91 Amendments of Sira REGO related to 2020/0277(COD)
Amendment 82 #
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set outRejects the Commission's proposal and refers the text back to the Commission;
Amendment 85 #
Proposal for a regulation
Title 1
Title 1
Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL addressing situations of crisis and force majeureemergency in the field of migration and asylum (Text with EEA relevance)
Amendment 90 #
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, and immigration and external border control, based on solidarity between Member States, which is fair towards third-country national, based on the fair sharing of responsibility and solidarity between Member States, which fully respects and guarantees the rights of third-country nationals as well as stateless persons pursuant to Article 1(1) of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons.
Amendment 97 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a) An effective implementation of the EU asylum acquis in full respect of the fundamental rights of applicants and a fair sharing of responsibility are essential elements of a well-functioning system of Union asylum. In situations of emergency, a Member State should not derogate from the EU asylum acquis, but be supported by other Member States through a mandatory relocation mechanism.
Amendment 99 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) ToIn this end, a comprehensive approach is required with the objective of building mutual trust between Member Statese light of the disproportionate responsibility being put on first Member States of entry under Regulation (EU) 604/2013, it is necessary to design a new system in full respect of Article 78(1) TFEU based on a fair share of responsibility and solidarity between Member States for applications for international protection.
Amendment 105 #
(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 happennew system should ensure a mandatory and automatic solidarity mechanism based on relocation of applicants and that all the necessary measures are put in place to prevent an emergency situation to happen. The mandatory solidarity mechanism should be effective and ensure that applicants have swift access to the procedures for granting international protection. Such a mechanism should ensure that family and other meaningful links of the applicants are taken into account.
Amendment 113 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
Amendment 124 #
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 crisisemergency in the field of asylum. 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 proceduress well as the granting of prima facie international protection, so that the Member States and the Union have the necessary tools at their disposal including sufficient time to carry out thoseasylum procedures in situations of emergency.
Amendment 135 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) A mass influx of persons crossing the border irregularly anddisproportionate arrival of persons with the intention to apply for international protection within a short period of time may lead to a situation of crisisemergency 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 andincluding due to the lack of capacity in theany Member State of first entry would face in a similar situation, to process the applications for international protection of such third-country nationals. It is necessary to lay down specific rules and mechanisms that should enable eff. It is necessary to lay down a common framework for the automatic distribution of applicants for international protectiveon action to address such situross the European Union, including after a Search and Rescue operations.
Amendment 143 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
Amendment 150 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) A situation of emergency should allow for the triggering of the full set of measures provided for in this Regulation.
Amendment 153 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
Amendment 158 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
Amendment 165 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) In order to ensure a swift access to the asylum procedure and quickly help alleviate the pressure faced by a Member State in a situation of crisisemergency, the scope of relocation should include all categories 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 following their consent to be relocated to another Member State and persons granted prima facie international fprom 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]tection. The mechanism should be also applicable to people disembarked following search and rescue operations.
Amendment 174 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
Amendment 180 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In situations of crisisemergency, Member States might need a wider set of measures in order to manage a mass influxdisproportionate arrival of third- country nationals in an orderly fashion and contain unauthorised movements. Such measures should include the application ofa mandatory and asylum crisis management procedure and a return crisis management procedureutomatic relocation mechanism, a light procedure to determine the Member State responsible and a procedure for the granting of prima facie international protection.
Amendment 189 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) Recognising refugee status on a prima facie basis has been a common practice of both States and UNHCR for over 60 years. A prima facie approach means the recognition by a State or UNHCR of refugee status on the basis of readily apparent, objective circumstances in the country of origin or, in the case of stateless asylum-seekers, their country of former habitual residence. A prima facie approach acknowledges that those fleeing these circumstances are at risk of harm that brings them within the applicable refugee definition.
Amendment 191 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 b (new)
Recital 12 b (new)
(12b) The consideration of third-country nationals fleeing climate change, should also be taken into account, where appropriate, in the determination of the specific groups of applicants, eligible for being granted prima facie international protection. Member States are encouraged to grant in such cases a humanitarian status or any other status available under national law.
Amendment 193 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 c (new)
Recital 12 c (new)
(12c) An EU relocation coordinator will be responsible for improving coordination between Member States in the implementation of the mandatory solidarity mechanism. The coordinator would work closely with the Asylum Agency who would provide the technical support by establishing the reference key for the distribution of asylum seekers, developing information material and be responsible for the transfer of applicants, and beneficiaries of international protection, including prima facie beneficiaries, in all cases provided under this Regulation.
Amendment 194 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 d (new)
Recital 12 d (new)
(12d) The European Union Asylum Agency should assist the EU relocation coordinator by determining the Member States responsible based on the criteria set out in this Regulation and ensuring the transfer to the Member State responsible. All applicants for international protection should be distributed in a proportionate manner among the Member States while fully taking into account family and other meaningful links of the applicants in the determination of the Member State responsible. Where Member States are themselves benefitting Member States, they should not be obliged to be a contributing Member State.
Amendment 195 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 e (new)
Recital 12 e (new)
(12e) A distribution key based on the size of the population, the economy of the Member States and the unemployment rate should be applied as a point of reference for the operation of the solidarity mechanism enabling the determination of the overall contribution of each Member State and ensure a fair sharing of responsibilities among Member States. The European Union Asylum Agency should establish this distribution key and set up an automated system to implement the solidarity mechanism. In case no criteria based on family and meaningful links can be applied, and the motivated application to any Member States based on other links was rejected, the applicant should be relocated to Member States which are below their share of applications on the basis of the distribution key. In such case, the applicant can choose between the 5 Member States with the lowest share of applications. After the transfer, the Member State of allocation should examine the application as the Member State responsible.
Amendment 196 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 f (new)
Recital 12 f (new)
(12f) A Member State should be able, at its own initiative or at the request of another Member State, to provide additional relocation places on a voluntary basis to assist that Member State. In order to incentivise voluntary solidarity through additional relocations, those relocations should be supported financially by the AMIF fund.
Amendment 197 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 g (new)
Recital 12 g (new)
(12g) It is appropriate that a clear and workable method for determining the Member State responsible for the examination of an application for international protection should be included in the Common European Asylum System. That method should be based on objective, fair criteria both for the Member States and for the persons concerned. It should, in particular, make it possible to determine rapidly the Member State responsible, so as to guarantee effective access to the procedures for granting international protection and not to compromise the objective of the rapid and fair processing of applications for international protection. If no family or other meaningful links can be found during the procedure of the determination of the Member State responsible, the applicant should be able to make a written, duly motivated request to be relocated to any Member States, in particular on the basis of cultural or social ties, language skills or other links that could facilitate his or her integration into a specific Member State and could not be taken into account under meaningful links as defined in this Regulation. These applications would be submitted by the determining Member State to these Member States, who would then apply the discretionary clause.
Amendment 198 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 h (new)
Recital 12 h (new)
(12h) In situations of emergency, it is crucial to invest in the early provision of accessible information to applicants so that they will understand the procedures linked to this regulation. The Asylum Agency should in this regard develop suitable information material, in close cooperation with national authorities. In order to assist applicants, the agency should also develop audio-visual information material complementary to written information material. The information material should be translated and made available in all the major languages spoken by applicants for international protection arriving in the Union. As different categories of applicants have differing information needs, information would need to be provided in different ways and adapted to those needs, including for persons with disabilities. It is particularly important to ensure that minors have access to child- friendly information that is specific to their needs and situation.
Amendment 199 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 i (new)
Recital 12 i (new)
(12i) Particular attention should be paid to identifying victims of trafficking in human beings, including directly after a Search and Rescue operation in order to offer protection and prevent them from being trafficked further into the Union. Suspicion of trafficking should be sufficient to transfer the person to a safe shelter.
Amendment 200 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 j (new)
Recital 12 j (new)
(12j) A personal interview with the applicant should be organised in order to identify whether the applicant is eligible for prima facie international protection or facilitate the determination of the Member State responsible for examining the application for international protection unless the information provided by the applicant is sufficient and the applicant does not request to be heard. As soon as the application for international protection is made, the applicant should be informed about the application of this Regulation, and the procedures and criteria being used to determine a Member State responsible. The applicant should be informed of the necessity to present all information which is relevant for determining the Member State responsible, in particular the presence of family members or relatives in the Member States, as well as former residence, visas and educational diplomas. The applicant should be fully informed about his or her rights, including the right to effective remedy and free legal assistance. The information to the applicant should be provided in a language that he or she understands, in a concise, intelligible, and easily accessible form, using clear and plain language.
Amendment 201 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 k (new)
Recital 12 k (new)
(12k) The person conducting the personal interview should have received sufficient training to take account of the personal and general circumstances of the applicants, including their cultural origin, age, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and vulnerability. Staff interviewing applicants should also have acquired general knowledge of problems which could adversely affect the applicant's ability to be interviewed, such as indicators showing that the person may have been tortured or victim of gender- based violence in the past.
Amendment 202 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 l (new)
Recital 12 l (new)
(12l) 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. An effective remedy should also be provided in situations when no transfer decision is taken but the applicant claims that another Member State is responsible. 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.
Amendment 203 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 m (new)
Recital 12 m (new)
(12m) In order to ensure the speedy determination of responsibility and allocation of applicants for international protection between Member States, the deadlines for making and replying to requests to take charge, and for carrying out transfers, should be short, while respecting the fundamental rights of applicants, the rights of vulnerable persons, in particular the rights of the child and the fundamental principle of the best interests of the child as well as the right to family reunification and the right to an effective remedy. Unaccompanied minors and families with minors, as well as vulnerable applicants should have their transfers prioritised.
Amendment 204 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 n (new)
Recital 12 n (new)
(12n) In order to ensure family unity, the processing together of the applications for international protection of the members of one family by a single Member State should make it possible to ensure that the applications are examined thoroughly, the decisions taken in respect of them are consistent and the members of one family are not separated. The processing together of the applications of a family is without prejudice to the right of an applicant to make an application individually.
Amendment 205 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 o (new)
Recital 12 o (new)
(12o) The definition of a family member in this Regulation should include the sibling or siblings as well as members of households that existed in the country of origin of the applicant. Reuniting siblings is of particular importance for improving the chances of integration of applicants. The scope of the definition of family member should 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 also include families formed outside the country of origin.
Amendment 206 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 p (new)
Recital 12 p (new)
(12p) In order to ensure full compliance with the principle of family unity and for the best interests of the child, the existence of a relationship of dependency between an applicant and his or her child, sibling or parent including on account of the applicant’s pregnancy or maternity, state of health or old age, should be a binding responsibility criterion. When the applicant is an unaccompanied minor, the presence of a family member or relative on the territory of another Member State who can take care of him or her should also become a binding responsibility criterion unless it is demonstrated that this is not in the best interest of the child. Before transferring a minor to another Member State, the transferring Member State should obtain individual guarantees from that Member State that it will take all necessary and appropriate measures to ensure the adequate protection of the child, and in particular the prompt appointment of a representative or representatives tasked with safeguarding respect for all the rights to which they are entitled. Any decision to transfer a minor should be preceded by an assessment of his or her best interests by a multidisciplinary team with the necessary qualifications and expertise and the participation of his or her representative and legal advisor.
Amendment 207 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 q (new)
Recital 12 q (new)
(12q) In times of emergency, it is crucial to simplify the rules on evidence to allow for a swifter family reunification. It is therefore necessary to clarify that formal proof, such as original documentary evidence and DNA testing, should not be necessary to establish responsibility for examining an application for international protection. Member States’ authorities should consider all available evidence including photos, proof of contact and witness statements to make a fair appraisal of the relationship. The best interests of the child should be a primary consideration throughout the family reunification procedure involving children, which must be completed in a positive, humane and expeditious manner.
Amendment 208 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 r (new)
Recital 12 r (new)
(12r) Where a person states that he or she has a previous legal residence in a Member State, that Member State should be responsible for the examination of the application and a swift transfer should be made. In times of emergency, a light procedure of proof should be established to ensure a swift transfer.
Amendment 209 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 s (new)
Recital 12 s (new)
(12s) Where a person states to have meaningful links to different Member States, the person should be able to choose to which Member State make the request to be responsible.
Amendment 210 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 t (new)
Recital 12 t (new)
(12t) To increase the prospects of integration and facilitate the administrative processing of applications for international protection, it is beneficial to ensure that applicants who wish to be transferred together can register and be transferred under the automated distribution mechanism as a group to one Member State rather than to be split up between several Member States. The applicants themselves should be able to determine their group and can have the choice between the five Member States with the lowest share of applications in accordance with the distribution mechanism. Where an applicant qualifies for reunification with family members or other meaningful links or a Member State has chosen to assume responsibility for the application under the discretionary provisions of this Regulation, including upon the motivated request of the applicant, the applicant should not be able to form part of a group in the context of the automated distribution mechanism. Where an applicant belonging to a group cannot be transferred because of, for example health reasons, it should be possible to transfer the other members of the group or parts of the group to the Member State of allocation before the applicant who cannot be transferred. Once the obstacles to the transfer of the remaining applicant are resolved he or she should be transferred to the same Member State as the rest of the group.
Amendment 211 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 u (new)
Recital 12 u (new)
(12u) A personal interview with the applicant should be organised in order to determine whether the applicant is eligible for prima facie international protection or facilitate the determination of the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection unless the information provided by the applicant is sufficient for determining the Member State responsible and the applicant does explicitly request not to be heard. As soon as the application for international protection is registered, the applicant should be informed in particular of the application of this Regulation, of his or her rights as well as of the obligations under this Regulation and of the consequences of not complying with them and of the necessity to presenting all information which is relevant to determining the Member State responsible, in particular the presence of family members in the Member States and other meaningful links. The applicant should also be fully informed about his or her rights, including the right to an effective remedy and legal assistance. The information should be provided in a language that he or she understands and can communicate in, in a concise, transparent, intelligible and easily accessible form, using clear and plain language.
Amendment 212 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 v (new)
Recital 12 v (new)
(12v) A person should not be held in detention on the basis of this Regulation. Detention or confinement of children, whether unaccompanied or within families, is never in their best interests and always constitutes a child’s rights violation. It should therefore be prohibited.
Amendment 213 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 w (new)
Recital 12 w (new)
(12w) The application of this Regulation can be facilitated, and its effectiveness increased, by bilateral arrangements between Member States for improving communication between competent departments and simplifying the processing of take charge requests.
Amendment 215 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
Amendment 220 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
Amendment 227 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
Amendment 233 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
Amendment 241 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
Amendment 247 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
Amendment 255 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
Amendment 264 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) The Commission should examine a reasoned request submitted by a Mand the European Parliament should assess a situation of ember State whilegency taking into account substantiated information gathered pursuant to Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Agency Regulation] and Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and of the Council24 and the Migration Management report referred to in Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management]. _________________ 24 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 295, 14.11.2019, p. 1s well as reports by UNHCR, IOM, and evidence- based factual reports from other organisations.
Amendment 269 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
Amendment 277 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
Amendment 294 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
Amendment 306 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
Amendment 310 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
Amendment 320 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
Amendment 331 #
(27) Since the adoption of Council Directive 2001/55/EC25 , the rules concerning the qualification of beneficiaries of international protection have evolved considerably. Given that this Regulation lays down rules for granting immediateprima facie international protection status in crisis situations of emergency to displaced persons from third countries who are unable to return to their country of origin, and provides for specific rules for solidarity for such persons, Directive 2001/55/EC should be repealed. _________________ 25 Council Directive 2001/55/EC of 20 July 2001 on minimum standards for giving temporary protection in the event of a mass influx of displaced persons and on measures promoting a balance of efforts between Member States in receiving such persons and bearing the consequences thereof (OJ L 212, 7.8.2001, p. 12.)
Amendment 340 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
Amendment 345 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28 a (new)
Recital 28 a (new)
(28a) Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Reception Conditions Directive recast] of the European Parliament and of the Council should apply to all procedures regulated under this Regulation.
Amendment 346 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
Amendment 353 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
Amendment 356 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
Amendment 362 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
Amendment 370 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) To support Member States as well as regional and local authorities who undertake relocation as a solidarity measure, financial support from the EU budget should be provided.
Amendment 374 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33 a (new)
Recital 33 a (new)
(33a) The Member State facing the situation of emergency in the field of asylum should be provided upon request with financial, technical and capacity support by the Asylum Agency and additional emergency funding, that should be complementary and additional to existing funding and support. Such funding should include funding for search and rescue operations. Additional emergency funding should be conditional upon the compliance of the Member state with fundamental rights of third country nationals.
Amendment 383 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission regarding the establishment of the decision on a situation of emergency, and definition of categories eligible for prima facie international protection. In accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law Making, the European Parliament should be equally involved as the Council in the preparation of delegated acts and have the same access to meetings and documents. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council26 . _________________ 26 Regulation (EU) No 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, (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).
Amendment 386 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
Amendment 392 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
Amendment 395 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36 a (new)
Recital 36 a (new)
(36a) Bearing in mind the importance of identifying infringements of EU asylum acquis at the earliest stage possible, the Commission should monitor on a constant basis potential infringements, and report yearly on the implementation of EU asylum acquis in each Member State. The Commission should initiate infringement procedures in case of non compliance. In times of emergency, particular attention should be paid to the access to the asylum procedure on EU's territory as well as at the EU's external borders, the fulfilment of relocations obligations by other Member States as well as the compliance with the Receptions Conditions Directive.
Amendment 400 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37 a (new)
Recital 37 a (new)
(37a) 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. Where necessary, the treatment of stateless persons should be distinguished from third-country nationals with due consideration to their particular protection needs.
Amendment 407 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation addresses situations of crisis and force majeureemergency in the field of migration and asylum within the Union and provides for specific rules derogating from those set out in Regulations (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management] and (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures Regulation] and in Directive XXX [recast Return Directive]in such situations. Its aim is to support Member States in such situations by sharing responsibility among Member States and simplifying procedures for international protection and relocation.
Amendment 411 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. For the purposes of this Regulation, a situation of crisis is to be understood as:emergency is to be understood as an exceptional situation that entails a considerable number of people arriving over an international border, a rapid rate of arrival, inadequate absorption or response capacity in a Member State, particularly during the emergency and individual asylum procedures which are unable to deal with the assessment of such large numbers.
Amendment 426 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 434 #
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter II – title
Chapter II – title
II Solidarity mechanismDetermination of the situation of emergency
Amendment 438 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2
Article 2
Amendment 469 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a Assessment of a situation of emergency 1. The Commission shall assess whether a Member State is in a situation of emergency as defined in Article 1 in any of the following cases: (a) the Member State has informed the Commission in a detailed request that it considers itself to be in a situation of emergency; (b) the Commission considers that the Member States may be in a situation of emergency ; (c) the European Parliament or the Council considers that the Member State is in a situation of emergency. 2. When assessing whether a Member State is in a situation of emergency the Commission shall consult the Asylum Agency, the Fundamental Rights Agency as well as international organisations, in particular the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, UNHCR and IOM, and take into account the information provided to them. 3. The Commission shall consult the Member State concerned during its assessment. 4. The Commission shall immediately notify the European Parliament, the Council and the Member State concerned that it is undertaking such an assessment. 5. An assessment of a situation of emergency shall take into account the following elements: (a) the number of applications for international protection by third-country nationals and the nationality of the applicants; (b) the number of unaccompanied minors; (c) the information provided by the Member State concerned, including concerning its capacity to process the increased requests for international protection, to provide reception to all persons, including to persons with specific procedural and reception needs and unaccompanied minors; (d) the support provided by the Asylum Agency to the Member state potentially in a situation of emergency.
Amendment 472 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 b (new)
Article 2 b (new)
Article 2 b Decision on a situation of emergency 1. The Commission shall adopt a reasoned decision on a situation of emergency following the request for an assessment carried out pursuant to Article 2a, no later than 7 days after the notification, and submit it to the European Parliament and the Council. 2. In its decision to be adopted by means of a delegated act, the Commission shall include: (a) recommendations to the Member State concerned to improve its reception and processing capacities in order to fulfil its obligations under the EU acquis, including possible additional support from the Asylum Agency, UNHCR and IOM; (b) the categories of persons to be eligible for the prima facie international protection procedure; (c) the expected timeframe for the implementation of the mandatory relocation mechanism.
Amendment 474 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 c (new)
Article 2 c (new)
Article 2 c End of a situation of emergency When the Commission assesses that a Member State is no longer in a situation of emergency, the Commission shall adopt a delegated act to determine that the situation of emergency has ended, following the same procedure as for the assessment of the emergency.
Amendment 478 #
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter III – title
Chapter III – title
III Asylum and return proceduresresponsibility-sharing and solidarity in a situation of crisisemergency
Amendment 480 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3
Article 3
Amendment 514 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a EU Relocation coordinator 1. With a view to supporting the implementation of the distribution mechanism under this Regulation, the Commission shall appoint an EU Relocation coordinator, who will coordinate the relocation from the benefitting Member State to the contributing Member States. 2. In its tasks, the EU Relocation coordinator should be assisted by an Office in order to support coordination between the Member States to ensure the streamlining of procedures. 3. The EU relocation coordinator would be supported by the Asylum Agency who is tasked to calculate the distribution key, to set up and manage the automated software to distribute applicants for international protection according to the criteria set in this Regulation.
Amendment 517 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 b (new)
Article 3 b (new)
Amendment 520 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 c (new)
Article 3 c (new)
Amendment 523 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 d (new)
Article 3 d (new)
Article 3 d Reference key The share of relocation contributions by each contributing Member State shall be calculated by the Asylum Agency, in accordance with the following formula for each Member State, according to the latest available Eurostat data: (a) the size of the population (40% weighting) (b) the total GDP (40% weighting) (c) the unemployment rate (20% weighting)
Amendment 525 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 e (new)
Article 3 e (new)
Amendment 529 #
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 545 #
Amendment 567 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6
Article 6
Amendment 575 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7
Article 7
Amendment 582 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8
Article 8
Amendment 591 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9
Article 9
Amendment 602 #
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter V – title
Chapter V – title
V Granting of immediateprima facie international protection
Amendment 608 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10
Article 10
Amendment 659 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10 a Granting of prima facie international protection status 1. In a situation of emergency as referred in Article 1 of this Regulation, Member States shall grant prima facie international protection to applicants from a specific country of origin or, in the case of stateless asylum-seekers, their country of former habitual residence, or specific groups of applicants, on the basis of readily apparent, objective circumstances in the country of origin or their country of former habitual residence. A prima facie approach acknowledges that those fleeing these circumstances are at risk of harm that make them qualify to benefit from international protection under Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Qualification Regulation]. 2. Member States shall ensure that persons granted prima facie international protection benefit from refugee status and have access to all the rights set out in Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Qualification Regulation]. 3. Applicants that have been denied the granting of a prima facie international protection status shall have the right to effective remedy before a court or tribunal. 4. The decision to apply prima facie international protection procedure to a particular group of applicants shall be taken by the Commission, by means of a delegated act, and be reviewed regularly to see if other groups shall be added to the list based on updated country of origin information or on relevant specific groups and consultation with the UNHCR and the European Parliament. 5. A decision to end the situation of emergency shall not affect applicants in an ongoing procedure nor persons who have been granted such a status.