return and removal of unaccompanied minors, entry bans, safeguards pending return, detention, conditions of detention, detention of minors and families and emergency situations. To reduce the risk of unauthorised entry and movement of illegally staying third-country nationals subject to the border procedure for carrying out return, a period for voluntary departure not exceeding 15 days may be granted to illegally staying third-country nationals, without prejudice for the possibility to voluntarily comply with the obligation to return at any moment.deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40i

(40i) Where an applicant, third-country national or stateless person who was detained during the border procedure for the examination of their application for international protection no longer has a right to remain and has not been allowed to remain, Member States should only be able to continue the detention ~~for the purpo~~based o~~f preventing entry into the territory and carrying out the return procedure,~~n an individual assessment of the circumstances and respecting the guarantees and conditions for detention laid down in Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Return Directive]. An applicant, third- country national or stateless person who was not detained during the border procedure for the examination of an application for international protection, and who no longer has a right to remain and has not been allowed to remain, ~~could also~~may only be detained ~~if there is a risk of absconding, if he or she avoids or hampers return, or if he or she poses a risk to public policy, public security or national~~unless other sufficient but less coercive measures can be applied effectively in a spec~~urity. Detention should be for as short a period as possible and should not exceed the maximum duration of the border procedure for carry~~ific case. Member States may only keep in detention a third- country national who is the subject of return procedures ing o~~ut return. When the illegally staying third-country national does not return or is not removed within that period and t~~rder to prepare the return and/or carry out the removal process, in particular if there is a risk of absconding, or if he bor~~der procedure for carrying out return ceases to apply, the provis~~ she avoids or hampers return. Minors and individuals in a situations of the [recast Return Directive] should apply. The maximum period of detention set by Article 15 of that Directive should include the period of detention applied during the border procedure for carrying our returnvulnerability should never be detained. Detention should be for as short a period as possible and not exceed 15 days.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40j

(40j) It should be possible for a Member State to which an applicant is relocated in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management Regulation] to examine the application in a border procedure provided that the applicant has not yet been authorised to enter the territory of the Member States and the conditions for the application of such a procedure by the Member State from which the applicant was relocated are met.’deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44a

(44a) ‘An applicant who lodges a subsequent application at the last minute merely in order to delay or frustrate his or her removal should not be authorised to remain pending the finalisation of the decision declaring the application inadmissible in cases where it is immediately clear to the determining authority that no new elements have been presented and there is no risk of refoulement and provided that the application is made within one year of the decision by the determining authority on the first application. The determining authority shall issue a decision under national law confirming that these criteria are fulfilled in order for the applicant not to be authorised to remain. ’deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 65

(65) ‘'For an applicant to be able to exercise his or her right to an effective remedy against a decision rejecting an application for international protection, a~~ll effects of the return~~ppeals against such decision should bhave automatic~~ally~~ suspended for as long as the applicant has the right to remain or has been allowed to remain on the territory of a Member State. To improve the effectiveness of procedures at the external border, while ensuring the respect of the right to an effective remedy, appeals against decisions taken in the context of the border procedure should take place only before a single level of jurisdiction of a court or tribunalsive effect and the applicant have an automatic right to remain.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 66

(66) Applicants should, in principle, have the right to remain on the territory of a Member State until the time-limit for lodging an appeal before a court or tribunal of first instance expires, and, where such a right is exercised within the set time-limit, pending the outcome of the appeal. It is only in the limited cases set out in this Regulation, where applications are likely to be unfounded, that the applicant should not have an automatic right to remain for the purpose of the appeal.deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 66a

(66a) ‘In cases where the applicant has no automatic right to remain for the purpose of the appeal, a court or tribunal should still be able to allow the applicant to remain on the territory of the Member State pending the outcome of the appeal, upon the applicant’s request or acting of its own motion. In such cases, applicants should have a right to remain until the time-limit for requesting a court or tribunal to be allowed to remain has expired and, where the applicant has presented such a request within the set time-limit, pending the decision of the competent court or tribunal. In order to discourage abusive or last minute subsequent applications, Member States should be able to provide in national law that applicants should have no right to remain during that period in the case of rejected subsequent applications, with a view to preventing further unfounded subsequent applications. In the context of the procedure for determining whether or not the applicant should be allowed to remain pending the appeal, the applicant’s rights of defence should be adequately guaranteed by providing him or her with the necessary interpretation and legal assistance. Furthermore, the competent court or tribunal should be able to examine the decision refusing to grant international protection in terms of facts and points of law.deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 66b

(66b) In order to ensure the right to effective re~~turns~~medy, applicants should ~~not ha~~receive a right to remain on the Member State’s territory at the stage of a second or further level of appeal before a court or tribunal against a negative decision on the application for international protection, without prejudice to the possibility for a court or tribunal to allow the applicant to remain. Furthermore, Member States should not grant applicants the possibility to lodge a further appeal against a first appeal decision in respect of a decision taken in a bord or an application for a residence permit on compassionate, humanitarian or other pgro~~cedure~~unds.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 66c

(66c) To ensure the consistency of the legal review carried out by a court or tribunal on a decision rejecting an application for international protection and the accompanying return decision, and with a view to accelerating the examination of the case and reducing the burden on the competent judicial authorities, such decisions should be subject to common proceedings before the same court or tribunal.deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 66d

(66d) In order to ensure fairness and objectivity in the management of applications and effectiveness in the common procedure for international protection, time-limits should be set for the administrative procedure.deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point i a (new)

(ia) ‘stateless person’ shall have the meaning assigned to it in Article 1 of the Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, signed in New York on 28 September;

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point i b (new)

(ib) ‘national security’ covers the internal security and external security and that, consequently, a threat to the functioning of institutions and essential public services and the survival of the population, as well as the risk of a serious disturbance to foreign relations or to peaceful coexistence of nations, or a risk to military interests, may affect public security;

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 3

3. ‘For third-country nationals subject to the screening referred to in Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Screening Regulation], paragraphs 1 and 2 shall apply only after the screening has ended.’deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 5

5. ‘For third-country nationals subject to the screening referred to in Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Screening Regulation], paragraphs 1 to 4 shall apply only after the screening has enddeleted.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 6

6. Where biometric data could not be taken during the screening in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation] or where the applicant was not subject to a screening, the competent authorities shall take the biometric data at the latest upon the registration of the application for international protection and transmit them together with the data referred to in Article 12 (c) to (p) of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation] to the Central System and to the Common Identity Repository respectively in accordance with that Regulation.’deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 a

Rejection of an application ~~and issuance~~ of a return decision Where an application is rejected as inadmissible, unfounded or manifestly unfounded with regard to both refugee status and subsidiary protection status, or as implicitly or explicitly withdrawn, Member States shall issue a return decision that respects Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Return Directive]. The return decision shall be issued as part of the decision rejecting the application for international protection or, in a separate act. Where and that the decision is final, Member States shall examine before issuing a separate return decision whether the applicant fulfils the conditions to apply for a residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay for compassionate, humanitarian or other grounds under the applicable national legal framework. Particular attention should be paid to victims of torture, inhumane and degrading treatment, gender-based violence and persons in a vulnerable situation including with PTSD symptoms and stateless persons. If no grounds for such a status would be found, Member States may issue a return decision that respects Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Return Directive] in a separate act after a full examination that their return ~~decision is issued as a separate act, it shall be issued at the same time and together with~~would not violate the principle of non refoulement and other fundamental rights obligations under EU and international law, including Article 2 and 3 of the ECHR, articles 2 and 4 of the Charter for Fundamental Rights, and Article 8 of the ECHR and Article 7 of the Charter for Fundamental Rights. The return decision shall for these reasons never be issued as part of the decision rejecting the application for international protection.’ to enable the thorough assessment of the case.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – point a – paragraph 1 – point i

(i) ‘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 by the determining authority granting international protection is, according to the latest available yearly Union-wide average Eurostat data, 20% or lower, unless a significant change has occurred in the third country concerned since the publication of the relevant Eurostat data or the applicant belongs to a category of persons for whom the proportion of 20% or lower cannot be considered as representative for their protection needs;’deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – point b – paragraph 5 – point c

(c) ‘the applicant is of a nationality or, in the case of stateless persons, a former habitual residence 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, 20% or lower, unless a significant change has occurred in the third country concerned since the publication of the relevant Eurostat data or the applicant belongs to a category of persons for whom the proportion of 20% or lower cannot be considered as representative for their protection needs;’deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. Following the screening procedure carried out in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Screening Regulation], and provided that the applicant has not yet been authorised to enter Member States’ territory, aA Member State may examine an application in a border procedure where that application has been made by a third- country national ~~or stateless person~~ who does not fulfil the conditions for entry in the territory of a Member State as set out in Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. The border procedure ~~may take place~~shall respect the principles and guarantees provided for in Chapter II. The border procedure can only take place after an individual assessment of the circumstances of the case, including an examination of vulnerabilities and potential special reception and procedural needs:

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – point b

~~(b) following apprehension in connection with an unauthorised crossing of the external border;~~deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – point c

~~(c) following disembarkation in the territory of a Member State after a search and rescue operation;~~deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – point d

~~(d) following relocation in accordance with Article [X] of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Ex Dublin Regulation].~~deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – second subparagraph (new)

The decision to apply the border procedure shall be issued in writing and the reasons for the application of the procedure shall be stated in fact and in law.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

2. Where a border procedure is applied, decisions may be taken on ~~the following:~~ly on the merits of an application in an accelerated examination procedure in the cases referred to in Article 40(1).

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 2 – point a

~~(a) the inadmissibility of an application in accordance with Article 36;~~deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 2 – point b

~~(b) the merits of an application in an accelerated examination procedure in the cases referred to in Article 40(1).~~deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 3

~~3. Member State shall examine an application in a border procedure in the cases referred to in paragraph 1 where the circumstances referred to in Article 40(1), point (c), (f) or (i), apply.~~deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 4 – first paragraph

4. A Member State ~~may decide~~shall not to apply ~~paragraph 3~~a border procedure to nationals or stateless persons who are habitual residents of third countries for which th~~at Member State has submitted a notification to the Commission in accordance with Article 25a(3) of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009~~ere is no reasonable prospect of return given the lack of cooperation of these third countries.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 4 – second subparagraph

Where, following the examination carried out in accordance with Article 25a(4) of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009, the Commission considers that the third country is cooperating sufficiently, the Member State shall again apply the provisions of paragraph 3.deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 4 – third subparagraph

Where the Commission considers that the third country concerned is not cooperating sufficiently, the Member State may continue not to apply paragraph 3: (a) until an implementing act previously adopted by the Council in accordance with Article 25a(5) of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 is repealed or amended; (b) consider that action is needed in accordance with Article 25a of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009, until the Commission reports in its assessment carried out in accordance with paragraph 2 of that Article that there are substantive changes in the cooperation of the third country concerned.deleted where the Commission does not

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 4 – third subparagraph a (new)

Once an applicant has been exempted from the border procedure, and referred to the regular procedure, that should remain the case for the entire procedure.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 5

5. TIn order to guarantee the best interest of the child the border procedure ~~may only~~shall not be applied to unaccompanied ~~minors and to minors below the age of 12 and their family members in the cases referred to in Article 40(5) (b)~~children and to children and their family members.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. The border procedure shall not be applied to people in a situation of vulnerability or with special procedural and reception needs.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. The border procedure shall not be applied to persons identified as stateless or at risk of statelessness, who shall be referred to the competent authorities to conduct a full determination of whether the individual is stateless and offer adequate protection, in accordance with national law. If the individual has made an application for international protection, the statelessness determination shall be conducted either in parallel with or following the consideration of the application for international protection, without prejudice to the primacy of international protection status and with full respect of the principle of confidentiality

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 6

6. Applicants subject to the border procedure shall ~~not~~ be authorised to enter the territory of the Member State~~, without prejudice to paragraphs 9 and 11.~~ and have access to all the rights under Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Reception Conditions Directive recast]. In accordance with Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Reception Conditions Directive recast], a Member State shall not hold an applicant in detention unless it has individually assessed that applicant’s case based on the principles of necessity and proportionality. Detention might only be applied as a measure of last resort and for the shortest time as possible, provided that an individual and motivated assessment has demonstrated that less coercive measures cannot be applied effectively in the specific case and that detention would not be disproportionately harmful. A vulnerability assessment should always be carried out before detention and repeated regularly. Free legal aid should be available to challenge the detention order.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 7

7. When applying the border procedure, Member States ~~may~~shall carry out the procedure for determining the Member State responsible for examining the application as laid down in Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management]~~, without prejudice to the deadlines established in paragraph 11~~

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 8

8. ~~Where~~In the c~~onditions for applying the border procedure are met in the Member State from which the applicant is reloc~~ase of asylum applicants who demonstrate to have family members or other meaningful links to another Member Stated, athe border procedure may be applied by the Member State to which the applicant is relocated in accordance with Article [x] of Regulation EU (No) XXX/XXX [Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management], including in the cases referred to in paragraph 1, point (d)shall not apply, or shall cease to apply. The Member State where the family members are present or with which the applicant has other meaningful links should be responsible for examining the application for international protection, provided that the persons concerned expressed their consent in writing.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 9 – point a

~~(a) the determining authority considers that the grounds for rejecting an application as inadmissible or for applying the accelerated examination procedure are not applicable or no longer applicable;~~deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 9 – point b

(b) the ~~necessary support cannot be provided to applicants with special procedural needs in the locations referred to in paragraph 14;~~applicant has been identified as vulnerable or with special procedural or reception needs; Vulnerabilities should be continuously considered, identified and assessed at all stages of the procedure. Due consideration should be given to persons with less visible vulnerabilities, such as torture survivors, victims of human trafficking and persons with mental health conditions.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 9 – point c

(c) there are medical reasons for not applying the border procedure, including mental health reasons;

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 9 – point d a (new)

(da) restriction of movement is used and the conditions of the facilities are not in line with Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Reception Conditions Directive]

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 2

~~In such cases, the competent authority shall authorise the applicant to enter the territory of the Member State.~~deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 10

10. By way of derogation from Article 28 of this Regulation, applications subject to a border procedure shall be lodged no later than five days from registration for the first time or, following a relocation in accordance with Article [x] of Regulation EU (No) XXX/XXX [Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management], five days from when the applicant arrives in the Member State responsible following a transfer pursuant to Article 56(1), point (e), of that Regulation.deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 11 – subparagraph 1

11. The border procedure shall be as short as possible while at the same time enabling a complete and fair examination of the claims. It shall ~~encompass the decision referred to in paragraph 2 and 3 and any decision on an appeal if applicable and shall~~ be completed within 12 weeks from when the application is registered. ~~Follow~~During that period, the applicant shall be authorised to enter the Member State’s territory ~~except when Article 41a(1) is applicable~~. After the 12 weeks, applicants should be channelled into the regular asylum procedure, including in case of an ongoing appeal.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 11 – subparagraph 2

By way of derogation from the time limits set in Articles 34, 40(2) and 55, Member States shall lay down provisions on the duration of the examination procedure and of the appeal procedure which ensure that, in case of an appeal against a decision rejecting an application in the framework of the border procedure, the decision on such appeal is issued within 12 weeks from when the application is registered.deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 12 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

12. ~~By way of derogation from paragraph 11 of this Article, the a~~Applicants shall ~~not be authorised to enter the Member State’s territory where:~~have the right to remain during the appeal until the final decision.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 12 – subparagraph 1 – point a

~~(a) the applicant’s right to remain has been revoked in accordance with Article 9(3), point (a);~~deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 12 – subparagraph 1 – point b

~~(b) the applicant has no right to remain in accordance with Article 54 and has not requested to be allowed to remain for the purposes of an appeal procedure within the applicable time-limit;~~deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 12 – subparagraph 1 – point c

~~(c) the applicant has no right to remain in accordance with Article 54 and a court or tribunal has decided that the applicant is not to be allowed to remain pending the outcome of an appeal procedure.~~deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 12 – subparagraph 2

In such cases, where the applicant has been subject to a return decision issued in accordance with the Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Return Directive] or a refusal of entry in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, Article 41a shall apply.deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 13

13. During the examination of applications subject to a border procedure, the applicants shall be ~~kept at or in proximity to the external border or transit zones~~accommodated in accordance with Article 7 of Directive XXX/XXX/EU (Reception Conditions Directive). The assigned area shall not affect the unalienable sphere of private life and shall allow effective access to all rights and benefits under this Directive. Liberty should be the norm in these locations and detention should remain a measure of last resort. Any detention decision must be taken on the basis of an individual assessment. It must be determined to be necessary, reasonable and proportionate to a legitimate purpose. The decision to place in detention must be reviewed with the least possible delay by a judicial or other independent authority and be subject to the right to appeal. The necessity to maintain in detention must be reviewed periodically. Each Member State shall notify to the Commission, [two months after the date of the application of this Regulation] at the latest, the locations where the border procedure will be carried out~~, at the external borders, in the proximity to the external border or transit zones, including when applying paragraph 3~~ and ensure that the capacity of those locations is sufficient to process the applications covered by that paragraph while guaranteeing all rights under the Reception Conditions Directive. Any changes in the identification of the locations at which the border procedure is applied, shall be notified to the Commission two months in advance of the changes taking effect.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 14

14. In situations where the capacity of the locations notified by Member States pursuant to paragraph 14 is temporarily insufficient to process the applicants covered by paragraph 3, Member States ~~may designate other locations within the territory of the Member State and upon notification to the Commission accommodate applica~~shall channel applicants intso the re~~, on a temporary basis and for the shortest time necessary~~gular asylum procedure.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Member States shall ensure that applicants have effective access to Non- governmental organisations in facilities used for the purposes of a border procedure. Non-governmental organisations shall be allowed to access these facilities without having to sign separate bilateral agreement and shall be able to carry out unannounced and frequent visits in compliance with the standards of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Under no circumstance shall non- governmental organisations be requested to share data or information on beneficiaries with state authorities or other entities.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 14 b (new)

14b. Where Member States impose restrictions on freedom of movement, a decision in writing should qualify the measures as either detention or restrictions on freedom of movement, and the reasons for the actual restrictions ordered should be stated in fact be guaranteed to and in law.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 14 c (new)

14c. When applying the border procedure, Member States shall take into account that an applicant for international protection should not be held in detention for the sole reason that he or she is seeking international protection. Detention can only be imposed as a measure of a last resort based on the legal grounds set out in article 8 of the Reception Directive (RCD) and when it proves necessary and on the basis of an individual assessment of each case, and if other less coercive alternative measures cannot be applied effectively.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 14 d (new)

14d. Applicants should be have the right to free legal assistance at all stages of the procedure, as soon as the application for international protection is made. In case of individuals residing or being held in facilities operated by Member States, there should be immediate and unhindered access of legal practitioners to individuals in such facilities, including in quarantine sites. Free legal aid should also challenge any detention order or restriction of movement restrictions.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 a – title

~~Border procedure for carrying out return~~deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 a – paragraph 1

1. Third-country nationals and stateless persons whose application is rejected in the context of the procedure referred to in Article 41 shall not be authorised to enter the territory of the Member State.deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 a – paragraph 2

2. Persons referred to in paragraph 1 shall be kept for a period not exceeding 12 weeks in locations at or in proximity to the external border or transit zones; where a Member State cannot accommodate them in those locations, it can resort to the use of other locations within its territory. The 12-week period shall start from when the applicant, third- country national or stateless person no longer has a right to remain and is not allowed to remain.deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 a – paragraph 3

3. For the purposes of this Article, Article 3, Article 4(1), Articles 5 to 7, Article 8(1) to (5), Article 9(2) to (4), Articles 10 to 13, Article 15, Article 17(1), Article 18(2) to (4) and Articles 19 to 21 of Directive XXX/XXX/EU [recast Return Directive] shall apply.deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 a – paragraph 4

~~4. Without prejudice to the possibility to return voluntarily at any moment, persons referred to in paragraph 1 may be granted a period for voluntary departure not exceeding 15 days.~~deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 a – paragraph 5

5. Persons referred to in paragraph 1 who have been detained during the procedure referred to in Article 41 and who no longer have a right to remain and are not allowed to remain may continue to be detained for the purpose of preventing entry into the territory of the Member State, preparing the return or carrying out the removal process.deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 a – paragraph 6

6. Persons referred to in paragraph 1 who no longer have a right to remain and are not allowed to remain, and who were not detained during the procedure referred to in Article 41, may be detained if there is a risk of absconding within the meaning of Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Return Directive], if they avoid or hamper the preparation of return or the removal process or they pose a risk to public policy, public security or national security.deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 a – paragraph 7

7. Detention shall be maintained for as short a period as possible, as long as removal arrangements are in progress and executed with due diligence. The period of detention shall not exceed the period referred to in paragraph 2 and shall be included in the maximum periods of detention set in Article 15 (5) and (6) of Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Return Directive].deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 a – paragraph 8

8. Member States that, following the rejection of an application in the context of the procedure referred to in Article 41, issue a refusal of entry in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, and that have decided not to apply Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Return Directive] in such cases pursuant to Article 2(2), point (a), of that Directive, shall ensure that the treatment and level of protection of the third-country nationals and stateless persons subject to a refusal of entry are in accordance with Article 4(4) of Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Return Directive] and are equivalent to the ones set out in paragraphs 2, 4 and 7 of this Article.’deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43

~~(17) Article 43 is amended as follows: (a) The following p~~deleted ‘Point (ca) is added in Article 43: (c) been lodged within one year of the decision of the determining authority on the first application merely in order to delay or frustrate the enforcement of a return decision which would result in the applicant’s imminent removal from the Member State, pending the finalisation of the decision declaring that application inadmissible in cases where it is immediately clear to the determining authority that no new elements have been presented in accordance with Article 42(4)’deleted. a first subsequent application has

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

1. Applicants shall have the right to an effective remedy before a court or tribunal in accordance with the principles and guarantees provided for in Chapter II against:

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)

(da) a detention order or a decision to apply, within the border procedure, restrictions to the freedom of movement.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d b (new)

(db) a decision rejecting an application for a residence permit on compassionate, humanitarian or other grounds;

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d c (new)

(dc) a decision to apply the border procedure.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

~~Return decisions shall be appealed before the same court or tribunal and within the same judicial proceedings and the same time-limits as decisions referred to in points (a), (b), (c) and (d)~~Applicants shall have the right to free legal assistance in order to be able to exercise their right to effective remedy.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 2

2. Persons recognised as eligible for subsidiary protection shall have the right to an effective remedy against a decision considering their application unfounded in relation to refugee status. Where subsidiary protection status granted by a Member State offers the same rights and benefits as refugee status under Union and national law, the appeal against that decision in that Member State may be considered as inadmissible where provided for in national law.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 3

3. An effective remedy within the meaning of paragraph 1 shall provide for a full and ex nunc examination of both facts and points of law, ~~at least before a court or tribunal of first instance,~~ including, where applicable, an examination of the international protection needs pursuant to Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Qualification Regulation] as well as an examination pursuant to Article 2 and 3 of the ECHR and Article 2 and 4 of the Charter for Fundamental Rights, and Article 8 of the ECHR and Article 7 of the Charter for Fundamental Rights.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 4

4. Applicants shall be provided with interpretation in a language they understand by qualified personnel for the purpose of a hearing before the competent court or tribunal where such a hearing takes place ~~and where appropriate communication cannot otherwise be ensured~~.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 5

5. ~~Where the~~A court or tribunal ~~considers it necessary, it~~ shall ensure the translation of all relevant documents that have not already been translated in accordance with Article 33(4). Alternatively, translations of those relevant documents may be provided by other entities and paid for from public funds in accordance with national law.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. When the appeal involves a minor, information shall also be provided in a child-friendly way. Unaccompanied minors and families with minor children shall have access to free legal assistance. Unaccompanied minors shall be assisted by a legal representative [guardian] throughout the procedure.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 6

6. If the documents are not submitted in time for the court or tribunal to ensure their translation, the court or tribunal may refuse to take those documents into account if they are not accompanied by a translation provided by the applicant.deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 7 – point a

(a) at least one ~~week~~month in the case of a decision rejecting an application as inadmissible, as implicitly withdrawn or as unfounded if at the time of the decision any of the circumstances listed in Article 40(1) or (5) apply;

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 7 – point b

(b) ~~between a minimum of two weeks and a maximum of two~~at least one months in all other cases.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 8

8. The time-limits referred to in paragraph 7 shall start to run from the date when the decision of the determining authority is notified to the applicant or his or her representative or legal adviser. The procedure for notification shall be laid down in national law. If free legal assistance would still not have been granted to the applicant when the decision is notified, the time-limits shall only start to run from the date by which a legal representative is appointed.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 9

~~9. Member States shall provide for only one level of appeal in relation to a decision taken in the context of the border procedure.~~deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1

~~1. The effects of a return decision shall be automatically suspended for as long as an applicant has a right to remain or is allowed to remain in accordance with this Article.~~deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 2

2. Applicants shall have the automatic right to remain on the territory of the Member States ~~until the time-limit within which~~in order to exercise their right to an effective remedy before a court or tribunal ~~of first instance has expired and, where such a right has been exercised within the time-limit, pending the outcome of the remedy~~.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 3

3. The applicant shall not have the right to remain pursuant to paragraph 2 where the competent authority has taken one of the following decisions: (a) application as unfounded or manifestly unfounded if at the time of the decision any of the circumstances listed in Article 40(1) and (5) apply [including safe country of origin] or in the cases subject to the border procedure; (b) application as inadmissible pursuant to Article 36(1)(a) [first country of asylum] or (c) [subsequent applicatdeleted a decision which rejects an a decision which rejects an a decision which rejects an a decisions without new elements]; (c) application as implicitly withdrawn; (d) subsequent application as unfounded or manifestly unfounded; (e) international protection in accordance with Article 14(1), points (b), (d) and (e), and Article 20(1), point (b), of Regulation No XXX/XXX (Qualification Regulation).hich rejects a a decision to withdraw

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 4

4. In the cases referred to in paragraph 3, a court or tribunal shall have the power to decide, following an examination of both facts and points of law, whether or not the applicant shall be allowed to remain on the territory of the Member States pending the outcome of the remedy upon the applicant’s request. The competent court or tribunal may under national law have the power to decide on this matter ex officio.deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 5

5. For the purpose of paragraph 4, the following conditions shall apply: (a) limit of at least 5 days from the date when the decision is notified to him or her to request to be allowed to remain on the territory pending the outcome of the remedy; (b) with interpretation in the event of a hearing before the competent court or tribunal, where appropriate communication cannot otherwise be ensured; (c) upon request, with free legal assistance and representation in accordance with Article 15(4) and (5); (d) remain: (i) a court or tribunal to be allowed to remain has expired; (ii) to be allowed to remain within the set time-limit, pending the decision of the court or tribunal on whether or notdeleted the applicant shall have a time- the applicant shall be provided the applicant shall be provided, the applicant shall have a right to until the time-limit for requesting where the applicant sha~~ll be allowed remain on the territory.~~s requested

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 6

6. In cases of subsequent applications, by way of derogation from paragraph 6, point (d) of this Article, Member States may provide in national law that the applicant shall not have a right to remain, without prejudice to the respect of the principle of non- refoulement, if the appeal has been made merely in order to delay or frustrate the enforcement of a return decision which would result in the applicant’s imminent removal from the Member State, in cases where it is immediately clear to the court that no new elements have been presented in accordance with Article 42(4).deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 7

7. An applicant who lodges a further appeal against a first or subsequent appeal decision shall not have a right to remain on the territory of the Member State, without prejudice to the possibility for a court or tribunal to allow the applicant to remain upon the applicant’s request or acting ex officio.’deleted

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

Sira REGO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 a (new)

Article 54a Monitoring of fundamental rights 1. In addition to the provisions foreseen in Article 7 of the [Screening Regulation], Member States shall adopt relevant provisions to investigate allegations of non-respect for fundamental rights during the asylum procedure, in addition to border surveillance, and return procedures. 2. Independent human rights bodies, at national, European and international level, shall be the implementing components of an Independent Monitoring Mechanism and shall be able to access the facilities used for the purpose of a border procedure, as well as the land and sea borders, including through unannounced visits, in order to monitor the respect of fundamental rights under the scope of the current Regulation. 3. Member States should enable the involved national independent authorities to trigger, refer to Justice and conduct investigations into misconduct at their own initiative and should allow national and international human rights bodies to report, also at their own initiative, and participate in or conduct such investigations. Member States should ensure access to documentation, places of detention, police stations and other relevant sites and areas to conduct such investigations. The information and findings of these authorities and bodies must be publicly accessible and transparent. 4. Civil Society Organisations shall be able to alert these authorities and bodies of potential violations, providing evidence and reports, referring victims, and representing or filing complaints on their behalf, regardless if at the time the complainants are on the Member State’s territory. 5. In order to monitor all applicants’ proper access to the asylum procedure and the rights foreseen by it, a specific independent complaint mechanism shall be set up by the involved national and international authorities and bodies, for applicants, including the ones who have not been allowed the right to enter the territory, are at risk of being returned and/or have been returned to a third country. Such a mechanism shall include a 24/7 hotline that can be accessed by persons in order to prevent further fundamental rights abuses, notably in case a person would be at risk of being arbitrarily returned to a third country. 6. The Independent Monitoring Mechanism shall also be able to monitor the eventual process of sanctions and redress that Member States would have to implement as decided by judicial or other national or European authorities.

2021/12/16
Committee: LIBE

103 Amendments of Sira REGO related to 2016/0224(COD)

ParlTrack - 2011-2024