Activities of Pernando BARRENA ARZA related to 2021/0140(CNS)
Plenary speeches (1)
The Schengen evaluation mechanism (debate)
Amendments (19)
Amendment 47 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The correct functioning and compliance to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU of the authorities that apply the Schengen acquis should be taken into account in all the evaluations in line with the European Council conclusions of 1 and 2 March 2012. The evaluation should also cover the practices of private entities, such as airlines or external service providers, as far as they are involved in or affected by the implementation of the Schengen acquis while cooperating with the Member States. Equally, given the increasing role of Union bodies, offices and agencies in the implementation of the Schengen acquis, the evaluation and monitoring mechanism should support the verification of the activities of these Union bodies, offices and agencies in so far as they perform functions on behalf of the Member States to assist in the operational application of provisions of the Schengen acquis. Verification of these activities in this regard should be embedded into the evaluation of the Member States and carried out without prejudice to and in full respect of the responsibilities attributed to the Commission and to the relevant governing bodies of the agencies, offices and bodies concerned by their establishing regulations and their own evaluation and monitoring procedures therein. Should evaluations identify deficiencies in relation to functions fulfilled or supported by Union bodies, offices and agencies, the Commission should inform their relevant governing bodies.
Amendment 51 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Evaluation and monitoring activities should be targeted, taking into account the results of previous evaluations and the results of national quality control mechanisms. They should be supported by reinforcedall request cooperation with Union bodies, offices and agencies, their systematic involvement in Schengen evaluations and by improved risk analyses and information sharing. This cooperation and involvement concerns in particular the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (‘Frontex’), the European Union Agency for the Operational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems (eu-LISA), the Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol), the European Agency for Fundamental Rights and the European Data Protection Supervisor. The cooperation should also become more reciprocal and the agencies should not only be contributors, but also benefit from being involved in the evaluation and monitoring mechanism.
Amendment 56 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) During the evaluation, particular attention should be paid to verifyensuring respect for fundamental rights in the application of the Schengen acquis in addition to the evaluation of the correct implementation and application of the data protection requirements of the Schengen acquis carried out by separate evaluations. To increase the capacity of the evaluation and monitoring mechanism to identify violations of fundamental rights in relevant policy areas, additional measures should be implemented, taking into consideration the cross-border nature of the issues related to the application of the Schengen acquis and accountability of national and Union authorities. Schengen evaluators should be properly trained in this regard, relevant information fpromvided by the European Agency for Fundamental Rights shouldall be better utilised and its experts better involvedconsulted upon in the design and implementation of evaluations. Furthermore, evidence which is made public or provided through independent monitoring mechanisms or by relevant third parties at their own initiative such as ombudspersons, authorities monitoring the respect of fundamental rights, non-governmental andorganisations, international organisations, and journalists should be taken into account in the programming, design and implementation of evaluations.
Amendment 62 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Unannounced visits, being one of the most effective tools to verify Member States practices should, depending on their purpose,must take place without prior notification to the Member State concerned or with only short prior notification. Unannounced visits without prior notification should take place for ‘investigative’ purposesshould take place in order to verify compliance with obligations under the Schengen acquis, including, in response to indications as regardsof the emergence of systemic problemdeficiencies that could potentially have a significant impact on the functioning of the Schengen area or to fundamental rights violations, in particular allegations of serious violations of fundamental rights at the external borders. In such cases, the provision of advance notice would defeat the objective of the visit. Unannounced visits with a 24-hour advance notice should take place if the main purpose of the visit is to carry out a random check of the Member State’s implementation of the Schengen acquis.
Amendment 78 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In addition, where evaluations identify a serious deficiency, a set of specific provisions should applyunder a clear timeline together with the consequences of inaction shall be provided to ensure the prompt adoption of remedial measures. Given the risk posed by such deficiency, as soon as the evaluated Member State is informed about a serious deficiency, the evaluated Member State should start immediately implementing actions to remedy the deficiency including, where necessary, mobilising all available operational and financial means. Remedial action should be subject to tighter deadlines and closer political scrutiny and monitoring throughout the process. In this regard, the Commission should immediately inform the Council and the European Parliament when an evaluation establishes the existence of a serious deficiency and organise a ‘serious deficiency’ revisit no later than one yearsix months from the date of the evaluation to verify whether the Member State has remedied the shortcomings concerned. The Commission should present a revisit report to the Council following the revisit.
Amendment 108 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) ‘serious deficiency’ means one or more deficiencies which concern the effective application of key elements of the Schengen acquis and which individually or in combination, have, or risk to have over time, a significant negative impact on the fundamental rights of individuals and/or on the functioning of the Schengen area;
Amendment 114 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) ‘team’ means a group comprising experts designated by Member States and, Commission representatives and Union observers who carry out evaluations and monitoring activities.
Amendment 116 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
(k a) 'Union observer' means a person designated by a Union institution, body, office or agency as referred to in Article 7(1) ) participating in an evaluation or monitoring activity.
Amendment 124 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. The Commission shall be responsible for making the necessary travel arrangements to and from the visited Member State for the Commission representatives and Member State experts in the teams. together with experts from civil society organisations.
Amendment 125 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
The Commission shall bear the travel and accommodation costs for experts and the observer referred to in this Article and Article 16(2) participating in the visits.
Amendment 130 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) to evaluate practices at internal borders; and external borders and locations where alleged violations of fundamental rights have taken place;
Amendment 160 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall use the results of relevant mechanisms and instruments, including evaluation and monitoring activities of Union bodies, offices and agencies which are involved in the implementation of the Schengen acquis such as the Independent Monitoring Mechanism as set out in Article 7 of the Screening Regulation and of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights as well as of independent national monitoring mechanisms and bodies and other national quality control mechanisms in preparing the evaluation and monitoring activities, during visits (announced or unannounced) to improve awareness on the functioning of the Schengen area and to avoid the duplication of efforts and conflicting measures.
Amendment 166 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The Commission mayshall share with relevant national and Union bodies, offices and agencies referred to in paragraph 1 in a secure and timely manner details of evaluation reports, action plans and updates on the implementation of the action plans.
Amendment 172 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
In the programming and implementation of the evaluations and monitoring activities and including during the formation of recommendations, the Commission shall take into account information and recommendations provided by third parties, including independent authorities, non- governmental organisations and, international organisations and journalists.
Amendment 210 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 19 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Unannounced visits shall take place without prior notification to the Member State concerned. By way of exception, the Commission may notify the Member State concerned at least 24 hours before such visit is to take place when the main purpose of the unannounced visit is a random verification of the implementation of the Schengen acquis.
Amendment 217 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
The Commission shall establish the detailed programme for unannounced visits. Where Member States have been notified, the Commission may consult the timetable and detailed programme with the Member State concerned.
Amendment 248 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
On duly justified imperative grounds of urgency relating to the serious deficiency, the Commission shall adopt the evaluation report no later than sixthree weeks after the end of the evaluation activity by means of an implementing act in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 29(4).
Amendment 253 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
Article 23 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. The evaluated Member State shall submit to the Commission and the Council its action plan within one monthtwo weeks of the adoption of the recommendations. The Commission shall transmit that action plan to the European Parliament.
Amendment 257 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 7 – introductory part
Article 23 – paragraph 7 – introductory part
7. To verify the progress made in the implementation of the recommendations related to the serious deficiency, the Commission shall organise a revisit that is to take place no later than one yearsix months from the date of the evaluation activity. The Commission shall withhold any further funding in connection to the serious deficiency until the evaluated Member States have fully implemented remedial measures.