1719 Amendments of Pernando BARRENA ARZA
Amendment 9 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
— having regard to the European Parliament resolution on access to decent and affordable housing for all (2019/2187(INI))1a _________________ 1a OJ C 456, 10.11.2021, p. 145–160.
Amendment 48 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. Whereas buildings are responsible for 40% of the EU energy consumption and 36% of greenhouse gas emissions;
Amendment 60 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. Whereas the New Bauhaus movement should be a continuation of the original Bauhaus, which introduced the social role of art and architecture in addressing societal needs;
Amendment 71 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas architecture, urban and territorial planning, mobility, design, the arts, sociology and engineering are complementary and instrumental for building an inclusive and fair society;
Amendment 101 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas access to decent and affordable housing is a fundamental right;
Amendment 122 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Reiterates that NEB aims at improving the quality of life of all people, regardless of their race, gender, nationality, age or possible disability;
Amendment 123 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Highlights the importance of broadening the perspective of the New European Bauhaus, so that it reflects our values and efforts to strengthen European cultural diversity, and thus moving away from the original Bauhaus, that reflected only the cultural perspective of one country, Member State or artistic school;
Amendment 135 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the New European Bauhaus (NEB) initiative and emphasises that it must primarily focus on improving the quality of people’s lives by sustainably transforming the spaces, means of mobility, buildings, cities and territories in which they live, work and recreate;
Amendment 143 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recognises the NEB as a creative and interdisciplinary initiative which has the potential to brings together architecture, design, housing, the arts and science at the forefront of EU policies for the first time, contributing to making the European Green Deal a tangible, positive and inclusive experience for all;
Amendment 156 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Reaffirms that the NEB has the potential to reshape the way policies are conceived and to define the environment of the future by meeting the need for spaces adapted to new ways of life, without compromising people's basic needs;
Amendment 187 #
2021/2255(INI)
6. Considers that this innovative cultural movementinitiative has the potential to position Europe as a global frontrunner in the area of architecture, design, culture, technology and energy efficiency by promoting ways of living, working and recreating better together, which can also be applied beyond the EU;
Amendment 193 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Reiterates the need for the NEB to be an instrument of exchange of culture and art between people from different backgrounds and ideas;
Amendment 220 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Regrets that no participation of the residents is foreseen for the committees of the New European Bauhaus; urges the Commission to include the perspective of ethical architecture and engage the people most affected by a New European Bauhaus project as active participants in the design process, as well as respect their cultural differences and diverse needs and perspectives;
Amendment 227 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Proposes the use of the New Bauhaus to ensure citizens’ “Right to the City”[1], and to help them to reclaim the city as a space created with their participation, as a space of encounter, societal interaction, collective actions and activities and on the basis of collective participation;[1]https://www.right2city.or g/
Amendment 228 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Calls on the Commission to ensure good governance, transparency and accountability towards relevant stakeholders for all New European Bauhaus projects;
Amendment 229 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 d (new)
Paragraph 7 d (new)
7d. Calls on the Commission to cooperate with local authorities and stakeholders so that citizens looking for housing have access to information on available New European Bauhaus housing projects; stresses the importance of strengthening the institutional and structured participation of tenants and residents and urges the Commission to facilitate this process by providing them with the necessary knowledge and information about the New European Bauhaus;
Amendment 269 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 – indent 7 a (new)
Paragraph 8 – indent 7 a (new)
- linking the NEB to the United Nations 2030 Sustainable Development Goals;
Amendment 270 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 – indent 7 b (new)
Paragraph 8 – indent 7 b (new)
- respecting the European Pillar of Social Rights;
Amendment 271 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 – indent 7 c (new)
Paragraph 8 – indent 7 c (new)
- enhancing the viability of SMEs;
Amendment 272 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 – indent 7 d (new)
Paragraph 8 – indent 7 d (new)
- -creating affordable housing;
Amendment 273 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 – indent 7 e (new)
Paragraph 8 – indent 7 e (new)
- contributing to modal shift towards public and collective transportation and less polluting means of transport;
Amendment 292 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Urges for EU-funded upskilling and training, in particular to digital tools, of workers in New European Bauhaus relevant sectors; calls on the Commission to ensure diversity and equal representation in the New European Bauhaus work environment; urges that workers’ and unions’ rights in the New European Bauhaus work environment should be safeguarded;
Amendment 319 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Commission to develop a clear plan for attracting public and private investment; encourages the Member States to allocate adequate funding to the NEB through their recovery and resilience plans and the European structural and investment funds and to assign to or create public bodies for the follow up and permanent accountability of NEB projects;
Amendment 338 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Believes that the NEB movement should promote more sustainable, socially inclusive, gender balanced and innovative ways of life based on a paradigm shift in consuming, mobility patterns and new models of planning, constructing and inhabiting our built environment in order to suit emerging needs and help to ensure decent housing and housing conditions for all;
Amendment 352 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Believes that the NEB movement should take into account the situation of minority and endangered languages when new buildings are planned, constructed or inhabited and their impact on the social and cultural communities;
Amendment 381 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Proposes the use of New European Bauhaus to develop neighbourhoods with open, inclusive, accessible and vibrant spaces that promote equality, cultural exchange, democracy and strengthen the sense of community, co-existence and cooperation;
Amendment 382 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17b. Welcomes the intention of the New European Bauhaus initiative to promote15-minute cities[1] in order to make all essential services and amenities accessible to citizens within walking distance; [1]https://www.15minutecity.com/
Amendment 389 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Highlights that the NEB could support energy security, affordability and efficiency by encouraging investment and incentivising low-tech, low-energy solutions and could facilitate the digital transition by improving connectivity to mitigate the digital divide; underlines the importance of the NEB fighting energy poverty through innovative solutions for the building, mobility, construction, industrial and materials sectors;
Amendment 404 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to use the NEB to better protect Europe’s rich cultural heritage from the impact of underfinancing and the climate change;
Amendment 429 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Calls on the Commission to use the New European Bauhaus to realize social sustainability whilst protecting EU citizens, in particular vulnerable groups, from the social impact of the European Green Deal with regard to housing and energy efficiency;
Amendment 446 #
2021/2255(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Calls on the Commission to have an own fund to finance New European Bauhaus projects, and to cooperate with citizens, neighbourhood organisations and relevant social enterprises, such as NGOs and cooperatives, as well as local authorities in the decision making process;
Amendment 9 #
2021/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that effective financial assistance in education is a prerequisite to eliminradicate poverty and enhance human well-being, especially at a time when public resources are increasingly constrained with competing demands in sectors heavily affected such as health and education;
Amendment 10 #
2021/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 1 – point 1 (new)
(1) Acknowledges that the COVID-19 crisis has made action on violence against children even more pressing; urges to take all appropriate measures to ban all forms of corporal punishment against children, and to explicitly condemn and commit to ending harmful practices, including child labour, child trafficking, gender-based violence, female genital mutilation, and early and forced child marriage;
Amendment 12 #
2021/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 2 (new)
Paragraph 1 – point 2 (new)
(2) Calls on the Commission and the European External Action Service (EEAS) to promote a quality education in conflict or emergency situation that adheres to the minimum standards developed by the Inter Agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE);
Amendment 13 #
2021/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 3 (new)
Paragraph 1 – point 3 (new)
(3) Calls on the Commission and the European External Action Service (EEAS) to support refugee-hosting countries in strengthening their local educational systems and assisting hosting communities to facilitate sustainable refugee inclusion;
Amendment 14 #
2021/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point 4 (new)
Paragraph 1 – point 4 (new)
(4) Stresses the importance to include the voices of children themselves in decisions that affect their access to quality, safe and inclusive education, in line with the EU Strategy on the Rights of the Child and its global dimension;
Amendment 20 #
2021/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses the importance of improving cosimpact analysis when selecting and monitoring education projects, of ensuring that projects last long enough to address children’sequately address learners’ educational needs, of avoiding excessive administrative burdens for implementing partners, and of addressing long-term sustainability in cash- for- education projects;
Amendment 21 #
2021/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 2 – point 1 (new)
(1) Calls on the Commission to support third countries, both through bilateral and multilateral efforts, to make use of existing flexibilities in international law to enable digital access to materials for educational purposes, as well as to advance solutions that would enable cross-border use; believes that progress in these areas would reduce the administrative and financial burden on educators and schools in carrying out their missions.
Amendment 24 #
2021/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to develop methodologies and guidelines that enhance the ability of its aid projects to reach girlall learners, particularly those who are at risk of being unable to access education such as girls and women, learners from disadvantaged backgrounds and with special educational needs, refugees, LGBTIQ+ people, learners living in rural and remote areas, and other marginalised groups by tackling barriers to quality, safe and inclusive education and training at all levels and by supporting the collection ofeffective monitoring of comparable data, disaggregated data, by gender and age, to better tailor responses to different subgroups of learners;
Amendment 26 #
2021/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to develop methodologies and guidelines that enhance the ability of its aid projects to reach girlsall learners, including girls, learners from disadvantaged backgrounds and with special educational needs, by tackling barriers to quality, safe and inclusive education and training at all levels and by supporting the collection ofeffective monitoring of comparable data, disaggregated data, by gender and age, to better tailor responses to different subgroups of learners;
Amendment 27 #
2021/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 3 – point 1 (new)
(1) Calls on the Commission and the European External Action Service (EEAS) to promote and support comprehensive sexuality education that is accessible, adapted and stigma-free for all children, adolescents and young people, in both formal and non-formal educational settings, including information on sexual and reproductive health services;
Amendment 29 #
2021/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Underlines that due to the pandemic, learners all over the globe have paid a heavy price in terms of learning and knowledge losses, which has been coupled with a severe methodology loss affecting the development of their critical thinking skills; calls therefore on the Commission and the European External Action Service (EEAS) to support national authorities in strengthening education systems both at national and regional level and investing in equality and skills for the future;
Amendment 31 #
2021/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Recalls that teachers play a prominent role in education at all levels and they should be equipped and empowered, even with digital skills, through continuous training and through better recognition of the teaching profession; stresses the importance of improving working conditions and the need for educators and teachers to be adequately remunerated for their work;
Amendment 34 #
2021/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Draws attention to the potential of online platforms such as eTwinning and teacher academies under Erasmus+ in order to further empower teachers, even beyond the EU, to help them communicate with their peers, exercise their professionalism and benefit from professional learning opportunities;
Amendment 44 #
2021/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 5 – point 1 (new)
(1) Recalls the importance of ensuring that digitalization leaves no child behind and calls on the Commission and the European External Action Service (EEAS) to cooperate closely with third countries and the private sector to enable broadband access and Internet-connected classrooms; calls for the inclusion of ICT and digital technology education in curricula, as well as the promotion of girls’ participation in STEAM subjects;
Amendment 45 #
2021/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – point 2 (new)
Paragraph 5 – point 2 (new)
(2) Stresses the importance of developing and strengthening awareness- raising activities related to climate change, environmental protection, and their impact on children and future generations; calls to make environmental education a core curriculum component;
Amendment 47 #
2021/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Draws attention to the need of harnessing the synergies between culture and education so as to shape sustainable, inclusive and resilient societies; in this regard, calls on the Commission and the European External Action Service (EEAS) to support national authorities in integrating arts and culture in school curricula and extra curricula activities so as to enrich the educational and learning experiences of learners in third countries;
Amendment 50 #
2021/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the importance of vocational education and training, particularly for children in third countries, to help them find stable work for all learners; believes that access to vocational education and training for learners in third countries represents a fundamental additional choice, which would help them to successfully manage the transition into the labour market and give them and their families a reason to finish school.
Amendment 54 #
2021/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 6 – point 1 (new)
Amendment 55 #
2021/2209(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Emphasises the significant role of non-formal and informal education as well as volunteering in acquiring crosscutting skills, which would enable learners to actively participate in society by developing their full potential personally and professionally; calls on the Commission and the European External Action Service (EEAS) to support the authorities of third countries in improving the recognition of competences gained through non-formal and informal education and in increasing cooperation between non-formal and informal organisations and schools;
Amendment 2 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)
Citation 4 a (new)
— having regard the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms
Amendment 38 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the negative consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic have disproportionately affected those from racial, religious and ethnic minority communities, creating, highlighting and exacerbating inequalities including in culture, media, education and sport;
Amendment 45 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas immigrants, refugees and political asylum seekers are subjected to racism and discriminatory behaviours
Amendment 55 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas according to the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights, racial discrimination and harassment remain commonplace throughout the European Union; whereas racial, religious and ethnic minorities are subjected to harassment, violence and hate speech, both online and offline; whereas racial, religious and ethnic minorities face structural discrimination in the EU in all areas, including housing, healthcare, employment and education;
Amendment 62 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas racist and xenophobic attitudes are embraced by certain opinion leaders and politicians across the EU, fomenting a social climate that provides fertile ground for racism, discrimination and hate crimes; whereas this environment is further fuelled by fascist, extreme right- wing and extremist movements which seek to divide our societies; whereas these acts run counter to the common European values which all the Member States have undertaken to uphold;
Amendment 68 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the fight against racism and discrimination in our societies needs to be stepped up and is a shared responsibility; whereas the European Union and Member States needs to further reflect on and commit to tackling the structural racism and discrimination faced by many minority groups;
Amendment 91 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas immigrants, refugees, political asylum seekers and members of racial, religious and ethnic minorities have limited access to the labour market and are often the subject of labour exploitation;
Amendment 119 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the publication and implementation of specific EU guidelines on the collection of equality data based on racial or ethnic origin; calls on the Member States to adapt national statistics and to remove barriers in order to facilitate the collection of quality data on equality; calls on the Commission and the Member States to use this data to develop policies to attain racial justice; calls for this data to be accessible by the public
Amendment 137 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Acknowledges that racism is inherentlyalso a matter of culture, heritage and norms; highlights, therefore, the role that culture can and must play in combating discrimination and racism, promoting social inclusion, diversity, equality and tolerance;
Amendment 149 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls for the Commission and the Member States to foster a more diverse cultural sector by removing barriers to participation in culture for racialised communities and individuals through funding from all the relevant programmes; encourages the creation of support networks and outreach activities, especially for those in rural and outermost regions;
Amendment 189 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls for the history of all racial and ethnic communities living in Europe to be included in all history curricula in order to encourage a broader perspective on world history centred on the interactions between different continents before and after European colonisation; urges that history books emphasize on the contribution that immigrants have made for the development and shaping of today's Europe;
Amendment 204 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Deplores the practice of segregation in schools; calls on all Member States to introduce policies to prevent children from minority groups from being placed in separate schools or classes, whether intentionally or not; encourages the Member States to actively promote the integration of children from minority groups to schools and local societies, while respecting their cultural identity;
Amendment 214 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Amendment 215 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls on the Member States to ensure that teaching staff from minority groups are recruited at all levels and are protected from racial discrimination in the school system; Calls on Member States for the systematic training of all teaching staff in promoting social inclusion, non- discrimination and tolerance
Amendment 232 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Urges Member States to put in place structures that will help migrants and people from racial and ethnic minorities to have equal access and opportunities to higher education
Amendment 239 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17b. Calls on Member States to introduce lifelong learning programs for civil servants and especially for state security forces to eliminate racist and xenophobic behaviours
Amendment 241 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17c. Calls on Member States to safeguard the secular character of public education with respect to the religious beliefs of all students
Amendment 263 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Notes that some Member States have audiovisual regulatory bodies with the power to issue sanctions following programmes that show discriminatory or racist content; encourages the Member States to empower their regulatory agencies in this sense; calls for the European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services to be given a greater role in coordinating the national agencies and collecting and sharing data; Calls on the Commission and Member States to stop EU and state funding for media outlets that are found guilty by official bodies for promoting hate speech and xenophobia;
Amendment 268 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Condemns the racist rhetoric expressed by certain media, as well as the targeting of immigrants as the source of various economic and social problems, for example by the over-coverage of crimes committed by immigrants
Amendment 277 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls on the Commission to open a specific call for funding for grassroots sports initiatives focused on inclusion and the fight against racism; calls on the Commission, furthermore, to systematically monitor the number and type of sports projects whose main focus is the fight against racism, and the amount of funding allocated to them; calls on the Commission to promote the inclusion of migrants and people from racial and ethnic minority backgrounds in grassroots sport clubs;
Amendment 293 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Urges Member States and national sports bodies to have a zero tolerance policy for hate speech and racist behaviours in sport arenas and training facilities
Amendment 294 #
2021/2057(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and, the Commission and the Member States.
Amendment 17 #
2021/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas the activities of the Committee on Petitions are based on the input provided by petitioners; whereas the information submitted by petitioners in their petitions and at committee meetings, along with the Commission’s assessment and the replies of the Member States and other bodies, are crucial for the work of the committee; whereas admissible petitions also provide valuable contributions to the work of the other parliamentary committees, given that they are forwarded by Committee on Petitions to other committees for an opinion or for information but very often these petitions are not taken into consideration;
Amendment 19 #
2021/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
N. whereas the main subjects of concern raised in petitions submitted in 2020 relate to fundamental rights (in particular the impact of COVID-19 emergency measures on the rule of law and democracy, as well on the freedom of movement, the right to work, the right to information and the right to education), health (notably questions on the public health crisis resulting from the pandemic, ranging from the protection of citizens’ health, including treatments and protective equipment, to the management of the health crisis in the Member States and the acquisition and distribution of vaccines), the environment (mostly mining activities and their impact on the environment, nuclear safety, air pollution and the deterioration of natural ecosystems), justice (notably issues related to access to justice or alleged procedural irregularities or concerns over the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary in the Member States, along with cross-border cases of child abduction and custody rights), education (in particular questions related to discriminatory access to education or contested national reform of the law on education), and the internal market (in particular questions relating to national travel restrictions in the context of the pandemic and their impact on the freedom of movement of persons within and outside the EU), in addition to many other areas of activity;
Amendment 28 #
2021/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Reiterates the importance of a continuous public debate on the Union’s fields of activity in order to ensure that citizens are correctly informed about the scope of the Union’s competences and the different levels of decision-making; calls, in this regard, for broader awareness raising campaigns, in order to enhance the visibility and increase the committee's responsiveness, through the active involvement of the press and communications services, to help increase citizens’ knowledge about their right to petition, as well as the scope and limits of the Union’s responsibilities, with a view to reducing the number of inadmissible petitions; it is also important to highlight those cases and success cases, in which an issue raised by a petitioner was solved with the support of the committee on petitions;
Amendment 37 #
2021/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that petitions constitute a unique opportunity for Parliament and the other EU institutions to directly connect with EU citizens and maintain a regular dialogue with them, particularly in cases where they are affected by the misapplication or breach of EU law; stresses the need for enhanced cooperation between the EU institutions and national, regional and local authorities on inquiries regarding the implementation of and compliance with EU law, including mandatory answer to the Committee; believes that such cooperation is crucial to address and resolve citizens’ concerns over the application of EU law and contributes to strengthening the democratic legitimacy and accountability of the Union; calls, therefore, for the more active participation of Member States’ representatives in committee meetings and for swifter responses to the requests for clarification or information sent by the Committee on Petitions to the national authorities;
Amendment 43 #
2021/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that petitions contribute considerably to the Commission’s role as guardian of the Treaties; stresses that reinforced cooperation between the Committee on Petitions and the Commission and timely, precise and clear answers from the Commission are essential to ensure the successful treatment of petitions; reiterates its call on the Commission for regular updates on developments in infringement proceedings and for access to relevant Commission documents on infringements and EU pilot procedures which have been closed;
Amendment 52 #
2021/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to actively assess whether national authorities are taking the necessary measures to respond to citizens’ concerns as expressed in their petitions where cases of systemic failure in compliance with EU law occur;
Amendment 55 #
2021/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls that cooperation with other committees in Parliament is essential for the accurate and comprehensive treatment of petitions; notes that in 2020, 56 petitions were sent to other committees for opinion and 385 for information; welcomes the fact that 40 opinions and 60 acknowledgements of taking petitions into consideration in their work were received from other committees; regrets, however, that there is no clear information about this feedback and the fact that many petitions are not even considered by the concerned committees; recalls that petitioners are informed of the decisions to request opinions from other committees for the treatment of their petitions; calls on parliamentary committees to step up their efforts to actively contribute to the examination of petitions – by proving their expertise – and thus enable Parliament to respond more swiftly and comprehensively to citizens’ concerns; regrets that the PETI Network could not meet in 2020;
Amendment 67 #
2021/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Is seriously concerned about the public health and socio-economic damages caused by the COVID-19 pandemic; welcomes the excellent work done by the Committee on Petitions which, by voicing citizens’ concerns over the public health and socio-economic crises related to the COVID-19 pandemic, contributed to ensuring Parliament’s responsiveness to citizens’ needs and expectations as regards the Union’s capacity to address such a global challenge; draws attention, in this regard, to the important follow-up actions taken by the Committee on Petitions to respond to the issues raised in COVID-19-related petitions, which lead to the adoption in plenary of the resolutions on the Schengen system and measures taken during the COVID-19 crisis9 , on the rights of persons with intellectual disabilities and their families in the COVID-19 crisis10 and on tackling homelessness rates in the EU11 ; _________________ 9 Texts adopted, P9_TA(2020)0315. 10 Texts adopted, P9_TA(2020)0183. 11 Texts adopted, P9_TA(2020)0314.
Amendment 73 #
2021/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Takes note that, along with fundamental rights, health was the main area of concern for petitioners in 2020; while recognising that health concerns related to the COVID-19 pandemic were at the centre of the Committee on Petitions’ work, draws attention to the resolution on additional funding for biomedical research on Myalgic Encephalomyelitis, the motion for which was adopted by the committee on 30 April 2020, adopted in plenary on 18 June 202013 ; recalls that Parliament’s resolution has been highly welcomed by the scientific and patients’ communities; reiterates, in this regard, its call for coordinated and enhanced research efforts and for additional funding to support progress in research in order to address the human and socio-economic consequences of the growing number of individuals living and working with long- term disabling and chronic conditions; _________________ 13 Texts adopted, P9_TA(2020)0140.
Amendment 87 #
2021/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Underlines that the Petitions Web Portal is an essential tool for ensuring a smooth, efficient and transparent petitions process; welcomes, in this regard, the improvements on data protection and on the security features which have made the portal more user-friendly and secure for citizens; stresses that efforts must be continued to make the portal more accessible to persons with disabilities, including by enabling the tabling of petitions in national sign languages; nevertheless, it is urgent to change or update the computerized registration and signature system, so that it is truly agile and allows citizen participation in accordance with their needs and urgencies, in real time.
Amendment 16 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 a (new)
Citation 15 a (new)
— having regards to the Directive (EU) 2018/1808 amending Directive 2010/13/EU on the coordination of certain provisions laid by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audio-visual media services (Audiovisual Media Service Directive),
Amendment 18 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 b (new)
Citation 15 b (new)
— having regard to the Protocole on the system of public broadcasting in the Member States annexed to the Treaty establishing the European Community (Amsterdam Protocol, 10/11/1997),
Amendment 23 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 20 a (new)
Citation 20 a (new)
— having regard the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Single Market for Digital Services (Digital Service Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (COM/2020/825 final),
Amendment 24 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 20 b (new)
Citation 20 b (new)
— having regard to the Proposal for the Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on contestable and fair market in the digital sector (Digital Market Act) (COM/2020/842 final),
Amendment 44 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas quality, well-financed and independent news media and professional journalism are an essential pillar of democracy and rule of law; whereas every effort must be made to increase media pluralism3 ; freedom and media pluralism3; whereas the transparency of media funding is an essential element in reducing the confidence's crisis of European citizens; whereas media shouldn't be subject to any pressure from political and economic power; whereas the media's concentration in hegemonic groups is not adequate for the information's diversity; _________________ 3 No EU country registers a low level of risk in the market plurality area according to ‘Monitoring Media Pluralism in the Digital Era’, p. 50:https://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/ 1814/67828/MPM2020- PolicyReport.pdf?sequence=5&isAllowed =y
Amendment 57 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the audio and audiovisual sector plays a vital part in fostering the resilience of our democratic societies; whereas the heterogeneity of the sector is also one of its strengths, helping to promote and strengthen Europe’s cultural, linguistic, including regional or minority languages, social and political diversity;
Amendment 63 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
D a. whereas the Commission must promote both transformation of new business models of audio and audiovisual media using own online profiles to create a broader investigative and trustworthy media landscape and non profit media freedom inititaives in a substainable and intensive manner;
Amendment 76 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the fallout of the economic downturn, and strongly reiterates its call on the Commission and the Member States to increase support available for the news media and audiovisual sectors, and the cultural and creative sectors more broadly; considers that allocations for the media sector should be increased across various multiannual financial framework (MFF) programmes;
Amendment 79 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Highlights the importance of the dual system of public and commercial media in Europe; calls on Member States to provide sustainable funding to public service media in order to secure the diverse European media landscape;
Amendment 81 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the launch of the ‘NEWS’ initiative for the news media sector, including the European News Media Forum; reiterates emphatically its repeated calls for the creation of a permanent European news media fund; including funding of press publishers, the dual system of pubic and commercial media and independent, local and cooperative and exile media producers;
Amendment 94 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Acknowledges that some parts of the audio and audiovisual ecosystem are not covered by current support measures; invites the Commission to continue exploring tailored support schemes; urges particular attention be paid in all support actions to Member States with low audio and audiovisual production capacity; invites to support especially the independet and investigative media whuch suffer from the crisis and the poltical will to silence them;
Amendment 106 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Invites the Commission to conduct a study, develop guidelines and share among Member States the best practices in public financing mechanisms; while recalling the Member States' responsibility in regards to culture, education, youth and media policy and more particularly funding mechanisms in these fields;
Amendment 135 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Calls that ecomomic based media concentration, pressure on public media sector and the pressure of infotainment spin with shortening information timeslots and conditioning kind presentation and debates are detrimental to the quality and impartiality of information and democratic exchange;
Amendment 137 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes with concern that global online platforms have a vast disruptive impact on the media sector, as they dominate the data and advertising market, and have radically changed audience consumption patterns; underlines that current legislation does not regulate pivotal issues in the information ecosystem such as access to data, digital advertising, algorithmic transparency, platform accountability, must-show and other questions; considers that timely adoption of legislation to help address these shortcomings is a matter of urgency; given that alerts on the will of the platforms not to refer the information coming from other media sources has to be answered with commen code of conduct on more public transparency to ensure the discoverability of information and other content; is also concerned about the platforms' business practises to remove or interfere with lawful content proboded under a media service provider's editprial responsibilty and that is sibject to specific standards and oversights;
Amendment 149 #
2021/2017(INI)
9 a. Highlights the importance of the Digital Service Act and the Digital Markets Act for European media and audiovisual sectors since citizens and in particular minors increasingly access news und diverse content via thord-party platforms; such as social networks and news aggregators; stresses the need to further improve the proposed Acts in order to mitigate the issues mentioned above;
Amendment 152 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9 b. Notes that media are increasingly dependent on global platforms and interfaces, some of which are vertically integrated competitors, to deliver their services to European audiences; call upon Member States to come up with prominence regimes to ensure that media content of general interest is easy to discover and find on third-party platforms and calls upon the Commission to develop a solid European approach to support this overall goal;
Amendment 157 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recognises the additional challenges for news media operating in smaller markets, including local, regional and niche media, which have limited revenues, and are not viable using current commercial business models, and which cannot embrace new ones that media operating in larger markets can; believes, therefore, that public funding mechanisms based on the arm’s length principle are increasingly necessary; calls on Member States to ensure stable, transparent and adequate funding for public service media on a multiannual basis in order to guarantee their independence from governmental, political and market pressures and enable them to provide a broad range of pluralistic information and diverse content;
Amendment 168 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Stresses that it is essential to guarantee financial sustainability of public service media, and to ensure and maintain the independence of private and public service media from political and economic interference, including from external actors and shareholders; acknowledges the specific situation of the Member States which are exposed to geopolitical risks arising from third country interference in their information space, including through media financing; believes that the best viable antidote is a more robust media landscape with steady revenue streams; considers increased transparency to be important, and therefore welcomes the Media Ownership Monitor initiative;
Amendment 180 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Encourages the Commission for an actve regulation of the big platforms with the new proposed Acts to allow a fair permanent discussion between the media that produce editorial contents and the platforms that used them by references in their searching, communicating and clouding services for individual, institutional and business users;
Amendment 196 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Urges the Commission to take into account the specificities of the different types of media and definite a broad approach on media producers, including press publishers and focused on independent, cooperative nd exile media producers and public audio and audiovisual media;
Amendment 203 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses the need for transformation in the news media sector, including through the digitalisation of newsrooms, the uptake of artificial intelligence (AI), changes and improvements to content creation and presentation, as well as better distribution and subscription models, including micro- payments; notes that the above require additional investment and skills that news media sector players often lack, especially those with small market share; calls on the Commission and the Member States to provide tailored support for the digital transformation of the sector;
Amendment 212 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to stabilize media freedom projects in order to prevent practices in the Member States that prevent journalists from reporting and researching, and to protect whistleblowers in a socially and legally sustainable manner;
Amendment 216 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Underlines the added value of including the media sector in media and information literacy initiatives; which must be central to the educational policies of Member States and the European Union;
Amendment 223 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Considers that in order to help spur competition, the EU also needs to promote the creation and growth of digital media start-ups through easier access to finance and a supportive framework that enables scalability;
Amendment 236 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Is of the view that targeted co- production, translation and co-distribution, subtitling and dubbing could contribute to increasing the availability of diverse European audiovisual content; notes with interest several innovative projects carried out by European public service media organisations in that regard, such as the ARTE European collection, the News Recommendation Box and ENTR;
Amendment 266 #
2021/2017(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Highlights that film literacy is particularly important for making younger audiences aware of European cultural diversity and history; considers it necessary to develop a film literacy toolkit; recalls the specificities of the European cinematographic production and the cultural exception in this domain to preserve the quality production of the European continent;
Amendment 4 #
2021/0316(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that the social impacts of the redundancies are expected to be important for workers in the Basque region, where the number of unemployed persons increased by 25 % between March and August 202011 , and where long-term unemployment represented 55,6 % of total unemployment in May 2021 (3,6 p.p. higher than in January 2021) and unemployed persons with basic education or less represented 60,8 %; recalls also that the wage gap between men and women is 22.6% and the temporary employment rate is 25.8% in the Basque region, 11.6 points above the Union average, which is 14.2%; _________________ 11Avance de los datos del mercado laboral del año 2020 (labor market data for 2020).
Amendment 7 #
2021/0316(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Welcomes that the co-ordinated package of personalised services was drawn up by Spain in consultation with the social partners12 ; the involvement of certain social partners was ensured by their representation in Lanbide's governance board, which is made up of representatives of the regional government, trade unions and employer organisations; considers that the biggest trade unions and the cooperative ventures of the Basque region should have also been consulted, as they are essential social partners in the context of the social dialogue; _________________ 12The application was approved by Lanbide, the Basque public employment service (social partners are part of the governance board), on 2 July 2021. Meetings were also held on 19 January and 2 February 2021 with Federación Vizcaína de Empresas del Metal, (federation of metal enterprises of Biscay), Asociación de Empresas de Guipúzcoa - ADEGI (Business association of Gupúzcoa) and SEA-Empresas Alavesas (business associations of Alava).
Amendment 60 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) In order to ensure transparency and public participation, the Commission should engage with all interested stakeholders. To that end, the Commission should closely cooperate with stakeholders including private and public actors, such as bodies governed by public laws of the educational or health sector, as well as establishments that make cultural heritage and global knowledge assets publicly accessible in libraries, archives and museums, and consult them on measures to accelerate the digital transformation at Union level. The involvement of stakeholders would be important at the level of Member States as well, in particular when adopting their national Digital Decade strategic roadmaps and their adjustments.
Amendment 78 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) ensure digital sovereignty notably by a secure and accessible digital infrastructure based on fundamental values that is capable tof processing vast volumes of data that, enables other technological developments, and innovative education and research, and supportings the competitiveness of the Union's industry, democratic dialogue and social welfare;
Amendment 96 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)
5a. Basic digital skills include knowledge of personal and institutional data protection, ownership and security structures of online applications used, and basic knowledge of legal safeguards that digital service providers must provide;
Amendment 152 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
(ia) Developing European projects for the digitisation of global knowledge assets and cultural heritage, including the public accessibility thereof;
Amendment 1 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that the economic crisis triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic should not adversely affect investments of a social, educational, creative and cultural nature; therefore, increases the allocations of Erasmus+ and the European Solidarity Corps Programme to better support the recovery, in particular by ‘greening’ those programmes; underlines that particular attention should be paid to ensure good outreach to vulnerable people, whose exclusion has been worsened by the pandemic, in order to ensure equal access to the programmes for all, leaving no one behind;
Amendment 6 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Given the dramatic consequences of the COVID-19 crisis on Europe’s cultural and creative sectors (CCS), reinforces the Culture strand of the Creative Europe Programme, to support organisations and artist, artists and all cultural workers in their recovery, to provide targeted support for the performing arts, in particular the music sector, and to ‘green’ and to “digitize” the programme;
Amendment 11 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Urges the Member States once more to earmark at least 2 % of the Recovery and Resilience Facility for the recovery of the CCS and industries, and/or to provide equal protection measures such as tax deductions or exemptions, disposal of public buildings for free to boost the recovery, financing of the costs of the expensive processes required for the special hygiene protocols to be obligatorily adopted by the CCS or other measures possibly suggested by the CCS agents themselves;
Amendment 15 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Insists that no funding from any of the three strands of the Creative Europe Programme should be used for financing projects in the framework of the New European Bauhaus initiative, in line with the repeated commitment of the Commissioner for Innovation, Research, Culture, Education and Youth to this effect, in order to prevent diversion of the programme’s already thinly spread funds towards new, unforeseen political prioritie, which, as past years have shown, are not sufficient to meet the needs of the programme, towards new, unforeseen political priorities; notes that the New European Bauhaus initiative needs its own funding, which should also be tailored to its particular needs and requirements;
Amendment 19 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Emphasises that more funding is needed to fund all high-quality projects submitted in the framework of calls for proposals under the Citizens’ engagement and participation strand Union programmes in the fields of culture and education, with particular emphasis ofn the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values Programme andin order to tackle the historically low application success rate of that strand;
Amendment 23 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Increases the budget for “Multimedia actions” by EUR 2,2 million and creates a reserve of EUR 5 million, in order to encourage the Commission to provide more stability, financial security and predictability for radio networks covering EU affairs with funding covering at least two years; furthermore, splits the existing budget line into its four components, for enhanced transparency and budgetary scrutiny.
Amendment 24 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Underlines the need to support the CCS so that they manage to develop creativity and innovation in order to further develop and eventually deal with the digital transition as an opportunity and not as a threat;
Amendment 25 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Νotes the importance of providing equal access for all to funding for education and culture; therefore, calls for specific measures to enhance visibility of the funding tools that the Union makes available to the CCS, as well as educational activities to enhance know- how and accessibility to the administrative processes required to access Union funding;
Amendment 26 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6 c. Stresses the need for Member States to monitor and be monitored with regard to the management of funding for the CCS;
Amendment 27 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 d (new)
Paragraph 6 d (new)
6 d. Highlights the need to enhance data gathering and usage for the CCS; notes that there are many data that are currently not further used to add value for policy-design; suggests the adoption of specific measures to enhance the usage of the data already gathered in the implementation processes of the programmes;
Amendment 28 #
2021/0227(BUD)
6 e. Highlights that public funding is vital for the CCS; notes, however, that they are currently inadequately funded; therefore, calls on the Commission and the Member States to adopt measures establishing long-term schemes for funding the CCS as well as measures incentivising the private sector to invest in the CCS.
Amendment 47 #
2021/0140(CNS)
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 #
2021/0140(CNS)
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 #
2021/0140(CNS)
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 #
2021/0140(CNS)
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 #
2021/0140(CNS)
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 #
2021/0140(CNS)
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 #
2021/0140(CNS)
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 #
2021/0140(CNS)
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 #
2021/0140(CNS)
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 #
2021/0140(CNS)
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 #
2021/0140(CNS)
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 #
2021/0140(CNS)
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 #
2021/0140(CNS)
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 #
2021/0140(CNS)
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 #
2021/0140(CNS)
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 #
2021/0140(CNS)
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 #
2021/0140(CNS)
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 #
2021/0140(CNS)
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 #
2021/0140(CNS)
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.
Amendment 67 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) At the same time, depending on the circumstances regarding its specific application and use, artificial intelligence may generate risks and cause harm to public interests and rightsfundamental rights of people in employment and in learning and of socially active people that are protected by Union law. Such harm might be material or immaterial.
Amendment 71 #
2021/0106(COD)
(5) A Union legal framework laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence is therefore needed to foster the development, use and uptake of artificial intelligence in the internal market that at the same time meets a high level of protection of public interests, such as health and safety and the protection of fundamental rights, as recognised and protected by Union law. To achieve that objective, rules regulating the placing on the market and putting into service of certain AI systems should be laid down, thus ensuring the smooth functioning of the internal market and allowing those systems to benefit from the principle of free movement of goods and services. By laying down those rules, this Regulation supports the objective of the Union of being a global leader in the development of secure, and trustworthy and ethical artificial intelligence based on fundamental rights, as stated by the European Council33, and it ensures the protection of ethical principles, as specifically requested by the European Parliament34. _________________ 33 European Council, Special meeting of the European Council (1 and 2 October 2020) – Conclusions, EUCO 13/20, 2020, p. 6. 34 European Parliament resolution of 20 October 2020 with recommendations to the Commission on a framework of ethical aspects of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, 2020/2012(INL).
Amendment 81 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) For the purposes of this Regulation the notion of publicly accessible space should be understood as referring to any physical or virtual place that is accessible to the public, irrespective of whether the place in question is privately or publicly owned or owned on a non-profit basis. Therefore, the notion does not cover places that are private in nature and normally not freely accessible for third parties, including law enforcement authorities, unless those parties have been specifically invited or authorised, such as homes, private clubs, offices, warehouses and factories. Online spaces are not covered either, as they are not physicalvirtual protected spaces. However, the mere fact that certain conditions for accessing a particular space may apply, such as admission tickets or age restrictions, does not mean that the space is not publicly accessible within the meaning of this Regulation. Consequently, in addition to public spaces such as streets, parks, sports complexes, relevant parts of government buildings and most transport infrastructure, spaces such as cinemas, theatres, museums, libraries, shops and shopping centres are normally also publicly accessible. Whether a given space is accessible to the public should however be determined on a case-by-case basis, having regard to the specificities of the individual situation at hand as regards the use made of that space.
Amendment 88 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Aside from the many beneficial uses of artificial intelligence, that technology can also be misused and provide novel and powerful tools for manipulative, exploitative and social control practices. Such practices are particularly harmful and should be prohibited because they contradict Union values of respect for human dignity, freedom, equality, democracy and the rule of law and Union fundamental rights, including the right to non-discrimination, employee protection, data protection and privacy and the rights of the child.
Amendment 91 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) AI systems providing social scoring of natural persons for general purpose by public authorities or on their behalf may lead to discriminatory outcomes and the exclusion of certain groups. They may violate the right to dignity and non- discrimination and the values of equality and justice. Such AI systems evaluate or classify the trustworthiness, interests and abilities of natural persons based on their social behaviour in multiple contexts or known or predicted personal or, personality characteristics. The social score obtained from such AI systems may lead to the detrimental or unfavourable treatment of natural persons or whole groups thereof in social contexts, whior identity ch are unrelated to the context in which the data was originally generated or collected or to a detrimental treatment that is disproportionate or unjustified to the gravity of their social behaviouracteristics. Such AI systems should be therefore prohibited.
Amendment 95 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The use of AI systems for ‘real- time’ remote biometric identification of natural persons in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement is considered particularly intrusive improperly encroaches on the rights and freedoms of the concerned persons, to the extent that it may affectpersons and is detrimental to the private life of a large part of the population, evoke a feeling of in that it makes constant surveillance possible and, indirectly dissuade the so doing, makes it difficult to exercise of the freedom of assembly and other fundamental rights. In addition, the immediacy of the impact and the limited opportunities for further checks or corrections in relation to the use of such systems operating in ‘real-time’ carry heightened risks for the rights and freedoms of the persons that are concerned by law enforcement activities.
Amendment 96 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) The use of those systems for the purpose of law enforcement should therefore be prohibited, except in three exhaustively listed and narrowly defined situations, where the use is strictly necessary to achieve a substantial public interest, the importance of which outweighs the risks. Those situations involve the search for potential victims of crime, including missing children; certain threats to the life or physical safety of natural persons or of a terrorist attack; and the detection, localisation, identification or prosecution of perpetrators or suspects of the criminal offences referred to in Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA38if those criminal offences are punishable in the Member State concerned by a custodial sentence or a detention order for a maximum period of at least three years and as they are defined in the law of that Member State. Such threshold for the custodial sentence or detention order in accordance with national law contributes to ensure that the offence should be serious enough to potentially justify the use of ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification systems. Moreover, of the 32 criminal offences listed in the Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA, some are in practice likely to be more relevant than others, in that the recourse to ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification will foreseeably be necessary and proportionate to highly varying degrees for the practical pursuit of the detection, localisation, identification or prosecution of a perpetrator or suspect of the different criminal offences listed and having regard to the likely differences in the seriousness, probability and scale of the harm or possible negative consequences. _________________ 38 Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States (OJ L 190, 18.7.2002, p. 1)in publicly accessible spaces should therefore be prohibited as a matter of principle.
Amendment 97 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
Amendment 98 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
Amendment 99 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
Amendment 100 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The use of AI systems for ‘real- time’ remote biometric identification of natural persons in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement necessarily involvesresults in the processing of biometric data. The rules of this Regulation that prohibit, subject to certain exceptions, such use, which are based on Article 16 TFEU, should apply as lex specialis in respect of the rules on the processing of biometric data contained in Article 10 of Directive (EU) 2016/680, thus regulating such use and the processing of biometric data involved in an exhaustive manner. Therefore, such use and processing should only be possible in as far as it is compatible with the framework set by this Regulation, without there being scope, outside that framework, for the competent authorities, where they act for purpose of law enforcement, to use such systems and process such data in connection thereto on the grounds listed in Article 10 of Directive (EU) 2016/680. In this context, this Regulation is not intended to provide the legal basis for the processing of personal data under Article 8 of Directive 2016/680. However, the use of ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible spaces for purposes other than law enforcement, including by competent authorities, should not be covered by the specific framework regarding such use for the purpose of law enforcement set by this Regulation. Such use for purposes other than law enforcement should therefore not be subject to the requirement of an authorisation under this Regulation and the applicable detailed rules of national law that may give effect to it.
Amendment 102 #
2021/0106(COD)
Amendment 105 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) High-risk AI systems should only be placed on the Union market or put into service if they comply with certain mandatory requirements. Those requirements should ensure that high-risk AI systems available in the Union or whose output is otherwise used in the Union do not pose unacceptable risks to important Union public interests as recognised and protected by Union law. AI systems identified as high-risk should be limited to those that have a significant harmful impact on the health, safety and fundamental rights of persons in the Union and such limitation minimises any potential restriction to international trade, if any.
Amendment 110 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) Technical inaccuracies of AI systems intended for the remote biometric identification of natural persons in protected spaces can lead to biased results and entail discriminatory effects. This is particularly relevant when it comes to age, ethnicity, sex or disabilities. Therefore, ‘real-time’ and ‘post’ remote biometric identification systems used in the workplace, in higher education or within vocational training should be classified as high-risk. In view of the risks that they pose, both types of remote biometric identification systems should be subject to specific requirements on logging capabilities and human oversight.
Amendment 119 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) AI systems used in employment, employment support, workers management and access to self- employment, notably for the recruitment and selection of persons, for making decisions on promotion and termination and for task allocation, monitoring or evaluation of persons in work-related contractual relationships, should also be classified as high-risk, since those systems may appreciably impact future career prospects and livelihoods of these persons. Relevant work-related contractual relationships should involve employees and persons providing services through platforms as referred to in the Commission Work Programme 2021. Such persons should in principle not be considered users within the meaning of this Regulation. Throughout the recruitment process and in the evaluation, promotion, or retention of persons in work-related contractual relationships, such systems may perpetuate historical patterns of discrimination, for example against women, certain age groups, persons with disabilities, or persons of certain racial or ethnic origins or sexual orientation. AI systems used to monitor the performance and behaviour of these persons may also impact their rights to data protection and privacy.
Amendment 140 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 85
Recital 85
(85) In order to ensure that the regulatory framework can be adapted where necessary, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU should be delegated to the Commission to amend the techniques and approaches referred to in Annex I to define AI systems, the Union harmonisation legislation listed in Annex II, the high-risk AI systems listed in Annex III, the provisions regarding technical documentation listed in Annex IV, the content of the EU declaration of conformity in Annex V, the provisions regarding the conformity assessment procedures in Annex VI and VII and the provisions establishing the high-risk AI systems to which the conformity assessment procedure based on assessment of the quality management system and assessment of the technical documentation should apply. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultatthe level of experts from different areas of society such as education, media and culture and from trade unions beand conductedsumer and data protection organisations, in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making58. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States’ experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. _________________ 58 OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1.
Amendment 160 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 39
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 39
(39) ‘publicly accessible space’ means any physical or virtual place accessible to the public, regardless of whether certain conditions for access may apply and regardless of form of ownership;
Amendment 163 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 a (new)
(44a) ‘cultural institutions’ means institutions such as libraries, museums, theatres, concert halls, exhibition centres, architectural ensembles and multi- purpose arts venues, as well as their virtual sections, which organise cultural education, democratic exchanges and research and provide ways and means of engaging with cultural heritage;
Amendment 181 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – introductory part
(c) the placing on the market, putting into service or use of AI systems by public authorities or on their behalf for the evaluation or classification of the trustworthiness of natural persons over a certain period of time based on their social behaviour or known or predicted personal or personality characteristics, with the social score leading to either or both of the following:
Amendment 186 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – introductory part
(d) the use of ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement, unless and in as far as such use is strictly necessary for one of the following objectives:;
Amendment 188 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point i
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point i
Amendment 189 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point ii
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point ii
Amendment 190 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point iii
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point iii
Amendment 194 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Amendment 197 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Amendment 199 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Amendment 267 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 4 – introductory part
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 4 – introductory part
4. Employment and employment support, workers management and access to self-employment:
Amendment 318 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The purpose of this Regulation is to improve the functioning of the internal market by laying down a uniform legal framework in particular for the development, marketing and use of artificial intelligence in conformity with Union values. This Regulation pursues a number of overriding reasons of public interest, such as a high level of protection of health, safety, environment and fundamental rights, as well as consumer protection and it ensures the free movement of AI- based goods and services cross-border, thus preventing Member States from imposing restrictions on the development, marketing and use of AI systems, unless explicitly authorised by this Regulation.
Amendment 322 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Artificial intelligence systems (AI systems) can be easily deployed in multiple sectors of the economy and society, including cross border, and circulate throughout the Union. Certain Member States have already explored the adoption of national rules to ensure that artificial intelligence is safe and is developed and used in compliance with fundamental rights obligations. Differing national rules may lead to fragmentation of the internal market and decrease legal certainty for operators that develop or use AI systems. A consistent and high level of protection throughout the Union should therefore be ensured, while divergences hampering the free circulation of AI systems and related products and services within the internal market should be prevented, by laying down uniform obligations for operators and guaranteeing the uniform protection of overriding reasons of public interest and of rights of persons throughout the internal market based on Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). To the extent that this Regulation contains specific rules on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data concerning restrictions of the use of AI systems for ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification in publicly accessible and online spaces for the purpose of law enforcement, it is appropriate to base this Regulation, in as far as those specific rules are concerned, on Article 16 of the TFEU. In light of those specific rules and the recourse to Article 16 TFEU, it is appropriate to consult the European Data Protection Board.
Amendment 330 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3 a) To ensure that Artificial Intelligence leads to socially and environmentally beneficial outcomes, Member States should support such measures through allocating sufficient resources, including public funding, and giving priority access to regulatory sandboxes to projects led by civil society and social stakeholders. Such projects should be based on the principle of interdisciplinary cooperation between AI developers, experts in equality and non- discrimination, accessibility, and consumer, environmental, and digital rights, and the academic community.
Amendment 332 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3 a) To ensure that Artificial Intelligence leads to socially and environmentally beneficial outcomes, Member States should support such measures through allocating sufficient resources, including public funding, and giving priority access to regulatory sandboxes to projects led by civil society and social stakeholders. Such projects should be based on the principle of interdisciplinary cooperation between AI developers, experts in equality and non- discrimination, accessibility, and consumer, environmental, and digital rights, and the academic community.
Amendment 333 #
2021/0106(COD)
(3 b) Furthermore, in order for Member States to fight against climate change, to achieve climate-neutrality and to meet the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the European companies should ensure the sustainable design of AI systems to reduce resource usage and energy consumption, thereby limiting the risks to the environment; AI systems have the potential to automatically provide businesses with detailed insight into their emissions, including value chains, and forecast future emissions, thus helping to adjust and achieve the Union's emission targets.
Amendment 336 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) At the same time, depending on the circumstances regarding its specific application and use, artificial intelligence may generate risks and cause harm to public interests and rights that are protected by Union law. Such harm might be material or immaterial and might affect one or more persons, a groups of persons or society as a whole, as well as the environment.
Amendment 340 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4 a) The concept of decision autonomy for machines is at its core in conflict with fundamental notions of our societies, such as human dignity, autonomy, and the rights to private life and the protection of personal data. This Regulation should reconcile the potential benefits to society offered by AI with the primacy of humans over machines;
Amendment 351 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) A Union legal framework laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence is therefore needed to foster the development, use and uptake of artificial intelligence in the internal market that at the same time meets a high level of protection of public interests, such as health and safetythe environment and the protection of fundamental rights and values, as recognised and protected by Union law. To achieve that objective, rules regulating the placing on the market and putting into service of certain AI systems should be laid down, thus ensuring the smooth functioning of the internal market and allowing those systems to benefit from the principle of free movement of goods and services. By laying down those rules, this Regulation supports the objective of the Union of being a global leader in the development of secure, trustworthy and ethical artificial intelligence, as stated by the European Council33 , and it ensures the protection of ethical principles, as specifically requested by the European Parliament34 . _________________ 33 European Council, Special meeting of the European Council (1 and 2 October 2020) – Conclusions, EUCO 13/20, 2020, p. 6. 34 European Parliament resolution of 20 October 2020 with recommendations to the Commission on a framework of ethical aspects of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, 2020/2012(INL).
Amendment 367 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The notion of biometric data used in this Regulation is in line with and should be interpreted consistently with the notion of biometric data as defined in Article 4(14) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council35 , Article 3(18) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council36 and Article 3(13) of Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council37 . An additional definition has been added for ‘biometrics-based data’ to cover physical, physiological or behavioural data that may not meet the criteria to be defined as biometric data (i.e. would not allow or confirm the unique identification of a natural person) but which may be used for purposes such as emotion recognition or biometric categorisation. The addition of this definition does not narrow the scope of, nor exclude anything from, the definition of biometric data, but rather provides for a comprehensive scope for additional forms of data which may be used for purposes such as biometric categorisation but which would not allow or confirm unique identification. _________________ 35 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1). 36 Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2018 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and Decision No 1247/2002/EC (OJ L 295, 21.11.2018, p. 39) 37 Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA (Law Enforcement Directive) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 89).
Amendment 368 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The notion of biometric data used in this Regulation is in line with and should be interpreted consistently with the notion of biometric data as defined in Article 4(14) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council35 , Article 3(18) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council36 and Article 3(13) of Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council37 . An additional definition has been added for ‘biometrics-based data’ to cover physical, physiological or behavioural data that may not meet the criteria to be defined as biometric data (i.e. would not allow or confirm the unique identification of a natural person) but which may be used for purposes such as emotion recognition or biometric categorisation. The addition of this definition does not narrow the scope of, nor exclude anything from, the definition of biometric data, but rather provides for a comprehensive scope for additional forms of data which may be used for purposes such as biometric categorisation but which would not allow or confirm unique identification. _________________ 35 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1). 36 Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2018 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and Decision No 1247/2002/EC (OJ L 295, 21.11.2018, p. 39) 37 Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA (Law Enforcement Directive) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 89).
Amendment 384 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) For the purposes of this Regulation the notion of publicly accessible space should be understood as referring to any physical place that is accessible to the public, irrespective of whether the place in question is privately or publicly owned. Therefore, the notion does not cover places that are private in nature and normally not freely accessible for third parties, including law enforcement authorities, unless those parties have been specifically invited or authorised, such as homes, private clubs, offices, warehouses and factories. Online spaces are not covered either, as they are not physical spaces. However, the mere fact that certain conditions for accessing a particular space may apply, such as admission tickets or age restrictions, does not mean that the space is not publicly accessible within the meaning of this Regulation. Consequently, in addition to online and public spaces such as streets, relevant parts of government buildings and most transport infrastructure, spaces such as cinemas, theatres, shops and shopping centres are normally also publicly accessible. Whether a given space is accessible to the public should however be determined on a case- by-case basis, having regard to the specificities of the individual situation at hand.
Amendment 396 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) This Regulation should also apply to Union institutions, offices, bodies and agencies when acting as a provider or user of an AI system. AI systems exclusively developed or used for military purposes should be excluded from the scope of this Regulation where that use falls under the exclusive remit of the Common Foreign and Security Policy regulated under Title V of the Treaty on the European Union (TEU). This Regulation should be without prejudice to the provisions regarding the liability of intermediary service providers set out in Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council [as amended by the Digital Services Act].
Amendment 403 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12 a) In order to ensure a minimum level of transparency on the ecological sustainability aspects of an AI system, providers and users should document parameters including but not limited to resource consumption, resulting from the design, data management and training, the underlying infrastructures of the AI system, and of the methods to reduce such impact for any AI system.
Amendment 406 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) In order to ensure a consistent and high level of protection of public interests as regards health, safety and fundamental rights, common normative standards for all high-risk AI systems should be established. Those standards should be consistent with the Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union (the Charter) and should be non-discriminatory and in line with the Union’s international trade commitments. In order to ensure a minimum level of transparency on the ecological sustainability aspects of an AI system, providers and users should document (i) parameters including, but not limited to, resource consumption resulting from the design, data management, training and from the underlying infrastructures of the AI system; as well as (ii) the methods to reduce such impact.
Amendment 407 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) In order to ensure a consistent and high level of protection of public interests as regards health, safety, the environment and fundamental rights, and values, common normative standards for all high-risk AI systems should be established. Those standards should be consistent with the Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union (the Charter), the European Green Deal (The Green Deal), the Joint Declaration on Digital Rights of the Union (the Declaration) and the Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence (AI) of the High- Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence (AI HLEG), and should be non-discriminatory and in line with the Union’s international trade commitments.
Amendment 418 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 a (new)
Recital 15 a (new)
(15 a) As signatories to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), the European Union and all Member States are legally obliged to protect persons with disabilities from discrimination and promote their equality (Article 5). They are also obliged to ensure that persons with disabilities have access, on an equal basis with others, to information and communications technologies and systems. (Article 9). Finally, they are obliged to ensure respect for privacy of persons with disabilities (Article 22).
Amendment 419 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 a (new)
Recital 15 a (new)
(15 a) As signatories to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), the European Union and all Member States are legally obliged to protect persons with disabilities from discrimination and promote their equality (Article 5). They are also obliged to ensure that persons with disabilities have access, on an equal basis with others, to information and communications technologies and systems. (Article 9). Finally, they are obliged to ensure respect for privacy of persons with disabilities (Article 22).
Amendment 422 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 b (new)
Recital 15 b (new)
(15 b) Given the growing importance and use of AI systems, the strict application of universal design principles to all new technologies and services should ensure full, equal, and unrestricted access for everyone potentially affected by or using AI technologies, including persons with disabilities, in a way that takes full account of their inherent dignity and diversity. It is essential to ensure that providers of AI systems design them, and users use them, in accordance with the accessibility requirements set out in Directive (EU) 2019/882. Union law should be further developed, including through this Regulation, so that no one is left behind as result of digital innovation.
Amendment 437 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) AI systems providing social scoring of natural persons for general purpose by public authorities or on their behalf may lead to discriminatory outcomes and the exclusion of certain groups. They may violate the right to dignity and non- discrimination and the values of equality and justice. Such AI systems evaluate or classify the trustworthiness of natural persons based on their social behaviour in multiple contexts or known or predicted personal or personality characteristics. The social score obtained from such AI systems may lead to the detrimental or unfavourable treatment of natural persons or whole groups thereof in social contexts, which are unrelated to the context in which the data was originally generated or collected or to a detrimental treatment that is disproportionate or unjustified to the gravity of their social behaviour. Such AI systems should be therefore prohibited.
Amendment 452 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The use of AI systems for ‘real- time’ remote biometric identification of natural persons in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement is considered particularly intrusive in the rights and freedoms of the concerned persons, to the extent that it may affect the private life of a large part of the population, evoke a feeling of constant surveillance and indirectly dissuade the exercise of the freedom of assembly and other fundamental rights. In addition, the immediacy of the impact and the limited opportunities for further checks or corrections in relation to the use of such systems operating in ‘real-time’ carry heightened risks for the rights and freedoms of the persons that are concerned by law enforcement activities. Such AI systems should be therefore prohibited.
Amendment 453 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The use of AI systems for ‘real- time’ remote biometric identification of natural persons in publicly accessible or online spaces for the purpose of law enforcement is considered particularly intrusive in the rights and freedoms of the concerned persons, to the extent that it may affect the private life of a large part of the population, evoke a feeling of constant surveillance and indirectly dissuade the exercise of the freedom of assembly and other fundamental rights. In addition, the immediacy of the impact and the limited opportunities for further checks or corrections in relation to the use of such systems operating in ‘real-time’ carry heightened risks for the rights and freedoms of the persons that are concerned by law enforcement activities.
Amendment 457 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 a (new)
Recital 18 a (new)
(18 a) The notion of ‘at a distance’ in Remote Biometric Identification (RBI) means the use of systems as described in Article 3(36), at a distance great enough that the system has the capacity to scan multiple persons in its field of view (or the equivalent generalised scanning of online / virtual spaces), which would mean that the identification could happen without one or more of the data subjects’ knowledge. Because RBI relates to how a system is designed and installed, and not solely to whether or not data subjects have consented, this definition applies even when warning notices are placed in the location that is under the surveillance of the RBI system, and is not de facto annulled by pre-enrolment.
Amendment 458 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 a (new)
Recital 18 a (new)
(18 a) The notion of ‘at a distance’ in Remote Biometric Identification (RBI) means the use of systems as described in Article 3(36), at a distance great enough that the system has the capacity to scanmultiple persons in its field of view (or the equivalent generalised scanning of online / virtual spaces), which would mean that the identification could happen without one or more of the data subjects’ knowledge. Because RBI relates to how a system is designed and installed, and not solely to whether or not data subjects have consented, this definition applies even when warning notices are placed in the location that is under the surveillance of the RBI system, and is not defacto annulled by pre-enrollment.
Amendment 461 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 b (new)
Recital 18 b (new)
(18 b) ‘Biometric categorisation systems’ are defined as AI systems that assign natural persons to specific categories, or infer their characteristics or attributes. ‘Categorisation’ shall include any sorting of natural persons, whether into discrete categories (e.g. male/female, suspicious/not-suspicious), on a numerical scale (e.g. using the Fitzpatrick scale for skin type) or any other form of assigning labels or values to people. ‘Inferring an attribute or characteristic’ shall include any situation in which an AI system uses one type of data about a natural person (e.g. hair colour) to ascribe a different attribute or characteristic to that person (e.g. ethnic origin).
Amendment 469 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) The use of those systems for the purpose of law enforcement should therefore be prohibited, except in three exhaustively listed and narrowly defined situations, where the use is strictly necessary to achieve a substantial public interest, the importance of which outweighs the risks. Those situations involve the search for potential victims of crime, including missing children; certain threats to the life or physical safety of natural persons or of a terrorist attack; and the detection, localisation, identification or prosecution of perpetrators or suspects of the criminal offences referred to in Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA38 if those criminal offences are punishable in the Member State concerned by a custodial sentence or a detention order for a maximum period of at least three years and as they are defined in the law of that Member State. Such threshold for the custodial sentence or detention order in accordance with national law contributes to ensure that the offence should be serious enough to potentially justify the use of ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification systems. Moreover, of the 32 criminal offences listed in the Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA, some are in practice likely to be more relevant than others, in that the recourse to ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification will foreseeably be necessary and proportionate to highly varying degrees for the practical pursuit of the detection, localisation, identification or prosecution of a perpetrator or suspect of the different criminal offences listed and having regard to the likely differences in the seriousness, probability and scale of the harm or possible negative consequences. _________________ 38 Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States (OJ L 190, 18.7.2002, p. 1).
Amendment 479 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) In order to ensure that those systems are used in a responsible and proportionate manner, it is also important to establish that, in each of those three exhaustively listed and narrowly defined situations, certain elements should be taken into account, in particular as regards the nature of the situation giving rise to the request and the consequences of the use for the rights and freedoms of all persons concerned and the safeguards and conditions provided for with the use. In addition, the use of ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement should be subject to appropriate limits in time and space, having regard in particular to the evidence or indications regarding the threats, the victims or perpetrator. The reference database of persons should be appropriate for each use case in each of the three situations mentioned above.
Amendment 480 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) In order to ensure that those systems are used in a responsible and proportionate manner, it is also important to establish that, in each of those three exhaustively listed and narrowly defined situations, certain elements should be taken into account, in particular as regards the nature of the situation giving rise to the request and the consequences of the use for the rights and freedoms of all persons concerned and the safeguards and conditions provided for with the use. In addition, the use of ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible or online spaces for the purpose of law enforcement should be subject to appropriate limits in time and space, having regard in particular to the evidence or indications regarding the threats, the victims or perpetrator. The reference database of persons should be appropriate for each use case in each of the three situations mentioned above.
Amendment 485 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
Amendment 488 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Each use of a ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification system in publicly accessible or online spaces for the purpose of law enforcement should be subject to an express and specific authorisation by a judicial authority or by an independent administrative authority of a Member State. Such authorisation should in principle be obtained prior to the use, except in duly justified situations of urgency, that is, situations where the need to use the systems in question is such as to make it effectively and objectively impossible to obtain an authorisation before commencing the use. In such situations of urgency, the use should be restricted to the absolute minimum necessary and be subject to appropriate safeguards and conditions, as determined in national law and specified in the context of each individual urgent use case by the law enforcement authority itself. In addition, the law enforcement authority should in such situations seek to obtain an authorisation as soon as possible, whilst providing the reasons for not having been able to request it earlier.
Amendment 503 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The use of AI systems for ‘real- time’ remote biometric identification of natural persons in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement necessarily involves the processing of biometric data. The rules of this Regulation that prohibit, subject to certain exceptions, such use, which are based on Article 16 TFEU, should apply as lex specialis in respect of the rules on the processing of biometric data contained in Article 10 of Directive (EU) 2016/680, thus regulating such use and the processing of biometric data involved in an exhaustive manner. Therefore, such use and processing should only be possible in as far as it is compatible with the framework set by this Regulation, without there being scope, outside that framework, for the competent authorities, where they act for purpose of law enforcement, to use such systems and process such data in connection thereto on the grounds listed in Article 10 of Directive (EU) 2016/680. In this context, this Regulation is not intended to provide the legal basis for the processing of personal data under Article 8 of Directive 2016/680. However, the use of ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible spaces for purposes other than law enforcement, including by competent authorities, should not be covered by the specific framework regarding such use for the purpose of law enforcement set by this Regulation. Such use for purposes other than law enforcement should therefore not be subject to the requirement of an authorisation under this Regulation and the applicable detailed rules of national law that may give effect to it. The lex specialis nature of the prohibition on RBI does not provide a legal basis for law enforcement uses of RBI, nor does it weaken existing protections of biometric data under the Data Protection Law Enforcement Directive (LED) or national implementations of the LED.
Amendment 504 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The use of AI systems for ‘real- time’ remote biometric identification of natural persons in publicly accessible or online spaces for the purpose of law enforcement necessarily involves the processing of biometric data. The rules of this Regulation that prohibit, subject to certain exceptions, such use, which are based on Article 16 TFEU, should apply as lex specialis in respect of the rules on the processing of biometric data contained in Article 10 of Directive (EU) 2016/680, thus regulating such use and the processing of biometric data involved in an exhaustive manner. Therefore, such use and processing should only be possible in as far as it is compatible with the framework set by this Regulation, without there being scope, outside that framework, for the competent authorities, where they act for purpose of law enforcement, to use such systems and process such data in connection thereto on the grounds listed in Article 10 of Directive (EU) 2016/680. In this context, this Regulation is not intended to provide the legal basis for the processing of personal data under Article 8 of Directive 2016/680. However, the use of ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible or online spaces for purposes other than law enforcement, including by competent authorities, should not be covered by the specific framework regarding such use for the purpose of law enforcement set by this Regulation. Such use for purposes other than law enforcement should therefore not be subject to the requirement of an authorisation under this Regulation and the applicable detailed rules of national law that may give effect to it.
Amendment 507 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23 a (new)
Recital 23 a (new)
(23 a) ‘Biometric categorisation systems’ are defined as AI systems that assign natural persons to specific categories, or infer their characteristics or attributes. ‘Categorisation’ shall include any sorting of natural persons, whether into discrete categories (e.g. male/female, suspicious/not-suspicious), on a numerical scale (e.g. using the Fitzpatrick scale for skin type) or any other form of assigning labels or values to people. ‘Inferring an attribute or characteristic’ shall include any situation in which an AI system uses one type of data about a natural person (e.g. hair colour) to ascribe a different attribute or characteristic to that person (e.g. ethnic origin).
Amendment 514 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Any processing of biometric data and other personal data involved in the use of AI systems for biometric identification, other than in connection to the use of ‘real- time’ remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible or online spaces for the purpose of law enforcement as regulated by this Regulation, including where those systems are used by competent authorities in publicly accessible or online spaces for other purposes than law enforcement, should continue to comply with all requirements resulting from Article 9(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Article 10(1) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 and Article 10 of Directive (EU) 2016/680, as applicable.
Amendment 528 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) High-risk AI systems should only be placed on the Union market or put into service if they comply with certain mandatory requirements. Those requirements should ensure that high-risk AI systems available in the Union or whose output is otherwise used in the Union do not pose unacceptable risks to important Union public interests as recognised and protected by Union law. AI systems identified as high-risk should be limited to those that have a significant harmful impact on the health, safety and fundamental rights of persons in the Union and such limitation minimises any potential restriction to international trade, if any, but also on the environment, democracy and the rule of law in the Union..
Amendment 540 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) As regards stand-alone AI systems, meaning high-risk AI systems other than those that are safety components of products, or which are themselves products, it is appropriate to classify them as high-risk if, in the light of their intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable uses, they pose a high risk of harm to the health and safety or the fundamental rights of persons, taking into account both the severity of the possible harm and its probability of occurrence and they are used in a number of specifically pre-defined areas specified in the Regulation. The identification of those systems is based on the same methodology and criteria envisaged also for any future amendments of the list of high-risk AI systems. (This amendment should apply throughout the text, i.e. any occurrence of "intended purpose" should be followed by "or reasonably foreseeable uses")
Amendment 542 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) As regards stand-alone AI systems, meaning high-risk AI systems other than those that are safety components of products, or which are themselves products, it is appropriate to classify them as high-risk if, in the light of their intended purpoforeseeable uses, they pose a high risk of harm to the health and safety or the fundamental rights of persons, taking into account both the severity of the possible harm and its probability of occurrence and they are used in a number of specifically pre-defined areas specified in the Regulation. The identification of those systems is based on the same methodology and criteria envisaged also for any future amendments of the list of high-risk AI systems.
Amendment 550 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) Technical inaccuracies of AI systems intended for the remote biometric identification of natural persons can lead to biased results and entail discriminatory effects. This is particularly relevant when it comes to age, ethnicity, sex or disabilities. Therefore, ‘real-time’ and ‘post’ remote biometric identification systems should be classified as high-risk. In view of the risks that they pose, both types of remote biometric identification systems should be subject to specific requirements on logging capabilities and human oversightprohibited.
Amendment 556 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) AI systems used in education or vocational training, notably for determining access or assigning persons to educational and vocational training institutions or to evaluate persons on tests as part of or as a precondition for their education should be considered high-risk, since they may determine the educational and professional course of a person’s life and therefore affect their ability to secure their livelihood. When improperly designed and used, such systems may violate the right to education and training as well as the right not to be discriminated against and perpetuate historical patterns of discrimination. Therefore, AI systems in education shall be prohibited to be used by public authorities in education of underaged children to meet the requirement in this regulation, to not exploit any of the vulnerabilities of the group of persons due to their age.
Amendment 564 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) AI systems used in employment, workers management and access to self- employment, notably but not limited to, for the recruitment and selection of persons, for making decisions on promotion and termination and for task allocation, monitoring or evaluation of persons in work-related contractual relationships, should also be classified as high-risk, since those systems may appreciably impact future career prospects and, livelihoods of these persons and workers’ rights. Relevant work-related contractual relationships should involve employees and persons providing services through platforms as referred to in the Commission Work Programme 2021. Such persons should in principle not be considered users within the meaning of this Regulation. Throughout the recruitment process and in the evaluation, promotion, or retention of persons in work-related contractual relationships, such systems may perpetuate historical patterns of discrimination, for example against women, certain age groups, persons with disabilities, or persons of certain racial or ethnic origins or sexual orientation. AI systems used to monitor the performance and behaviour of these persons may also impact their rights to data protection and privacy.
Amendment 566 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36 a (new)
Recital 36 a (new)
(36 a) In line with Article 114 (2) TFEU, this Regulation does not in any way affect the rights and interests of employed persons. This Regulation is without prejudice to Community law on social policy and national labour law and practice.
Amendment 567 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36 b (new)
Recital 36 b (new)
(36 b) Given the significance of Artificial Intelligence impact assessments according to the usage Artificial Intelligence applications in the workplace, the EU will consider a corresponding directive with specific provisions for an impact assessment to ensure the protection of the rights and freedoms of workers affected by AI systems through collective agreements of national legislation.
Amendment 570 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) Another area in which the use of AI systems deserves special consideration is the access to and enjoyment of certain essential private and public services and benefits necessary for people to fully participate in society or to improve one’s standard of living. In particular, AI systems used to evaluate the credit score or creditworthiness of natural persons should be classified as high-risk AI systemsprohibited, since they determine those persons’ access to financial resources or essential services such as housing, electricity, and telecommunication services. AI systems used for this purpose may lead to discrimination of persons or groups and perpetuate historical patterns of discrimination, for example based on racial or ethnic origins, disabilities, age, sexual orientation, or create new forms of discriminatory impacts. Considering the very limited scale of the impact and the available alternatives on the market, it is appropriate to exempt AI systems for the purpose of creditworthiness assessment and credit scoring when put into service by small-scale providers for their own use. Natural persons applying for or receiving public assistance benefits and services from public authorities are typically dependent on those benefits and services and in a vulnerable position in relation to the responsible authorities. If AI systems are used for determining whether such benefits and services should be denied, reduced, revoked or reclaimed by authorities, they may have a significant impact on persons’ livelihood and may infringe their fundamental rights, such as the right to social protection, non- discrimination, human dignity or an effective remedy. Those systems should therefore be classified as high-risk. Nonetheless, this Regulation should not hamper the development and use of innovative approaches in the public administration, which would stand to benefit from a wider use of compliant and safe AI systems, provided that those systems do not entail a high risk to legal and natural persons. Finally, AI systems used to dispatch or establish priority in the dispatching of emergency first response services should also be classified as high- risk since they make decisions in very critical situations for the life and health of persons and their property.
Amendment 584 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) Actions by law enforcement authorities involving certain uses of AI systems are characterised by a significant degree of power imbalance and may lead to surveillance, arrest or deprivation of a natural person’s liberty as well as other adverse impacts on fundamental rights guaranteed in the Charter. In particular, if the AI system is not trained with high quality data, does not meet adequate requirements in terms of its accuracy or robustness, or is not properly designed and tested before being put on the market or otherwise put into service, it may single out people in a discriminatory or otherwise incorrect or unjust manner. Furthermore, the exercise of important procedural fundamental rights, such as the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial as well as the right of defence and the presumption of innocence, could be hampered, in particular, where such AI systems are not sufficiently transparent, explainable and documented. It is therefore appropriate to classify as high-risk a number of and where a redress procedure is not foreseen. It is therefore appropriate to prohibit some AI systems intended to be used in the law enforcement context where accuracy, reliability and transparency is particularly important to avoid adverse impacts, retain public trust and ensure accountability and effective redress, including the availability of redress-by-design mechanisms and procedures. In view of the nature of the activities in question and the risks relating thereto, those high-risk AIprohibited systems should include in particular AI systems intended to be used by law enforcement authorities for individual risk assessments, polygraphs and similar tools or to detect the emotional state of natural person, to detect ‘deep fakes’, for the evaluation of the reliability of evidence in criminal proceedings, for predicting the occurrence or reoccurrence of an actual or potential criminal offence based on profiling of natural persons, or assessing personality traits and characteristics or past criminal behaviour of natural persons or groups, for profiling in the course of detection, investigation or prosecution of criminal offences, as well as for crime analytics regarding natural persons. AI systems specifically intended to be used for administrative proceedings by tax and customs authorities should not be considered high-risk AI systems used by law enforcement authorities for the purposes of prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of criminal offencesincluded in such a ban.
Amendment 586 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) AI systems used in migration, asylum and border control management affect people who are often in particularly vulnerable position and who are dependent on the outcome of the actions of the competent public authorities. The accuracy, non-discriminatory nature and transparency of the AI systems used in those contexts are therefore particularly important to guarantee the respect of the fundamental rights of the affected persons, notably their rights to free movement, non- discrimination, protection of private life and personal data, international protection and good administration. It is therefore appropriate to classify as high-risk AI systems intended to be used by the competent public authorities charged with tasks in the fields of migration, asylum and border control management as polygraphs and similar tools or to detect the emotional state of a natural person; for assessing certain risks posed by natural persons entering the territory of a Member State or applying for visa or asylum; for verifying the authenticity of the relevant documents of natural persons; for assisting competent public authorities for the examination of applications for asylum, visa and residence permits and associated complaints with regard to the objective to establish the eligibility of the natural persons applying for a status. AI systems in the area of migration, asylum and border control management covered by this Regulation should comply with the relevant procedural requirements set by the Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council49 , the Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council50 and other relevant legislation. _________________ 49 Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 60). 50 Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 establishing a Community Code on Visas (Visa Code) (OJ L 243, 15.9.2009, p. 1).
Amendment 593 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39 a (new)
Recital 39 a (new)
(39 a) The use of AI systems in migration, asylum and border control management should in no circumstances be used by Member States or European Union institutions as a means to circumvent their international obligations under the Convention of 28 July 1951 relating to the Status of Refugees as amended by the Protocol of 31 January 1967, nor should they be used to in any way infringe on the principle of non- refoulement, or deny safe and effective legal avenues into the territory of the Union, including the right to international protection;
Amendment 594 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39 a (new)
Recital 39 a (new)
(39 a) The use of AI systems in migration, asylum and border control management should in no circumstances be used by Member States or European Union institutions as a means to circumvent their international obligations under the Convention of 28 July 1951 relating to the Status of Refugees as amended by the Protocol of 31 January1967, nor should they be used to in any way infringe on the principle of non-refoulement, or deny safe and effective legal avenues into the territory of the Union, including the right to international protection;
Amendment 600 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40 a (new)
Recital 40 a (new)
(40 a) Another area in which the use of AI systems deserves special consideration is the use for health-related purposes, including healthcare. Next to medical devices (as per EU regulation 2017/745), other health-related AI systems also bring about risks which should be regulated. These include systems that influence individual’s health outcomes but do not meet the criteria for a medical device, systems that influence population health outcomes or health equality, systems that impact the distribution of healthcare resources and systems used by pharmaceutical and medical technology companies in research and development, pharmacovigilance, market optimisation and pharmaceutical marketing. Bias and errors in health-related AI systems can have major and immediate consequences for individuals’ and populations’ health and wellbeing. Further, many systems will use sensitive and personal data, which needs to be justified, and about which patients need to be properly informed. What is more, systems that work on hospital, health system, or population level may have a major effect on societal health because they influence the distribution of healthcare resources and health policy design. For these reasons, there is a need for trustworthy AI in healthcare, meaning people must be able to trust that systems used in healthcare are scientifically, technically and clinically valid, safe and accountable, and safeguard individuals’ autonomy and privacy.
Amendment 616 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) To mitigate the risks from high-risk AI systems placed or otherwise put into service on the Union market for users and affected persons, certain mandatory requirements should apply, taking into account the intended purpose of thr reasonably foreseeable use of the system and according to the risk management system to be established by the provider.
Amendment 617 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) To mitigate the risks from high-risk AI systems placed or otherwise put into service on the Union market for users and affected persons, certain mandatory requirements should apply, taking into account the intended purpose of thforeseeable uses of the system and according to the risk management system to be established by the provider.
Amendment 620 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) Requirements should apply to high- risk AI systems as regards the quality of data sets used, technical documentation and record-keeping, transparency and the provision of information to users, human oversight, and robustness, accuracy and cybersecurity. Those requirements are necessary to effectively mitigate the risks for health, safety and fundamental rights, as applicable in the light of the intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use of the system, and no other less trade restrictive measures are reasonably available, thus avoiding unjustified restrictions to trade.
Amendment 621 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) Requirements should apply to high- risk AI systems as regards the quality of data sets used, technical documentation and record-keeping, transparency and the provision of information to users, human oversight, and robustness, accuracy and cybersecurity. Those requirements are necessary to effectively mitigate the risks for health, safety and fundamental rights, as applicable in the light of the intended purpoforeseeable uses of the system, and no other less trade restrictive measures are reasonably available, thus avoiding unjustified restrictions to trade.
Amendment 626 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) High data quality is essential for the performance of many AI systems, especially when techniques involving the training of models are used, with a view to ensure that the high-risk AI system performs as intended and safely and it does not become the source of discrimination prohibited by Union law. High quality training, validation and testing data sets require the implementation of appropriate data governance and management practices. Training, validation and testing data sets should be sufficiently relevant, representative and free of errors and complete in view of the intended purpoforeseeable uses of the system. They should also have the appropriate statistical properties, including as regards the persons or groups of persons on which the high-risk AI system is intended to be used. In particular, training, validation and testing data sets should take into account, to the extent required in the light of their intended purpoforeseeable uses, the features, characteristics or elements that are particular to the specific geographical, behavioural or functional setting or context within which the AI system is intended to be used. In order to protect the right of others from the discrimination that might result from the bias in AI systems, the providers shouldbe able to process also special categories of personal data, as a matter of substantial public interest, in order to ensure the bias monitoring, detection and correction in relation to high- risk AI systems.
Amendment 627 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) High data quality is essential for the performance of many AI systems, especially when techniques involving the training of models are used, with a view to ensure that the high-risk AI system performs as intended and safely and it does not become the source of discrimination prohibited by Union law. High quality training, validation and testing data sets require the implementation of appropriate data governance and management practices. Training, validation and testing data sets should be sufficiently relevant, representative and free of errors and complete in view of the intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use of the system. They should also have the appropriate statistical properties, including as regards the persons or groups of persons on which the high-risk AI system is intended to be used. In particular, training, validation and testing data sets should take into account, to the extent required in the light of their intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use , the features, characteristics or elements that are particular to the specific geographical, behavioural or functional setting or context within which the AI system is intended or foreseeable to be used. In order to protect the right of others from the discrimination that might result from the bias in AI systems, the providers should be able to process also special categories of personal data, as a matter of substantial public interest, in order to ensure the bias monitoring, detection and correction in relation to high- risk AI systems.
Amendment 651 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51
Recital 51
(51) Cybersecurity plays a crucial role in ensuring that AI systems are resilient against attempts to alter their use, behaviour, performance or compromise their security properties by malicious third parties exploiting the system’s vulnerabilities. Cyberattacks against AI systems can leverage AI specific assets, such as training data sets (e.g. data poisoning) or trained models (e.g. adversarial attacks), or exploit vulnerabilities in the AI system’s digital assets or the underlying ICT infrastructure. To ensure a level of cybersecurity appropriate to the risks, suitable measures should therefore be taken by the providers of high-risk AI systems, as well as the notified bodies, competent national authorities and market surveillance authorities, also taking into account as appropriate the underlying ICT infrastructure.
Amendment 693 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 66
Recital 66
(66) In line with the commonly established notion of substantial modification for products regulated by Union harmonisation legislation, it is appropriate that an AI system undergoes a new conformity assessment whenever a change occurs which may affect the compliance of the system with this Regulation or when the intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use of the system changes. In addition, as regards AI systems which continue to ‘learn’ after being placed on the market or put into service (i.e. they automatically adapt how functions are carried out), it is necessary to provide rules establishing that changes to the algorithm and its performance that have been pre-determined by the provider and assessed at the moment of the conformity assessment should not constitute a substantial modification.
Amendment 695 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 66
Recital 66
(66) In line with the commonly established notion of substantial modification for products regulated by Union harmonisation legislation, it is appropriate that an AI system undergoes a new conformity assessment whenever a change occurs which may affect the compliance of the system with this Regulation or when the intended purpoforeseeable uses of the system changes. In addition, as regards AI systems which continue to ‘learn’ after being placed on the market or put into service (i.e. they automatically adapt how functions are carried out), it is necessary to provide rules establishing that changes to the algorithm and its performance that have been pre-determined by the provider and assessed at the moment of the conformity assessment should not constitute a substantial modification.
Amendment 702 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 69
Recital 69
(69) In order to facilitate the work of the Commission and the Member States in the artificial intelligence field as well as to increase the transparency towards the public, providers and users of high-risk AI systems other than those related to products falling within the scope of relevant existing Union harmonisation legislation, should be required to register their high-risk AI system or the use thereof in a EU database, to be established and managed by the Commission. Certain AI systems listed in Article 52 (1b) and (2) and uses thereof shall be registered in the EU database. In order to facilitate this, users shall request information listed in Annex VIII point 2(g) from providers of AI systems. Any uses of AI systems by public authorities or on their behalf shall also be registered in the EU database. In order to facilitate this, public authorities shall request information listed in Annex VIII point 3(g) from providers of AI systems. The Commission should be the controller of that database, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council55 . In order to ensure the full functionality of the database, when deployed, the procedure for setting the database should include the elaboration of functional specifications by the Commission and an independent audit report. _________________ 55 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1)In order to maximise the availability and use of the database by the public, the database, including the information made available through it, should comply with requirements under the European Accessibility Act.
Amendment 703 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 69
Recital 69
(69) In order to facilitate the work of the Commission and the Member States in the artificial intelligence field as well as to increase the transparency towards the public, providers and users of high-risk AI systems other than those related to products falling within the scope of relevant existing Union harmonisation legislation, should be required to register their high-risk AI system or the use thereof in a EU database, to be established and managed by the Commission. The Commission should be the controller of that database, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council55 . In order to ensure the full functionality of the database, when deployed, the procedure for setting the database should include the elaboration of functional specifications by the Commission and an independent audit report. In order to maximise the availability and use of the database by the public, the database, including the information made available through it, should comply with requirements under the European Accessibility Act. _________________ 55 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).
Amendment 718 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 71
Recital 71
(71) Artificial intelligence is a rapidly developing family of technologies that requires novel forms of regulatory oversight and a safe and fully controlled space for experimentation, while ensuring responsible innovation and integration of appropriate ethical safeguards and risk mitigation measures. To ensure a legal framework that is innovation-friendly, future-proof and resilient to disruption, national competent authorities from one or more Member States should be encouraged to establish artificial intelligence regulatory sandboxes to facilitate the development and testing of innovative AI systems under strict regulatory oversight before these systems are placed on the market or otherwise put into service. Regulatory sandboxes involving activities that may impact health, safety and fundamental rights, democracy and the rule of law or the environment should be developed in accordance with redress-by-design principles. Any significant risks identified during the development and testing of such systems should result in immediate mitigation and, failing that, in the suspension of the development and testing process until such mitigation takes place. The legal basis of such sandboxes should comply with the requirements established in the existing data protection framework and should be consistent with the Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union.
Amendment 725 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 72
Recital 72
(72) The objectives of the regulatory sandboxes should be to foster AI innovation by establishing a strictly controlled experimentation and testing environment in the development and pre- marketing phase with a view to ensuring compliance of the innovative AI systems with this Regulation and other relevant Union and Member States legislation, as well as with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the General Data Protection Regulation; to enhance legal certainty for innovators and the competent authorities’ oversight and understanding of the opportunities, emerging risks and the impacts of AI use, andto provide safeguards needed to build trust and reliance on AI systems, to accelerate access to markets, including by removing barriers for the public sector, small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and start-ups; and to contribute to the development of ethical, socially responsible and environmentally sustainable AI systems. To ensure uniform implementation across the Union and economies of scale, it is appropriate to establish common rules for the regulatory sandboxes’ implementation and a framework for cooperation between the relevant authorities involved in the supervision of the sandboxes. This Regulation should provide the legal basis for the use of personal data collected for other purposes for developing certain AI systems in the public interest within the AI regulatory sandbox, in line with Article 6(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, and Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725, and without prejudice to Article 4(2) of Directive (EU) 2016/680. Participants in the sandbox should ensure appropriate safeguards and cooperate with the competent authorities, including by following their guidance and acting expeditiously and in good faith to mitigate any high-risks to safety and fundamental rights that may arise during the development and experimentation in the sandbox. The conduct of the participants in the sandbox should be taken into account when competent authorities decide whether to impose an administrative fine under Article 83(2) of Regulation 2016/679 and Article 57 of Directive 2016/680.
Amendment 736 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 74
Recital 74
(74) In order to minimise the risks to implementation resulting from lack of knowledge and expertise in the market as well as to facilitate compliance of providers and notified bodies with their obligations under this Regulation, the AI- on demand platform, the European Digital Innovation Hubs and the Testing and Experimentation Facilities established by the Commission and the Member States at national or EU level should possib, as well as the ENISA, the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights, EIGE, and the European Data Protection Supervisor should constantly contribute to the implementation of this Regulation. Within their respective mission and fields of competence, they may provide in particular technical and scientific support to providers and notified bodies.
Amendment 766 #
2021/0106(COD)
(84 a) Union legislation on the protection of whistleblowers (Directive (EU) 2019/1937) has full application to academics, designers, developers, project contributors, auditors, product managers, engineers and economic operators acquiring information on breaches of Union law by a provider of AI system or its AI system, even if they are not explicitly mentioned in Article 4(1)a-4(1)d of that Directive.
Amendment 768 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 84 b (new)
Recital 84 b (new)
(84 b) Union legislation on consumer protection(notably Directives (EU) 2019/2161, 2005/29/EC,2011/83/EU) applies to AI systems to the extent determined in these legislations, regardless of whether these systems are categorized as high-risk.
Amendment 781 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph -1 (new)
Article 1 – paragraph -1 (new)
-1 The purpose of this Regulation is to ensure a high level of protection of health, safety, fundamental rights and the environment, from harmful effects of artificial intelligence systems ("AI systems") in the Union, while enhancing innovation.
Amendment 788 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) harmonised rules for the development, placing on the market, the putting into service and the use of artificial intelligence systems (‘AI systems’) in the Union;
Amendment 809 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The purpose of this Regulation is to ensure protection of health, safety, fundamental rights and the environment, from harmful effects of artificial intelligence systems in the Union, while supporting innovation.
Amendment 810 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
These provisions shall apply to AI systems as a product, service or practice, or as part of a product, service or practice.
Amendment 812 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 b (new)
This Regulation is based on the principle that it is for developers, importers, distributors and downstream users to ensure that they develop, place on the market or use artificial intelligence that does not adversely affect health, safety, fundamental rights, and the environment. Its provisions are underpinned by the precautionary principle.
Amendment 813 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 b (new)
This Regulation is based on the principle that it is for developers, importers, distributors and downstream users to ensure that they develop, place on the market or use artificial intelligence that does not adversely affect health, safety, fundamental rights, or the environment. Its provisions are underpinned by the precautionary principle.
Amendment 814 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Any processing of personal data for the purposes of this Regulation shall take place in accordance with Union legislation for the protection of personal data, in particular Regulation 2016/679, Directive 2016/680, Regulation 2018/1725 and Directive 2002/58.
Amendment 817 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(a a) providers of AI systems that have their main establishment in the EU;
Amendment 823 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) natural persons affected by the use of AI systems;
Amendment 839 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. This Regulation shall also apply to Union institutions, offices and agencies where they develop, deploy or otherwise make use of AI systems.
Amendment 841 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Amendment 865 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3
Article 2 – paragraph 3
Amendment 866 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3
Article 2 – paragraph 3
Amendment 873 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Any exemptions from the application of this Act to AI systems used exclusively by Member States for national security purposes will be without prejudice to the application of Union law to any activity carried out by the Union or by a Member State that is subject to Union law.
Amendment 880 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Amendment 885 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. The use of any AI-system that is in line with this Regulation, should also continue to comply with the European Charter on Fundamental Rights, secondary Union law and national law. This Regulation shall not provide the legal ground for unlawful AI development, deployment or use.
Amendment 886 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. An AI-system or practice that is in line with this Regulation, should also continue to comply with the European Charter on Fundamental Rights, existing and new secondary Union law and national law.
Amendment 894 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 5 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Member States may adopt or maintain in force more stringent provisions, compatible with the Treaty in the field covered by this Directive, to ensure a higher level of protection of health, safety and fundamental rights.
Amendment 896 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 5 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. This Regulation shall be without prejudice to Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 899 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 5 c (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 5 c (new)
5 c. This Regulation shall be without prejudice to Community law on social policy.
Amendment 900 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 5 d (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 5 d (new)
5 d. This Regulation shall be without prejudice to national labour law and practice, that is any legal or contractual provision concerning employment conditions, working conditions, including health and safety at work and the relationship between employers and workers, including information, consultation and participation
Amendment 901 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 5 e (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 5 e (new)
5 e. This Regulation shall not in any way affect the exercise of fundamental rights as recognised in the Member States and at Union level, including the right or freedom to strike or to take other action covered by the specific industrial relations systems in Member States, in accordance with national law and/or practice. Nor does it affect the right to negotiate, to conclude and enforce collective agreements, or to take collective action in accordance with national law and/or practice.
Amendment 909 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘artificial intelligence system’ (AI system) means software that is developed with one or more of the techniques(AI)' means computer systems that act in the physical or digital world and that, in and approaches listed in Annex I and can, for a given set of human-defined objectives, generate outputs such as content, predictions, recommendations, or decisions influencing the environments they interact with; utomated manner: (i) decide on action(s) to take according to predefined parameters by perceiving their environment and analysing the collected structured or unstructured information from that environment;and/or (ii) can adapt their decisions by analysing how the environment is affected by their previous actions.
Amendment 919 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘artificial intelligence system’ (AI system) means software that is developed with one or more of the techniques and approaches listed in Annex I and can, for a given set of human-defined objectives, generate outputs such as content, predictions, recommendations, or decisions influencing the environments they interact with;
Amendment 943 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
(4) ‘user’ means any natural or legal person, data subject, public authority, agency or other body using an AI system under its authority and on its own responsibility, except where the AI system is used in the course of a personal non- professional activity;
Amendment 962 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 11
(11) ‘putting into service’ means the supply of an AI system for first use directly to the user or for own use on the Union market for its intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use ;
Amendment 964 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 11
(11) ‘putting into service’ means the supply of an AI system for first use directly to the user or for own use on the Union market for its intended purpoforeseeable uses;
Amendment 967 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 12
(12) ‘intended purpoforeseeable uses’ means the use for which an AI system is intended by the provider, including the specific context and conditions of use, as specified in the information supplied by the provider in the instructions for use, promotional or sales materialuses that can reasonably be expected to be made of an AI system, including but not limited to the use for which the AI system is intended for consumers or the likely use by consumers aund statements, as well as in the technical documentaer reasonably foreseeable conditions;
Amendment 970 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 12 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 12 a (new)
(12 a) ‘foreseeable uses’ means uses that can reasonably be expected to be made of an AI system, including but not limited to the use for which the AI system is intended for consumers or the likely use by consumers under reasonably foreseeable conditions;
Amendment 971 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 12 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 12 a (new)
(12 a) 'reasonably foreseeable use' means the use of an AI system in a way that is or should be reasonably foreseeable;
Amendment 977 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 13
(13) ‘reasonably foreseeable misuse’ means the use of an AI system in a way that is not in accordance with its intended purpose, but which may result from reasonably foreseeable human behaviour or interaction with other systems, and with other AI systems;;
Amendment 985 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 14
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 14
(14) ‘safety component of a product or system’ means a component of a product or of a system which fulfils a direct or indirect safety function for that product or system or the failure or malfunctioning of which endangers the health and safety of persons or property;
Amendment 988 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 15
(15) ‘instructions for use’ means the information provided by the provider to inform the user of in particular an AI system’s intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use and proper use, inclusive of the specific geographical, behavioural or functional setting within which the high- risk AI system is intended or foreseeable to be used;
Amendment 990 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 15
(15) ‘instructions for use’ means the information provided by the provider to inform the user of in particular an AI system’s intended purpoforeseeable uses and proper use, inclusive of the specific geographical, behavioural or functional setting within which the high-risk AI system is intended to be used;
Amendment 994 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 18
(18) ‘performance of an AI system’ means the ability of an AI system to achieve its intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use ;
Amendment 995 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 18
(18) ‘performance of an AI system’ means the ability of an AI system to achieve its intended purpoforeseeable uses;
Amendment 1005 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23
(23) ‘substantial modification’ means a change to the AI system following its placing on the market or putting into service which affects the compliance of the AI system with the requirements set out in Title III, Chapter 2 of this Regulation or results in a modification to the intended purpoforeseeable uses for which the AI system has been assessed, health and safety requirements are to be covered;
Amendment 1008 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23
(23) ‘substantial modification’ means a change to the AI system following its placing on the market or putting into service which affects the compliance of the AI system with the requirements set out in Title III, Chapter 2 of this Regulation or results in a modification to the intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use for which the AI system has been assessed;
Amendment 1014 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 29
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 29
(29) ‘training data’ means data used for training an AI system through fittingo fit its learnable parameters, including the weights of a neural network;
Amendment 1016 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 30
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 30
(30) ‘validation data’ means data used for providing an evaluation of the trained AI system and for tuning its non- learnable param. The process evaluates whethers and the model its learning process, among other things, in order to prevent overfitting; whereasunder-fitted or overfitted; The validation dataset should be a separate dataset of the training set for the evaliduation dataset can be a separate dataset or part of the training dataset, either as a fixed or variable split;to be unbiased. If there is only one available dataset, this is divided into two parts, a training set and a validation set. Both sets should still comply with Article 10(3) to ensure appropriate data governance and management practices.
Amendment 1020 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 31
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 31
(31) ‘testing data’ means data used for providing an independent evaluation of the trained and validated AI system in order to confirm the expected performance of that system before its placing on the market or putting into service;. Similar to Article 3(30), the testing dataset should be a separate dataset from the training set and validation set. This set should also comply with Article 10(3) to ensure appropriate data governance and management practices.
Amendment 1025 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 33 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 33 a (new)
(33 a) ‘biometrics-based data’ means data resulting from specific technical processing relating to physical, physiological or behavioural signals of a natural person which may or may not allow or confirm the unique identification of a natural person;
Amendment 1026 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 33 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 33 a (new)
(33 a) ‘biometrics-based data’ means data resulting from specific technical processing relating to physical, physiological or behavioural signals of a natural person which may or may not allow or confirm the unique identification of a natural person
Amendment 1031 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 34
(34) ‘emotion recognition system’ means an AI system for the purpose of identifying or inferring emotions, thoughts, states of mind (such as ‘deception’, ‘trustworthiness’ or ‘truthfulness’) or intentions of natural persons on the basis of their biometric data or other biometrics-based data;
Amendment 1032 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 34
(34) ‘emotion recognition system’ means an AI system for the purpose of identifying or inferring emotions , thoughts, states of mind (such as ‘deception’, ‘trustworthiness’ or ‘truthfulness’)or intentions of natural persons on the basis of their biometric data or biometrics-based data;
Amendment 1043 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 35
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 35
(35) ‘biometric categorisation system’ means an AI system that uses biometric or biometrics-based data for the purpose of assigning natural persons to specific categories, such as sex, age, hair colour, eye colour, tattoos, ethnic origin or sexual or political orientation, on the basis of their biometric dataor inferring their characteristics and attributes ;
Amendment 1045 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 35
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 35
(35) ‘biometric categorisation system’ means an AI system for the purpose of assigning natural persons to specific categories, such as sex, age, hair colour, eye colour, tattoos, ethnic origin or sexual or political orientation, or inferring their characteristics and attributes on the basis of their biometric data or biometrics-based data;
Amendment 1054 #
2021/0106(COD)
(36) ‘remote biometric identification system’ means an AI system for the purposcapable of identifying natural persons at a distance through the comparison of a person’s biometric data with the biometric data contained in a reference database, and without prior knowledge of the user of the AI system whether the person will be present and can be identified ;
Amendment 1058 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 36
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 36
(36) ‘remote biometric identification system’ means an AI system for the purposcapable of identifying natural persons at a distance through the comparison of a person’s biometric data with the biometric data contained in a reference database, and without prior knowledge of the user of the AI system whether the person will be present and can be identified or data repository;
Amendment 1072 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 40 – point a a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 40 – point a a (new)
(a a) any other authority competent for law enforcement, including courts and the judiciary;
Amendment 1074 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 41
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 41
(41) ‘law enforcement’ means i) activities carried out by law enforcement authorities for the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, including the safeguarding against and the prevention of threats to public security; and ii) activities carried out by any other authority that is part of the criminal justice system, including the judiciary;
Amendment 1086 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point a
(a) the death of a person or serious damage to a person’s healthphysical health, mental health or wellbeing, to property or the environment,
Amendment 1090 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point a a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point a a (new)
(a a) a breach of fundamental rights defined by The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
Amendment 1091 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point a b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point a b (new)
(a b) systematic, mass or serious breach of other rights;
Amendment 1092 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point a c (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point a c (new)
(a c) damage to democracy, the rule of law or the environment
Amendment 1096 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point b a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point b a (new)
(b a) breach of obligations under Union law intended to protect personal data
Amendment 1105 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 a (new)
Amendment 1106 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 a (new)
(44 a) scientific research and development means: any scientific development, experimentation, analysis, testing or validation carried out under controlled conditions.
Amendment 1108 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 b (new)
(44 b) ‘social scoring’ means the evaluation or categorisation of EU citizens based on their behavior or (personality) characteristics, where one or more of the following conditions apply: (i) the information is not reasonably relevant for the evaluation or categorisation; (ii) the information is generated or collected in another domain than that of the evaluation or categorisation; (iii) the information is not necessary for or proportionate to the evaluation or categorisation; (iv) the information contains or reveals special categories of personal data.
Amendment 1109 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 b (new)
Amendment 1116 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 c (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 c (new)
(44 c) ‘affectee(s)’ mean(s) any natural or legal person or group of natural or legal persons affected by the use or outcomes of, or a combination of, AI system(s);
Amendment 1119 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 c (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 c (new)
(44 c) “child” is any person under the age of 18.
Amendment 1120 #
2021/0106(COD)
(44 d) ‘artificial intelligence system within determinate uses’ means an artificial intelligence system without specific and limited provider-defined purposes;
Amendment 1122 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 e (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 e (new)
(44 e) 'deep fake' means generated or manipulated image, audio or video content produced by an AI system that appreciably resembles existing persons, objects, places or other entities or events and falsely appears to a person to be authentic or truthful;
Amendment 1125 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 f (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 44 f (new)
Amendment 1133 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4
Article 4
Amendments to Annex I The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 73 to amend the list of techniques and approaches listed in Annex I, in order to update that list to market and technological developments on the basis of characteristics that are similar to the techniques and approaches listed therein.rticle 4 deleted
Amendment 1159 #
2021/0106(COD)
(a) the placing on the market, putting into service or use of an AI system that deploys subliminal techniques beyond a person’s consciousness in order to materiallyed, aimed at, or used for manipulation, deception or distorting a person’s behaviour or exploit a person’s characteristics, in a manner that causes, or is likely to cause, harm to: (i) that person or’s, another person physical or psychological harm’s or group of persons’ fundamental rights, including their physical or psychological health and safety, and/or (ii) democracy, the rule of law, or society at large;
Amendment 1162 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the placing on the market, putting into service or use of an AI system that deploys manipulative, including subliminal, techniques beyond a person’s consciousness in order to materially distort a person’s behaviour in a manner that causes or is likely to cause that person or another person physical or psychological harm;
Amendment 1175 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the placing on the market, putting into service or use of an AI system that exploits any of the vulnerabilicharacteristiecs of a specific group of persons due to their age, physical or mental disability,gender, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability, or any other biological, physical, physiological, behavioural or social characteristics that results in a detrimental, unfavourable, or discriminatory treatment vis-à-vis persons without those characteristics, or that is used in order to materially distort the behaviour of a person pertaining to that group in a manner that causes or is likely to cause that person or another person physical or, psychological or material harm;
Amendment 1187 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – introductory part
(c) tThe placing on the market, putting into service or use of AI systems by public authorities or on their behalf for the evaluation or classification of the trustworthiness of natural persons over a certain period of time based on their social behaviour or known or predicted personal or personality characteristics, with the social score leading to either or both of the following:or on behalf of public authorities or by private actors for the purpose of social scoring.
Amendment 1193 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – introductory part
(c) the placing on the market, putting into service or use of AI systems by public authorities or on their behalf for the evaluation or classification of the trustworthiness of natural persons over a certain period of time based on their social behaviour or known or predicted personal or personality characteristics, with the social score leading to either or both of the following:r groups thereof relating to their education, employment, housing, socio-economic situation, health, reliability, social behaviour, location or movements.
Amendment 1200 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i
Amendment 1205 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i
Amendment 1215 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – point ii
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – point ii
Amendment 1216 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – point ii
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – point ii
Amendment 1232 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – introductory part
(d) the use of ‘real-time’putting into service, by public and private entities or on their behalf, of remote biometric identification systems that are or may be used in publicly - accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement, unless and in as far as such use is strictly necessary for one of the following objectiv, including online, spaces; and the use of remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible, including online, spaces, but without affecting employees who work in publicy accessibe spaces:.
Amendment 1238 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – introductory part
(d) the use of ‘real-time’placing or making available on the market or putting into service of remote biometric identification systems that are or may be used in publicly- accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement, unless and in as far as such use is strictly necessary for one of the following objectiv, as well as online spaces, and the use of remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible spaces:;
Amendment 1247 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point i
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point i
Amendment 1249 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point i
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point i
Amendment 1258 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point ii
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point ii
Amendment 1264 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point ii
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point ii
Amendment 1276 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point iii
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point iii
Amendment 1278 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point iii
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point iii
Amendment 1283 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(d a) the placing on the market, putting into service or use of: (i) AI systems intended to be used for the purpose of determining access or assigning natural persons to educational and vocational training institutions; (ii) AI systems intended to be used for the purpose of assessing students in educational and vocational training institutions. (iii) AI systems intended to be used for recruitment or selection of natural persons, notably for advertising vacancies, screening or filtering applications, evaluating candidates in the course of interviews or tests; (iv) AI systems intended to be used for making decisions on promotion and termination of work-related contractual relationships, for task allocation and for monitoring and evaluating performance and behavior of persons in such relationships. (v) AI systems intended to be used by public authorities, private entities or on their behalf to evaluate the eligibility of natural persons for public assistance benefits and services, essential private services, as well as to grant, reduce, revoke, or reclaim such benefits and services; (vi) AI systems intended to be used to evaluate the creditworthiness of natural persons or establish their credit score, with the exception of AI systems put into service by small scale providers for their own use; (vii) AI systems intended to be used by competent authorities for migration, asylum and border control management to assess a risk, including a security risk, a risk of irregular immigration, or a health risk, posed by a natural person who intends to enter or has entered into the territory of a Member State; (viii) AI systems intended to be used by public authorities, including competent authorities for migration, asylum and border control management, as polygraphs and similar tools or to detect the emotional state of a natural person;
Amendment 1285 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(d a) AI systems intended to be used by law enforcement authorities for making individual risk assessments of natural persons in order to assess the risk of a natural person for offending or reoffending or the risk for potential victims of criminal offences;
Amendment 1293 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
(d b) the placing on the market, putting into service or use of AI systems to infer emotions of a natural person, except for health or research purposes or other exceptional purposes, and subject to full regulatory review and with full and informed consent at all times.
Amendment 1294 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
(d b) AI systems intended to be used by law enforcement authorities or other competent public authorities as polygraphs and similar tools or to detect the emotional state of a natural person;
Amendment 1301 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d c (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d c (new)
(d c) the use of AI systems by or on behalf of competent authorities in migration, asylum or border control management, to profile an individual or assess a risk, including a security risk, a risk of irregular immigration, or a health risk, posed by a natural person who intends to enter or has entered the territory of a Member State, on the basis of personal or sensitive data, known or predicted, except for the sole purpose of identifying specific care and support needs;
Amendment 1302 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d c (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d c (new)
(d c) AI systems intended to be used by law enforcement authorities for predicting the occurrence or reoccurrence of an actual or potential criminal offence based on profiling of natural persons as referred to in Article 3(4) of Directive (EU) 2016/680 or assessing personality traits and characteristics or past criminal behaviour of natural persons, groups, or locations;
Amendment 1309 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d d (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d d (new)
Amendment 1310 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d d (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d d (new)
(d d) AI systems intended to be used by law enforcement authorities for profiling of natural persons as referred to in Article 3(4) of Directive (EU) 2016/680 in the course of detection, investigation or prosecution of criminal offences;
Amendment 1312 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d d (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d d (new)
(d d) The use of private facial recognition or other private biometric databases for the purpose of law enforcement;
Amendment 1314 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d e (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d e (new)
(d e) AI systems intended to be used for crime analytics regarding natural persons, allowing law enforcement authorities to search complex related and unrelated large data sets available in different data sources or in different data formats in order to identify unknown patterns or discover hidden relationships in the data.
Amendment 1320 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d f (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d f (new)
(d f) The use of remote biometric identification in migration management, border surveillance and humanitarian aid.
Amendment 1321 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d f (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d f (new)
Amendment 1324 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d g (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d g (new)
(d g) the use of AI systems, by or on behalf of competent authorities in migration, asylum and border control management, to forecast or predict individual or collective movement for the purpose of, or in any way reasonably foreseeably leading to, the interdicting, curtailing or preventing migration or border crossings;
Amendment 1326 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d g (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d g (new)
(d g) the use of biometric categorisation systems in publicly-accessible spaces, workplaces (including in hiring processes), and educational settings;
Amendment 1327 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d h (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d h (new)
(d h) the placing on the market, putting into service or use of biometric categorisation systems, or other AI systems, that categorise natural persons according to sensitive or protected attributes or characteristics, or infer those attributes or characteristics, including: ◦ Sex ◦ Gender & gender identity ◦ Race ◦ Ethnic origin ◦ Membership of a national minority ◦ Migration or citizenship status ◦ Political orientation ◦ Social origin or class ◦ Language or dialect ◦ Trade union membership ◦ Sexual orientation ◦ Religion or philosophical orientation ◦ Disability ◦ Or any other grounds on which discrimination is prohibited under Article 21 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights as well as under Article 9 of the General Data Protection Regulation
Amendment 1330 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d h (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d h (new)
(d h) The use of private facial recognition or other private biometric databases for the purpose of law enforcement;
Amendment 1331 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d i (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d i (new)
(d i) the use of AI systems by law enforcement authorities, criminal justice authorities, or other public authorities in conjunction with law enforcement and criminal justice authorities, to make predictions, profiles or risk assessments based on data analysis or profiling of natural persons [as referred to in Article 3(4) of Directive EU)2016/680], groups or locations, for the purpose of predicting the occurrence or reoccurrence of an actual or potential criminal offence(s) or other criminalised social behaviour.”
Amendment 1333 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d i (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d i (new)
(d i) The creation or expansion of facial recognition or other biometric databases through the untargeted or generalised scraping of biometric data from social media profiles or CCTV footage, or equivalent methods;
Amendment 1335 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d j (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d j (new)
(d j) the use of AI systems, by or on behalf of competent authorities in migration, asylum and border control management, to forecast or predict individual or collective movement for the purpose of, or in any way reasonably foreseeably leading to, the interdicting, curtailing or preventing migration or border crossings;
Amendment 1337 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d j (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d j (new)
(d j) the placing on the market, putting into service or use of ‘emotion recognition systems’;
Amendment 1338 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d k (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d k (new)
(d k) The use of AI systems by law enforcement and criminal justice authorities to make predictions, profiles or risk assessments for the purpose of predicting crime.
Amendment 1339 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d k (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d k (new)
Amendment 1341 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d l (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d l (new)
(d l) the placing on the market, putting into service or use of: (i) AI systems intended to be used for the purpose of determining access or assigning natural persons to educational and vocational training institutions; (ii) AI systems intended to be used for the purpose of assessing students in educational and vocational training institutions. (iii) AI systems intended to be used for recruitment or selection of natural persons, notably for advertising vacancies, screening or filtering applications, evaluating candidates in the course of interviews or tests; (iv) AI systems intended to be used for making decisions on promotion and termination of work-related contractual relationships, for task allocation and for monitoring and evaluating performance and behaviour of persons in such relationships; (v) AI systems intended to be used by public authorities, private entities or on their behalf to evaluate the eligibility of natural persons for public assistance benefits and services, essential private services, as well as to grant, reduce, revoke, or reclaim such benefits and services; (vi) AI systems intended to be used to evaluate the creditworthiness of natural persons or establish their credit score;
Amendment 1374 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. As regards paragraphs 1, point (d) and 2, each individual use for the purpose of law enforcement of a ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification system in publicly accessible or online spaces shall be subject to a prior authorisation granted by a judicial authority or by an independent administrative authority of the Member State in which the use is to take place, issued upon a reasoned request and in accordance with the detailed rules of national law referred to in paragraph 4. However, in a duly justified situation of urgency, the use of the system may be commenced without an authorisation and the authorisation may be requested only during or after the use.
Amendment 1392 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. A Member State may decide to provide for the possibility to fully or partially authorise the use of ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible or online spaces for the purpose of law enforcement within the limits and under the conditions listed in paragraphs 1, point (d), 2 and 3. That Member State shall lay down in its national law the necessary detailed rules for the request, issuance and exercise of, as well as supervision relating to, the authorisations referred to in paragraph 3. Those rules shall also specify in respect of which of the objectives listed in paragraph 1, point (d), including which of the criminal offences referred to in point (iii) thereof, the competent authorities may be authorised to use those systems for the purpose of law enforcement.
Amendment 1393 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. When assessing for the purposes of paragraph 1 whether an AI system poses a risk of harm to the health and safety or a risk of adverse impact on worker’s rights that is equivalent to or greater than the risk of harm posed by the high-risk AI systems already referred to in Annex III, the Commission shall seek and take into account the opinion of social partners.
Amendment 1397 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Member States may, by law or collective agreement, decide to prohibit or to limit the use of AI systems or provide more specific provisions for this purpose to ensure the protection of the rights of workers in the employment context, in particular for the purposes of the recruitment, the performance of the contract of employment, including discharge of obligations laid down by law or by collective agreements, management, planning and organisation of work, equality and diversity in the workplace, health and safety at work, protection of employer’s or customer’s property and for the purposes of the exercise and enjoyment, on an individual or collective basis, of rights and benefits related to employment, and for the purpose of the termination of the employment relationship.
Amendment 1403 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a (new)
Amendment 1406 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 b (new)
Article 5 b (new)
Amendment 1407 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Title II a (new)
Title II a (new)
Amendment 1416 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Irrespective of whether an AI system is placed on the market or put into service independently from the products referred to in points (a) and (b), that AI system shall be considered high-risk where bothone of the following conditions are fulfilled:
Amendment 1421 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the AI system is intended to be used as a safety component of a product, or is itself a product, covered by the Union harmonisation legislation listed in Annex IIthe failure or malfunctioning of which endangers the health, safety or fundamental rights of persons;
Amendment 1430 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the product whose safety component as meant under (a) is the AI system, or the AI system itself as a product, is required to undergo a third- party conformity assessment with a view to the placing on the market or putting into service or use of that product pursuant to the Union harmonisation legislation listed in Annex II.
Amendment 1432 #
2021/0106(COD)
(b a) the AI system is used by a public authority.
Amendment 1434 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. In addition to the high-risk AI systems referred to in paragraph 1, AI systems referred to in Annex III shall also be consideredidentified as posing a risk to fundamental human rights as defined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, in relation to a specific intended use shall also be considered high-risk. Such risk is to be determined by completion of a Human Rights Impact Assessment by the user of the AI in relation to the specific use intended for the AI system, with records of such assessment retained for regulatory inspection. The provider shall apply a precautionary principle and, in case of uncertainty over the AI system's classification, shall consider the AI system high-risk.
Amendment 1448 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. In addition to the high-risk AI systems referred to in paragraph 1, AI systems referred to in Annex III shall also be considered high-risk.
Amendment 1450 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. In addition to the high-risk AI systems referred to in paragraphs 1, AI systems that have over 20 million EU citizens across the EU or 50% of any given Member States’ population as active monthly users, or whose users have cumulatively over 20 million customers or beneficiaries in the EU affected by it shall be considered high-risk, unless these are placed onto the market.
Amendment 1453 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 c (new)
2 c. In addition to the high-risk AI systems referred to in paragraph 1, AI systems affecting employees in the employment relationship or in matters of training or further education shall be considered high risk.
Amendment 1454 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 d (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 d (new)
2 d. In addition to the high-risk AI systems referred to in paragraph 1, AI systems likely to interact with children shall be considered high-risk.
Amendment 1455 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 e (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 e (new)
2 e. In addition to the high-risk AI systems referred to in paragraph 1, an artificial intelligence system with indeterminate uses shall also be considered high risk.
Amendment 1461 #
2021/0106(COD)
1. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 73 to update the list in Annex III by adding high-risk AI systems where both of the following conditions are fulfilled:the following condition is fulfilled: the AI systems pose a risk of harm to health and safety, or a risk of adverse impact on fundamental rights, that is, in respect of its severity or probability of occurrence, equivalent to or greater than the risk of harm or of adverse impact associated with the high-risk AI systems already referred to in Annex III. Where an AI system is not intended to be used in any of the areas listed in points 1 to 8 of Annex III, the Commission is empowered to update the list of areas in Annex III by including new areas or extending the scope of existing areas.
Amendment 1469 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 73 to update the list in Annex III by adding high-risk AI systems where both of the following conditions are fulfilled:.
Amendment 1470 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 73 to update the list in Annex III by adding high-risk AI systems where botheither of the following conditions areis fulfilled:
Amendment 1472 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 1478 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 1482 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the AI systems pose a risk of harm to theeconomic harm, negative societal impacts or harm to the environment, health and safety, or a risk of adverse impact on fundamental rights, democracy and the rule of law, that is, in respect of its severity and probability of occurrence, equivalent to or greater than the risk of harm or of adverse impact posed by the high-risk AI systems already referred to in Annex III.
Amendment 1485 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) the AI systems pose a risk of harm to occupational health and safety, including psychosocial risks.
Amendment 1490 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. When assessing for the purposes of paragraph 1 whether an AI system poses a risk of harm to the health and safety or a risk of adverse impact on fundamental rights or on the environment, democracy and rule of law that is equivalent to or greater than the risk of harm posed by the high-risk AI systems already referred to in Annex III, the Commission shall take into account the followingconsult social partners and civil society and take into account, including but not limited to, the following non-cumulative criteria:
Amendment 1494 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the intended purpose of the AI system, or the reasonably foreseeable consequences of its use;
Amendment 1510 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) the extent to which the use of an AI system has already caused harm to the health and safety or adverse impact on the fundamental rights or, democracy, rule of law and the environment has given rise to significant concerns in relation to the materialisation of such harm or adverse impact, as demonstrated by available reports or documented allegations submitted to national competent authorities;
Amendment 1513 #
2021/0106(COD)
(d) the potential extent of such harm or such adverse impact, in particular in terms of its intensity and its ability to affect a plurality of persons or on the environment or to affect a particular group of persons disproportionately;
Amendment 1517 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) the extent to which potentially harmed or adversely impacted persons are dependent on the outcome produced withby a process involving an AI system, in particular because for practical or legal reasons it is not reasonably possible to opt- out ofrom that outcome;
Amendment 1528 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point g
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point g
(g) the extent to which the outcome produced with an AI system is not easily reversible, whereby outcomes having an impact on the health or safety of persons or on their fundamental rights shall not be considered as easily reversible;
Amendment 1540 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point h – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point h – introductory part
(h) the extent to which existing Union legislation provides forlacks:
Amendment 1541 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point h – point i
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point h – point i
(i) effective measures of redress, the availability of redress-by-design mechanisms and procedures in relation to the risks posed by an AI system, with the exclusion of claims forincluding claims for material and non-material damages;
Amendment 1543 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point h a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point h a (new)
(h a) The general capabilities and functionalities of the AI system independent of its foreseeable use;
Amendment 1544 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point h b (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point h b (new)
(h b) The extent of the availability and use of demonstrated technical solutions and mechanisms for the control, reliability and corrigibility of the AI system;
Amendment 1545 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point h c (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point h c (new)
(h c) The potential misuse and malicious use of the AI system and of the technology underpinning it.
Amendment 1564 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. The intended purpoforeseeable uses and foreseeable misuses of AI systems with indeterminate uses of the high- risk AI system and the risk management system referred to in Article 9 shall be taken into account when ensuring compliance with those requirements.
Amendment 1568 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. The intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use of the high- risk AI system and the risk management system referred to in Article 9 shall be taken into account when ensuring compliance with those requirements.
Amendment 1577 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. A risk management system shall be established, implemented, documented and maintained in relation to high-risk AI systems, throughout the entire lifecycle of the AI system.
Amendment 1580 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The risk management system shall consist of a continuous iterative process run throughout the entire lifecycle of a high-risk AI system, requiring regular systematic updatingreview and updating, including when the high-risk AI system is subject to significant changes in its design or purpose. It shall comprise the following steps:
Amendment 1582 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) identification and analysis of the known and the reasonably foreseeable risks associated with each high-risk AI system;that the high-risk AI system, and AI systems with indeterminate uses can pose to: (i) the health or safety of natural persons; (ii) the legal rights or legal status of natural persons; (iii) the fundamental rights of natural persons; (iv) the equal access to services and opportunities of natural persons; (v) the Union values enshrined in Article 2 TEU; (vi) society at large and the environment.
Amendment 1593 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) estimation and evaluation of the risks that may emerge when the high-risk AI system is used in accordance with its intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use and under conditions of reasonably foreseeable misuse;
Amendment 1612 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. The risk management measures referred to in paragraph 2, point (d) shall be such that any residual risk associated with each hazard as well as the overall residual risk of the high-risk AI systems is judged acceptable, provided that the high- risk AI system is used in accordance with its intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use or under conditions of reasonably foreseeable misuse. Those residual risks shall be communicated to the user.
Amendment 1619 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) elimination or reduction of risks as far as possible through adequate design and development involving relevant domain and other experts and internal and external stakeholders, including but not limited to representative bodies and the social partners;
Amendment 1644 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 5
Article 9 – paragraph 5
5. High-risk AI systems shall be tested for the purposes of identifying the most appropriate risk management measures. Testing shall ensure that high-risk AI systems perform consistently for their intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use and they are in compliance with the requirements set out in this Chapter.
Amendment 1647 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 6
Article 9 – paragraph 6
6. Testing procedures shall be suitable to achieve the intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use of the AI system and do not need to go beyond what is necessary to achieve that purpose.
Amendment 1655 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 7
Article 9 – paragraph 7
7. The testing of the high-risk AI systems shall be performed, as appropriate, at any point in time throughout the development process, and, in any event, prior to the placing on the market or the putting into service. Testing shall be made against preliminarily defined metrics and probabilistic thresholds that are appropriate to the intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use of the high-risk AI system.
Amendment 1672 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. High-risk AI systems which make use of techniques involving the training of models with data shall be developed on the basis of training, validation and testing data sets that meet the quality criteria referred to in paragraphs 2 to 5. Techniques such as unsupervised learning and reinforcement learning that do not use validation and testing data sets shall be developed on the basis of training data sets the quality criteria referred to in paragraphs 2 to 5.
Amendment 1681 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Training, validation and testing data sets as well as data that is collected, fed into, or used by the AI system, after deployment of the system and throughout its lifecycle shall be subject to appropriate data governance and management practices. Those practices shall concern in particular,
Amendment 1695 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) the formulation of relevant, justified and reasonable assumptions, notably with respect to the information that the data are supposed to measure and represent;
Amendment 1703 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point f
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point f
(f) examination in view of possible biases;
Amendment 1712 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. Training data sets, validation and testing data sets, including the labels, as well as data that is collected, fed into, or used by the AI system, after deployment of the system and throughout its lifecycle shall be relevant, representative, free of errors and complete. They shall have the appropriate statistical properties, including, where applicable, as regards the persons or groups of persons on which the high-risk AI system is intended to be used. These required characteristics of the data sets mayshould be met at the level of each individual data sets set, whether in combination or not. Training validation and testing data sets shall be relevant, representative, free of errors and combination thereofplete. They shall have the appropriate properties, including, where applicable, as regards the persons or groups of persons on which the high-risk AI system is intended to be used.
Amendment 1728 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. Training, validation and testing data sets as well as data that is collected, fed into, or used by the AI system, after deployment of the system and throughout its lifecycle shall take into account, to the extent required by the intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use , the characteristics or elements that are particular to the specific geographical, behavioural or functional setting within which the high-risk AI system is intended to be used.
Amendment 1737 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Amendment 1739 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Article 10 – paragraph 5
5. To the extent that it is strictly necessary for the purposes of ensuring bias monitoring, detection and correction in relation to the high-risk AI systems, the providers of such systems may process special categories of personal data referred to in Article 9(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Article 10 of Directive (EU) 2016/680 and Article 10(1) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725, subject to appropriate safeguards for the fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons, including technical limitations on the re-use and use of state-of-the-art security and privacy- preserving measures, such as pseudonymisation, or encryption where anonymisation may significantly affect the purpose pursued. This should also guarantee explainability of AI driven recommendations or decisions.
Amendment 1770 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. High-riskAll AI systems shall be designed and developed with capabilities enabling the automatic recording of events (‘logs’) while the high-risk AI systems is operating. Those logging capabilities shall conform to recognised standards or common specifications.
Amendment 1774 #
2021/0106(COD)
2. The logging capabilities shall ensure a level of traceability of the AI system’s functioning throughout its lifecycle that is appropriate to the intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use of the system.
Amendment 1781 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. For high-risk AI systems referred to in paragraph 1, point (a) of Annex III, the logging capabilities shall provide, at a minimum:
Amendment 1784 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. For high-risk self-learning AI systems the logging of self-learning shall be maintained.The logging shall provide, at a minimum: (a) the input data used for self-learning; (b) the used algorithms of the input data interpretation; (c) the results of self-learning.
Amendment 1785 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Where a decision and/or proposal of decision is the outcome of an AI system, the logging shall cover information comprehensively sufficient for further human manual review of the decision/proposal with no need to refer to the AI system itself.The logging shall provide, at a minimum: (a) the input data; (b)the reference database, if such present; (c) the algorithms that could had been used; (d) the algorithms that actually had been used; (e) output data (decision and/or proposal); (f) comprehensive mechanism of how the input data resulted into the output data.
Amendment 1786 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4 c (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 4 c (new)
4 c. For all high-risk AI systems, including those mentioned in paragraphs 4–6 above, the logging shall provide, at a minimum: (a) log-in information (user, date, time, authentication type); (b) the input data; (c) the output data.
Amendment 1787 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4 d (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 4 d (new)
4 d. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 73 to define more minimum logging requirements for AI systems or their certain types.
Amendment 1810 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a Transparency for affectees of AI systems 1) High-risk AI systems shall be designed, developed and used in such a way that an affectee can obtain an explanation from the developer and user for any decision taken or supported by a high-risk AI system that significantly affects the affectee; 2) Providers and users of high-risk AI systems shall provide access to the person of persons designated with the exercise of 'human oversight' as described in Art. 14 to discuss and to clarify the facts, circumstances and reasons having led to the decision by the AI system; 3) Providers and users of high-risk AI systems shall provide the affectee with a written statement of the reasons for any decision taken or supported by a high-risk AI system; 4) Where the affectee is not satisfied with the explanation or the written statement of reasons obtained or consider that the decision referred to in paragraph (1) jeopardizes their health, safety or fundamental rights, the provider or user, as the case may be, shall review that decision, upon reasonable request by the affectee. The provider or user, as the case maybe, shall respond to such request by providing the affectee with a substantiated reply without undue delay and in any event within one week of receipt of the request.
Amendment 1816 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. Human oversight shall aim at preventing or minimising the risks to health, safety or fundamental rights that may emerge when a high-risk AI system isAI systems that pose risks to health and safety or fundamental rights or AI systems subjected to the transparency obligations ex Article 52 are used in accordance with its intended purpotheir foreseeable uses or under conditions of reasonably foreseeable misuse, in particular when such risks persist notwithstanding the application of other requirements set out in this Chapter.
Amendment 1894 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) ensure that the high-risk AI system undergoes the relevant conformiindependent third party assessment procedure, prior to its placing on the market or putting into service;
Amendment 1896 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) ensure that the high-risk AI system undergoes the relevant conformity assessment procedure, prior to its placing on the market or putting into service or use;
Amendment 1905 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point j a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point j a (new)
(j a) refrain from placing on the market or putting into service a High-Risk AI system that: (i) is not in conformity with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title;or (ii) poses a risk of harm to health, safety or fundamental rights despite its conformity with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title.
Amendment 1907 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point j b (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point j b (new)
(j b) ensure that the individual to whom human oversight is assigned shall either be fully independent from the provider or user or, be adequately protected against negative consequences for their position within the organisation, resulting from or related to their exercise of human oversight.
Amendment 1913 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Providers of high-risk AI systems shall put a quality management system in place, certified by an independent third party that ensures compliance with this Regulation. That system shall be documented in a systematic and orderly manner in the form of written policies, procedures and instructions, and shall include at least the following aspects:
Amendment 1927 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) systems and procedures for data management, including data collection, data analysis, data labelling, data storage, data filtration, data mining, data aggregation, data retention and any other operation regarding the data that is performed before and for the purposes of the placing on the market or putting into service or use of high-risk AI systems;
Amendment 1932 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point i
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) procedures related to the reporting of serious incidents and of malfunctioning, including near misses, in accordance with Article 62;
Amendment 1943 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. High-risk AI systems shall make use of high quality models, that use relevant, justified and reasonable parameters and features and optimise for justified goals;
Amendment 1944 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. High-risk AI systems shall only be used in a different domain or environment where they are generalisable to such domain or environment
Amendment 1949 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – title
Article 19 – title
Independent Third party Conformity assessment
Amendment 1950 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of high-risk AI systems shall ensure that their systems undergo the relevantan independent third party conformity assessment procedure in accordance with Article 43 and Annex VII, prior to their placing on the market or putting into service. Where the compliance of the AI systems with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title has been demonstrated following that conformity assessment, the providers shall draw up an EU declaration of conformity in accordance with Article 48 and affix the CE marking of conformity in accordance with Article 49. The conformity assessment shall be publicly available.
Amendment 1952 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of high-risk AI systems shall ensure that their systems undergo the relevant conformity assessment procedure in accordance with Article 43, prior to their placing on the market or putting into service or use. Where the compliance of the AI systems with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title has been demonstrated following that conformity assessment, the providers shall draw up an EU declaration of conformity in accordance with Article 48 and affix the CE marking of conformity in accordance with Article 49.
Amendment 1955 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of high-risk AI systems shall keep the logs automatically generated by their high-risk AI systems, to the extent such logs are under their control by virtue of a contractual arrangement with the user or otherwise by law. The logs shall be kept for a period that is appropriate in the light of the intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use of high-risk AI system and applicable legal obligations under Union or national law.
Amendment 2028 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) they modify the intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use of a high- risk AI system already placed on the market or put into service;
Amendment 2034 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 a (new)
Article 28 a (new)
Amendment 2046 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2
Article 29 – paragraph 2
2. The obligations in paragraph 1 are without prejudice to other user obligations under Union or national law and to the user’s discretion in organising its own resources and activities for the purpose of implementing the human oversight measures indicated by the provider. This regulation does not conflict with the scope of Art. 153 TFEU, which sets minimum requirements for Member States that may be exceeded.
Amendment 2052 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 3
Article 29 – paragraph 3
3. Without prejudice to paragraph 1, to the extent the user exercises control over the input data, that user shall ensure that input data is relevant in view of the intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use of the high-risk AI system.
Amendment 2055 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 29 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Users shall monitor the operation of the high-risk AI system on the basis of the instructions of use. When they have reasons to consider that the use in accordance with the instructions of use may result in the AI system presenting a risk within the meaning of Article 65(1) they shall inform the national competent authorities and the provider or distributor and suspend the use of the system. They shall also inform the national competent authorities and the provider or distributor when they have identified any serious incident or any malfunctioning, including near misses, within the meaning of Article 62 and interrupt the use of the AI system. In case the user is not able to reach the provider, Article 62 shall apply mutatis mutandis.
Amendment 2057 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 29 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. Users of high-risk AI systems shall keep the logs automatically generated by that high-risk AI system, to the extent such logs are under their control. The logs shall be kept for a period that is appropriate in the light of the intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use of the high-risk AI system and applicable legal obligations under Union or national law.
Amendment 2071 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Users of high-risk AI systems shall refrain from placing on the market or putting into service a high-risk AI system that: (i) is not in conformity with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title;or (ii) poses a risk of harm to health, safety or fundamental rights despite its conformity with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title.
Amendment 2073 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Users of high risk AI systems, who modify or extend the purpose for which the conformity of the AI system was originally assessed, shall establish and document a post-market monitoring system (Art. 61)and must undergo a new conformity assessment (Art. 43) involved by a notified body.
Amendment 2083 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 a (new)
Article 29 a (new)
Article 29 a Obligation on users to define affected persons 1. Before putting into use a high-risk AI system as defined in Article 6(2), the user shall define categories of natural persons and groups likely to be affected by the use of the system.
Amendment 2084 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 a (new)
Article 29 a (new)
Article 29 a A fiduciary duty for providers and users of high-risk AI systems Providers and users of high-risk AI systems have a fiduciary duty to act in the interest of the affectees.
Amendment 2085 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 b (new)
Article 29 b (new)
Amendment 2088 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1
Article 30 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall designate or establish athe national Data Protection Authority (DPA) as the notifying authority responsible for setting up and carrying out the necessary procedures for the assessment, designation and notification of conformity assessment bodies and for their monitoring.
Amendment 2115 #
2021/0106(COD)
1. The Commission shall ensure that, with regard to the areas covered by this Regulation, appropriate coordination and cooperation between notified bodies active in the conformity assessment procedures of AI systems pursuant to this Regulation are put in place and properly operated in the form of a sectoral group of notified bodies. The coordination role will be held by the European Data Protection Supervisor.
Amendment 2126 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 40 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Harmonised standards shall be limited to technical specifications and procedures. Work organisation and ethical considerations are not applicable.
Amendment 2132 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1
Article 41 – paragraph 1
1. Where harmonised standards referred to in Article 40 do not exist or where the Commission considers that the relevant harmonised standards are insufficient or that there is a need to address specific safety or fundamental right concerns, the Commission may, by means of implementing acts, adopt common specifications in respect of the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 74(2). The Commission shall adopt common specifications setting out how risk management systems should give specific consideration to interaction with or impact on children.
Amendment 2151 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42
Article 42
Amendment 2153 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1
Article 42 – paragraph 1
1. Taking into account their intended purpoforeseeable uses, high-risk AI systems that have been trained and tested on data concerning the specific geographical, behavioural and functional setting within which they are intended to be used shall be presumed to be in compliance with the requirement set out in Article 10(4).
Amendment 2157 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. For high-risk AI systems listed in point 1, 3 and 4 of Annex III, where, in demonstrating the compliance of a high- risk AI system with the requirements set out in Chapter 2 of this Title, the provider has applied harmonised standards referred to in Article 40, or, where applicable, common specifications referred to in Article 41, the provider shall follow one of the following procedures:follow the conformity assessment procedure based on assessment of the quality management system and assessment of the technical documentation, with the involvement of a notified body, referred to in Annex VII.
Amendment 2163 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 2170 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the conformity assessment procedure based on assessment of the quality management system and assessment of the technical documentation, with the involvement of a notified body, referred to in Annex VIIdocumentation of analysis and achievement of the tests of strict necessity, proportionality and legality of the system, as well as any associated database or data repository on which it relies; with the involvement of a notified body, referred to in Annex VII, and with the involvement of the relevant national data protection authority.
Amendment 2180 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 2
Article 43 – paragraph 2
2. For high-risk AI systems referred to in points 2 to 8 of Annex III, providers shall follow the conformity assessment procedure based on internal control as referred to in Annex VI, which does not provide for the involvement of a notified body. For high-risk AI systems referred to in point 5(b) of Annex III, placed on the market or put into service by credit institutions regulated by Directive 2013/36/EU, the conformity assessment shall be carried out as part of the procedure referred to in Articles 97 to101 of that Directive.
Amendment 2194 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 43 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
For high-risk AI systems that continue to learn after being placed on the market or put into service, changes to the high-risk AI system and its performance that have been pre-determined by the provider at the moment of the initial conformity assessment and are part of the information contained in the technical documentation referred to in point 2(f) of Annex IV, shall not constitute a substantial modification. A new conformity assessment is always required whenever safety-related limits of continuing learning high-risk AI systems may be exceeded or have an impact on the health or safety.
Amendment 2214 #
Amendment 2246 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 1
Article 51 – paragraph 1
Before placing on the market or putting into service a high-risk AI system referred to in Article 6(2)n AI system, the provider or, where applicable, the authorised representative shall register that system in the EU database referred to in Article 60.
Amendment 2251 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 51 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Before using a high-risk AI system referred to in Article 6(2), the user or, where applicable, the authorised representative, shall register the uses of that system in the EU database referred to in Article 60. A new registration entry must be completed by the user for each new use of a high-risk AI system.
Amendment 2256 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 51 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Before using an AI system, public authorities shall register the uses of that system in the EU database referred to in Article 60. A new registration entry must be completed by the user for each new use of an AI system.
Amendment 2283 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 a (new)
Article 52 a (new)
Amendment 2286 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Title IV a (new)
Title IV a (new)
Amendment 2290 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 1
Article 53 – paragraph 1
1. AI regulatory sandboxes established by the Commission in collaboration with one or more Member States competent authorities or the European Data Protection Supervisor, are considered high risk and shall provide a controlled environment that facilitates the development, testing and validation of innovative AI systems for a limited time before their placement on the market or putting into service pursuant to a specific plan. They shall operate in full compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation. This shall take place under the direct supervision and guidance by the Commission in collaboration with competent authorities with a view to identifying risks to health and safety and fundamental rights, testing mitigation measures for identified risks, demonstrating prevention of these risks and otherwise ensuring compliance with the requirements of this Regulation and, where relevant, other Union and Member States legislation supervised within the sandbox. AI regulatory sandboxes shall remain a technical solution, shall assess potentialadverse effects and not be used on the employment context.
Amendment 2310 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 2
Article 53 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission in collaboration with Member States shall ensure that to the extent the innovative AI systems involve the processing of personal data or otherwise fall under the supervisory remit of other national authorities or competent authorities providing or supporting access to data, the national data protection authorities and those other national authorities are associated to the operation of the AI regulatory sandbox.
Amendment 2314 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 3
Article 53 – paragraph 3
3. The AI regulatory sandboxes shall not affect the supervisory and corrective powers of the competent authorities. Any significant risks toRegulatory sandboxes involving activities that may impact health and, safety and fundamental rights, democracy and rule of law or the environment shall be developed in accordance with redress-by-design principles. Any significant risks identified during the development and testing of such systems shall result in immediate mitigation and, failing that, in the suspension of the development and testing process until such mitigation takes place.
Amendment 2331 #
2021/0106(COD)
5. The Commission, Member States’ competent authorities that have established AI regulatory sandboxes shall coordinate their activities and cooperate within the framework of the European Artificial Intelligence Board. They shall submit annual reports to the Board and the Commission on the results from the implementation of those scheme, including good practices, lessons learnt and recommendations on their setup and, where relevant, on the application of this Regulation and other Union legislation supervised within the sandbox.
Amendment 2338 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 53 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. The modalities referred to in Article 53(6) shall ensure at least the following: (a) participants in the regulatory sandboxing system, in particular small-scale providers, are granted access to pre-deployment services, such as preliminary registration of AI system, insurance, compliance and R&D support services, and to all the other relevant elements of the Union’s AI ecosystem and other Digital Single Market initiatives such as testing and experimentation facilities, digital hubs, centers of excellence, testing and experimentation facilities, and EU benchmarking capabilities; and to other value-adding services such as standardization and certification, community social platform and contact databases, tenders and grant making portal and lists of potential investors. (b) foreign providers, in particular small- scale providers, are eligible to take part in the regulatory sandboxes to incubate and refine their products in compliance with this Regulation. (c) individuals such as researchers, entrepreneurs, innovators and other pre-market ideas owners are eligible to take part in the regulatory sandboxes to incubate and refine their products in compliance with this Regulation. (d) there be as little fragmentation as possible of the regulatory sandboxes across Member States, notably through development of a single interface and contact point at the EU level to interact with the regulatory sandbox ecosystem and through the Commission facilitating the creation of transnational and EU-wide regulatory sandboxes
Amendment 2388 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 a (new)
Article 55 a (new)
Article 55 a Promoting research and development of AI in support of socially and environmentally beneficial outcomes led by civil society 1. Member States shall promote research and development of AI solutions which support socially and environmentally beneficial outcomes, including but not limited to development of AI-based solutions to increase accessibility for persons with disabilities, tackle socio- economic inequalities, and meet sustainability and environmental targets, by: (a) providing relevant projects with priority access to the AI regulatory sandboxes to the extent that they fulfil the eligibility conditions; (b) earmarking public funding, including from relevant EU funds, for AI research and development in support of socially and environmentally beneficial outcomes; (c) organising specific awareness raising activities about the application of this Regulation, the availability of and application procedures for dedicated funding, tailored to the needs of those projects; (d) where appropriate, establishing accessible dedicated channels for communication with projects to provide guidance and respond to queries about the implementation of this Regulation. 2. Member States shall ensure that when conformity assessment is required under Article 43, cost of such assessment is covered by public, including EU, funds available for AI research and development. 3. Without prejudice to Article 55 a (new)1(a), Member States shall ensure that relevant projects are led by civil society and social stakeholders that set the project priorities, goals, and outcomes.
Amendment 2390 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 b (new)
Article 55 b (new)
Article 55 b Right not to be subject to non-compliant AI systems Natural persons shall have the right not to be subject to AI systems that: (a) pose an unacceptable risk pursuant to Article 5, or (b) otherwise do not comply with the requirements of this Regulation.
Amendment 2391 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 c (new)
Article 55 c (new)
Article 55 c Right to information about the use and functioning of AI systems 1. Natural persons shall have the right to be informed that they have been exposed to high-risk AI systems as defined in Article 6, and other AI systems as defined in Article 52. 2. Natural persons shall have the right to be provided upon request, with an explanation for decisions producing legal effects or otherwise affecting them or outcomes related to them taken by or with the assistance of systems within the scope of this Regulation, pursuant to Article 52 paragraph (3b). 3. The information outlined in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be provided in a clear, easily understandable and intelligible way, in a manner that is accessible for persons with disabilities.
Amendment 2396 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – title
Article 56 – title
Amendment 2402 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 56 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. The Board shall be independent in the fulfilment of its task. It shall have legal personality.
Amendment 2403 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 56 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. The Board shall ensure the consistent application of this Regulation.
Amendment 2406 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 56 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Board shall provide advice and assistance to the Commission and the national authorities in order to:
Amendment 2411 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 56 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) carry out annual reviews and analyses of the complaints sent to and findings by national competent authorities, of the serious incidents and malfunctioning reports referred to in Article 62, and of the new registration in the EU Database referred to in Article 60 to identify trends and potential emerging issues threatening the future health and safety and fundamental rights of citizens and not adequately addressed by this Regulation; to carry out biannual horizon scanning and foresight exercises to extrapolate the impact these trends and emerging issues can have on the Union; and to annually publish recommendations to the Commission, including but not limited to recommendations on the categorization of prohibited practices, high-risk systems, and codes of conduct for AI systems that are not classified as high-risk.
Amendment 2417 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
Article 56 – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
(c b) represent and defend the interest of the broad cicil society, including Social Partners.
Amendment 2418 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 2 – point c c (new)
Article 56 – paragraph 2 – point c c (new)
(c c) launch an evaluation procedure for an AI system
Amendment 2419 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 56 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. The Board shall have a sufficient number of competent personnel at their disposal for assistance in the proper performance of their tasks.
Amendment 2420 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 56 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. The Board shall be organised and operated so as to safeguard the independence, objectivity and impartiality of their activities. The Board shall document and implement a structure and procedures to safeguard impartiality and to promote and apply the principles of impartiality throughout its activities.
Amendment 2432 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 1
Article 57 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall be composed of the national supervisory authorities, who shall be represented by the head or equivalent high-level official of that authority, and the European Data Protection Supervisor, the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights, ENISA, EIGE and social partners as well representratives of civil society. Other national authorities may be invited to the meetings, where the issues discussed are of relevance for them.
Amendment 2435 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 1
Article 57 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall be composed of the national supervisory authorities, who shall be represented by the head or equivalent high-level official of that authority, and the European Data Protection Supervisor and the Fundamental Rights Agency. Other national authorities or EU agencies may be invited to the meetings, where the issues discussed are of relevance for them.
Amendment 2438 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 57 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. The Commission shall have the right to participate in the activities and meetings of the Board without voting right. The Commission shall designate a representative. The Chair of the Board shall communicate to the Commission the activities of the Board.
Amendment 2444 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 2
Article 57 – paragraph 2
2. The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure by a simple majority of its members, following the consent of the Commission. The rules of procedure shall also contain the operational aspects related to the execution of the Board’s tasks as listed in Article 58. The Board may establish sub-groups as appropriate for the purpose of examining specific questions.
Amendment 2448 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 57 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. The Board may establish sub- groups as appropriate for the purpose of examining specific questions. The Board shall establish a permanent sub-group for the purpose of examining the question of the proper governance of general purpose AI systems. The Board shall also establish a permanent sub-group for the purpose of examining the question of the proper governance of research and development activities on the topic of AI and to inform the development of the governance framework.
Amendment 2451 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 3
Article 57 – paragraph 3
3. The Board shall be chaired by the Commission. The Commission shall convene the meetings and prepare the agenda in accordance with the tasks of the Board pursuant to this Regulation and with its rules of procedure. The Commission shall provide administrative and analytical support for the activities of the Board pursuant to this Regulation.
Amendment 2459 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 57 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. The Board shall elect a chair and two deputy chairs from amongst its members by simple majority.
Amendment 2461 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 57 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. The term of office of the Chair and of the deputy chairs shall be five years and be renewable once.
Amendment 2465 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 4
Article 57 – paragraph 4
4. The Board may invite external experts and observers to . To thatt end its meetings and may hold exchanges with interested third parties to inform its activities to an appropriate extent. To that end tthe Commission may facilitate exchanges between the Board and other Union bodies, offices, agencies and specialised bodies. The Ccommission may facilitate exchanges between the Board and other Union bodies, offices, agencies and advisory groupsposition of the specialised body shall ensure fair representation of consumer organisations, civil society organisations and academics specialised on AI. Its meetings and their minutes shall be published online.
Amendment 2488 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 58 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
When providing advice and assistance to the Commissensuring the consistent application inof the context of Article 56(2)is Regulation, the Board shall in particular:
Amendment 2517 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 58 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Amendment 2520 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new)
Article 58 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new)
(c b) provide guidance in relation to governing research and development activities for creating new or improving existing AI systems, and the alignment of these activities with the objectives of this Regulation.
Amendment 2524 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 1 – point c c (new)
Article 58 – paragraph 1 – point c c (new)
(c c) The Board shall provide statutory guidance in relation to children’s rights, applicable law and minimum standards for the evaluation of automated decision- making systems to meet the objectives of this Regulation pertaining to children and to investigate the design goals, data inputs, model selection, implementation and outcomes of such systems.
Amendment 2568 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 3
Article 59 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall inform the Board and the Commission of their designation or designations and, where applicable, the reasons for designating more than one authority.
Amendment 2580 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 5
Article 59 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall report to the Board and the Commission on an annual basis on the status of the financial and human resources of the national competent authorities with an assessment of their adequacy. The Commission shall transmit that information to the Board for discussion and possible recommendations.
Amendment 2594 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 8
Article 59 – paragraph 8
8. When Union institutions, agencies and bodies fall within the scope of this Regulation, tThe European Data Protection Supervisor shall act as the competent authority for their supervision of Union institutions, agencies and bodies.
Amendment 2608 #
Amendment 2610 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – title
Article 60 – title
60 EU database for stand-alone high- risk, general purpose and certain AI systems, uses thereof, and uses of AI systems by public authorities AI systems
Amendment 2612 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – title
Article 60 – title
EU database for stand-alone high-risk AI systems
Amendment 2614 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 1
Article 60 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall, in collaboration with the Member States, set up and maintain a EU database containing information referred to in paragraph 2 concerning high-risk AI systems referred to in Article 6(2) which are registered in accordance with Article 51. AI systems which are registered in accordance with Article 51 and general purpose AI systems, in accordance with Article xx: a. high-risk AI systems referred to in Article 6(2) which are registered in accordance with Article 51(1); b. any AI systems referred to in Article 52 paragraphs 1b and 2 which are registered in accordance with Article 51(1); c. any uses of high-risk AI systems referred to in Article 6(2) which are registered in accordance with Article 51(2); d. any uses of AI systems referred to in Article 52 paragraph 1b and 2 which are registered in accordance with Article 51(2); e. any uses of AI systems by or on behalf of public authorities registered in accordance with Article 51(3).
Amendment 2620 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 2
Article 60 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall provide providers and users entering data into the EU database with technical and administrative support.The following information should be included in the EU database: (a) For registrations according to paragraph 1(a) and 1(b), the data listed in Annex VIII point 1 shall be entered into the EU database by the providers. The Commission shall provide them with technical and administrative support. (b) For registrations according to paragraph 1(c) , 1(d) and 1(e), the data listed in Annex VIII point 2 shall be entered into the EU database by the users.
Amendment 2624 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 3
Article 60 – paragraph 3
3. Information contained in the EU database shall be accessible to the publicThe EU database and the information contained in it shall be freely available to the public, comply with the accessibility requirements of Annex I to Directive 2019/882, and be user-friendly, navigable, and machine-readable, containing structured digital data based on a standardised protocol.
Amendment 2626 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 60 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Users should register deployments of high-risk AI systems into the EU database before putting them into use. The users should include information in the database, not limited to, the identity of the provider and the user, the context of the purpose and of deployment, the designation of impacted persons, and the results of the impact assessment.
Amendment 2628 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 4
Article 60 – paragraph 4
4. The EU database shall contain personal data only insofar as necessary for collecting and processing information in accordance with this Regulation. That information shall include the names and contact details of natural persons who are responsible for registering the system and have the legal authority to represent the provider, or the user.
Amendment 2632 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 5
Article 60 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall be the controller of the EU database. It shall also ensure to providers and users adequate technical and administrative support, in particular in relation to registrations according to paragraph 1(e).
Amendment 2637 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 60 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. The database shall comply with the accessibility requirements of Annex I to Directive 2019/882.
Amendment 2638 #
2021/0106(COD)
Article 60 a Systemic transparency and monitoring of societal implications 1. The Commission shall, in collaboration with the Member States, set up and maintain a relational database of digital and AI systems that interact with high- risk or general purpose AI systems or with AI systems with transparency obligations. Among others, the relational database shall include digital and AI systems whose input directly or indirectly come from a high-risk or general purpose AI system or whose output directly or indirectly is taken as input by a high-risk or general purpose AI system. 2. For each entry in the EU database referred to in Article 60, the provider shall enter the upstream and downstream digital and AI systems into the relational database, as well as, to the extent it is possible, the digital and AI systems upstream of the upstream AI systems and the digital and AI systems downstream of the downstream AI systems. 3. The European AI Board and the Commission shall regularly assess the relational map to facilitate incident response and to identify AI systems (‘Societally Significant AI systems’)whose output is used as input into many downstream digital and AI systems.4. The European AI Board and the Commission shall develop a Code of Conduct for Societally Significant AI Systems.
Amendment 2640 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 2
Article 61 – paragraph 2
2. The post-market monitoring system shall actively and systematically collect, document and analyse relevant data provided by users or collected through other sources on the performance of high- risk AI systems throughout their lifetime, and allow the provider to evaluate the continuous compliance of AI systems with the requirements set out in Title III, Chapter 2. Post-market monitoring must include continuous analysis of the AI environment, including other devices, software, and other AI systems that will interact with the AI system.
Amendment 2654 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 62 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 62 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Providers of high-risk AI systems placed on the Union market shall report anyand, where users have identified a serious incident or any malfunctioning of th, including near misses, users of high-risk or general purpose systems which constitutes a breach of obligations under Union law intended to protect fundamental rights, health and safety to the market surveillance authorities of the Member States where that incident or breach occurred, and to the Commission..
Amendment 2661 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 62 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 62 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Such notification shall be made immediately after the provider has established a causal link between the AI system and the incident or malfunctioning or the reasonable likelihood of such a linkwhen an AI system is involved in the incident or malfunctioning, including near misses, and, in any event, not later than 15 day72 hours after the providers or, where applicable, the user becomes aware of the serious incident or of the malfunctioning.
Amendment 2703 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 a (new)
Article 64 a (new)
Article 64 a Market surveillance authorities 1. Market surveillance authorities shall, at a minimum, have the power to (a) carry out unannounced on-site and remote inspections of AI systems. (b) acquire samples related to AI systems, including through remote inspections, to reverse-engineer the AI systems and to acquire evidence to identify non- compliance. 2. Member States may authorise their market surveillance authorities to reclaim from the relevant operator the totality of the costs of their activities with respect to instances of non-compliance. 3. The costs referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article may include the costs of carrying out testing, computation, hardware,storage, and the costs of activities relating to AI systems that are found to be non-compliant and are subject to corrective action prior to their placing on the market.
Amendment 2706 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 1
Article 65 – paragraph 1
1. AI systems presenting a risk shall be understood as a product presenting a risk defined in Article 3, point 19 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 insofar as risks to the health or safety or to the protection of fundamental rights of persons are concerned. in general, including safety in the workplace, protection of consumers, the environment, or to the protection of fundamental rights of persons are concerned, including autonomy of choice, access to goods and services, unfair discrimination and economic harm, privacy and data protection, as well as societal risks.
Amendment 2711 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 65 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. When AI systems are likely to interact with or impact on children, the precautionary principle shall apply.
Amendment 2713 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 65 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Where the market surveillance authority of a Member State has sufficient reasons to consider that an AI system presents a risk as referred to in paragraph 1, they shall carry out an evaluation of the AI system concerned in respect of its compliance with all the requirements and obligations laid down in this Regulation. When risks to the protection of fundamental rights are present, the market surveillance authority shall also inform the relevant national public authorities, Board or bodies referred to in Article 64(3). Where there is sufficient reason to consider that that an AI system exploits the vulnerabilities of children or violates their rights intentionally or unintentionally, the market surveillance authority shall have the duty to investigate the design goals, data inputs, model selection, implementation and outcomes of the AI system and the burden of proof shall be on the operator or operators of that system to demonstrate compliance with the provisions of this Regulation. The relevant operators shall cooperate as necessary with the market surveillance authorities and the other national public authorities or bodies referred to in Article 64(3), including by providing access to personnel, documents, internal communications, code, data samples and on platform testing as necessary.
Amendment 2716 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 65 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Where, in the course of thatits evaluation, the market surveillance authority finds that the AI system does not comply with the requirements and obligations laid down in this Regulation, it shall without delay require the relevant operator to take all appropriate corrective actions to bring the AI system into compliance, to withdraw the AI system from the market, or to recall it within a reasonable period, commensurate with the nature of the risk, as it may prescribe. The corrective action can also be applied to AI systems in other products or services judged to be similar in their objectives, design or impact.
Amendment 2740 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 66 – paragraph 1
Article 66 – paragraph 1
1. Where, within three months of receipt of the notification referred to in Article 65(5), objections are raised by the European Parliament or a Member State against a measure taken by another Member State, or where the Commission considers the measure to be contrary to Union law, or has sufficient reasons to believe that an AI system presents a risk or affects consumers in more than one Member State the Commission shall without delay enter into consultation with the relevant Member State and operator or operators and shall evaluate the national measure. On the basis of the results of that evaluation, the Commission shall decide whether the national measure is justified or not within 9 months from the notification referred to in Article 65(5) and notify such decision to the Member State concerned.
Amendment 2743 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 66 – paragraph 3
Article 66 – paragraph 3
3. Where the national measure is considered justified and the non- compliance of the AI system is attributed to shortcomings in the harmonised standards or common specifications referred to in Articles 40 and 41 of this Regulation, the Commission shall apply the procedure provided for in Article 11 of Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012.The Commission shall also have the possibility to suggest alternative measures to the Member State concerned.
Amendment 2776 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 a (new)
Article 68 a (new)
Article 68 a Right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority 1. Citizens have a right not to be subjected to prohibited AI systems. 2. Citizens have a right not to be subjected to high-risk AI systems that fail to meet the requirements for high-risk systems. 3. Without prejudice to any other administrative or judicial remedy, every citizen shall have the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority, in particular in the Member State of his or her habitual residence, place of work or place of the alleged infringement if the citizen considers that he or she has been subjected to an AI system that infringes this Regulation. 4. The supervisory authority with which the complaint has been lodged shall inform the complainant on the progress and the outcome of the complaint. 5. Without prejudice to any other administrative or non-judicial remedy, each natural or legal person shall have the right to an effective judicial remedy against a legally binding decision
Amendment 2813 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 b (new)
Article 70 b (new)
Article 70 b Right for removal and injunction 1. If an AI system infringes this Regulation each natural or legal person affected by said AI system may require the user of this system to stop the use and to remove the infringement. 2. If further infringements of an AI system are to be feared, each affected natural or legal person may seek a prohibitory injunction.
Amendment 2835 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 71 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The following infringements shall be subject to administrative fines of up to 30 000 000 EUR or, if the offender is a company, up to 610 % of its total worldwide annual turnover for the preceding financial year, whichever is higher:
Amendment 2850 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 4
Article 71 – paragraph 4
4. The non-compliance of the AI system with any requirements or obligations under this Regulation, other than those laid down in Articles 5 and 10, shall be subject to administrative fines of up to 20 000 000 EUR or, if the offender is a company, up to 47 % of its total worldwide annual turnover for the preceding financial year, whichever is higher.
Amendment 2856 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 5
Article 71 – paragraph 5
5. The supply of incorrect, incomplete or misleading information to notified bodies and national competent authorities in reply to a request shall be subject to administrative fines of up to 10 000 000 EUR or, if the offender is a company, up to 24 % of its total worldwide annual turnover for the preceding financial year, whichever is higher.
Amendment 2884 #
2021/0106(COD)
1. The European Data Protection Supervisor may impose administrative fines on Union institutions, agencies and bodies falling within the scope of this Regulationdeveloping, deploying or operating AI systems. When deciding whether to impose an administrative fine and deciding on the amount of the administrative fine in each individual case, all relevant circumstances of the specific situation shall be taken into account and due regard shall be given to the following:
Amendment 2898 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 72 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 72 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The following infringements shall be subject to administrative fines of up to 5 000 000 EUR:
Amendment 2908 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 72 – paragraph 3
Article 72 – paragraph 3
3. The non-compliance of the AI system with any requirements or obligations under this Regulation, other than those laid down in Articles 5 and 10, shall be subject to administrative fines of up to 25 500 000 EUR.
Amendment 2918 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 73 – paragraph 2
Article 73 – paragraph 2
2. The delegation of power referred to in Article 4, Article 5a, Article 7(1), Article 11(3), Article 43(5) and (6), Article 48(5) and Article 48(5)52a shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [entering into force of the Regulation].
Amendment 2922 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 73 – paragraph 3
Article 73 – paragraph 3
3. The delegation of power referred to in Article 4, Article 5a, Article 7(1), Article 11(3), Article 43(5) and (6) and, Article 48(5) and Article 52a may be revoked at any time by a joint decision from the European Parliament or byand the Council.. A decision of revocation shall put an end to the delegation of power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.
Amendment 2929 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 73 – paragraph 4
Article 73 – paragraph 4
4. As soon as it adoptsIn preparation of a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council.
Amendment 2930 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 73 – paragraph 5
Article 73 – paragraph 5
5. Any delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 4, Article 5a, Article 7(1), Article 11(3), Article 43(5) and (6) and, Article 48(5) and Article 52a shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed by either the European Parliament or the Council within a period of three months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by three months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
Amendment 2947 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. This Regulation shall not apply to the AI systems which are components of the large-scale IT systems established by the legal acts listed in Annex IX that have been placed on the market or put into service before [12 months after the date of application of this Regulation referred to in Article 85(2)], unless and the replacquirement or amendment of those legal acts leads to a significant change in the design or intended purpose of the AI system or AI systems concerneds laid down in this Regulation shall be taken into account in the evaluation of each large-scale IT systems established by the legal acts listed in Annex IX.
Amendment 2951 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 2956 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 2
Article 83 – paragraph 2
2. This Regulation shall apply to the high-risk AI systems, other than the ones referred to in paragraph 1, that have been placed on the market or put into service before [date of application of this Regulation referred to in Article 85(2)], only if, from that date, those systems are subject to significant changes in their design or intended purpose.
Amendment 2964 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 1
Article 84 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall assess the need for amendment of the list in Annex III, including the extension of existing area headings or addition of new area headings; ,Article 5’s list of prohibited AI practices, and Article 52’s list of AI systems requiring additional transparency measures, once a year following the entry into force of this Regulation.
Amendment 2984 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 6
Article 84 – paragraph 6
6. In carrying out the evaluations and reviews referred to in paragraphs 1 to 4 the Commission shall take into account the positions and findings of the Board, of the European Parliament, of the Council, and of equality bodies and other relevant bodies or sources, and shall consult relevant external stakeholders, in particular those potentially affected by the AI system, as well as stakeholders from academia and civil society.
Amendment 2991 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 7
Article 84 – paragraph 7
7. The Commission shall, if necessary, submit appropriate proposals to amend this Regulation, in particular taking into account developments in technology, the effect of AI systems on health and safety, fundamental rights, equality, and accessibility for persons with disabilities, and in the light of the state of progress in the information society.
Amendment 2996 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 84 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. To guide the evaluations and reviews referred to in paragraphs 1 to 4, the Board shall undertake to develop an objective and participative methodology for the evaluation of risk level based on the criteria outlined in the relevant articles and inclusion of new systems in: the list in Annex III, including the extension of existing area headings or addition of new area headings; Article 5’s list of prohibited AI practices; and Article 52’s list of AI systems requiring additional transparency measures.
Amendment 3011 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I
Annex I
Amendment 3052 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 1 – introductory part
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 1 – introductory part
1. Biometric identification and categorisation of natural personsAI systems which use biometric or biometrics-based data:
Amendment 3064 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
(a) AI systems intended tothat are or may be used for the ‘real-time’ and ‘post’ remote biometric identification of natural persons;
Amendment 3068 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a a (new)
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a a (new)
(a a) AI systems that are or may be used for the biometric identification of natural persons in publicly accessible spaces, as well as in workplaces, in educational settings and in border surveillance, or in the provision of public or essential services;
Amendment 3076 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a b (new)
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a b (new)
(a b) AI systems that are or may be used for biometric verification in publicly accessible spaces, as well as in workplaces and in educational settings;
Amendment 3081 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a c (new)
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a c (new)
(a c) AI systems that are or may be used to diagnose or support diagnosis of medical conditions or medical emergencies on the basis of biometric or biometrics-based data;
Amendment 3082 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a c (new)
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a c (new)
(a c) AI systems that are or may be used for categorisation on the basis of biometric or biometrics-based data;
Amendment 3084 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a d (new)
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a d (new)
(a d) AI systems that are or may be used for the detection of a person’s presence, in workplaces, in educational settings, and in border surveillance, including in the virtual / online version of these spaces, on the basis of their biometric or biometrics-based data;
Amendment 3086 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a e (new)
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a e (new)
(a e) AI systems that are or may be used for monitoring compliance with health and safety measures or inferring alertness / attentiveness for safety purposes, on the basis of biometric or biometrics-based data;
Amendment 3087 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 2 – introductory part
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 2 – introductory part
2. Management and operation, operation, generation and supply of critical infrastructure, technology and energy:
Amendment 3089 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
(a) AI systems intended to be used as safety components in the management and operation of roada component, the failure or malfunctioning of which endangers the health, safety or fundamental rights of persons or the safety of property, in the management, operation, generation and/or supply of the telecom, internet, and financial infrastructure, road, rail, air and water traffic, and the operation, management an/or supply of water, gas, heating, and electricity and energy (including nuclear power).
Amendment 3104 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b a (new)
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b a (new)
(b a) AI systems intended to be used for the optimization of individual learning processes based on a student's learning data.
Amendment 3116 #
2021/0106(COD)
(b) AI intended to be used for making decisions on promotion and termination of work-related contractualaffecting the initiation, establishment, implementation and termination of an employment relationship, including AI systems intended to support collective legal and regulationships,ory matters, particularly for task allocation and for monitoring and evaluating performance and behavior of persons in such relationships.
Amendment 3122 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a
(a) AI systems intended to be used by public authorities or on behalf of (semi-)public authorities to evaluateor private parties to evaluate or predict the lawful use by, or the eligibility of, natural persons, including the self employed and micro-enterprises, for public assistance, benefits and services and essential private services including but not limited to housing, electricity, heating/cooling, finance, insurance and internet, as well as to grant, reduce, revoke, or reclaim such benefits and services or set payment obligations related to these services;
Amendment 3127 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Amendment 3132 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
(b) AI systems intended to be used to evaluate the creditworthiness of natural persons or establish their credit score, with the exception of AI systems put into service by small scale providers for their own use;
Amendment 3151 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a
Amendment 3152 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a
Amendment 3159 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b
Amendment 3161 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b
Amendment 3174 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point e
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point e
Amendment 3175 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point e
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point e
Amendment 3181 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point f
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point f
Amendment 3185 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point g
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point g
Amendment 3191 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point a
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point a
Amendment 3192 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point a
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point a
Amendment 3198 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b
Amendment 3202 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b
(b) AI systems intended to be used by competent public authorities, or by third parties acting on their behalf, to assess a risk, including but not limited to a security risk, a risk of irregular immigration, or a health risk, posed by a natural person who intends to enter or has entered into the territory of a Member State;
Amendment 3212 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d
(d) AI systems intended to assist competent public authorities for the examination and assessment of the veracity of evidence and claims in relation tof applications for asylum, visa and residence permits and associated complaints with regard to the eligibility of the natural persons applying for a status.
Amendment 3219 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d a (new)
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d a (new)
Amendment 3225 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d b (new)
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d b (new)
(d b) AI systems that are or may be used by or on behalf of competent authorities in law enforcement, migration, asylum and border control management for the biometric identification of natural persons;
Amendment 3227 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d c (new)
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d c (new)
(d c) AI systems intended to be used by, or on behalf of, competent authorities in migration, asylum and border control management to monitor, surveil or process data in the context of border management activities for the purpose of recognizing or detecting objects and natural persons;
Amendment 3239 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 8 a (new)
Annex III – paragraph 1 – point 8 a (new)
8 a. Use in online platforms such as social media and search engines: a) AI systems intended to recommend content to users of online intermediaries such as social media platforms and search engines b) AI systems intended to assist the moderation of content produced by users of online intermediaries such as social media platforms.
Amendment 3245 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex IV – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
Annex IV – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
(a) its intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use , the person/s developing the system the date and the version of the system;
Amendment 3270 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex IV – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point g
Annex IV – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point g
(g) the validation and testing procedures used, including information about the validation and testing data used and their main characteristics; metrics used to measure accuracyperformance, robustness, cybersecurity and compliance with other relevant requirements set out in Title III, Chapter 2 as well as potentially discriminatory impacts; test logs and all test reports dated and signed by the responsible persons, including with regard to pre-determined changes as referred to under point (f).
Amendment 3272 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex IV – paragraph 1 – point 3
Annex IV – paragraph 1 – point 3
3. Detailed information about the monitoring, functioning and control of the AI system, in particular with regard to: its capabilities and limitations in performance, including the degrees of accuracy for specific persons or groups of persons on which the system is intended to be used and the overall expected level of accuracy in relation to its intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use ; the foreseeable unintended outcomes and sources of risks to health and safety, fundamental rights and discrimination in view of the intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use of the AI system; the human oversight measures needed in accordance with Article 14, including the technical measures put in place to facilitate the interpretation of the outputs of AI systems by the users; specifications on input data, as appropriate;
Amendment 3282 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex IV – paragraph 1 – point 8 a (new)
Annex IV – paragraph 1 – point 8 a (new)
8 a. Without prejudice to Article 9(2), a detailed description of the economic and social implications and potential risks for health, and in particular mental health, safety and fundamental rights arising from the hypothetical widespread usage of the AI system or of similar systems in society, with reference to past incidents that occurred using similar systems and associated mitigating measures.
Amendment 3287 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VII – point 4 – point 4.7
Annex VII – point 4 – point 4.7
4.7. Any change to the AI system that could affect the compliance of the AI system with the requirements or its intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use shall be approved by the notified body which issued the EU technical documentation assessment certificate. The provider shall inform such notified body of its intention to introduce any of the above-mentioned changes or if it becomes otherwise aware of the occurrence of such changes. The intended changes shall be assessed by the notified body which shall decide whether those changes require a new conformity assessment in accordance with Article 43(4) or whether they could be addressed by means of a supplement to the EU technical documentation assessment certificate. In the latter case, the notified body shall assess the changes, notify the provider of its decision and, where the changes are approved, issue to the provider a supplement to the EU technical documentation assessment certificate.
Amendment 3288 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VIII – title
Annex VIII – title
INFORMATION TO BE SUBMITTED UPON THE REGISTRATION OF HIGH- RISK AI SYSTEMS AND OF CERTAIN AI SYSTEMS, USES THEREOF, AND USES OF AI SYSTEMS BY PUBLIC AUTHORITIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 51
Amendment 3290 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VIII – paragraph 1
Annex VIII – paragraph 1
The following information shall be provided and thereafter kept up to date by the provider with regard to high-risk AI systems referred to in Article 6(2) and to any AI system referred to in Article 52 1(b) and (2) to be registered in accordance with Article 51(1).
Amendment 3293 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VIII – paragraph 1 a (new)
Annex VIII – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 3295 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VIII – paragraph 1 b (new)
Annex VIII – paragraph 1 b (new)
The following information shall be provided and thereafter kept up to date by the user with regard to uses of AI systems by public authorities to be registered in accordance with Article 51(3). (a) Name, address and contact details of the user;(b) Where submission of information is carried out by another person on behalf of the user, the name, address and contact details of that person; (c) Name, address and contact details of the authorised representative, where applicable; (d) For high-risk AI systems, URL of the entry of the AI system in the EU database by its provider, or, for non-high risk systems, AI system trade name and any additional unambiguous reference allowing identification and traceability of the AI system; (e) Description of the intended purpose of the intended use of the AI system; (f) Description of the context and the geographical and temporal scope of application, geographic and temporal, of the intended use of the AI system; (g) Basic explanation of design specifications of the system, namely the general logic of the AI system and of the algorithms;the key design choices including the rationale and assumptions made, also with regard to categories persons or groups of persons on which the system is intended to be used;the main classification choices;and what the system is designed to optimise for and the relevance of the different parameters. (h) Designation of persons foreseeably impacted by the intended use of the AI system; (i) If available, results of any impact assessment or due diligence process regarding the use of the AI system that the user has conducted; (j) Assessment of the foreseeable impact on the environment, including but not limited to energy consumption, resulting from the use of the AI system over its entire lifecycle, and of the methods to reduce such impact; (k) A description of how the relevant accessibility requirements set out in Annex I to Directive 2019/882 are met by the use of the AI system.
Amendment 3300 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VIII – point 5
Annex VIII – point 5
5. Description of the intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use of the AI system;
Amendment 3307 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VIII – point 11
Annex VIII – point 11
11. Electronic instructions for use; this information shall not be provided for high-risk AI sy as listed in Article 13(3) and basic explanation of the general logic and key design as listemsd in the areas of law enforcement and migration, asylum and border control management referred toAnnex IV point 2(b) and of optimization choices as listed in Annex III,V points 1, 6 and 7 (3).
Amendment 3308 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VIII – point 11 a (new)
Annex VIII – point 11 a (new)
11 a. Assessment of the environmental impact, including but not limited to resource consumption, resulting from the design, data management and training, and underlying infrastructures of the AI system, and of the methods to reduce such impact;
Amendment 3309 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VIII – point 11 b (new)
Annex VIII – point 11 b (new)
11 b. A description of how the system meets the relevant accessibility requirements of Annex I to Directive 2019/882.
Amendment 7 #
Amendment 24 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 47 a (new)
Citation 47 a (new)
— Whereas 23 million non-EU nationals were legally resident in EU Member States in 2020, some 5, 1% of the EU total population,
Amendment 25 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 47 b (new)
Citation 47 b (new)
— Whereas there are currently around 3.1 million EU long-term resident permits; Whereas 7.1 million long-term residence permits were issued under Member States’ national legislation,
Amendment 28 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 47 c (new)
Citation 47 c (new)
— whereas the low issuance rate of long-term resident permits indicates a need to improve its attractiveness, which could be achieved by a revision of the directive clarifying the advantages of holding an EU long-term residence permit and approximating national legislative schemes,
Amendment 29 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 47 d (new)
Citation 47 d (new)
— Whereas Article 79(1)of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union states that “The Union shall develop a common immigration policy aimed at ensuring, at all stages, the efficient management of migration flows, fair treatment of third-country nationals residing legally in Member States, and the prevention of, and enhanced measures to combat, illegal immigration and trafficking in human beings”,
Amendment 30 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 47 e (new)
Citation 47 e (new)
— Whereas the main findings of the Commission’s fitness check on legal migration highlighted effective legal migration policies being key in the management of migratory flows,
Amendment 31 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 47 f (new)
Citation 47 f (new)
— Whereas the same fitness check clearly stated that the current EU rules on legal migration has had limited impact in relation to attracting the skills and talents needed for the EU labour market and economy, as well as pointing out that the current legal framework is “fragmented and presents a number of gaps, as well as implementation problems”,
Amendment 32 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 47 g (new)
Citation 47 g (new)
— Whereas according to the European Commission Report on the Impact of Demographic Change from 2020, the median age of the EU27 is at 44 years today, has been increasing for several years and will continue to do so for at least the coming two decades,
Amendment 33 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 47 h (new)
Citation 47 h (new)
— Whereas this implies that long- term, the EU will face a growing share of the population consisting of citizens being 65+ years old in the coming decades, while the share representing the working age population is projected to decrease during the same time period,
Amendment 34 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 47 i (new)
Citation 47 i (new)
— Whereas the mismatch of skills on the EU Member States’ labour markets’ has proven very costly for the European Union, causing its economy to lose over 2% of productivity per year according to a study from the European Economic and Social Committee from 2018; whereas the same report states that the mismatch occurs on all skill levels -ranging from cooks and truck drivers to medical doctors and teachers; Whereas this report asserts that the current legislative schemes are insufficient in ensuring that the European Union remains economically competitive in both short-, medium and long-term, as well as meeting the demands of the Member States’ labour markets,
Amendment 35 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 47 j (new)
Citation 47 j (new)
— Whereas the creation of additional legal pathways on an EU level could help to provide EU Member States with a tool to properly face these demographic challenges, as well as meeting demands of the labour markets that cannot be met by the domestic workforce and enhance the matching of skills on the labour markets,
Amendment 36 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 47 k (new)
Citation 47 k (new)
— Whereas according to a publication from the Commission on 24 April 2020, an average of 13 % of keyworkers for societies are immigrants in the EU; whereas this shows that they played a crucial role in the EU's ability to handle the COVID-19 pandemic,
Amendment 38 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 47 m (new)
Citation 47 m (new)
— Whereas the EU is one of the main investors in developing human capital in neighbouring countries,
Amendment 39 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 47 n (new)
Citation 47 n (new)
— Whereas the renewed European Partnership for Integration with social and economic partners looks into expanding the future cooperation to the area of labour migration,
Amendment 40 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 47 o (new)
Citation 47 o (new)
— Whereas an adequate implementation of the existing legislation on labour migration is equally important to proposing new legislation,
Amendment 41 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 47 p (new)
Citation 47 p (new)
— Whereas several EU Member States have already entered into successful partnerships with third countries to create a legal pathway for labour migration, as well as matching labour market demands on a smaller scale through pilot projects; Whereas talent partnerships should build upon positive lessons learned from these projects,
Amendment 42 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 47 q (new)
Citation 47 q (new)
— Whereas the partnership frameworks between EU Member States and third countries can serve as a crucial tool in the acceleration of the mutual recognition of skills and qualifications of legal labour migrants,
Amendment 43 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 47 r (new)
Citation 47 r (new)
— Whereas the Single Permit Directive, adopted in 2011, has the facilitation of application procedures for a combined work and residence permit and equal treatment as its two main objectives; whereas the evaluation of the Directive under the Fitness Check on legal migration and its implementation report identified a number of shortcomings with regard to the achievement of those objectives; whereas to address those shortcomings, the 2020 Commission Pact on Migration and Asylum announced a number of new initiatives, including a revision of the Single permit Directive,
Amendment 45 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 47 t (new)
Citation 47 t (new)
— Whereas the direct link between a legally staying third country national’s right of residence and his or her employer exposes them to potential labour exploitation; whereas there has been calls to phase out these permits and instead to allow legally staying third country nationals to change employers without losing their work permits,
Amendment 46 #
2020/2255(INL)
— Whereas the European Labour Authority has strengthened its cross- border operational capacity to support and strengthen national labour inspectorates and authorities, as well as social partners, in order to promote fair labour mobility and tackle cross-border fraud and abuse,
Amendment 48 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 47 w (new)
Citation 47 w (new)
Amendment 52 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that, in order to face demographic challenges, the Union needs third-country workers of all skill levels to increase its economic competitiveness and its global influence as the champion of democracy, inclusion, human rights, free trade in goods and services and the rule of law, and as the leader in the fight against climate change; notes that more international migration from third countries and a greater degree of mobility between EU member states remains only one possible answer to the future of mismatches between supply and demand;
Amendment 76 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that the creation of a Union-wide talent pool for third-country nationals who wish to apply for work with a view to migrating legally to a Member State, as well as for employers to search for potential employees in third countries, would be an essential tool for achieving the purpose of the proposed act and calls on the Commission to include the creation of such a talent pool in its proposal; calls on the commission to create a framework for the validation and recognition of skills and qualifications, based on objections and uniform criteria, ensuring fair treatment during the process, enabling fast-tracks schemes and quick procedures, and facilitating information in an efficient and easy way;
Amendment 89 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. SupporRequests the Commission’s statement in its communication of 23 September 2020 on a New Pact on Migration and Asylum regarding to explore further the enhancement of short- term mobility as a complement to legal pathways, especially for the purposes of research or study in order to improve upstream cooperation with third countries, for example to stem irregular migratory flows, and asks the Commission to explore this direction further;
Amendment 100 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes Directive (EU) 2021/...15 , but considers it insufficient due to the fact that the labour markets of the Union are also in need of low- and medium-skilled workers; calls, therefore, on the Commission to include in its proposal an admission scheme for low- and medium- skilled third-country workers, including the creation of a framework for the validation and recognition of their skills and qualifications, including vocational training, informal learning and skills, based on objective and uniform criteria; _________________ 15EUT number of 2016/0176 COD to be inserted.
Amendment 103 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Calls when revising existing legislation as laid out in the New Pact on Migration and Asylum, to allow for in- country applications, for in-country job seeker permits, for conversions of permits into other types and for multiple changes of employer; stresses the need to include labour rights protections in all labour migration legislation;
Amendment 108 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that the Union is in need of more self-employed people and entrepreneurship in order to remain competitive; notes the cross cultural interactions that immigrants bring lead to enhanced innovation; calls on the Commission to include in its proposal an admission scheme for entry and residence of self- employed people and entrepreneurs, in particular those who establish small and medium-sized enterprises and start-ups, based on objective and uniform criteria;
Amendment 115 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. RInsists that the Talent partnerships should be developed in consultation with social partners, civil society organisations and all relevant parts of government on the European side, but also in third countries; requests the Commission to include in its proposal a framework for talent partnerships between Member States and third countries, tailored to the situation of the third country in question, which should include vocational training programmes based on skills, in particular aptitude tests, workplace observation and simulations, and that Member States could opt into on a voluntary basis; calls on the Commission to ensure that the framework allows for Parliament to be able to fully exercise its scrutiny and evaluation role;
Amendment 127 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that the objective of Directive 2011/98/EU to simplify and harmonise the rules concerning permits currently applicable in the Member States and promote equal treatment has not been fully achieved with some of the provisions being implemented in different ways across Union; requests the Commission to take the necessary steps to ensure that the Member States implement that Directive fully; further considers that that Directive should be amended to allowrequire that applications for a single permit tomay be lodged from within both a Member State and a third country, and, in order to further simplify and harmonise the rules, to clearly regulate the procedure for obtaining an entry visa so as to avoid applicants having to submit the documents needed to obtain a single permit twice, and to reduce dependency of workers and risks of exploitation, and calls on the Commission to include such amendments in its proposal;
Amendment 134 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Requests that the Commission includes in its proposal the establishment of a transnational advisory service network, to be managed by the Commission, for legally migrating third- country workers, with each Member State designating a lead authority to process applications and to coordinate the advice and information provided to third-country nationals applying for work in the Union; insists that the lead authorities should be responsible for the sharing of information among Member States on third-country workers and should act as contact points for the talent pool; asks that the lead authorities be responsible also for close coordination with one another with regard to applications lodged for a single permit to reside and work in accordance with Directive 2011/98/EU in order to avoid double submissions;
Amendment 139 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Commission to include in its proposal an amendment to Directive 2014/36/EU to allow holders of work permits under that Directive a period of three months, which can be extended with another three months, to seek new employment after having left their previous employer without having their work permit revoked;
Amendment 148 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Requests the Commission to include provisions to improve enforcement of equal treatment and employment rights, including accessible and effective complaints mechanisms and access to justice for all workers in case of exploitation and other criminal offences;
Amendment 174 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – Recommendation 1 – indent 1
Annex I – Recommendation 1 – indent 1
- The European Parliament considers that the legislative act to be adopted should establish a Union-wide talent pool for third-country nationals who wish to apply for work in and migrate legally to a Member State, as well as for Union-based employers to search in third countries for potential employees, and should facilitate the admission and free movement of third- country workers. The job matching through the talent pool should happen on a voluntary basis. The European Parliament considers that such a Union- wide talent pool should establish synergies with the existing framework and the legislative act should therefore amend Regulation (EU) 2016/589 in order to expand the current scope of the EURES Portal, established by that Regulation;
Amendment 184 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – indent 1
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – indent 1
- It is a pressing need for the Union to improve its attractiveness forallow the admission of all skilled third- country workers, not only for highly- skilled workers. With the revision of the Directive (EU) [EU BLUE CARD], the Union has taken further steps to achieve that goal for highly-skilled third-country workers. However, it is imperative to achieve that goal for low- and medium- skilled third-country workers in order to fill vacancies and improve matching on the Member States’ labour markets, further enhancing the Union’s economic competitiveness. When envisaging new EU labour migration systems or schemes, skills should be approached in the same way as sectors, privileging efficient, streamlined processes which do not segment the market based on presumptive skills (or wage)levels.
Amendment 191 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – indent 2
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – indent 2
- To properly address that issue, the European Parliament calls on the Commission to, within the legislative act to be adopted, include provisions setting up an admission scheme with conditions of entry and residence for low- and medium- skilled third-country workers. The scheme should include the creation of a framework within which third-country workers are able to have their skills and qualifications properly recognised and validated for use on the Member States’ labour markets. In addition, complementary measures to support inclusion of workers and their families regardless of status are crucial. These include non-discriminatory policies on - alongside measures to facilitate - access to education, health care and housing, and pathways to regularise status on various grounds.
Amendment 203 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – Recommendation 4 – indent 1
Annex I – Recommendation 4 – indent 1
- The European Parliament calls on the Commission to prepare a tailor-made framework for talent partnerships in which Member States can voluntarily participate and to include this in the legislative act to be adopted. Those partnerships would be open to third-country workers of all skill- levels, as well as students and graduates, and would serve as an efficient tool for Member States to match the skills of workers in third countries with the demands of the Member States’ labour markets which the domestic workforce cannot meet. The aim of those partnerships is to add another legal channel as a mobility-option for third-country nationals who wish to migrate to the Union for work and to tackle the issues of labour market shortages and mismatches across the Union. They should be developed involving social partners, civil society organisations and all relevant parts of government on the European side, but also in third countries. The practical implementation of the partnerships would rely on close cooperation with national authorities, labour market institutions and partners. The Commission should ensure that the European Parliament is able to, on a regular basis, scrutinise and evaluate the functioning of the partnerships, as well propose recommendations to improve the overall functioning of the framework.
Amendment 218 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – Recommendation 5 a (new)
Annex I – Recommendation 5 a (new)
Recommendation 5 a The Single Permit Directive should shift the burden of proof of unequal treatment from the single permit holder to the employer. Furthermore, third parties (e.g. work councils, NGOs) should be granted legal standing to engage in proceedings before national courts on behalf of or in support of single permit holders. This is relevant to all migrant workers, irrespective of the directive which governs their entry into the EU
Amendment 224 #
2020/2255(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – Recommendation 6 – indent 1
Annex I – Recommendation 6 – indent 1
- The European Parliament is of the view that systematic cooperation between and engagement with the authorities of Member States and of third countries is required to enhance legal pathways for migration. To achieve that goal, the European Parliament considers that the legislative act to be adopted should establish a transnational advisory service network, managed by the Commission, for third-country workers, with each Member State designating a lead authority to coordinate the advice and information provided to legally migrating third-country nationals applying for work in the Union. The authorities in each Member State should also be responsible for closely coordinating with one another with regard to applications lodged for a single permit to reside and work in the Union in accordance with Directive 2011/98/EU in order to avoid double submissions. That network should also take into account national specificities and different demands of national labour markets. Furthermore, The Commission should issue guidelines and recommendations on good practices on granting migrants a more secure legal status.
Amendment 1 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 3 a (new)
Citation 3 a (new)
— having regard to the first Principle of the European Pillar of Social Rights,
Amendment 4 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 a (new)
Citation 5 a (new)
— having regard to the Council Recommendation of 22 May 2018 on promoting common values, inclusive education, and the European dimension of teaching,
Amendment 31 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the EU single marketcreation of the European Community and other subsequent EU policies have contributed to the natural development of a European educational space, historically underpinned by the traditions of European humanism;
Amendment 34 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the ultimate goal is building a bottom-up European Education Area with common European policy objectives, requiring existing obstacles to be removed, European tools to be utilised and supporting policies at national and European levels to be developed, designed with the future of the planet in mind and encompassing the key roles to be played by education systems in addressing the climate crisis and enabling a successful digital transformation and Green transition;
Amendment 40 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the challenges the EU and its Member States are currently faced with today, including climate change, various forms of extremism and populism, andexacerbation of existing inequalities as a result of the COVID- 19 pandemic, and the rise of far- right extremism, neo-facism and authoritarianism require appropriate educational answers and concerted European action;
Amendment 44 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the realities of educational infrastructure, expertise and access to resources vary within and across Member States, and whereaswith those differences haveing become further pronounced during the COVID-19 pandemic; primarily as a result of increased inequality, including lack of access to IT infrastructure for people from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds, negatively impacting access to education; whereas in person education remains essential in both the intellectual and personal development of the student.
Amendment 61 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
H a. whereas the European Education Area provides an important opportunity for increased international cooperation amongst both formal and informal education facilitators;
Amendment 66 #
2020/2243(INI)
1. Emphasises the importance of quality education founded upon the principle of inclusiveness and accessibility for all and that the European Education Area (EEA) initiative should provide more and better opportunities for every single European citizenone in Europe to study, train and work abroad, and cultivate anthe environment where skills and diplomas are recognised throughout Europe;
Amendment 73 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses the role of the EEA in fostering a sense of European belongingcommunity and in providing economicfair and equal opportunities by addressing existing educational challenges;
Amendment 78 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Considers the need for increased collaboration on education across Europe and beyond, to ensure that common answers to common, cross-border challenges, such as the climate crisis, the skills mismatches, the academic achievement gaps, can be developed;
Amendment 90 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Appreciates the Commission’s efforts to foster an EEA, while noting the need for a more holistic approach, requiring meaningful cooperation and coordination between all actors and stakeholders across national, regional &; local authorities;
Amendment 92 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Highlights the diversity of the stakeholders that include the education and training community, social partners, trade unions, youth organisations, youth workers and civil society;
Amendment 94 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Cautions that the Commission’s proposals are still mainly a strategic outline rather than a concrete policy roadmap, and thus suggests setting clear priorities including the establishment of a governance body that is inclusive of civil society and facilitates a sustained and meaningful dialogue with relevant actors and realistic deadlines for the actions that should be adopted, including clearly defined interim deliverables;
Amendment 101 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Emphasises the urgent need to develop a common implementation strategy and roadmap that includes the European institutions, Member States and all relevant stakeholders including local and regional authorities and civil society, and defines their respective responsibilities;
Amendment 104 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3
Subheading 3
Turning vision into reality: common strategic priorities, funding and EU-level targets
Amendment 105 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses the potential of using European policy coordination tools to achieve the common objectives of an EEA; considers the importance of fostering the whole-school approach, ensuring the promotion of the idea that all education stakeholders, including non-formal and informal learning and youth work must collaborate, placing the learner at the centre of the learning process, and sharing expertise and practice to ensure that the transversal skills needed for the 21st century challenges for all learners are fostered; acknowledges the potential of these arenas of learning to enhance accessibility and to foster the key competences such as citizenship education, sustainability and digital competences that are key elements for the European Education Area;
Amendment 108 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Considers the breadth of expertise on transformative education, transversal skills, sustainable social, economic and environmental development that non- formal and informal education providers have been providing to disadvantaged learners; encourages synergies with these education stakeholders, for the purpose of sharing learning methodologies and mainstreaming education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, culture and arts, human rights, equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non- violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development;
Amendment 113 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Highlights inclusiveness of the most marginalised communities including women in all their diversity, racial and ethnic minorities, LGBTIQ+ people, persons with disabilities, refugees and migrants, as a central dimension of an EEA and a prerequisite for achieving quality education for all, ensuring that no talentlearner is left behind;
Amendment 124 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Calls for at least 10% of the recovery and resilience facility's funding to be allocated to education and for the provision of adequate funding for the establishment, implementation and development of the European Education Area; Encourages Member States to earmark funds to contribute towards the development of the EEA;
Amendment 130 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls for synergies between the EEA, the European Research Area and the European Higher Education Area as well as the European Youth Work agenda to be exploited and for a further strengthening of the Erasmus+ pProgramme for the benefit of all teachers andcurrent and future teachers, educational workers and providers, youth workers and all learners;
Amendment 137 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Aims to foster inclusion, equality, media literacy and critical thinking at all stages of learning as a central means to empower responsible Europemembers of society and citizensounter the increasing tide of disinformation;
Amendment 139 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Aims to foster soft skills and life skills such as 'learning to learn' competences, including readiness to discard one’s own convictions when they contradict new experimental findings and learners’ understanding of the impact of their local level action on the environment and on their fellow European citizens, for the purpose of providing all learners with the capacity to adapt to the ever-changing, fast-paced 21st century society;
Amendment 141 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls for a common framework on the development of digital competences and on learning about the EU throughout all appropriate levels and areas of education; prioritising the development of basic digital skills above the development of advanced digital skills, and of significantly reducing digital competences gaps across Europe rather than further exacerbating them via the insistence on new, more advanced digital competences;
Amendment 152 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Stresses the importance of improving working conditions and enhancing competences and motivation in the education profession, especially supported through the improved recognition of educators’ value to societygreater societal valuation of educators and by bolstering pedagogical autonomy;
Amendment 157 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Underlines the need for Member States to take action to support the development of linguistic competences in primary and secondary education, to embrace the Council of Europe’s goal of ‘plurilingualism’ and to achieve the benchmark of all pupils having a sufficient knowledge of English as well as through non formal education providers, including the promotion and protection of non-official or co-official languages as well as those included in UNESCO's Atlas of Languages in Danger, to embrace the recommendation of the Barcelona convention to enabling citizens to communicate in 2 languages other than their mother tongue at the end of lower secondary education or any informal equivalent;
Amendment 163 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Stresses the importance of Commission and Member State action in higher education, such as reinforcing the Bologna Process, strengthening the international dimension of the EEA, including partners from the global south, and furthering the European Student Card, including through embracing the synergies offered by existing EU programmes;
Amendment 173 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls on the Commission and Member States to facilitate the expansion of automatic mutual recognition of learning outcomes and study periods abroad, including in VET, non-formal exchanges and volunteering;
Amendment 189 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to establish a concrete European Education Area Strategic Framework 2030 (EEASF 2030) by the end of 2022 with a comprehensive steering, monitoring and evaluation mechanism, in line with UN Sustainable Development Goal 4 to ‘ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all’ and the first principle of the European Pillar of Social Rights;
Amendment 192 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Urges the Commission and the Member States to clarify the type of participation required from Member States andommit to meaningful participation as well as to engage with and promote participation of other levels of government, including local and regional authorities, and to devise effective multi-level governance arrangements that respect subsidiarity whilest aiming to generate European added value;
Amendment 194 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Seeks clarity on the level of involvement expected from stakeholders, education sectors that have been underrepresented so far, and relevant civil society actors; stresses that the governance framework should involve all relevant stakeholders working in all arenas of learning. This also includes the involvement of youth workers and youth organisations specifically;
Amendment 197 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Seeks clarity onto increase the level of involvement expected from stakeholders, education sectors that have been underrepresented so far, and relevant civil society actors;
Amendment 200 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Calls on the Commission to establish an EEA Platform that is accessible in all European languages, both official and co-official, as an interactive public gateway to support Member States and stakeholders in exchanging information and promoting cooperation and exchange of good practices;
Amendment 204 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Underlines the need for a European dimension in education by strengthening a distinct European perspective in students’ curricula and teachers’ training, with regards to all teachers, trainers & learners from both formal & non-formal organisations including with support from Jean Monnet actions and teacher academies; proposes that these teacher academies be called ‘Comenius Teacher Academies’;
Amendment 211 #
2020/2243(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Emphasises the need to provide learners with knowledge about European history and cultural heritage, both tangible and intangible, and to foster a critical European memory and historical consciousness, taking into account the legacy of colonialism and its continued influence throughout European society and beyond;
Amendment 1 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that AI should be used in a fair and ethical manner and with due respect for Union values and principles, human rights, freedom of expression, the right to privacy, data protection, non- discrimination, media pluralism and cultural diversity; notes that while AI offers great potential, it can also present certain risks due to issues such as bias and opacity, the manipulation of individual behaviour, violation of privacy, the identification/forecasting of sensitive identity traits and emotion, enabling of mass surveillance, the restriction of access to vital public services, and reinforcing structural discrimination; stresses that in view of commercial activities on online market places, self- regulation provided to be insufficient and therefore, asks the Commission to introduce strong safeguards and obligations for product safety and consumer protection for commercial activities on online market places, accompanied by a tailored liability regime with proper enforcement mechanisms;
Amendment 20 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Deplores the omission of culture from AI strategies and policy recommendations at both national and Union level; stresses the need to set up a clear legal framework that prioritises culture, education and sports, without discrimination, in order to bring the Union to the forefront of AI-driven innovation and value creation worldwide and to maximise its benefits, while assessing its potential risks for society; underlines the role of AI to preserve and boost the European culture and language diversity; underlines that data sets used by AI systems (both for training and operation) may suffer from the inclusion of inadvertent historic bias, incompleteness and bad governance models; stresses that the continuation of such biases could lead to unintended (in)direct prejudice and discrimination against certain groups or people, potentially exacerbating prejudice and marginalisation;
Amendment 33 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises that the transposition of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) into national law is crucial to achieving a genuine digital single market; urges the Member States that have not yet done so to complete the transposition as soon as possible; stresses that the future Digital Services Act (DSA) and any future regulation on AI, with particular regard to the cultural and creative sectors, should be in line with the principles and obligations of the AVMSD and should respect the broad framework of fundamental European rights of users and consumers, such as the protection of privacy, data, non-discrimination, dignity, fairness and free speech;
Amendment 38 #
2020/2216(INI)
4 a. Urges the Union to take steps to prevent or mitigate associated risks by the negative effects of AI and to set concrete and applicable baseline standards and rules, specifically in the sensitive area of AI systems in law enforcement, such as facial recognition software;
Amendment 40 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Amendment 41 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4 c. Stresses that the DSA should introduce a tailored liability regime with proper enforcement mechanisms for commercial activities on online market places in order to guarantee consumer protection and product safety;
Amendment 50 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Considers it necessary to end the “attention- seeking” profiling business model of digital markets, where algorithms prioritise controversial content and thus contribute to its spread online; stresses thus, that users should have more control on how rankings are presented, e.g. by giving them the choice to arrange them alternatively;
Amendment 53 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Notes that large platforms acquired a huge amount of data and replaced services of a diverse and decentralised system with open standards by “walled gardens” with locked- in users; stresses that as a consequence some markets are characterised by large platforms with significant network effects which are able to act as de facto “online gatekeepers” of the digital economy; considers it therefore necessary to introduce additional obligations regarding data protection, transparency, user choice and interoperability in order to guarantee a level playing field and consumer welfare;
Amendment 58 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Recalls that the Member States and the EU institutions have an obligation, under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights, to ensure that each person’s rights to privacy, data protection, free expression and assembly, non- discrimination, dignity and other fundamental rights are not unduly restricted by the use of new and emerging technologies;
Amendment 59 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Calls on the Commission to support public trust in AI by providing clear, regulatory limits to uses of AI which inherently undermine fundamental rights and the protection of the environment;
Amendment 60 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6 c. Calls on the Commission and the Member States for the surveillance of all workers, artists, athletes and students to be prevented;
Amendment 61 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 d (new)
Paragraph 6 d (new)
6 d. Highlights that it is important for the Union to guarantee a high degree of control over data and maintain the highest standards of protection for personal data;
Amendment 62 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 f (new)
Paragraph 6 f (new)
6 f. Reiterates European principles on the ownership of individuals of their own personal data and explicit, informed consent, which is necessary before using personal data as enshrined in the GDPR; points out that consent implies that individuals understand for which purposes their data will be used and that entities using personal data in algorithms have a responsibility for ensuring this understanding;
Amendment 63 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 h (new)
Paragraph 6 h (new)
Amendment 64 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 i (new)
Paragraph 6 i (new)
6 i. Believes that it is vital that the upcoming EU regulatory proposal establishes in law clear limitations as to what can be considered lawful uses of AI and must legally restrict uses and deployments of AI which unduly infringe upon access to social, cultural, linguistic rights and benefits;
Amendment 65 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 j (new)
Paragraph 6 j (new)
6 j. Highlights that the main purpose of AI must be to provide more ecological and effective alternative to current technology; stresses that AI and humans should collaborate in fulfilling the long- term goals of humankind - to create equal society based on indisputability of human rights and especially right to human dignity, while achieving balances relationship with nature; stresses that making the most advanced AI is not a goal for itself;
Amendment 66 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 k (new)
Paragraph 6 k (new)
6 k. Highlights that beneficial innovation can only be achieved when we guarantee that uses are safe, legal, and do not discriminate; believes in the need to ensure democratic oversight and clear regulation before technologies are deployed;
Amendment 67 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 l (new)
Paragraph 6 l (new)
6 l. Believes that consumers should be adequately informed, if requested in offline format, in a timely, impartial, easily-readable, standardised and accessible manner about the existence, process, rationale, reasoning and possible outcome of algorithmic systems, about how to reach a human with decision- making powers, and about how the system’s decisions can be checked, meaningfully contested and corrected;
Amendment 68 #
2020/2216(INI)
6 m. Believes that particular attention in AI literacy programs should be paid in all education levels;
Amendment 69 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 n (new)
Paragraph 6 n (new)
6 n. Notes that those who own or operate inputs to AI systems and profit from it should be asked to help fund the development of AI literacy programmes for schools and universities.
Amendment 2 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas inclusive, quality education is the cornerstone of the green and digital transitions, because it both enhances participation in democratic life and the life of society and individual self- determination, and gives people the skills needed to assess technological developments and their implications for society, including the need for political regulation;
Amendment 45 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the shift to online and distance learning has exacerbated existing inequalities, leaving disadvantaged and vulnerable learners and learners with disabilities further behind, increasing drop- out rates across education sectors, and revealing an absence of pastoral and social supportsupport for socially disadvantaged or linguistically less able students in the digital environment;
Amendment 56 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
Ha. whereas the development and expansion of digital infrastructure in primary and secondary schools is in some cases still being planned and carried out in the complete absence of permanent IT network and support staff;
Amendment 105 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the Commission’s scheduled mid-term review of the plan and its intention to ramp up data collection; reiterates the need for a clear implementation timetable; remains convinced that the plan needs a clearer governance and coordination structure, in which Parliament should be involved, to monitor developments and performance on an ongoing basis; calls on the Commission, therefore, to establish a forum bringing together the Member States, Parliament and other relevant stakeholders and experts; urges the Commission to better integrate digital education into the European Semester exercisedevelop synergies between innovative measures to promote digital education under the various European support programmes and to determine and outline their impact in the mid-term assessments;
Amendment 143 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Welcomes the plan’s focus on supporting school and university connectivity through the Connecting Europe Facility and efforts to publicise EU funding opportunities; calls on the Commission to work closely with Member States, local authorities and stakeholders to ensure that EU support dovetails with national schemes, in particular to support disadvantaged groups; calls on the Commission to target support at other educational establishments besides schools, this support to be provided on a long-term basis by trained staff who oversee networks and applications and provide basic instruction in data protection;
Amendment 200 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Underlines the need to enhance tools at Union level to open up lifelong learning opportunities and to enable full and quality access to university and post- university courses and materials; calls on the Commission to create an public Online European University with distance and online education content available across Europe and, in that connection, to take account of Europe's language diversity as regards access and communication;
Amendment 204 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Emphasises that the special emphasis on encouraging girls and women to study MINT subjects at school and university and as part of their professional training and further training must also cover the related digital skills, from programming to networked application;
Amendment 51 #
2020/2084(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses that the societal transition towards a sustainable energy basis calls for respect and promotion of a changing regional identity; notes that active promotion of industrial cultural heritage and ethnographic research is one way of achieving this goal;
Amendment 55 #
2020/2084(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Calls for support for a regional settlement policy in declining mining areas by cultural and tourism enterprises through the restoration and repurposing of industrial sites, and a focus on exemplary renaturalisation measures that limit climate change by means of natural water reservoirs such as forests, floodplains and meadows;
Amendment 56 #
2020/2084(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Supports the promotion of democratic dialogue on a social and just transition by cultural and scientific institutions and educational establishments, and through an appropriate exchange of experience at EU level on successful developments towards an inclusive social transition;
Amendment 10 #
2020/2072(INL)
— having regard to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, the conventions, recommendations, resolutions and reports of the Parliamentary Assembly, the Committee of Ministers, the Human Rights Commissioner, the European Commission Against Racism and Intolerance, the recently-formed Steering Committee on Anti-Discrimination, Diversity and Inclusion and the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe,
Amendment 73 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas vulnerable groups such as women, Roma and LGBTI persons continue not seeing their rights fully respected in some Member States, and are not fully protected from hate and discrimination, in disregard of Union values provided for in Article 2 TEU and the right to non-discrimination, provided for in Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
Amendment 75 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)
Recital B c (new)
Bc. whereas, contrary to the jurisprudence of the Hungarian Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights, the right of transgender and intersex persons to access legal gender recognition procedures in Hungary was terminated through legislative amendments to the national registry; whereas such amendments changed the previously mutable category of “sex” to the immutable category of “sex at birth”, in intentional contravention of national and European rule of law;
Amendment 76 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B d (new)
Recital B d (new)
Bd. whereas it is documented and confirmed by the Polish Commissioner for Human Rights that over 100 Polish municipalities and local authorities have declared themselves LGBTI-free zones or adopted so-called ‘Regional Charters of Family Rights’, which are discriminatory against LGBTI people; whereas the Polish Commissioner for Human Rights condemned such actions and filed nine complaints to administrative courts, arguing that LGBTI-free zones violate Union law; whereas the Commission sent a letter in May 2020 to five mayors of Polish cities who are recipients of Union cohesion funding underlining the responsibilities of regional managing authorities, that spending under cohesion funds must not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation and that municipalities acting as employers must respect Council Directive 2000/78/EC1a, which prohibits discrimination and harassment on the ground of sexual orientation in employment; whereas lawsuits have been brought by local governments against three Polish LGBTI activists who created the so-called “Atlas of Hate”; _________________ 1aCouncil Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (OJ L 303, 2.12.2000, p. 16).
Amendment 139 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. recognises that the Union remains structurally ill-equipped to tackle democratic, fundamental rights and rule of law backsliding in the Member States; regrets the inability of the Council to make meaningful progress in enforcing Union values in ongoing Article 7 TEU procedures; notes with concern the disjointed nature of the Union’s toolkit in that field;
Amendment 148 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. welcomes the Commission’s work on the Annual Rule of Law Report; notes, however, that it fails to encompass the areas of democracy and fundamental rights; underlines with concern that vulnerable groups, including women, Roma and LGBTI persons, continue not seeing their rights fully respected in some Member States and are not fully protected from hate and discrimination, in disregard of Union values as provided for in Article 2 TEU; reiterates the need for a comprehensive monitoring mechanism enshrined in a legal act binding Parliament, the Council and the Commission to a transparent and regularised process, with clearly defined responsibilities, so that the protection and promotion of Union values becomes a permanent and visible part of the Union agenda;
Amendment 193 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. recalls the indispensable role played by civil society, equality bodies and national human rights institutions and other relevant actors in all stages of the Annual Monitoring Cycle, from providing input to facilitating implementation; points out that the accreditation status of equality bodies, national human rights institutions and the space for civil society, as well as the protection provided to human rights defenders, may themselves serve as indicators for assessment purposes; considers that national parliaments must hold public debates and adopt positions on the outcome of the monitoring cycle;
Amendment 269 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part 2 – point 6
Annex I – part 2 – point 6
6. The Commission shall draw on all information at its disposal when preparing the Annual Report. Of particular relevance in that regard are reports and data from the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, the Council of Europe, including the Venice Commission, the European Commission Against Racism and Intolerance, the recently-formed Steering Committee on Anti-Discrimination, Diversity and Inclusion and the Group of States against Corruption, and other international organisations that produce relevant studies.
Amendment 4 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas climate change and consequential natural disasters have become common drivers of forced migration, which will be further exacerbated as the climate crisis worsens; whereas major CO2 emitters like the EU have a moral duty to help developing countries adapt to climate change, and should reduce their own emissions;
Amendment 6 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas climate change and consequential natural disasters affect enjoyment of basic human rights and have become common drivers of migration, whicha phenomenon that will be further exacerbated as the climate crisis worsendeepens; whereas there is a diversity of environmental drivers;
Amendment 19 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas climate-induced migration is strongly related to other factors, including povertylow access to education, financial aids and public resources, since when a country lacks the appropriate resources to adapt to climate change, this can aggravate povertyexisting inequalities and constraints and force people to move; whereas climate change is an important risk multiplier for conflict, drought, famine and migration;
Amendment 27 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas migration has to be seen in the context of environmental change as an adaptation strategy to adverse environmental change and part of the solution, not as a problem which must be fought;
Amendment 32 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas there have been about 288 million people newly internally displaced due to disasters between 2008 and 2019, with floods causing half of the disaster- related displacement;
Amendment 33 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B c (new)
Recital B c (new)
Bc. whereas regional initiatives in Africa and Latin America have developed instruments to strengthen protection for those displaced in the context of climate change and disasters;
Amendment 34 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B d (new)
Recital B d (new)
Bd. whereas the UN non-binding Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement define IDPs as persons who were compelled to leave their homes or habitual residences, ‘in particular as a result of or in order to avoid the effects of armed conflicts, situations of generalised violence, violations of human rights or natural or human-made disasters”; whereas there is however today no international legal instrument that would address cross-border migration as a consequence of climate change, natural or human-made disasters;
Amendment 35 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B e (new)
Recital B e (new)
Be. whereas Italy, Sweden and Finland developed national protection grounds for victims of climate change and natural disasters;
Amendment 43 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Highlights that there are other environmental factors not directly linked to climate change, but linked to human- made environmental changes such as land degradation or marine and coastal ecosystem degradation, land and water grabbing, as well as environmental disasters and pollution caused by wars, which also act as risk-multipliers and migration drivers, notably in vulnerable populations that are highly dependent on agriculture and natural local resources.
Amendment 49 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Emphasises that mobility, including cross-border mobility, needs to be part of the responses to adverse environmental changes;
Amendment 58 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Deplores the fact that, while climate migration is a reality that is set to intensify, people who move for long-term, climate change-related reasons have no effective access to protection in the EU; calls on the Member States and the Commission to put in place protection pathways, which include promoting humanitarian visas, temporary protection, authorisation to stay, and regional and bilateral free movement agreements; proposes that a climate passport be issued to persons coming from a country, or part of it, that will become uninhabitable due to climate change, its consequences or other environmental changes as a way to offer them protection from vulnerability and statelessness; proposes that any change in the environment due to climate change, natural or human-made disaster be explicitly listed among eligibility criteria for humanitarian protection; calls on the Commission and Member States to put forward such proposals in international forums, in parallel to other EU initiatives;
Amendment 72 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls for the effective implementation of the Global Compact on Refugees, to ensure more effective protection, via complementary pathways and appropriate financing, for persons displaced by the consequences of climate change or, natural or human-made disasters;
Amendment 90 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to enhance and better coordinate less restrictive legal channels for third-country workers and their families, which would include mobility schemes and preferential access for workers coming from a country, or part of it, affected by climate change or human- made environmental changes;
Amendment 111 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines the ruling of the UN Human Rights Committee of 20 January 2020, which states that countries may not deport individuals facing climate change- induced conditions that violate the right to life; calls on the Member States to consider the risk of violations of the right to life due to climate change, natural or human- made disasters as part of their return decisions, notably triggering non- refoulement obligations;
Amendment 124 #
2020/2042(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls on the EU to enhance its support, as part of its external action, towards climate mitigation and adaptation in developing countries, as well as the protection and restoration of biodiversity, calls also on the EU to step up its technical assistance, as well as sharing of best practices with developing countries; notes that more funding should be dedicated to climate-related objectives and efforts to strengthen climate-resilience in developing countries; stresses that funding currently channelled towards border security and policing in the EU would be better spent on grants-based and other non-contingent financial support for climate mitigation, adaptation and other efforts to strengthen climate resilience in developing countries;
Amendment 4 #
2020/2026(INL)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. non-profit organisations (NPOs) are increasingly involved in economic activities and contribute to the rapid development of the social economy, bringing societal benefits in terms of citizens welfare, the fight against climate change, quality employment and the fight against social exclusion and discrimination; whereas the development of the social economy directly contributes to the strengthenwellbeing of the single marketpopulation;
Amendment 11 #
2020/2026(INL)
Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. NPOs they are an essential component of a strong rule of law ecosystem, and a precondition for healthy democracies;
Amendment 12 #
2020/2026(INL)
Draft opinion
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
B b. European Association statute can solve cross border issues, but not civic space issue, which are core problem for a well-functioning democracy;
Amendment 20 #
2020/2026(INL)
Draft opinion
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
E a. While NPOs play important roles in Member States and at EU level, their activities are blocked by legal and administrative obstruction and by the limits placed on NPOs' organisational capacity to operate across borders. As a result, their contributions are below its potential, especially in cross-border regions;
Amendment 29 #
2020/2026(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative package creating a Statute for European Associations and laying down common rules and minimum standards for NPOs to exercise the right to freedom of assembly and to remove the barriers precluding NPOs from playing their fundamental role in society and contributing to the strengthening of the single market;
Amendment 34 #
2020/2026(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights that the definition of common measures for NPOs will enable coherent judicial review at Union level and lay down the foundations for future case law that will help strengthen Union-wide standardsthe protection of fundamental rights which are an essential part of Union law;
Amendment 39 #
2020/2026(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that the long-overdue creation of a Statute for European Associations iscan be a crucial step in fostering civic space at Union level, cross-border cooperation and dialogue; points out that such a Statute would help European civil society to structure itself; considers that European Associations could be instrumentalplay an important role in enhancing civic participation in Union policy-making;
Amendment 44 #
2020/2026(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that, in light of the growing number of threats which transcend national boundaries such as environmental damages, pandemics or the misuse of digital technologies, the potential of cross- border NPO activities should be unlockeddisplayed to the general public; emphasises that cross-border activities should both mean activities or cooperation carried out in more than one Member State and activities furthering the Union’s objectives or contributing to the promotion and safeguarding of its valuefundamental rights and freedoms;
Amendment 47 #
2020/2026(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Deplores that civil society was completely left out of pandemic-response relief schemes;
Amendment 53 #
2020/2026(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that NPOs cannot thrive at Union level if the space in which they operate is being restricted in a number of Member States, being of outmost importance in cross-border regions and Euroregions; considers therefore that the setting of common minimum standards will also help to provide a minimum level of protection throughout the Union and to spread best practices;
Amendment 54 #
2020/2026(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Highlights that whereas many cross-border regions involve connections with civil society facilitated by NPOs and there is a growing number of NPOs operations across borders, legal and fiscal barriers remain;
Amendment 58 #
2020/2026(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Suggests that where relevant, the Commission should complement the legislative acts called for in this report with guidelines to assist Member States in their implementa proposal for an interinstitutional agreement on civil dialogue that should include guidelines on civil dialogue as well as a proposal for a participatory status for not for profit associations taking example from the Council of Europe and the United Nations;
Amendment 61 #
2020/2026(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that under no circumstances should the definition of minimum standards at Union level result in a lowering of standards in any Member State; calls onasks the Commission to ensure that the proper avenues to obtain legal redress are available and that any abusive practice on behalf of Member State authorities can be effectively addressed;present a clear proposal for legal redress for NPOs
Amendment 68 #
2020/2026(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Emphasises that national bodies designated for the oversightregistration of NPOs must be legally distinct and functionally independent of their respective governments; considers that any European legislation must provide for the same independency.
Amendment 70 #
2020/2026(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Considers that the proposal should respect the diversity, plurality and independence of the NPO sector, not replace national frameworks but complement these by promoting civic participation at European level;
Amendment 73 #
2020/2026(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls for the creation of a European Associations’ Authority, tasked with ensuring the implementation of the Statute for European Associations and monitoring the transposition of minimum rules for NPOs as called for in this report; suggests that it could alson the European Commission to be the focal point for NPOs that report violations of the minimum standards and rights conferred upon NPOs by Union law;
Amendment 77 #
2020/2026(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Considers that the definition at Union level of minimum standards for NPOs to receive public benefit statuproposal and complementary measures should enable mutual recognition across Member States and facilitate equal treatment in terms of benefits awarded; emphasises that donors to public benefit NPOs who received public benefit status in another Member State should enjoy the same benefits as if they were donating to a domestic organisation;awarded donations and access to donations as well as regards tax incentive measures inline with European Court of Justice rulings
Amendment 81 #
2020/2026(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Suggests the use of carefully calibrated definitions to clarify the meaning of key concepts that otherwise risk remaining too vague and lead to uneven transpositionwhich are in compliance with Union law. Underlines the need for clarity on which types or associations will be covered and which ones will fall out of scope.
Amendment 2 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 3
Citation 3
— having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular Article 6, Article 7, Article 8, Article 11, Article 13, Article 221, Article 22, Article 24 and Article 2438 thereof,
Amendment 7 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7
Citation 7
Amendment 15 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8
Citation 8
— having regard to the judgment of the Court of Justice of 3 October 2019 in case C-18/185 , _________________ 5Judgment of the Court of Justice of 3⁰October 2019, Eva Glawischnig- Piesczek v Facebook Ireland Limited, C- 18/18, ECLI:EU:C:2019:821.relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union,
Amendment 19 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the data protection rules applicable to all providers offering digital services in the EU’s territory were recently updated and harmonised across the EU with the General Data Protection Regulation, its enforcement needs to be strengthened;
Amendment 23 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the amount of user- generated content, including harmful and illegal contentvices available and users' activities, including illegal services and activities, shared via cloud services or online platforms, has increased exponentially;
Amendment 35 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas a small number of mostly non-European service providers have significant market power and exert influence over suppliers and control how information, services and products are presented, thereby having an impact on the rights and freedoms of individuals, and our societies and democracies;
Amendment 38 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the politicalcy approach to tackle harmful and illegal contentactivities online in the EU has mainly focused on voluntary cooperation thus far, but a growing number of Member States are adopting national legislation to address illegal content;
Amendment 46 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas some forms of harmful content may be legal, yet detrimental to society or democracy, with examples such as opaque political advertising and disinformation on COVID-19 causes and remedies;
Amendment 51 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas a pure self-regulatory approach of platforms does not provide adequate transparency to public authorities, civil society and users on how platforms address illegal and harmful contentctivities; whereas such an approach does not guarantee compliance with fundamental rights;
Amendment 55 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the absence of uniform and transparent rules for procedural safeguards across the EU is a key obstacle for persons affected by illegal contentactivities online and content providers, including users, seeking to exercise their rights;
Amendment 60 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
Ja. whereas persons of colour, persons belonging to or who are perceived to belong to ethnic or linguistic minorities, asylum seekers, migrants, LGBTIQ persons and women often experience high levels of discriminatory hate speech, bullying, threats and scapegoating online and run high risks of experiencing so- called "shit storms";
Amendment 61 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J b (new)
Recital J b (new)
Jb. whereas algorithms used for automated decision-making or profiling often reproduce existing discriminatory patterns in society, thereby leading to a high risk of exacerbated discrimination for persons already affected.
Amendment 63 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
Amendment 70 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas according to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), jurisprudence, host providers may have recourse to automated search tools and technologies to assess if content is equivalent to content previously declared unlawful, and should thus be removed following an order from a Member State, but they are not obliged to use such automated tools;
Amendment 80 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 84 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 96 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes in the clear economic benefits of a functioning digital single market for the EU and its Member States; stresses the important obligation to ensure a fair digital ecosystem in which fundamental rights and, including data protection, are respected; calls for a minimum level ofcomprehensive and effective regulatory intervention based on the principles of necessity and proportionality;
Amendment 107 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Deems it necessary that illegal content isactivities are removed swiftly and consistently in order to address crimelaw infringements and fundamental rights violations; considers that voluntary codes of conduct only partiallylack adequate enforcement and have proven to be inefficient in addressing the issue;
Amendment 111 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that illegal contentinformation, services and products online should not only be removed by online platforms, but should be followed up by law enforcement and the judiciary; finds, in this regard, that a key issue in some Member States is not that they have unresolved cases but rather unopened onescalls on the Commission to consider obliging major hosting service providers to report serious crime to the competent law enforcement authority, upon obtaining actual knowledge of such a crime; calls for barriers to filing complaints with competent authorities to be removed; is convinced that, given the borderless nature of the internet and the fast dissemination of illegal content online, cooperation between service providers and national competent authorities should be improved;, as well as cross-border cooperation between national competent authorities should be improved; stresses in this regard the need to respect the legal order of the EU and the established principles of cross-border cooperation; stresses that competent authorities have to be provided with adequate resources in order to be effective.
Amendment 120 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Acknowledges the fact that, while the decision on the illegal nature of certain types of content can be easily established, the decision is more difficult for other types of content as it requires contextualisation; warns that some automated tools are not sophisticated enough to take contextuaonline information, products and services is difficult as it requires contextualisation; warns that automated tools are unable to differentiate illegal content from content that is legal in a given context , which could lead to unnecessary restrictions being placed on the freedom of expression; highlights that a review of automated reports by service providers, their staff or their contractors does not solve this problem as private staff lack the independence, qualification and accountability of public authorities; therefore stresses that the Digital Services Act shall explicitly prohibit any oblisgation into account, which could lead to unnecessary restrictions being placed on the freedom of expressionon hosting service providers or other technical intermediaries to use automated tools for content moderation, and refrain from imposing notice-and-stay-down mechanisms; content moderation procedures used by providers shall not lead to any ex-ante control measures based on automated tools or upload- filtering of content;
Amendment 129 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines that a specific piece of information may be deemed illegal in one Member State but is covered by the right to freedom of expression in another; stresses, therefore, that national authorities should only be allowed to address and enforce removal orders to service providers established in their territory;
Amendment 133 #
2020/2022(INI)
7. Strongly believes that the current EU legal framework governing digital services should be updated with a view to addressing the challenges posed by new technologies and ensuring legal clarity and, respect for fundamental rights, and enhanced consumer protection; considers that the reform should build on the solid foundation of and full compliance with existing EU law, especially the General Data Protection Regulation and the Directive on privacy and electronic communications; calls on the Council to swiftly reach a general approach which does not lower current levels of protection for consumers to start trilogue negotiations with the European Parliament on the proposal for the ePrivacy Regulation as soon as possible
Amendment 141 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Deems it indispensable to have the widest-possible harmonisation and clarification of rules on liability exemptions and content moderation at EU level to guarantee the respect of fundamental rights and the freedoms of users across the EU; believes that such rules should maintain liability exemptions for intermediaries not having knowledge of the illegal activity or information on their platforms; expresses its concern that recent national laws to tackle hate speech and disinformation lead to a fragmentation of rules and to a lower level of fundamental rights protection in the EU;
Amendment 144 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls, to this end, for legislative proposals that keep the digital single market open and competitive by requiringstrengthening the rules on competition with regard to digital service providers to prevent harm to competition and consumers; requests for the Digital Services Act to require digital service providers to apply effective, coherent, transparent and fair procedures and procedural safeguards to removtackle illegal contentactivities in line with European valueslaw; firmly believes that this should be harmonised within the digital single market;
Amendment 153 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Believes, in this regard, that large online platforms that are actively hosting or, moderating contentor recommending content, services or products, should bear more, yet proportionate, responsiliability for the infrastructure they provide and the content on it; emphasises that this should be achieved without resorting to general monitoring requirements; services they offer to users; considers, in this sense, that online marketplaces must be liable upon obtaining credible evidence of illegal activities; emphasises that this should be achieved without resorting to general monitoring requirements, nor to a general and undefined duty of care; Highlights that, in order to ensure legal certainty, the new legal framework shall exhaustively and explicitly spell out the obligations of digital service providers;
Amendment 159 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Highlights that this should includeUrges the adoption of rules on theransparent notice-and-action mechanisms and requirements for platforms to take proactive measures that are proportionate to their scale of reach and operational capacities in order to address the appearance of illegal content on their services; supports a balanced duty-of-care approach andmeasures in order to address the appearance of illegal activities on their services; these measures should include a robust business user authentication and verification process for services and products offered or facilitated in their platforms, while preserving consumer anonymity; stresses that independent public authorities should be ultimately responsible to determine whether an activity is legal or not; supports a clear chain of responsibility to avoid unnecessary regulatory burdens for the platforms and unnecessary and disproportionate restrictions on fundamental rights, including the freedom of expression;
Amendment 171 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses the need for appropriate safeguards and due process obligations, including human oversight and verification, in addition to counter notice procedures, to ensure that removal or blocking decisions are accurate, well- founded, protect consumers and respect fundamental rights; recalls that the possibility of effective judicial redress should be made available to satisfy the right to effective remedy;
Amendment 172 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Stresses that, in order to protect the freedom of expression and information, it is crucial to maintain the limited liability regime for intermediaries not having knowledge of the illegal activity or information; highlights that the legal regime for digital providers liability should not depend on uncertain notions such as the ‘active’ or ‘passive’ role of providers;
Amendment 174 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Supports limited liability for content and the country of origin principle, butthe country of origin principle including its consumer contracts derogation, but clarifications to the liability regime, particularly for online marketplaces, is needed; considers improved coordination for removal requests between national competent authorities to be essentialimportant; emphasises that such orders should be subject to legal safeguards in order to prevent abuse and ensure full respect of fundamental rights; stresses that an effective oversight and enforcement mechanism, including sanctions, should apply to those service providers that fail to comply with legitimate orderstransparency obligations, judicial orders, and other provisions of the Digital Services Act;
Amendment 180 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Stresses that the responsibility for enforcing the law, deciding on the legality of online activities and ordering hosting service providers to remove or disable access to content as soon as possible shall rest with independent judicial authorities; only a hosting service provider that has actual knowledge of illegal content and its illegal nature shall be subject to content removal obligations
Amendment 191 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Believes that terms of services of din order to protect consumers' fundamental rights and interests, the Digital sService providers should be clear, transparent and fair; deplores the fact that some terms of services from content platforms do not allow law enforcement to use non-personal accounts, which poses a threat both to possible investigations and to personal safetys Act should introduce rules aiming to ensure that terms of services of digital service providers be clear, transparent and fair;
Amendment 193 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Stresses that in line with the principle of data minimisation established by the General Data Protection Regulation, the Digital Services Act shall require intermediaries to enable the anonymous use of their services and payment for them wherever it is technically possible, as anonymity effectively prevents unauthorized disclosure, identity theft and other forms of abuse of personal data collected online; only where existing legislation requires businesses to communicate their identity, providers of major market places could be obliged to verify their identity, while in other cases the right to use digital services anonymously shall be upheld
Amendment 196 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Underlines that certain types of legal, yet harmful, content should also be addressed to ensure a fair digital ecosystem; eExpects guidelines to include increased transparency rules on content moderation or political advertising policy to ensure that removals and the blocking of harmful content are limited to the absolute necessarylegal content is not removed;
Amendment 216 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls, in this regard, for a regular, comprehensive and consistent public reporting obligation for platforms, proportionate to their scale of reach and operational capacities, including inter alia information on adopted measures against illegal activities online, number of removed illegal material, number and outcome of internal complaints and judicial remedy;
Amendment 222 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls, moreover, for a regular public reporting obligation for national authorities, including inter alia information on the number of removal orders, on the number of identified illegal content or activities which led to investigation and prosecution, and the number of cases of content or activities wrongly identified as illegal;
Amendment 235 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Supports the creation of an independent EU bodyenforcement mechanism coordinated at EU level, with clear allocation of responsibilities and necessary enforcement tools to exercise effective oversight of compliance with the applicable rules; believes that it should enforce procedural safeguards and transparency and provide quick and reliable guidance on contexts in which legal content is to be considered harmful;
Amendment 239 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Considers that the transparency reports drawn up by platforms and national competent authorities should be made available to this EU bodyenforcement mechanism, which should be tasked with drawing up yearly reports that provide a structured analysis of illegal content removal and blocking at EU level;
Amendment 247 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Stresses that this EU bodyenforcement mechanism should not take on the role of content moderator, but that it should analyse, upon complaint or on its own initiative, whether and how digital service providers amplify illegal content; calls for this regulator to have the power to impose proportionate fines or other corrective actions when platforms do not provide sufficient information on their procedures or algorithms in a timely manner;
Amendment 248 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Is concerned that the increased use of automated decision making and machine learning for purposes such as identification, prediction of behaviour or targeted advertising leads to exacerbated direct and indirect discrimination based on grounds such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation when using digital services; insists that the Digital Services Act must aim to ensure a high level of transparency as regards the functioning of online services and a digital environment free of discrimination;
Amendment 254 #
2020/2022(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Underlines the importance of empowering users to enforce their own fundamental rights online, including by means of easily accessibltransparency obligations for online services and easily accessible, impartial, efficient and free complaint procedures, legal remedies, educational measures and awareness-raising on data protection issues;
Amendment 67 #
2020/2018(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Urges the Commission to adopt a tailored regulatory approach to address all challenges raised by the diversity of actors and services offered online; in particular, stresses that the new horizontal framework should regulate differently commercial activities on online market places and other intermediaries’ activities that have an impact on the freedom of expression and information; in this regard, considers essential to apply different regulatory approaches to illegal and legal content.
Amendment 11 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that AI may give rise to biases and thus to various forms of discrimination; in this regard, recalls that everyone’s rights must be ensured and that AI initiatives that lead to discriminatory processes should not be allowed; emphasizes that AI technologies should aim at not reflecting any sort of profiling bias whether regarding any identity, race, age, colour, gender or sexuality or disability;
Amendment 17 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that AI-powered education brings a wide range of possibilities and opportunities, while at the same time posing risks regarding equal access to education and learning equalities; expresses its concerns about lacking telecommunication infrastructures in some regions across the European Union, which limits the accessibility to the internet and calls on the Commission to deploy sustained efforts in ameliorating telecommunication infrastructures, particularly with regards to the public education sector; calls for the non- discriminatory use of AI in the education sector; recalls the risks and discrimination arising from recently developed AI tools used for school admission;
Amendment 20 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that AI-powered education brings a wide range of possibilities and opportunities, while at the same time posing risks regarding equal access to education and learning equalities; calls for the non-discriminatory use of AI in the education sector; calls not to underestimate the digital gender gap and to take measures to remedy it; recalls the risks and discrimination arising from recently developed AI tools used for school admission;
Amendment 23 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Stresses that artificial intelligence can reproduce and accentuate discriminatory processes ; requests that special attention be paid to this problem when designing and maintaining artificial intelligence; therefore recommends to ensure that the teams that design, develop, test and maintain, deploy and procure these systems, reflect the diversity of uses and society in general, and that they are diverse in terms of gender, culture and age to reflect all the essentials elements of society and avoid prejudice;
Amendment 31 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the Commission’s plan to update the Digital Education Action Plan in order to make better use of data and AI-based technologies so as to make educational systems fit for the digital age; stresses that general public awareness of AI at all levels, including awareness of AI risks relating to privacy and bias, is essential for preparing everyone to make informed decisions; recalls that educating the public to ensure proper skills should be viewed as a prerequisite before the widespread use of AI, especially for children and vulnerable peoples;
Amendment 36 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls that data protection and privacy can be particularly affected by AI; defends the principles established in the General Data Protection Regulation as guiding principles for AI deployment; calls for stronger protection and safeguards in the education sector where children’s data are concerned; recalls that children constitute a vulnerable public, which deserves particular attention and protection; strongly believes that AI technologies pose a risk regarding collection of individual data of students and teachers in particular, which could breach their human rights; recommends in this sense that audiovisual recording and monitoring devices should not be used in schools to collect data for AI- related purposes;
Amendment 39 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Recognises the threat that automation and AI might pose to employment and reiterates the need to maintain jobs as a priority, particularly in education, cultural and creative sectors;
Amendment 44 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines the need for full transparency and explicability of AI algorithms and the possibility of human verification and for due process, including the right of appeal, especially for decisions taken within the framework of prerogatives of public power;
Amendment 48 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to assess the risks of AI assisting the spread of disinformation and deep fakes in the digital environment and to propose recommendations, among others, for action against any AI-powered threats to free and fair elections and democracy;
Amendment 53 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that AI tools have the potential to fight illegal content online, but strongly recalls, ahead of the Digital Services Act expected for the end of this year, that such tools should always respect fundamental rights, especially freedom of expression, and should not lead to a general monitoring of the internet; nor to the removal of material disseminated for education, journalistic, artistic or research purposes;
Amendment 55 #
2020/2017(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that AI tools have the potential to fight illegal content online, but strongly recalls, ahead of the Digital Services Act expected for the end of this year, that such tools should always respect fundamental rights, especially freedom of expression and information, and should not lead to a general monitoring of the internet;
Amendment 23 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that any ethical framework should seek toensure respect for human autonomy, ensure benefits for all, prevent harm, and promote fairness, and respect the principle of explicability of technologies; equality and transparency; notes that the potential for artificial intelligence (AI), robotics and related technologies that are truly ethical will inevitably conflict with the profit- orientation of private companies and interests; stresses therefore that an ethical framework for AI, robotics and related technologies is no substitute for wide- ranging and binding legal regulation of same; calls for the project of full and binding legal regulation of AI, robotics and related technologies by the European Union to be moved forward without any delay;
Amendment 32 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Emphasises that the development and deployment of AI, robotics and related technologies should not be left solely or principally to the private sector; stresses the urgent need to mobilise both the Union’s resources and the resources of Member States to work toward the creation of truly public, non-proprietary and ethical AI, robotics and related technologies, bearing in mind that AI in particular is a general purpose technology which is currently underpinning and will increasingly underpin critical public and social infrastructure in the future;
Amendment 34 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Stresses that the development of AI, robotics and related technologies poses risks for human rights - namely privacy, data protection, and freedom of expression and information - and that in the future it may pose further risks that are still unknown; calls for the precautionary principle to be at the heart of both ethical and legal frameworks for AI;
Amendment 36 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses the importance of developing an “ethics-by-default and by design” framework which fully respect the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Union law and the Treaties; stresses that European standards for AI must be based on the principles of digital ethics, human dignity, respect for fundamental rights, data protection and security; emphasises the importance of capitalising on the EU’s potential for creating a strong infrastructure for AI systems rooted in high standards of data and respect for humans; stresses that specific risk assessments, rather than broad sector-oriented criteria, should determine the level of risk of any AI system; calls for the introduction of a mandatory human rights impact assessment in the design and ongoing development of every AI system, including an evaluation of the societal implications of and risks posed by the system and an outline of the actions needed to mitigate such risks;
Amendment 45 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that the Union legal framework willmay need to be updacomplemented with guiding ethical principles; points out that, where it would be premature to adopt legal acts, a soft law framework should be used;
Amendment 48 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Recalls that the lack of transparency of AI systems makes it difficult to identify and prove possible breaches of laws, including legal provisions that protect fundamental rights; believes that an examination of, and guidelines on, how the Union’s human rights frameworks and the obligations that flow therefrom can protect citizens in the context of the widespread use of AI, robotics and related technologies are urgently needed; stresses the need to assess whether the EU’s human rights framework will need to be updated to meet the challenge posed to rights by these complex and emergent technologies;
Amendment 51 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Stresses the need to assess how existing EU rules, in particular data protection rules, apply to AI and how proper enforcement of these rules in this field can be assured; calls on the Commission, the Member States and the data protection authorities to identify and take any possible measures to minimise algorithmic discrimination and bias and to develop a strong and common ethical framework for the transparent processing of personal data and automated decision- making that can guide data usage and the ongoing enforcement of Union law;
Amendment 53 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Stresses that the data sets and algorithmic systems used when making classifications, assessments and predictions at the different stages of data processing in the development of AI, robotics and related technologies may result not only in infringements of the fundamental rights of individuals, but also in differential treatment of and indirect discrimination against groups of people with similar characteristics; calls for a rigorous examination of AI’s politics and consequences, including close attention to AI’s classification practices and harms; emphasises that ethical AI, robotics and related technologies require that the field centre non-technical disciplines whose work traditionally examines such issues, including science and technology studies, critical race studies, disability studies, and other disciplines attuned to social context, including how difference is constructed, the work of classification, and its consequences; stresses the need therefore to systematically and immediately invest in integrating these disciplines into AI study and research at all levels;
Amendment 54 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Notes that the field of AI, robotics and related technologies is strikingly homogenous and lacking in diversity; recognises the need to ensure that the teams that design, develop, test, maintain, deploy and procure these systems reflect the diversity of its uses and of society in general in order to ensure that bias is not unwittingly ‘built in’ to these technologies;
Amendment 60 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for a horizontal approach, including technology-neutral standards that apply to all sectors in which AI could be employed; calls on the Union to promote strong and transparenta debate on how best the public and private sectors may cooperatione and share knowledge-sharing between the public and private sectors to create best practic to create best practices; recalls that artificial intelligence technologies would not exist without training data sets populated with data harvested from citizens and from public sources, and calls for the Union to urgently explore mechanisms for making privately-held data sets publicly and freely available, without prejudice to applicable data protection rules;
Amendment 89 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that AI and roboticBelieves that certain uses of AI cannot be considered as ethical as such, and that there are areas where any legal and ethical framework would not prevent risks of fundamentals rights violations; recalls that the use of AI, robotics and related technologyies in the area of law enforcement and border control could enhance public safety and security; stresses that its use must respect the principles of proportionality and necessityposes extremely serious risks to fundamental rights; calls for a complete ban on the use of AI, robotics and related technologies in this arena; calls also for a ban on the use of facial recognition technology in public areas and a ban on affect recognition AI in any arena;
Amendment 95 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Notes the increasing use of AI- enabled labour-management systems; emphasises that the introduction of such systems raises significant questions about worker rights and safety; notes that AI systems used for worker control and management are inevitably optimised to produce benefits for employers, often at great cost to workers; recalls that Article 22 GDPR is not sufficient to adequately protect workers in the context of AI- enabled management systems; calls for urgent and specific regulation in this arena;
Amendment 101 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that AI and robotics are not immune from making mistakes; considers the need for legislators to reflect upon the complex issue of liability in the context of both civil and criminal justice.
Amendment 108 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Reiterates the call for the establishment of a European Agency for Artificial Intelligence, and emphasises the importance of having national supervisory authorities in each Member State responsible for ensuring, assessing and monitoring compliance with ethical principles and legal obligations pertaining to the development, deployment and use of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies.
Amendment 8 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)
Citation 6 a (new)
- having regard to European Parliament resolution of 25 October 2018 on the rise of neo-fascist violence in Europe (2018/2869(RSP)),
Amendment 13 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 a (new)
Citation 10 a (new)
- having regard to Principle 16 of The European Pillar of Social Rights, which stresses the right to timely access to affordable, preventive and curative health care of good quality;
Amendment 15 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 b (new)
Citation 10 b (new)
- having regard to Principle 19 of the European Pillar of Social Rights which states that ‘access to social housing or housing assistance of good quality shall be provided for those in need’;
Amendment 16 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 c (new)
Citation 10 c (new)
- having regard to the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development;
Amendment 17 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 d (new)
Citation 10 d (new)
- having regard to Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin;
Amendment 18 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 e (new)
Citation 10 e (new)
- having regard to Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation;
Amendment 19 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 f (new)
Citation 10 f (new)
- having regard to Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law;
Amendment 20 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 g (new)
Citation 10 g (new)
- having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 September 2006 on the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to Community institutions and bodies;
Amendment 24 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 a (new)
Citation 15 a (new)
- having regard to the General Policy Recommendation No. 13 of the European Commission Against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI);
Amendment 49 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas persistent and structural antyi-gypsyism continues to exist at all levels of European society and manifests itself on a daily basisremains pervasive across the EU, where structural anti-gypsyism and sustained socio-economic inequalities affect Roma in areas such as housing, healthcare, employment and education; whereas Roma people suffer increased hate speech in public, in social media and by public figures and politicians, police violence, including collective punishment, racial profiling, residential and school segregation;
Amendment 58 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. Whereas dysfunctioning rule of law in some Member States provides no protection and access to justice for victims of police violence, instead the victims are persecuted by the state authorities;
Amendment 64 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. Whereas only 21 % of Roma women and 25 % of Roma men aged 16– 24 have completed secondary education (ISCED3) or higher;
Amendment 67 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)
Recital B c (new)
Bc. Whereas 43 % of Roma men and 22% Roma women are in some form of paid work 1a; whereas 63 % of young Roma (aged 16-24) are not in education, employment or training (NEET) 1b; whereas overall 72 % of Roma women aged 16 to 24 years are NEET compared with 55 % of young Roma men 1c; whereas the increasing share of Roma NEETs was an area where the situation had deteriorated in 2016 compared to 2011 1d; __________________ 1a EU FRA2016 Second European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey : Roma 1bReport on the implementation of national Roma integration strategies – 2019, p. 4 1c EU FRA2019 Roma women survey 1dRoma inclusion measures reported under the EU framework for NRIS, p. 18
Amendment 71 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B d (new)
Recital B d (new)
Bd. Whereas the adoption of the European Pillar of Social Rights has brought to the fore the fundamental right of everyone to engage in work and the reinforcement of social rights leading to a positive impact on the lives of people belonging to marginalised groups, such as the Roma;
Amendment 73 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B e (new)
Recital B e (new)
Be. Whereas one third of Roma households do not have tap water, just over half have an indoor flush toilet or shower, and 78 % of Roma live in overcrowded housing 1a; __________________ 1aEuropean Commission, 2019 Report on National Roma Integration Strategies: Key Conclusions, p. 6
Amendment 75 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B f (new)
Recital B f (new)
Bf. Whereas 43 % of Roma are discriminated against when trying to buy or rent housing and are not sufficiently aware of their rights in terms of equality 1a; __________________ 1aEuropean Commission, 2019 Report on National Roma Integration Strategies: Key Conclusions, p. 6
Amendment 77 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B g (new)
Recital B g (new)
Bg. Whereas the increased use of new technology by public authorities, such as predictive policing and the use of facial recognition, presents a number of risks for Roma in Europe;
Amendment 78 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B h (new)
Recital B h (new)
Bh. Whereas environmental injustices are regularly related to health risks and negative consequences for Roma and whereas Roma are disproportionately affected by environmental burdens, have less access to environmental resources and services, and are discriminated against in their right to information, to participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters;
Amendment 79 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B i (new)
Recital B i (new)
Bi. Whereas Roma women, Roma LGBTI, Roma people with disabilities face intersectional discrimination which increase the severity of discrimination on their lives;
Amendment 80 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B j (new)
Recital B j (new)
Bj. Whereas Roma women are particularly affected as regards women’s rights and often face exacerbated forms of verbal, physical, psychological and racial harassment in reproductive health care settings, as has found to be the case in Bulgaria 1a;whereas Roma have also experienced in that Member State, ethnic segregation in maternal health care facilities, and are placed in segregated rooms with segregated bathrooms and eating facilities 1b;whereas in some Member States, such as Slovakia and the Czech Republic, Roma have been subjected to systematic practices of forced and coercive sterilization and have been unable to obtain adequate reparations, including compensation, for the resulting violations of their human rights 1c; __________________ 1aSee, e.g., Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe, Women’s Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights in Europe 42-43, 44 (2017) 1b European Roma Rights Centre v. Bulgaria, Complaint No. 151/2017, Eur. Comm. Soc. R.(2018). 1cSee, e.g., Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Concluding Observations: Slovakia, paras. 44-45, E/C.12/SVK/CO/3 (2019)
Amendment 121 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Amendment 125 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)
Recital G b (new)
Gb. whereas expert reports on the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies recognise that Roma LGBTI face a range of facets of discrimination: first as people with Romani background, secondly as LGBTI, thirdly as LGBTI persons in Roma communities; whereas some LGBTI people with Romani background may resort to suppressing aspects of their identity as a result;
Amendment 151 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to develop a proposal for a post-2020 EU directive for the equality and inclusion of people with Romani background, giving priority to (i) achieving a positive impact; (ii) a rights-based approach, including a plan to eliminate social and economic inequalities; (iii) developing a vision for the future proposal, including specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time- bound objectives to protect and improve the inclusion of people with Romani background; and (iv) eliminating inequalities, especially for children from their earliest years; and those with Romani background facing multiple discrimination, such as women and girls, LGBTI persons and people with disabilities.
Amendment 175 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Points out that EU and its Member States should combat effectively discriminatory or violent treatment and reactions against the schooling and participation of Roma children, both through law enforcement and by promoting mutual understanding and social cohesion;
Amendment 177 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Considers that the fight against anti-gypsyism is a horizontal issue and that it should be taken into account in all areas of Union policy, in particular with regard to new technologies;
Amendment 182 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Takes the view that particular attention should be paid to the situation and the rights of individuals at the intersections of discrimination grounds in the EU, in particular women, migrants, LGBTI people, people with physical and intellectual disabilities, victims of abuse or modern slavery; points out that the EU and the Member States must take actions in this regard;
Amendment 191 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Insists in this respect, that entities that engage in discriminatory activities against Roma, or take decisions or implement measures to this effect, should not be eligible for funding from the Union's budget;
Amendment 193 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Calls on the Commission to effectively respond to the concern about the increasingly shrinking space for independent civil society in some Member States; recalls the importance of ensuring adequate funding to support activities of Roma civil society; takes the view that in order to support Roma and pro-Roma civil society organisations, they should be exempt from co-financing requirements;
Amendment 200 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls for the EU wide implementation of the Aarhus Convention that links environmental rights and human rights; calls for the environmental regulation that would equally benefit all parts of society and address environmental racism that amounts to breaches of internationally recognised human rights;
Amendment 204 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls on the Member States to specifically target mitigation of the disproportionate impact of Covid-19 pandemic on Romani people who experienced intensified scapegoating and hate speech including by politicians; calls on the Member States to evaluate and address the following elements of impact of the Covid-19 on Roma: enforcement of racist policies, increase of racist attacks, racial profiling and police brutality, more difficult access to education, increased financial insecurity, loss of income, closure or reduction of support services, benefit from the state support, overcrowding and access to clean water and sanitary conditions;
Amendment 205 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Stresses that housing is not a commodity, but a necessity, without which people cannot fully participate in society and access fundamental rights; calls on the Commission and the Member States to integrate the recommendations of the Council of Europe Human Rights Commissioner Report, "ECSR The Right to affordable housing, Europe's neglected duty", with particular reference to ensuring that all Member States promptly accept to be bound by Article 31 of the revised European Social Charter dealing with the right to housing, and step up investing in social and affordable housing to eradicate the housing cost overburden, particularly among marginalised groups;
Amendment 232 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls on the Member States to ensure the effective practical enforcement of the Race Equality Directive (2000/43/EC) and to ensure effective enforcement of the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia to combat persisting anti-gypsyism; calls for implementation of legislation and stronger sanctions of any discrimination on the grounds of ethnic or social origin, religion or belief, disability, age, gender, gender expression, gender identity, sexual orientation, residence status or health;
Amendment 237 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Calls on Member States to secure equal access to justice and equality before the law for Roma and effectively fight structural anti-gypsyism taking shape in over-policing and violations of Roma rights committed by police officers, such as violent raids resulting in injuries and property damage, severe ill-treatment during detention, etc, and failure to bring perpetrators to justice in cases of crimes committed by police officers;
Amendment 239 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)
Paragraph 9 c (new)
9c. Calls on all the Member States to guarantee comprehensive sexuality education, ready access for women to family planning, and the full range of reproductive and sexual health services, including modern contraceptive methods and safe and legal abortion;
Amendment 243 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 d (new)
Paragraph 9 d (new)
9d. Calls on Member States to prevent, condemn and secure appropriate punishment for any denial of sexual and reproductive health and rights of Roma women and girls;
Amendment 246 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 e (new)
Paragraph 9 e (new)
9e. Strongly condemns Roma women ethnic segregation in maternal health care facilities; calls on Member States to immediately prohibit all forms of ethnic segregation in health facilities, including maternal health care settings; calls on Member States to ensure effective and timely remedies to all survivors of forced and coercive sterilization, including through the establishment of effective compensation schemes;
Amendment 248 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 f (new)
Paragraph 9 f (new)
9f. Calls on all the Member States to address the lack of reporting of hate crimes by victims due to inadequate safeguards and failure of authorities to properly investigate and bring convictions for hate crimes in Member States;
Amendment 261 #
2020/2011(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls on the Member States to collect and publish, in consultation with the relevant communities, equality data disaggregated by ethnic origin, that is voluntary and anonymous and ensures the protection of personal data, and is based on self-identification;
Amendment 2 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Regrets that the proposed commitment appropriations for the “Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values Programme” at EUR 90 600 000 are much lower than initially requested by the Parliament; requests, in line with the first reading position of the Parliament adopted on 17 April 2019, that commitment appropriations are increased to EUR 265 000 000 and that a new budget line to “promote and protect Union values“ (EUR 120 000 000 in commitment appropriations) is created; calls, in line with the partial agreement reached with Council, to increase the commitment appropriations under the “Daphne” budget line to EUR 37 100 000 and to earmark EUR 27 300 000 of this amount for the fight against gender-based violence by creating a subline “Combating all forms of gender-based violence against women and girls and domestic violence”; calls further for an increase of the commitment appropriations of the budget line “Promote citizens engagement and participation in the democratic life of the Union” to EUR 70 600 000, to rename the budget line “Promote equality and rights” to “Promote equality, rights and gender equality” and to earmark EUR 10 300 000 to “Promote gender equality and gender mainstreaming” by creating a new subline;
Amendment 7 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Calls, in line with the European Parliament first reading position of 13 March 2019 on the proposal for the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, to create separate budget lines for each specific objective of this fund to increase transparency, ensure adequate financing of each separate objective and guarantee a better budgetary scrutiny;
Amendment 9 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Regrets the proposal to disproportionately increase the Border Management and Visa Instrument Fund while other budget lines such as rights and values are being cut and in light of increased evidence of fundamental rights violations; calls, therefore, for this appropriation to be restored to its level of 2020 and for the Commission to use its powers to ensure that EU funding is being used in full respect of fundamental rights;
Amendment 21 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes note of the proposal to increase the appropriations of the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) by 11.5% while leaving the number of statutory staff unchanged; remind; notes that the Agency is requested to provide increased operational support to Member States and, upon request, has recently launched new initiatives such as the European Financial and Economic Crime Centre and the Innovation Lab which require additional funding; expects Agency’s tasks to be further extended in 2021 with; believes however that an increase to the Europol budget should not be the priority and proposes to keep Europol budget at the same level as 2020; considers that a decision on additional funding and posts with a view on the upcoming revision of the AgencyEuropol mandate; considers, therefore, that EUR 184 900 000 should be provided to the Agency in line with its request; requests to add further 63 posts to the Agency establishment planan be taken only at the end of the legislative process; reminds that extended tasks would entail additional work for the EDPS;
Amendment 25 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. StExpresses the importance of integrated border management to ensure the functioning of the Schengen area; highlights the important role of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) in this regard and calls for a significant budget increase for 2021 to EUR 838 000 000 to allow the Agency to build and train its standing corps as well as to purchase own equipment,concerns regarding the increased violations of fundamental rights at the EU's external borders; believes that the considerable budget FRONTEX has been allocated over the years should rather be spent to providing safe and legal ways to access the European Union as well as in the short thereby allowing a successful deployment and operational support to the Member States at the external bordersm a pan-European Search and Rescue operation in order to save people's lives at sea;
Amendment 29 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Calls for a new budget line to support Search and Rescue operations to guarantee access to international protection in accordance with the obligations contracted by the Member States in the field of human rights and maritime law, including the right to life and the principle of non-refoulement;
Amendment 38 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Regrets the reduction of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights’ budget by 0.4%; requests instead to increase Agency’s commitment and payment appropriations to EUR 246 60079 000; calls for adding twosix AD6 and two contractual agent function group IV posts to the Agency establishment plan; highlights that without adequate financial and staff resources, the Agency may not be able to implement projects that respond to identified needs and monitor adequately fundamental rights in the EU;
Amendment 42 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Welcomes the proposed increase of the European Asylum Support Office’s commitment and payment appropriations by 16.5% but regrets that the number of posts in its establishment plan have not been increased accordingly; requests therefore to reinforce the establishment plan of the Office by an additional 50 posts; recalls that Office plans to keep the same level of staff as requested for 2021 throughout the new programming period but stresses that additional staff will be needed if the new Regulation on the European Union Agency for Asylum is adopted; highlights that the additional staff will reinforce field operations, development and delivery of trainings, information and analysis, practical tools, governance activities and administrative functions. ; notes however concerns expressed by NGOs over interviews practices carried out by EASO staff and proposes to create a reserve to ensure EASO puts in place safeguards to ensure their staff is not involved in fundamental rights violations in the course of the operational support it provides to Member States;
Amendment 52 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Despite existing measures at Union19 and national level aimed at supporting the protection of critical infrastructures in the Union, the entities operating those infrastructures are not adequately equipped to address current and anticipated future risks to their operations that may result in disruptions of the provision of services that are essential for the protection of the population and the performance of vital societal functions or economic activities. This is due to a dynamic threat landscape with an evolving terrorist threat and growing interdependencies between infrastructures and sectors, as well as an increased physical risk due to natural disasters and climate change, which increases the frequency and scale of extreme weather events and brings long-term changes in average climate that can reduce the capacity and efficiency of certain infrastructure types if resilience or climate adaptation measures are not in place. Moreover, relevant sectors and types of entities are not recognised consistently as critical in all Member States. _________________ 19European Programme for Critical Infrastructure Protection (EPCIP).
Amendment 55 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Those growing interdependencies are the result of an increasingly cross- border and interdependent network of service provision using key infrastructures across the Union in the sectors of energy, transport, banking, financial market infrastructure, digital infrastructure, drinking and waste water, health, certain aspects of public administration, as well as space in as far as the provision of certain services depending on ground-based infrastructures that are owned, managed and operated either by Member States or by private parties is concerned, therefore not covering infrastructures owned, managed or operated by or on behalf of the Union as part of its space programmes. These interdependencies mean that any disruption, even one initially confined to one entity or one sector, can have cascading effects more broadly, potentially resulting in far-reaching and long-lasting negative impacts in the delivery of services across the internal market and on the human wellbeing. The COVID-19 pandemic has shown the vulnerability of our increasingly interdependent societies in the face of low-probability risks.
Amendment 59 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The entities involved in the provision of essential services are increasingly subject to diverging requirements imposed under the laws of the Member States. The fact that some Member States have less stringent security requirements on these entities not only risks impacting negatively on the maintenance of vital societal functions or economic activities across the Union, it also leads to obstacles to the proper functioning of the internal market. Similar types of entities are considered as critical in some Member States but not in others, and those which are identified as critical are subject to divergent requirements in different Member States. This results in additional and unnecessary administrative burdens for companies operating across borders, notably for companies active in Member States with more stringent requirements.
Amendment 63 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) It is therefore necessary to lay down harmonised minimum rules to ensure the provision of essential services into the internal marketpopulation and enhance the resilience of critical entities.
Amendment 67 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
(6a) Account should be taken of the fact that the operations of many critical entities are limited to the local or regional level, including EU regions. In accordance with Member States’ constitutional order and requirements, Member States should be able to delegate tasks under this Directive to territorial entities, as appropriate, in order to better guarantee the provision of essential services to their entire population.
Amendment 69 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
Amendment 79 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
Amendment 82 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Member States should designate authorities competent to supervise the application of and, where necessary, enforce the rules of this Directive and ensure that those authorities are adequately empowered and resourced. In view of the differences in national governance structures and in order to safeguard already existing secterritorial arrangements or Union supervisory and regulatory bodies, and to avoid duplication, Member States should be able to designate more than one competent authority. In that case, they should however clearly delineate the respective tasks of the authorities concerned and ensure that they cooperate smoothly and effectively. All competent authorities should also cooperate more generally with other relevant authorities, both at national and Union level.
Amendment 92 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
Recital 24
Amendment 100 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Critical entities should notify, as soon as reasonably possible under the given circumstances, Member States’ competent authorities of incidents that significantly disrupt or have the potential to significantly disrupt their operations. The notification should allow the competent authorities to respond to the incidents rapidly and adequately and to have a comprehensive overview of the overall risks that critical entities face. For that purpose, a procedure should be established for the notification of certain incidents and parameters should be provided for to determine when the actual or potential disruption is significant and the incidents should thus be notified. Given the potential cross-border impacts of such disruptions, a procedure should be established for Member States to inform other affected Member States via single points of contacts.
Amendment 102 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) While critical entities generally operate as part of an increasingly interconnected network of service provision and infrastructures and often provide essential services in more than one Member State, some of those entities are of particular significance for the Union because they provide essential services to a large number of Member States, and therefore require specific oversight at Union level. Rules on the specific oversight in respect of such critical entities of particular European significance should therefore be established. Those rules are without prejudice to the rules on supervision and enforcement set out in this Directive.
Amendment 103 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) Since the objectives of this Directive, namely to ensure the provision into the internal marketpopulation of services essential for the maintenance of vital societal functions or economic activities and to enhance the resilience of critical entities providing such services, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, but can rather, by reason of the effects of the action, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on the European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality as set out in that Article 5, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.
Amendment 104 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33 a (new)
Recital 33 a (new)
(33a) This Directive complies with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’). Obligations put on the Member States should not have the effect of putting in place measures that do not fully comply with the Charter.
Amendment 106 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) lays down obligations for Member States to take certain measures aimed at protecting people and ensuring the provision in the internal market of services essential for the maintenance of vital societal functions or economic activities, in particular to identify critical entities and entities to be treated as equivalent in certain respects, and to enable them to meet their obligations;
Amendment 110 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 4
Article 1 – paragraph 4
4. Without prejudice to Article 346 TFEU, information that is confidential pursuant to Union and national rules, such as rules on business confidentiality, shall be exchanged with the Commission and other relevant authorities only where that exchange is necessary for the application of this Directive. The information exchanged shall be limited to that which is relevant and proportionate to the purpose of that exchange. The exchange of information shall preserve the confidentiality of that information and protect the security and commercial interests of critical entities.
Amendment 121 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
(6) “risk” means any circumstance or event having a potential adverse effect on the resilience ofprovision of essential services by critical entities;
Amendment 128 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Where in a Member State several regional strategies are adopted, the provisions of this Article shall apply mutatis mutandis.
Amendment 142 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The risk assessment shall account for all relevant natural and man-made risks, including accidents, natural disasters, public health emergencies, antagonistic threats, including terrorist offences pursuant to Title II of the Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council34 . _________________ 34Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 2005/671/JHA (OJ L 88, 31.3.2017, p. 6).
Amendment 149 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. By [three years and three months after entry into force of this Directive] Member States shall identify for each sector and subsector referred to in the Annex, other than points 3, 48 and 89 thereof, the critical entities.
Amendment 154 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 5
Article 5 – paragraph 5
5. Following the notification referred in paragraph 3, Member States shall ensure that critical entities provide information to their competent authorities designated pursuant to Article 8 of this Directive on whether they have been identified as a critical entity in one or more other Member States. Where an entity has been identified as critical by two or more Member States, these Member States shall engage in consultation with each other with a view to reduce the burden on the critical entity in regard to the obligations pursuant to Chapter III and to achieve a comparable level of resilience across the border.
Amendment 157 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 6
Article 5 – paragraph 6
6. For the purposes of Chapter IV, Member States shall ensure that critical entities, following the notification referred in paragraph 3, provide information to their competent authorities designated pursuant to Article 8 of this Directive on whether they provide essential services to or in more than one third ofthree Member States. Where that is so, the Member State concerned shall notify, without undue delay, to the Commission the identity of those critical entities.
Amendment 161 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the number of userpersons relying on the service provided by the entity;
Amendment 163 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the impacts that incidents could have, in terms of degree and duration, on the provision of essential services to the affected population, economic and societal activities, the environment and public safety;
Amendment 173 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. As regards the sectors referred to in points 3, 48 and 89 of the Annex, Member States shall, by [three years and three months after entry into force of this Directive], identify the entities that shall be treated as equivalent to critical entities for the purposes of this Chapter. They shall apply the provisions of Articles 3, 4, 5(1) to (4) and (7), and 9 in respect of those entities.
Amendment 175 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Amendment 176 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
1. Each Member State shall designate one or more competent authorities responsible for the correct application, and where necessary enforcement, of the rules of this Directive at national level (‘competent authority’). Member States may designate an existing authority or authorities.
Amendment 177 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Where they designate more than one authority, they shall clearly set out the territorial delineation of competences and the respective tasks of the authorities concerned and ensure that they cooperate effectively to fulfil their tasks under this Directive, including with regard to the designation and activities of the single point of contact referred to in paragraph 2.
Amendment 184 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 5
Article 8 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall ensure that their competent authorities, whenever appropriate, and in accordance with Union and national law, consult and cooperate with other relevant national authorities, in particular those in charge of civil protection, law enforcement and protection of personal data, as well as with relevant interested parties, including academia, civil society and critical entities.
Amendment 186 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 6
Article 8 – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall ensure that their competent authorities designated pursuant to this Article cooperate with competent authorities designated pursuant to [the NIS 2 Directive] on cybersecurity risks and cyber incidents affecting critical entities, as well as the measures taken by competent authorities designated under [the NIS 2 Directive] relevant for critical entities.
Amendment 187 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 7
Article 8 – paragraph 7
7. Each Member State shall notify the Commission of the designation of the competent authority and single point of contact within threone months from that designation, including their precise tasks and responsibilities under this Directive, their contact details and any subsequent change thereto. Each Member State shall make public its designation of the competent authority and single point of contact.
Amendment 191 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall support critical entities in enhancing their resilience and ensure that such support is given at all levels of government. That support may include developing guidance materials and methodologies, supporting the organisation of exercises to test their resilience and providing training to personnel of critical entities.
Amendment 193 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall establish information sharing tools to support voluntary sharing of information stharingt is not personal data between critical entities in relation to matters covered by this Directive, in accordance with Union and national law on, in particular, competition and protection of personal data.
Amendment 200 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) recover from incidents, including business continuity measures and the identification of alternative supply chains to ensure the continuation of the essential service;
Amendment 209 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Member States shall ensure that where the measures referred to in paragraph 1 have the potential to limit the exercise of fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons, these limitations shall be limited to what is strictly necessary and proportionate in a democratic society.
Amendment 212 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. Upon request of the Member State that identified the critical entity and with the agreement of the critical entity concerned, the Commission shall organise advisoryssessment missions, in accordance with the arrangements set out in Article 15(4), (5), (7) and (8), to provide adviassess compliance tof the critical entity concerned in meetingwith its obligations pursuant to Chapter III. The advisoryssessment mission shall report its findings to the Commission, that Member State and the critical entity concerned.
Amendment 218 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 3
Article 12 – paragraph 3
Amendment 221 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that critical entities notify without undue delay the competent authority of incidents that significantly disrupt or have the potential to significantly disrupt their operations. Notifications shall include any available information necessary to enable the competent authority to understand the nature, cause and possible consequences of the incident, including so as to determine any cross-border impact of the incident. Such notification shall not make the critical entities subject to increased liability.
Amendment 224 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Amendment 225 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 226 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 227 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 228 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
3. On the basis of the information provided in the notification by the critical entity, the competent authority, via its single point of contact, shall inform the single point of contact of other affected Member States if the incident has, or may have, a significantn impact on critical entities and the continuity of the provision of essential services in one or more other Member States.
Amendment 229 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
In so doing, the single points of contact shall, in accordance with Union law or national legislation that complies with Union law, treat the information in a way that respects its confidentiality and protects the security and commercial interest of the critical entity concerned.
Amendment 235 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. An entity shall be considered a critical entity of particular European significance when it has been identified as a critical entity and it provides essential services to or in more than one third ofthree Member States and has been notified as such to the Commission pursuant to Article 5(1) and (6), respectively.
Amendment 237 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
1. Upon request of one or more Member States or of the Commission, the Member State where the infrastructure of thea critical entity of particular European significance is located shall, together with that entity, inform the Commission andshall, inform the Critical Entities Resilience Group of the outcome of the risk assessment carried out pursuant to Article 10 and the measures taken in accordance with Article 11.
Amendment 239 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
That Member Stateentity shall also inform, without undue delay, the Commission and the Critical Entities Resilience Group of any supervisory or enforcement actions, including any assessments of compliance or orders issued, that its competent authority has undertaken pursuant to Articles 18 and 19 in respect of that entity.
Amendment 240 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. Upon request of one or more Member States, or at its own initiative, and in agreement with the Member State where the infrastructure of the critical entity of particular European significance is located, the Commission shall organise an advisoryssessment mission to assess the measures that that entity put in place to meet its obligations pursuant to Chapter III. Where needed, the advisoryssessment missions may request specific expertise in the area of disaster risk management through the Emergency Response Coordination Centre.
Amendment 244 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
3. The advisoryssessment mission shall report its findings to the Commission, the Critical Entities Resilience Group and the critical entity of particular European significance concerned within a period of three months after the conclusion of the advisory mission.
Amendment 245 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
The Commission shall, based on that advice, communicate its viewsthe advice to the Member States where the infrastructure of that entity is locoperateds, the Critical Entities Resilience Group and that entity on whether that entity complies with its obligations pursuant to Chapter III and, where appropriate, which measures could be taken to improve the resilience of that entity.
Amendment 246 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 4
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 4
Thate Member States shall take due account of those views and provide information to the Commission and the Critical Entities Resilience Group on any measures ithey hasve taken pursuant to the communication.
Amendment 247 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
4. Each advisoryssessment mission shall consist of experts from Member States and ofthe Commission representatives. Member States may proposshall nominate candidates to be part of an advisoryssessment mission. The Commission shall select and appoint the members of each advisory mission according to their professional capacity and ensuring a geographically balanced representation among Member States. The Commission shall bear the costs related to the participation in the advisoryssessment mission.
Amendment 248 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
The Commission shall organise the programme of an advisoryssessment mission, in consultation with the members of the specific advisory mission and in agreement with the Member State where the infrastructure of the critical entity or the critical entity of European significance concerned is located.
Amendment 250 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 5
Article 15 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall adopt an implementing act laying down rules on the procedural arrangements for the conduct and reports of advisoryssessment missions. This implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 20(2).
Amendment 251 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 6
Article 15 – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall ensure that the critical entity of particular European significance concerned provides the advisoryssessment mission with access to all information, systems and facilities relating to the provision of its essential services necessary for the performance of its tasks.
Amendment 252 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 7
Article 15 – paragraph 7
7. The advisoryssessment mission shall be carried out in compliance with the applicable national law of the Member State where that infrastructure is located.
Amendment 253 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 8
Article 15 – paragraph 8
8. When organising the advisoryssessment missions, the Commission shall take into account the reports of any inspections carried out by the Commission under Regulation (EC) 300/2008 and Regulation (EC) 725/2004 and of the reports of any monitoring carried out by the Commission under Directive 2005/65/EC in respect of the critical entity or the critical entity of particular European significance, as appropriate.
Amendment 254 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
2. The Critical Entities Resilience Group shall be composed of representatives of the Member States and the Commission. Where relevant for the performance of its tasks, the Critical Entities Resilience Group mayshall invite representatives of interested parties, such as academia, civil society and critical entities, to participate in its work.
Amendment 257 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The Commission’s representative shall chairchair of the Critical Entities Resilience Group shall be elected by the Critical Entities Resilience Group.
Amendment 259 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) conduct unannounced on-site inspections of the premises that the critical entity uses to provide its essential services, and off-site supervision of critical entities’ measures pursuant to Article 11;
Amendment 260 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) conduct or order audits in respect of those entities.
Amendment 108 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) To further address key supply chain risks and assist entities operating in sectors covered by this Directive to appropriately manage supply chain and supplier related cybersecurity risks, the Cooperation Group involving relevant national authorities, in cooperation with the Commission and ENISA, should carry out coordinated sectoral supply chain risk assessments, as was already done for 5G networks following Recommendation (EU) 2019/534 on Cybersecurity of 5G networks21 , with the aim of identifying per sector which are the critical ICT services, systems or products, relevant threats and vulnerabilities. Particular consideration should be given to the fact that ICT services, systems or products subject to specific requirements in the country of origin that might represent an obstacle to compliance with EU privacy and data protection law. Where appropriate, the EDPB should be consulted in the framework of such risk assessments. _________________ 21Commission Recommendation (EU) 2019/534 of 26 March 2019 Cybersecurity of 5G networks (OJ L 88, 29.3.2019, p. 42).
Amendment 110 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 46 a (new)
Recital 46 a (new)
(46a) Free and open source software as well as open source hardware could bring huge benefits in terms of cybersecurity, in particular as regards transparency and verifiability of features. As this could help address and mitigate specific supply chain risks, their use should be preferred where feasible.
Amendment 116 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 54
Recital 54
(54) In order to safeguard the security of electronic communications networks and services, the use of encryption, and in particular end-to-end encryption, should be promoted and, where necessary, should be mandatory for providers of such services and networks in accordance with the principles of security and privacy by default and by design for the purposes of Article 18. The use of end-to-end encryptionNo provision in this Directive should be reconciled with the Member State’ powers to ensure the protection of their essential security interests and public security, and to permit the investigation, detection and prosecution of criminal offences in compliance with Union law. Solutions for lawful access to information in end-to-end encrypted communications should maintain the effectiveness of encryption in protecting privacy and security of communications, while providing an effective response to crimestrued as an endorsement of or obligation to weakening end-to-end encryption, whether through “backdoors” or other solutions.
Amendment 136 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 82 a (new)
Recital 82 a (new)
(82a) This Directive does not apply to Union bodies, however, Union bodies could be considered essential or important entities under this Directive. By [6 months after entry into force], the Commission should evaluate the need to apply the provisions of this Directive to Union bodies and present, where appropriate, legislative proposals to this effect.
Amendment 140 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive applies to public and private entities of a type referred to as essential entities in Annex I and as important entities in Annex II. This Directive does not apply to entities that qualify as micro and small enterprises within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC.28 _________________ 28 Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium- sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).
Amendment 145 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) the entity is the sole provider of a service in a Member State or region;
Amendment 149 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Article 2 – paragraph 4
4. This Directive applies without prejudice to Council Directive 2008/114/EC30 and Directives 2011/93/EU31 and 2013/40/EU32 of the European Parliament and of the Council. _________________ 30Council Directive 2008/114/EC of 8 December 2008 on the identification and designation of European critical infrastructures and the assessment of the need to improve their protection (OJ L 345, 23.12.2008, p. 75). 31Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA (OJ L 335, 17.12.2011, p. 1). 32Directive 2013/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 August 2013 on attacks against information systems and replacing Council Framework Decision 2005/222/JHA (OJ L 218, 14.8.2013, p. 8).
Amendment 150 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Amendment 152 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 5
Article 2 – paragraph 5
5. Without prejudice to Article 346 TFEU, information that is confidential pursuant to Union and national rules, such as rules on business confidentiality, shall be exchanged with the Commission and other relevant authorities only where that exchange is necessary for the application of this Directive. The information exchanged shall be limited to that which is relevant and proportionatenecessary to the purpose of that exchange. The exchange of information shall preserve the confidentiality of that information and protect the security and commercial interests of essential or important entities.
Amendment 159 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Amendment 162 #
2020/0359(COD)
Amendment 181 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. ENISA shall develop and maintain a European vulnerability registry. To that end, ENISA shall establish and maintain the appropriate information systems, policies and procedures with a view in particular to enabling important and essential entities and their suppliers of network and information systems to disclose and register vulnerabilities present in ICT products or ICT services, as well as to provide access to the information on vulnerabilities contained in the registry to all interested partiesthe public. The registry shall, in particular, include information describing the vulnerability, the affected ICT product or ICT services and the severity of the vulnerability in terms of the circumstances under which it may be exploited, the availability of related patches and, in the absence of available patches, guidance addressed to users of vulnerable products and services as to how the risks resulting from disclosed vulnerabilities may be mitigated.
Amendment 182 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) objectives of national, regional and cross-border preparedness measures and activities;
Amendment 187 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) providing, upon request of an entity, a proactive scanning of the network and information systems used for the provision of their services; the processing of personal data in the context of such scanning shall be limited to what is strictly necessary, and in any case to IP addresses and URLs.
Amendment 189 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The Cooperation Group shall be composed of representatives of Member States, the Commission and ENISA. The European External Action Service shall participate in the activities of the Cooperation Group as an observer. The European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) in accordance with Article 17(5)(c) of Regulation (EU) XXXX/XXXX [the DORA Regulation] may participate in the activities of the Cooperation Group.
Amendment 192 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Where appropriate, the Cooperation Group mayshall invite representatives of relevant stakeholders, academia and civil society to participate in its work.
Amendment 193 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 8
Article 12 – paragraph 8
8. The Cooperation Group shall meet regularly and at least once a year with the Critical Entities Resilience Group established under Directive (EU) XXXX/XXXX [Resilience of Critical Entities Directive] to promote strategic cooperatione and exchange of information.
Amendment 224 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. For the purpose of contributing to the security, stability and resilience of the DNS, Member States shall ensure that TLD registries and the entities providing domain name registration services for the TLD shall collect and maintain accurate and complete domain name registration data in a dedicated database facility with due diligence subject toin accordance with Union data protection law as regards data which are personal data.
Amendment 225 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the databases of domain name registration data referred to in paragraph 1 contain relevant information to identify and contact the holders of the domain names, such as name and electronic mail address, and the points of contact administering the domain names under the TLDs.
Amendment 226 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 5
Article 23 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall ensure that the TLD registries and the entities providing domain name registration services for the TLD provide access to specific domain name registration data upon lawful and duly justified requests of legitimate access seeker, necessary within the competences of CERTs, CSIRTs and competent authorities under Union or national law for the prevention, investigation or prosecution of criminal offences, in compliance with Union data protection law. Member States shall ensure that the TLD registries and the entities providing domain name registration services for the TLD reply without undue delay to all sufficiently substantiated requests for access. Member States shall ensure that policies and procedures to disclose such data are made publicly available.
Amendment 166 #
2020/0279(COD)
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 169 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Title 1
Title 1
Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on asylum and migration managementresponsibility-sharing and solidarity and amending Council Directive (EC) 2003/109 and the proposed Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Fund] (Text with EEA relevance) (This amendment applies throughout the whole text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
Amendment 173 #
2020/0279(COD)
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, immigration and management of the external borders of the Union, based on solidarity between Member States, which is fair towards third-country national and immigration, based on 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 181 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
Amendment 191 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) This Regulation should contribute to that comprehensive approach by settIn the light of the disproportionate responsibility being oput a common framework for the actions of the Union and of the Member States in the field of asylum and migration management policies, by elaborating on the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility in accordance with Article 80 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)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. This Regulation should contribute to that aim by setting out a common framework for the automatic distribution of applicants for international protection across the European Union, including after a Search and Rescue operation. Member States should therefore take all necessary measures, inter alia, to provide access to international protection and adequate reception conditions to those in need, to enable the effective application of the rules on determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection, to return illegally staying third-country nationals, to prevent irregular migration and unauthorised movements between them, and to provide support to other Member States in the form of solidarity contributions, as their contribution to the comprehensive approachand to share responsibility across the European Union for the processing of applications for international protection.
Amendment 199 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
Amendment 210 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
Amendment 217 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
Amendment 225 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Member States should have sufficient human and financial resources and infrastructure to effectively implement asylum and migration management policies and should ensure appropriate coordination between the relevant national authorities as well as with the national authorities of the other Member States.
Amendment 232 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Taking a strategic approach, the Commission should adopt a European Asylum and Migration Management Strategyhe Commission should present every year a report on the implementation of EU asylum and migration management policies. The Strategycquis. This report should be based on relevant reports and analyses produced by Union agencies and on the national strategies of the Member States, Member States, UNHCR, the Council of Europe and other international organisations as well as reports from Civil Society Organisations. This report should serve as a basis to carry out infringement procedures and ensure compliance with EU and international law.
Amendment 239 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) National strategies of theInformation provided by Member States should include information on contingency planning and on the implementation of the principles of integrated policy-making and of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility of this Regulation and legal obligations stemming therefrom at national level.
Amendment 244 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) In order to ensure that an effective monitoring system is in place to ensure the application of the asylum acquis, the results of the monitoring undertaken by the European Union Asylum Agency, and Frontex, of the evaluations carried out in accordance with Council Regulation No 1053/2013 as well as those carried out in line with Article 7 of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Screening Regulation]by independent human rights bodies such as the Council of Europe, national ombudspersons, UNHCR should also be taken into account in these strategiereports.
Amendment 247 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Bearing in mind the importance of ensuring that the Union is prepared and able to adjust to the developing and evolving realities of asylum and migration management, the Commission should annually adopt a Migration Management Report setting out the likely evolution of the migratory situation and the preparedness of the Union and the Member States to respond and adapt to it. The Report should also include the results of the reporting on monitoring foreseen in the national strategies and should propose improvements where weaknesses are apparentidentifying infringements of EU asylum acquis at the earliest stage possible, the Commission should also include the results of the reporting on monitoring the implementation of EU asylum acquis in each Member State, and initiate infringement procedures in case of non- compliance. 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.
Amendment 255 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In order to ensure that the necessary tools are in place to assist Member States in dealing with challenges that may arise due to the presence on their territory of third-country nationals that are vulnerable applicants for international protection, regardless of how they crossed the external borders, the Report should also indicate whether the said Member States are faced with such challengeshave been providing effective access to international protection on their territory and comply with the principle of non-refoulement. Those Member States should also be able to rely on the use of the ‘solidarity pool’an automatic distribution mechanism that will provide for the relocation of vulnerable personapplicants.
Amendment 261 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) For the effective implementation of the common frameworksystem based on solidarity and to identify gaps, address challenges, the Commission should monitor and prevent the building up of migratory pressure, the Commission should monitor and regularly report on the migratory situatgularly report on the implementation of the EU asylum acquis. The Commission should monitor and regularly report on the respect of fundamental rights of applicants for international protection in the Union.
Amendment 270 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) An effective return policy is an essential element of a well-functioning system of Union asylum and migration management, whereby those who do not have the right to stay on Union territory should return. Given that a significant share of applications for international protection may be considered unfounded, it is necessary to reinforce the effectiveness of the return policy. By increasing the efficiency of returns and reducing the gaps between asylum and return procedures, the pressure on the asylum system would decrease, facilitating the application of the rules on determining the Member State responsible for examining those applicatimplementation 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 Unions as well as contributing to effective access to international protection for those in needylum.
Amendment 280 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
Amendment 298 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) In order to ensure a fair sharing of responsibility and a balance of effort between Member States, a solidarity mechanism based on relocation of applicants should be established which is effective and ensures that applicants have swift access to the procedures for granting international protection. Such a mechanism should provide for different types of solidarity measures and should be flexible and able to adapt to the evolving nature of the migratory challenges facing a Member Stateensure that family and other meaningful links of the applicant are taken into account.
Amendment 306 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
Amendment 311 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 a (new)
Recital 17 a (new)
(17a) An EU relocation coordinator will be responsible for improving coordination between Member States in the implementation of the solidarity mechanism. The coordinator would work closely with the Asylum Agency who would provide the technical support by establishing the key reference key for the distribution of asylum seekers, developing information material and be responsible for the transfer of applicants for, and beneficiaries of international protection in all cases provided under this Regulation.
Amendment 317 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Given the specific characteristics of disembarkations arising in the context of search and rescue operations conducted by Member States or private organisations whether under instruction from Member States or autonomously in the context of migration, this Regulation should provide for a specific process applicable to people disembarked following those operations irrespective of whether there is a situation of migratory pressureThe automatic distribution mechanism foreseen in this Regulation should be also applicable to people disembarked following search and rescue operations.
Amendment 328 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
Amendment 344 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) In order to provide a timely response to the specific situation following disembarkations from search and rescue operations, the Commission, with the assistance of Union Agencies, should facilitate there should be a swift relocation of eligible applicants for international protection who are not in the border procedure. Under the coordination of the Commission, the European Union Asylum Agency and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency should draw up the list of eligible persons to be relocated indicating the distribution of those persons among the contributing. The European Union Asylum Agency should assist by determining the Member States responsible based on the criteria set out in Chapter II and ensuring the transfer to the Member States responsible.
Amendment 352 #
2020/0279(COD)
(21) Persons disembarkedAll 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.
Amendment 354 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
Amendment 371 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
Amendment 382 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Theis solidarity mechanism should also addressbe adapted in situations of migratory pressure in particular for those Member States which due to their geographical location are exposed to or likely to be exposed to migratory pressure. For this purpose, the Commission should adopt a report identifying whether a Member State is under migratory pressure and setting out the measures that could support that Member State in addresscrisis linked to a disproportionate arrival of applicants for international protection to a Member State. For this purpose, a prima facie procedure for international protection has been set up ing the situation of migratory pressureCrisis Regulation.
Amendment 389 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
Amendment 405 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
Amendment 411 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) The solidarity mechanism should include measures to promote a fair sharing of responsibility and a balance of effort between Member States also in the area of return. Through return sponsorship, a Member State should commit to support a Member State under migratory pressure in carrying out the necessary activities to return illegally staying third-country nationals, bearing in mind that the benefitting Member State remains responsible for carrying out the return while the individuals are present on its territory. Where such activities have been unsuccessful after a period of 8 months, the sponsoring Member States should transfer these persons in line with the procedures set out in this Regulation and apply Directive 2008/115/EC; if relevant, Member States may recognise the return decision issued by the benefitting Member State in application of Council Directive 2001/4039 . Return sponsorship should form part of the common EU system of returns, including operational support provided through the European Border and Coast Guard Agency and the application of the coordination mechanism to promote effective cooperation with third countries in the area of return and readmission. _________________ 39Council Directive 2001/40/EC of 28 May 2001 on the mutual recognition of decisions on the expulsion of third country nationals, OJ L 149, 2.6.2001, p. 34ensure a fair sharing of responsibility between Member States.
Amendment 428 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Member States should notify the type of solidarity contributions that they will take through the completion of a solidarity response plan. Where Member States are themselves benefitting Member States they should not be obliged to make solidarity contributions to other Member States. At the same time, wThe European Asylum Agency should set up an automated distribution system that would ensure a fair sharing of responsibility among Member States. Where a Member State has incurred a heavy migratory burden in previous years, due to a high number of applications for international protection it should be possible for a Member State to request a reduction of its share of the solidarity contribution to Member States under migratory pressure where such contribution consists of relocation or return sponsorship. That reduction should be shared proportionately among the other Member States taking such measuress are themselves benefitting Member States they should not be obliged to be a contributing Member State.
Amendment 437 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
Amendment 452 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
Amendment 462 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) A distribution key based on the size of the population and of, 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 469 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) A Member State should be able to take, at its own initiative or at the request of another Member State, other solidarity measures on a voluntary basis to assist that Member State in addressing the migratory situation or to prevent migratory pressure. Those contributions should include measures aimed at strengthening the capacity of the Member State under pressure or at responding to migratory trends through cooperation with third countries. In addition, such solidarity measures should include relocation of third-country nationals that are in the border procedure as well as illegally staying third-country nationals. In order to incentivise voluntary solidarity, where Member States make voluntary contributions in the form of relocation or return sponsorship, those contributions should be taken into account in the implementing act provided for in respect of situations of migratory pressureprovide 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 474 #
2020/0279(COD)
(33) The Common European Asylum System (CEAS) has been built progressively as a common area of protection based on the full and inclusive application of the Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, as supplemented by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967 (‘the Geneva Convention’), thus ensuring that no person is sent back to persecution, in compliance with the principle of non- refoulement. In this respect, and without the responsibility criteria laid down in this Regulation being affected, Member States, all respecting the principle of non- refoulement, are considered as safe countries for third-country nationalsArticle 18 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union provides that the right to asylum is guaranteed with due respect for the rules of the Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, as supplemented by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967 (‘the Geneva Convention’) and in accordance with the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 480 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) 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 System40 . 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 on 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. _________________ 40As set out by the European Council at its special meeting in Tampere on 15 and 16 October 1999.
Amendment 486 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34 a (new)
Recital 34 a (new)
(34a) In order to increase applicants' understanding of the CEAS and the solidarity mechanism under this regulation, it is necessary to improve the provision of information significantly. Investing in the early provision of accessible information to applicants will greatly increase the likelihood 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. It is particularly important to ensure that minors have access to child- friendly information that is specific to their needs and situation.
Amendment 487 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34 b (new)
Recital 34 b (new)
(34b) 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 for being trafficked further into the Union. Suspicion of trafficking should be sufficient to transfer the person to a safe shelter.
Amendment 488 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34 c (new)
Recital 34 c (new)
(34c) A personal interview with the applicant should be organised in order to 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 489 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34 d (new)
Recital 34 d (new)
(34d) The person conducting the personal interview should have received sufficient training to take account of the personal and general circumstances of the applicant, 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 490 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34 e (new)
Recital 34 e (new)
(34e) 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 492 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
Amendment 505 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
Amendment 511 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) In order to limit unauthorised movements and to ensure that the Member States have the necessary tools to ensure transfers of beneficiaries of international protection who entered the territory of another Member State than the Member State responsible without fulfilling the conditions of stay in that other Member State to the Member State responsible, and to ensure effective solidarity between Member States, this Regulation should also apply to beneficiaries of international protection. Likewise, this Regulation should apply to persons resettled or admitted by a Member State in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Union Resettlement Framework Regulation] or who are granted international protection or humanitarian status under a national resettlement schemThis Regulation should also apply to beneficiaries of international protection; following their consent to be relocated to another Member state.
Amendment 521 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) At the same time, and given the importance of facilitating the full integration of beneficiaries of international protection in the Member State of residence, the prospect of obtaining long- term resident status in a shorter period of time should be provided for. Beneficiaries of international protection, as well as beneficiaries of protection under the 1954 Convention Relating to Stateless Persons, should be able to obtain long-term resident status in the Member State which granted them international protection after three years of legal and continuous residence in that Member State. As regards other conditions to obtain the status, beneficiaries of international protection should be required to fulfil the same conditions as other third- country nationals. Council Directive 2003/109/EC42 should therefore be amended accordingly. _________________ 42Council Directive 2003/109/EC of 25 November 2003 concerning the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents, OJ L 016, 23.1.2004, p. 44.
Amendment 526 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) For reasons of efficiency and legal certainlty, it is essential that the Regulation is based on the principle that responsibility is determined only once, unless the person concerned has left the territory of the Member States in compliance with a return decision or removal order.
Amendment 530 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Reception Conditions Directive] of the European Parliament and of the Council43 should apply to theall procedure for the determination of the Member State responsible as regulated under this Regulation, subject to the limitations in the application of that Directive. _________________ 43 Directive XXX/XXX/EU (full text)
Amendment 539 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) In accordance with the 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the best interests of the childfundamental principle of the best interests of the child as well as the right to family reunification should be athe primary consideration of Member States when applying this Regulation. In assessing the best interests of the child in the short, medium and long-term, Member States should, in particular, take due account of the minor’s well-being and social development, safety and security considerations and the views of the minor in accordance with his or her age and maturity, including his or her background. In addition, specific procedural guarantees for unaccompanied minors should be laid down on account of their particular vulnerability.
Amendment 544 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) In accordance with the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, respect for family lifeprivate and family life as well as the principle of non-discrimination should be athe primary consideration of Member States when applying this Regulation.
Amendment 547 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44 a (new)
Recital 44 a (new)
(44a) 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 550 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
Recital 45
Amendment 555 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45 a (new)
Recital 45 a (new)
(45a) 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 558 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) TIn 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 568 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) 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 of the applicant. Reuniting siblings is of particular importance for improving the chances of integration of applicants and hence reducing unauthorised movements. 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, but before their arrival on the territory of the Member State. This limited and targeted enlargement of the scope of the definition is expected to reduce the incentive for some unauthorised movements of asylum seekers within the EU.
Amendment 577 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) In order to ensure full respect forcompliance 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. In order to discourage unauthorised movements of unaccompanied minors, which are unless it is demonstrated that this is not in their best interests, i of the child. In the absence of a family member or a relative, the Member State responsible should be that where the unaccompanied minor’s application for international protection was first registeredis currently present, unless it is demonstrated that this would not be in the best interests of the child. Before transferring an unaccompanied minor to another Member State, the transferring Member State should make sure thatobtain 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 an unaccompanied minor should be preceded by an assessment of his or her best interests by staffa multidisciplinary team with the necessary qualifications and expertise and the participation of his or her representative and legal advisor.
Amendment 581 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) The rules on evidence should allow for a swifter family reunification than until now. It is therefore necessary to clarify that formal proof, such as original documentary evidence and DNA testing, should not be necessary in cases where the circumstantial evidence is coherent, verifiable and sufficiently detailed to establish responsibility for examining an application for international protectionto 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 592 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50 a (new)
Recital 50 a (new)
(50a) Where a person has a previous legal residence in an EU Member State, that Member State should be responsible for the examination of the application and a swift transfer should be made.
Amendment 593 #
2020/0279(COD)
(50b) Where a person is found to have meaningful links to different EU Member States, the person should be able to choose to which Member State make the request to be responsible.
Amendment 596 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51
Recital 51
Amendment 607 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 53
Recital 53
Amendment 614 #
2020/0279(COD)
(53a) 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 application 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 620 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54
Recital 54
Amendment 628 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55
Recital 55
(55) A personal interview with the applicant should be organised in order to facilitate the determination of the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection unless the applicant has absconded, has not attended the interview without justified reasons or 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, the fact that the Member State responsible for examining his or her application for international protection is based on objective criteria, of his or her rights as well as of the obligations under this Regulation and of the consequences of not comof 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 present 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 plyaing with them language.
Amendment 633 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56
Recital 56
(56) 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. 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. The scope of the effective remedy should be limited to an assessment of whether applicants' fundamental rights to respect of family life, the rights of the child, or the prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment risk to be infringed upon.
Amendment 639 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) In order to facilitate the smooth application of this Regulation, Member States should in all cases indicate the Member State responsible in Eurodac after having concluded the procedures for determining the Member State responsible, including in cases where the responsibility results from the failure to respect the time limits for sending or replying to take charge requests, carrying a transfer, as well as in cases where the Member State of first application becomes responsible or it is impossible to carry out the transfer to the Member State primarily responsible due to systemic deficiencies resulting in a risk of inhuman or degrading treatmenta risk of violation of fundamental rights and subsequently another Member State is determined as reponsible.
Amendment 642 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
Amendment 650 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 59
Recital 59
(59) The detention of applicants should be applied in accordance with the underlying principle that aA person should not be held in detention foron the sole reason that he or she is seeking international protection. Detention should be for as short a period as possible and subject to the principles of necessity and proportionality thereby only being allowed as a measure of last resort. In particular, the detention of applicants must be in accordance with Article 31 of the Geneva Convention. The procedures provided for under this Regulationbasis of this Regulation. Detention or confinement of children, whether unaccompanied or within families, is never in their best in terespect of a detained person should be applied as a matter of priority, within the shortest possible deadlines. As regards the general guarantees governing detention, as well as detention conditions, where appropriate, Member States should apply the provisions of Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Reception Conditions Directive] also to persons detained on the basis of this Regulationts and always constitutes a child’s rights violation. It should therefore be prohibited.
Amendment 662 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 61
Recital 61
(61) In accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 1560/200345 , transfers to the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection mayshall be carried out on a voluntary basis, by supervised departure or under escort. Member States should promote voluntary transfers by providing adequate information to the person concerned and should ensure that supervised or escorted transfers are undertaken in a humane manner, in full compliance with fundamental rights and respect for human dignity, as well as the best interests of the child and taking utmost account of developments in the relevant case law, in particular as regards transfers on humanitarian grounds. _________________ 45Commission Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003 of 2 September 2003 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national, OJ L 222, 5.9.2003, p. 3.
Amendment 667 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 62
Recital 62
(62) In order to ensure a clear and efficient relocation procedure, specific rules for a benefitting and a contributing Member State should be set out. The rules and safeguards relating to transfers set out in this Regulation should apply to transfers for the purpose of relocation except where they are not relevant for such a procedure.
Amendment 675 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 63
Recital 63
(63) To support Member States who undertake relocation as a solidarity measure, financial support from the Union budget should be provided. In order to incentivise Member States to give priority to the relocation of unaccompanied minors a higher incentive contribution should be provided.
Amendment 679 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 64
Recital 64
(64) The application of this Regulation can be facilitated, and its effectiveness increased, by bilateral arrangements between Member States for improving communication between competent departments, reducing time limits for procedures or and simplifying the processing of take charge requests or take back notifications, or establishing procedures for the performance of transfers.
Amendment 689 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 68
Recital 68
Amendment 695 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 70
Recital 70
(70) Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council47 applies to the processing of personal data by the Member States under this Regulation. Member States should implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure and be able to demonstrate that processing is performed in accordance with that Regulation and the provisions specifying its requirements in this Regulation. In particular those measures should ensure the security of personal data processed under this Regulation and in particular to prevent unlawful or unauthorised access or disclosure, alteration or loss of personal data processed. In particular, data subjects should be notified without undue delay when a security incident is likely to result in a high risk to their rights and freedoms. The competent supervisory authority or authorities of each Member State should monitor the lawfulness of the processing of personal data by the authorities concerned, including of the transmission to the authorities competent for carrying out security checks. _________________ 47Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (Text with EEA relevance), OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1.
Amendment 698 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 70 a (new)
Recital 70 a (new)
(70a) Member States as well as the Union agencies should take all proportionate and necessary measures to ensure that the data is stored in a secure way.
Amendment 703 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 72
Recital 72
(72) The examination procedure should be used for the adoption of a standard form for the exchange of relevant information on unaccompanied minors; of uniform conditions for the consultation and exchange of information on minors and dependent persons; of uniform conditions on the preparation and submission of take charge requests and take back notifications; of two lists of relevant elements of proof and circumstantial evidence, and the periodical revision thereof; of a laissez- passer for take charge requests; of uniform conditions for the consultation and exchange of information regarding transfers; of a standard form for the exchange of data before a transfer; of a common health certificate; of uniform conditions and practical arrangements for the exchange of information on a person’s health data before a transfer, and of secure electronic transmission channels for the transmission of requests.
Amendment 708 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 73
Recital 73
Amendment 717 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 74
Recital 74
(74) In order to provide for supplementary rules, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the TFEU should be delegated to the Commission in respect of the identification of family members or relatives of an unaccompanied minor; the criteria for establishing the existence of proven family links; the criteria for assessing the capacity of a relative to take care of an unaccompanied minor, including where family members, siblings or relatives of the unaccompanied minor stay in more than one Member State; the elements for assessing a dependency link; the criteria for assessing the capacity of a person to take care of a dependent person and the elements to be taken into account in order to assess the inability to travel for a significant period of time. In exercising its powers to adopt delegated acts, the Commission shall not exceed the scope of the best interests of the child as provided for in this Regulation. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level with children's rights NGOs and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts.
Amendment 725 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 78
Recital 78
(78) Since the objective of this Regulation, namely the establishment of criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodgregistered in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person, and the establishment of a solidarity mechanism to support Member States in addressing a situation of migratory pressure, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale and effects of this Regulation, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.
Amendment 737 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 746 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) establishes a mechanism for solidarity and fair-sharing of responsibility;
Amendment 751 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) ‘third-country national’ means any person who is not a citizen of the Union within the meaning of Article 20(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and who is not a person enjoying the right to free movement under Union law as defined in Article 2, point (5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council53 ; _________________ 53Regulation (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 77, 23.3.2016, p. 1.
Amendment 754 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) ‘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 1954. (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
Amendment 757 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) ‘application for international protection’ or ‘application’ means a request for protection made to a Member State by a third-country national or a stateless person, who can be understood as seeking refugee status or subsidiary protection status; pursuant to Article 1 (1) of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, who can be understood as seeking refugee status or subsidiary protection status; (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
Amendment 764 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) ‘applicant’ means a third-country national or a stateless person pursuant to Article 1 (1) of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, who has made an application for international protection in respect of which a final decision has not been taken, or has been taken and is either subject to or can still be subject to a remedy in the Member State concerned, irrespective of whether the applicant has a right to remain or is allowed to rema (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedure Regulation], including a person who has been granted immediate protection pursuant to Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Regulation addressing situations of crisis and force majeure in the field of asylum and migration];t will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
Amendment 772 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) ‘examination of an application for international protection’ means examination of the admissibility or the merits of an application for international protection in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedure Regulation] and Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Qualification Regulation], excluding procedures for determining the Member State responsible in accordance with this Regulation;
Amendment 774 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) ‘beneficiary of international protection’ means a third-country national or a stateless person pursuant to Article 1 (1) of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, who has been granted international protection as defined in Article 2(2) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Qualification Regulation]; (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
Amendment 778 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – introductory part
(g) ‘family members’ means, insofar as the family already existed before the applicant or the family member arrived on the territory of the Member States, the following members of the applicant’s family who are present on the territory of the Member States:
Amendment 785 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point i
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point i
(i) the spouse of the applicant or his or her unmarried partner in a stable relationship, where the law or practice of the Member State concerned treats unmarried couples in a way comparable to married couples under its law relating to third-country nationals,
Amendment 790 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point ii
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point ii
(ii) the minor children of couples referred to in the first indent or of the applicant, on condition that they are unmarried and regardless of whether they were born in or out of wedlock or adopted as defined or recognised under national law, as well as other children for whom they hold parental responsibility
Amendment 796 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point iii
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point iii
(iii) where the applicant is a minor and unmarried, the father, mother or another adult responsible for the applicant, whether by law or by the practice of the Member State where the adult is present,
Amendment 802 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point iv
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point iv
(iv) where the beneficiary of international protection is a minor and unmarried, the father, mother or another adult responsible for him or herthe beneficiary of international protection whether by law or by the practice of the Member State where the beneficiary is present,
Amendment 812 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point v a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point v a (new)
(va) the member of households that existed in the country of origin
Amendment 814 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) ‘relative’ means the applicant’s adult aunt or uncle or grandparent or cousin or nephew or niece who is present in the territory of a Member State, regardless of whether the applicant was born in or out of wedlock or adopted as defined under national law;
Amendment 819 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) ‘minor’ means a third-country national or a stateless person pursuant to Article 1 (1) of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, below the age of 18 years;
Amendment 823 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) ‘representative’ means a person or an organisation appointed by the competent bodies in order to assist and represent an unaccompanied minor in procedures provided for in this Regulation with a view to ensuring t, including a public authority designated by the competent authorities or bodies, with the necessary skills and expertise, including regarding the treatment and specific needs of minors, to represent, assist and act on behalf of an unaccompanied minor, as applicable, in order to safeguard his or her best interests of the child and exercising legal capacand general well-being and so that the unaccompanied minor can benefity forom the minor where necessary;rights under this Regulation.
Amendment 828 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
(ka) 'person of trust' means any person nominated by the applicant to accompany him or her to the personal interview.
Amendment 830 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point l
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point l
(l) ‘residence document’ means any authorisation issued by the authorities of a Member State authorising a third-country national or a stateless person pursuant to Article 1 (1) of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, to stay on its territory, including the documents substantiating the authorisation to remain on the territory under temporary protection arrangements or until the circumstances preventing a removal order from being carried out no longer apply, with the exception of visas and residence authorisations issued during the period required to determine the Member State responsible as established in this Regulation or during the examination of an application for international protection or an application for a residence permit;
Amendment 835 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point n
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point n
(n) ‘diploma or qualification’ means a diploma or qualification which is obtained after at least a three months’ period of study in a recognised, state or regional programme of education or vocational training at least equivalent to level 2 of the International Standard Classification of Education, operated by an education establishment in accordance with national law or administrative practice of the Member States;
Amendment 837 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o
(o) ‘education establishment’ means any type of public or private education or vocational training establishment established in a Member State and recognised by that Member State or considered as such in accordance with national law or whose courses of study or training are recognised in accordance with national law or administrative practice, regardless of what such an establishment may be called, or any institution which, in accordance with national law or practice, offers vocational education or training;
Amendment 840 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point p
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point p
(p) ‘absconding’ means the intentional action by which an applicant does not remain available to the competent administrative or judicial authorities, such as by leaving the territory of the Member State without authorisation from the competent authorities for reasons which are not beyond the applicant’s control;
Amendment 844 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q
(q) ‘risk of absconding’ means the proven existence of specific reasons and circumstances in an individual case, following an individual assessment which areis based on objectivean exhaustive list of objective and specific criteria defined by national law to believe that an applicant who is subject to a transfer procedure may abscondand in line with standards developed by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights to believe that an applicant who is subject to a transfer procedure may abscond, not including criteria of a general nature such as merely being an applicant within the meaning of [APR Regulation], or one's nationality;
Amendment 852 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point r
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point r
(r) ‘benefitting Member State’ means the Member State benefitting from the solidarity measures in situations of migratory pressure or for disembarkations following search and rescue operations as set out in Chapters I-III of Part IV of this Regulation;relocation including after disembarkations following search and rescue operations
Amendment 859 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point s
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point s
(s) ‘contributing Member State’ means a Member State that contributes, on a voluntary basis through the discretionary clause or additional pledges, or is obliged to contribute to the solidarity measures torelocation from a benefitting Member State set out in Chapters I-III of Part IV of this Regulation;
Amendment 862 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point t
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point t
Amendment 866 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point u
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point u
(u) ‘relocation’ means the transfer of a third-country national or a stateless person pursuant to Article 1 (1) of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, from the territory of a benefitting Member State to the territory of a contributing Member State;
Amendment 878 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point w
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point w
Amendment 895 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point aa
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point aa
(aa) ‘illegalrregularly staying third-country national’ means a third-country national who does not fulfil or no longer fulfils the conditions of entry as set out in Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 or other conditions for entry, stay or residence in a Member State.
Amendment 898 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part II – title
Part II – title
II COMMON FRAMEWORK FOR ASYLUM AND MIGRATION MANAGEMENTASYLUM POLICIES
Amendment 904 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – title
Article 3 – title
Comprehensive approach to asylum and migration managementmon actions in the field of asylum
Amendment 906 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
The Union and the Member States shall take common actions in the field of asylum, and migration management on the basis of a comprehensive approach. That comprehensive approach shall address the entirety of the migratory routes that affect asylum and migration management and shall consist ofddressing in particular the following components:
Amendment 914 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 930 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 932 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 942 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e
Amendment 951 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) full respect of the obligations laid down in international and European law concerning persons rescued at sea, including through the funding of a proactive transnational civil Search and Rescue operation in the Central Mediterranean;
Amendment 956 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) access to procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection on Union territory and recognition of third- country nationals or stateless persons pursuant to Article 1(1) of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Person as refugees or beneficiaries of subsidiary protection;
Amendment 961 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ga) ensure through proactive measures, that any third-country national or stateless person on their territory, including at the external border, in the territorial sea or in their transit zones or at border crossing points, including transit zones at external borders, can reasonably be expected to apply for international protection in a Member State and are given the effective possibility to be registered in accordance with the provisions of Regulation (EU) XXXX/XX [Asylum procedures Regulation]
Amendment 966 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) determination of the Member State responsible for the examination of an application for international protection, based on shared responsibility and rules andfamily and other meaningful links, and the automated distribution mechanisms for solidarity;
Amendment 973 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point i
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) access for applicants to adequate reception conditions in accordance with the Reception Conditions Directive;
Amendment 977 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point j
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point j
Amendment 986 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point l
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point l
Amendment 993 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point m
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point m
(m) full deployment and use of the operational tools set up at Union level, notably the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, the Asylum Agency, EU- LISA and Europol, as well as large-scale Union Information Technology systems;of the Asylum Agency
Amendment 996 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point n
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point n
Amendment 1000 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – title
Article 4 – title
Amendment 1001 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Amendment 1010 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. The Union and Member States acting within their respective competencies shall be responsible for the implementation of the asylum and migration management policies. policies that comply fully with EU and international law, including with regard to fundamental rights.
Amendment 1016 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. Member States, with the support of Unionthe Asylum Agenciesy, shall ensure that they have the capacity to effectively implement asylum and migration management policies, taking into account the comprehensive approach referred to in Article 3policies, including the necessary human and financial resources and infrastructure.
Amendment 1026 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. In implementing their obligations, the Member States shall observe the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility and shall take into account the shared interest in the effective functioning of the Union’s asylum and migration management policies. Member States shall:
Amendment 1040 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) establish and maintain national asylum and migration management systems that provide access to international protection procedures, grant such protection to those who are in need and ensure the return of those who are illegally stayingand other national protection procedures offering a right to stay for compassionate, humanitarian or other reasons;
Amendment 1042 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 1068 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) provide support to other Member States in the form of solidarity contriburelocations on the basis of needscriteria set out in Chapters I-III of Part IV II;
Amendment 1070 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e
Amendment 1078 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Financial and operational support by the Union for the implementation of the obligations shall be provided in accordance with the Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Fund] and Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Integrated Border Management Fund].
Amendment 1083 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – title
Article 6 – title
Amendment 1086 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall adopt a European Asylum and Migration Management Strategy setting out the strategic approach to managing asylum and migration at Union level andould present every year a report on the implementation of EU asylum and migration management policies in accordance with the principles set out in this Partcquis. The Commission shall transmit the Strategyreport to the European Parliament and the Council.
Amendment 1093 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The European Asylum and Migration Management Strategyreport shall take into account the following:
Amendment 1099 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the national strategielegislations of the Member States referred to paragraph 3 of this Article;
Amendment 1100 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 1104 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) relevant reports and analyses from the Asylum Agency and the European Union aAgenciey for Fundamental Rights;
Amendment 1110 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) information gathered in the course of evaluations undertaken in the Schengen evaluation and monitoring mechanism in accordance with Article 4 of Regulation (EU) No 1053/201355 . _________________ 55Council Regulation (EU) No 1053/2013 of 7 October 2013 establishing an evaluation and monitoring mechanism to verify the application of the Schengen acquis and repealing the Decision of the Executive Committee of 16 September 1998 setting up a Standing Committee on the evaluation and implementation of Schengen, OJ L 295, 6.11.2013, p. 27relevant reports and analyses produced by UNHCR, the Council of Europe and other international organisations as well as reports from Civil Society Organisations.
Amendment 1112 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
(da) the evolving jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights
Amendment 1116 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1122 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Amendment 1132 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Article 6 – paragraph 5
5. The Member States shall establish the national strategies by [one year after the entry into force of this Regulation] at the latest. The first European Asylum and Migration ManagementBased on the report, the European Commission should initiate infringement procedures to ensure compliance. The Member Strategys shall be adopted by [18 months after the entry into force of this Regulation] at the latest and the first Migration Management Report shall be issuedpresent a timeline by which they will ensure compliance with the EU acquis by [one year after the entry into force of this Regulation]publication of the report at the latest.
Amendment 1137 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 6
Article 6 – paragraph 6
6. The Commission shall monitor and provide information on the migratoryasylum situation through regular situational reports based on good quality data and information provided by Member States, the External Action Service, the Asylum Agency, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, Europol and the Fundamental Rights Agency and notably the information gathered within the framework of the Migration Preparedness and Crisis Blueprint and its NetworkFundamental Rights Agency, international organisations such as UNHCR and the Council of Europe, Civil Society Organisations and independent international and national human rights mechanism.
Amendment 1139 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7
Article 7
Amendment 1173 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 a (new)
Article 7 a (new)
Article 7a 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 1175 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall examine any application for international protection by a third-country national or a stateless person pursuant to Article 1 (1) of the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, who applies on the territory of any one of them, including at the border or in the transit zones. The application for international protection shall be examined by a single Member State, which shall be the one which the criteria set out in Chapter II of Part III indicate is responsible.
Amendment 1186 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Where no Member State responsible can be designated on the basis of the criteria listed in this Regulation, the first Member State in which the application for international protection was registered shall be responsible for examining itset out in Chapter II, the Member State responsible for examining the application for international protection shall be determined in accordance with the procedure set out in Article 31a.
Amendment 1194 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Where it is impossible for a Member State to transfer an applicant or a beneficiary of international protection to the Member State primarily designated as responsible because there are substantial grounds for believing that there are systemic flaws in the asylum procedure and in the reception conditions for applicants in that Member State, resulting in a risk of inhuman or degrading treatment within the meaning of Article 4 of the Charter of F applicant or beneficiary of international protection would be subjected to a risk of a serious violation of his or her fundamental Rrights ofin the European Unionat Member State, the determining Member State shall continue to examine the criteria set out in Chapter II of Part III in order to establish whether another Member State can be designated as responsible.
Amendment 1199 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1203 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Amendment 1209 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1212 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 1217 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 5
Article 8 – paragraph 5
Amendment 1224 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Where a third-country national or stateless person pursuant to Article 1 (1) of the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, intends to make an application for international protection, the application shall be made and registered in the Member State of first entry, that shall determine the Member State responsible according to the criteria set out in this Regulation.
Amendment 1232 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. By derogation from paragraph 1, where a third-country national or stateless person is in possession of a valid residence permit or a valid visa, the application shall be made and registered in the Member State that issued the residence permit or visa unless there is a risk of violation of fundamental rights for the applicant.
Amendment 1238 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Where a third-country national or stateless person, pursuant to Article 1 (1) of the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless persons, who intends to make an application for international protection is in possession of a residence permit or visa which has expired, the application shall be made and registered in the Member State where he or she is present.
Amendment 1245 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. The applicant shall fully cooperate with the competent authorities of the Member States in matters covered by this Regulation, in particular by submitting as soon as possible and at the latest during the interview referred to in Article 12, all the elements andbefore the competent authority takes a decision on the responsible Member State in accordance with this Regulation, all information available to him or her relevant for determining the Member State responsible. Where the applicant is not in a position at the time of the interview to submitIt shall be made possible that additional evidence tois substantiamitted after the elements and information provided, the competent authority may set a time limit within the period referred to in Article 29(1) for submitting such evidencetake charge request is sent. The circumstances of the individual case shall be taken into account.
Amendment 1250 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. The applicant shall be required to be present in:
Amendment 1252 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 5
Article 9 – paragraph 5
5. Where a transfer decision is final and notified to the applicant in accordance with Article 32(2) and Article 57(8), the applicant shall comply with that decision. the applicant shall have the right to challenge the transfer decision and benefit from free legal assistance in accordance with the right to an effective remedy enshrined in Article 47 of the Charter.
Amendment 1257 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. TheAn applicant shall not be entitled to the reception conditions set out in Articles 15 to 17 of Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Reception Conditions Directive] pursuant to Article 17a of that Directive sanctioned for entering any Member State other than the one in which he or she is required to be present pursuant to Article 9(4) of this Regulation from the moment he or she has been notified of a decision to transfer him or her to the Member State responsible, provided that the applicant has been informed of that consequence pursuant to Article 8(2), point (b) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Screening Regulation]. This shall be without prejudice to the need to ensure a standard of living in accordance with Union law, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and international obligationsMember State in which he or she is obliged to be present in accordance with Article 31 of the Geneva Convention.
Amendment 1268 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. Elements and information relevant for determining the Member State responsible submitted after expiry of the time limit referred to in Article 9(3) shall not be taken into account by the competent authorities.
Amendment 1280 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. As soon as possible and at the latest when an application for international protection is registered in a Member State, its competent authorities shall inform the applicant of the application of this Regulation and of the obligations set out in Article 9 as well as the consequences of non-compliance set out in Article 10, and in particular:
Amendment 1283 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) that the right to apply for international protection does not encompass a choice by the applicant in relation to either thewhich Member Sstate shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection or the Member State of relocation;, except in the situation provided under the terms set out in the procedure set out in Article 31a.
Amendment 1289 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) of the objectives of this Regulation and the consequences of making another application in a different Member State as well as the consequences of leaving the Member State where he or she is required to be present pdursuant to Article 9(4), in particular that the applicant shall only be entitled toing the phases in which the Member state responsible under theis recepgulation conditions as set out in Article 10(1)is being determined;
Amendment 1295 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) of the criteria and the procedures for determining the Member State responsible, the hierarchy of such criteria in the different steps of the procedure and their duration; including the specific criteria applied and Member States requested or notified in the individual case
Amendment 1296 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) of the aimpurpose of the personal interview pursuant to Article 12 and of the obligprovisions relationg to submit and substantiate orally or through the provision of documents informationfamily reunification and, in that regard, of the applicable definition of family members and relatives as well as of the need for the applicant to disclose as soon as possible in the procedure any relevant information that could help to establish the presencewhereabouts of family members, or relatives or any other family relationspresent in other Member States, including the means by which the applicant can submit such information, as well as any assistance that the Member State can offer with regard to the tracing of family members or relatives;
Amendment 1304 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) of the obligationneed for the applicant to disclose, as soon as possible in the procedure any relevant information that could help to establish any prior residence permits, visas or educational diplomas;
Amendment 1305 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) of the possibility under Article 25 to request the discretionary clause be applied by any Member State from the Member State where they are present, as well as of the specific arrangements relating to the procedure;
Amendment 1308 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
(eb) of the possibility, if no family or other meaningful links can be found during the procedure of the determination of the Member State responsible, to make a written, duly motivated request to be relocated to any Member States, in particular on the basis on 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 be able on a voluntary basis to accept responsibility;
Amendment 1310 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point e c (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point e c (new)
(ec) of the possibility for the applicant under Article 31a to choose between the five Member States with the lowest share of applicants pursuant to the distribution key as referred to in Article 54 and the possibility to register as a group to be relocated together;
Amendment 1313 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) of the possibility tof and arrangements for challenge a ing a transfer decision within the and of the existence of the right to have an effectimve limit set remedy before a court in Article 33(2) and of the fact that the scope of that challenge is limited as laid down in Article 33(1);or tribunal in accordance with Article 33, including in a situation where no transfer decision is issued.
Amendment 1318 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) of the right to be granted, on request, legal assistance free of charge where the person concerned cannot afford the costs involved;and representation free of charge at all stages of the procedure. This right is without prejudice to the applicant's right to choose his or her own legal representative at his or her own cost.
Amendment 1322 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ga) The legal assistance and representation shall, at least, include: (a) the provision of information on the procedure in the light of the applicant's individual circumstances; (b) assistance in the preparation of the personal interview and supporting documents and evidence to be provided as part of the interview, including participation in the personal interview; (c) an explanation of the reasons for and consequences of a transfer decision as well as information as to how to challenge that decision or how to access remedies in situations where no transfer decision is taken. (d) preparation of the required procedural documents and representation before a court or tribunal In complying with this paragraph, Member States shall ensure that legal assistance and representation is not arbitrarily restricted and that the applicant’s effective access to justice is not hindered.
Amendment 1325 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point j a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point j a (new)
(ja) any other information in accordance with applicable Union or Member State law on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data
Amendment 1337 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The information referred to in paragraph 1 shall be provided in writing in a language that the applicant understands or is reasonably supposed to understand. Member States shall use the common information material drawn up in clear and plain language pursuant to paragraph 3 for that purpose. in a concise, transparent, intelligible and easily accessible form, using clear and plain language. With regard to minors and, in particular, to unaccompanied minors, the information shall be provided in a child-friendly manner by appropriately trained staff. Member States shall use the common information material drawn up in clear and plain language pursuant to paragraph 3 for that purpose. The information shall be provided as soon as the application is made. The information shall be provided both in written and oral form, in addition where appropriate with the support of multimedia equipment. It may be given either in individual or group sessions and applicants shall have the possibility to ask questions about the procedural steps they are expected to follow with regard to the process of determining a responsible Member State in accordance with this Regulation. In the case of minors, information shall be provided in a child friendly manner by appropriately trained staff and with the involvement of the guardian.
Amendment 1346 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Where necessary for the applicant’s proper understanding, the information shall also be supplied orally, where appropriate in connection with the personal interview as referred to in Article 12. This information shall be adapted to the individual circumstances of the applicant.
Amendment 1347 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
The competent authorities of the Member States shall keep the applicants informed on the progress of the procedures carried out under this Regulation with regard to their application. Such information shall be provided in writing at regular intervals. In the case of minors, the competent authorities shall inform both the minor and the representative with the same modalities. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt implementing acts to establish the modalities for the provision of such information.
Amendment 1348 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. In order to increase applicants' understanding of the CEAS and the solidarity mechanism under this regulation, the Asylum Agency shall develop suitable information material, in close cooperation with national authorities, making full use of modern technologies. In order to assist applicants, the agency shall also develop audio-visual information material that can be used as a complement to written information material. The information material shall be translated and made available in all the major languages spoken by applicants for international protection arriving in the Union. The information material shall be adjusted to the different categories of applicants and their needs, in particular to ensure that minors have access to child-friendly information that is specific to their needs and situation.
Amendment 1349 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. The Asylum Agency shall, in close cooperation with the responsible national agencies, draw up common information material, as well as a specific leaflet for unaccompanied minors,specific target groups such as unaccompanied minors, adult applicants and accompanied minors containing at least the information referred to in paragraph 1. That common information material shall also include information regarding the application of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation] and, in particular, the purpose for which the data of an applicant may be processed within Eurodac. The common information material shall be drawn up in such a manner as to enable Member States to complete it with additional Member State- specific information. Insofar as this information material includes information in accordance with data protection legislation, the Asylum Agency shall closely cooperate with the EDPS, the responsible national authorities and FRA when drawing up this material.
Amendment 1360 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. In order to facilitate the process of determining the Member State responsible, the determining Member State shall conduct a personal interview with the applicant. The interview shall also allow the proper understanding of the information supplied to the applicant in accordance with Article 11. The determining Member State shall proactively ask questions on all aspects of the claim that would allow for the determination of the Member State responsible, as well as aspects that would impede the transfer of an applicant due to risk of fundamental rights violations.
Amendment 1363 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1374 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3
Article 12 – paragraph 3
3. The personal interview shall take place in a timely manner and, in any event, before any take charge request is madepursuant to Article 29 or take back request pursuant to Article 2931 is made.
Amendment 1384 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4
Article 12 – paragraph 4
4. The personal interview shall be conducted in a language that the applicant understands or is reasonably supposed to understand and in which he or she is able to communicate. Interviews of unaccompanied minors shall be conducted in a child-friendly manner, by staff who are appropriately trained and qualified under national law, in the presence of the representative and, where applicable, the minor’s legal advisor or counsellor. Where necessary, Member States shall have recourse to an qualified interpreter, and where appropriate a cultural mediator, who is able to ensure appropriate communication between the applicant and the person conducting the personal interview. The applicant may request to be interviewed and assisted by staff of the same sex.
Amendment 1385 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. In addition to the presence of the legal advisor or counsellor and, where applicable, a representative during the interview, the applicant shall have the right to nominate one person of his or her trust to accompany him or her to the interview.
Amendment 1387 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 5
Article 12 – paragraph 5
5. The personal interview shall take place under conditions which ensure appropriate confidentiality. It shall be conducted by a qualified person under national law. Applicants who are identified as being in need of special procedural guarantees pursuant to Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedure Regulation], shall be provided with adequate support including sufficient time in order to create the conditions necessary for effectively presenting all elements allowing for the determination of the Member State responsible.
Amendment 1389 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. The person conducting the personal interview shall have received sufficient training to take account of the personal and general circumstances of the applicant, including their cultural origin, age, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and vulnerability. Staff interviewing applicants shall 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 1391 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 6
Article 12 – paragraph 6
Amendment 1398 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. The best interests of the child shall be athe primary consideration for Member States with respect to all procedures provided for in this Regulation.
Amendment 1403 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Amendment 1417 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. The representative of an unaccompanied minor shall be involved in the process of establishing the Member State responsible under this Regulation to the greatest extent possible. The representative shall assist the unaccompanied minor to provide information relevant to the assessment of his or her best interests in accordance with paragraph 4, including the exercise of the right to be heard, and shall support his or her engagement with other actors, such as family tracing organisations, where appropriate for that purpose. and with due regard to confidentiality obligations to the child. The representative shall ensure the minor has access to information, legal advice and representation concerning the procedures under this Regulation and shall keep the minor informed on the progress in the procedures under this Regulation concerning him or her. The representative shall have access to the content of the relevant documents in the minor's file including the specific information material for unaccompanied minors. Representatives shall receive regular training and support to undertake their tasks.
Amendment 1435 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) the minor’s well-being and social development, in the short, medium and long term, taking into particular consideration the minor’s backgroundhis or her ethnic, religious, cultural and linguistic background and the need for stability and continuity in the minor's care and custodial arrangements and access to health and education services;
Amendment 1452 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point c a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point c a (new)
(ca) situations of vulnerability, including trauma, specific health needs and disability;
Amendment 1453 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point c b (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point c b (new)
(cb) the guarantee of a handover to a designated representative in the receiving Member State;
Amendment 1454 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point c c (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point c c (new)
(cc) the need for decisions concerning minors to be treated with priority;
Amendment 1456 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point d
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point d
(d) the views of the minor, in accordance with his or her age and maturity and in accordance with his or her right to be heard;
Amendment 1469 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 5
Article 13 – paragraph 5
Amendment 1478 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
Article 13 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. For the purpose of applying Article 15, the Member State where the unaccompanied minor’s application for international protection was registered shall, as soon as possible, take appropriate action to identify the family members or relatives of the unaccompanied minor on the territory of Member States, whilst protecting the best interests of the child.
Amendment 1483 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
The staff of the competent authorities referred to in Article 41 who deal with requests concerning unaccompanied minors shall have received, and shall continue to receive, appropriate training concerning the specific needs of minors. including training on rights of the child and child psychology and development. Such training shall also include modules on risk assessment to target care and protection depending on the individual needs of the minor, with a specific focus on early identification of victims of trafficking in human beings and of abuse, as well as training on good practices to prevent disappearance.
Amendment 1489 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 7
Article 13 – paragraph 7
7. With a view to facilitating the appropriate action to identify the family members or relatives of the unaccompanied minor living in the territory of another Member State pursuant to paragraph 6, the Commission shall adopt implementing acts includdelegated acts (a) the identification of family members or relatives; (b) the criteria for establishing the existence of proven family links. The Commission shall adopt an implementing act establishing a standard form for the exchange of relevant information between Member States. Thoseis implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2).
Amendment 1495 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. The criteria for determining the Member State responsible shall be applied in the order in which they are set out in this Chapter II.
Amendment 1512 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. Where the applicant has a relative who is legally present in another Member State and where it is established, based on an individual examination, that the relative can take care of him or her, that Member State shall unite the minor with his or her relative and shall be the Member State responsible, unlprovided that it is in the best interests it is demonstrated that it is not inof the child. Any decision on the Member State responsible should be preceded by a multidisciplinary assessment of the best interests of the minor.
Amendment 1514 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5
Article 15 – paragraph 5
5. In the absence of a family member or a relative as referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3, the Member State responsible shall be that where the unaccompanied minor’s application for international protection was first registered, unless it is demonstrated that this is notchild is present provided that it is in the best interests of the minorchild.
Amendment 1526 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
In exercising its powers to adopt delegated acts, the Commission shall not exceed the scope of the best interests of the child as provided for under Article 13(4) and shall consult relevant experts including children's rights NGOs.
Amendment 1535 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – title
Article 16 – title
Family members who are beneficiaries of international protectionlegally reside in a Member State
Amendment 1537 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Where the applicant has a family member who has been allowed to reside as a beneficiary of international protection, regardless of whether the family was previously formed in the country of origin, who is legally residing in a Member State, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection, provided that the persons concerned expressed their desire in writing.
Amendment 1544 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The processing together of the applications of a family is without prejudice to the right of an applicant to make an application individually.
Amendment 1547 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Where the applicant is in possession of more than one valid or expired residence document or visa issued by different Member States, the responsibility for examining the application for international protection shall be assumed by the Member States in the following order:applicant shall be able to choose the Member State where she or he want to be transferred;
Amendment 1548 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – point a
Amendment 1549 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – point b
Amendment 1550 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – point c
Amendment 1551 #
2020/0279(COD)
Amendment 1559 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Where the applicant is in possession of a diploma or qualification issued by an education establishment established in a Member State and the application for international protection was registered after the applicant left the territory of the Member States following the completion of his or her studies, the Member State in which that education establishment is established shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection, the Member State in which that education establishment is established shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection. In this context, an education institution means any type of education institution recognised or considered as such in accordance with national law which, in accordance with national law or practice, offers recognised education degrees or other recognised qualifications, regardless of the name of such establishment, or any institution which, in accordance with national law or practice, offers vocational education or training.
Amendment 1562 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
2. Where the applicant is in possession of more than one diploma or qualification issued by education establishments in different Member States, the responsibility for examining the application for international protection shall be assumed by the Member State which issued the diploma or qualification following the longest period of study or, where the periods of study are identical, by the Member State in which the most recent diploma or qualification was obtainedapplicant shall be able to choose the Member State where she or he want to be transferred and be responsible for examining the application for international protection.
Amendment 1568 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21
Article 21
Amendment 1585 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 1
If a third-country national or a stateless person pursuant to Article 1(1) of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, enters into the territory of the Member States through a Member State in which the need for him or her to have a visa is waived, that Member State shall be responsible for examining his or her application for international protection. That responsibility shall cease if the application is registered more than threone years after the date on which the person entered the territory.
Amendment 1590 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Where the application for international protection is made in the international transit area of an airport of a Member State by a third-country national or a stateless person, pursuant to Article 1(1) of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application.
Amendment 1592 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 a (new)
Article 23 a (new)
Article 23 a Where it is not possible to determine a Member State responsible in accordance with the criteria set in this Chapter, the Member State responsible shall be determined according to the procedure set out in Article 31a of this Regulation.
Amendment 1596 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Where, on account of pregnancy, having a new-born child, serious illness, severe disability, severe trauma or old age, an applicant is dependent on the assistance of his or her childspouse, child, sibling or parent legally resident in one of the Member States, or his or her childspouse, child, sibling or parent legally resident in one of the Member States is dependent on the assistance of the applicant, Member States shall normally keep or bring together the applicant with that childspouse, child, sibling or parent, provided that family ties existed before the applicant arrived on the territory of the Member States, that the childthe spouse, child, sibling or parent or the applicant is able to take care of the dependent person and that the persons concerned expressed their desire in writing.
Amendment 1602 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Where there are indications that a childspouse, child, sibling or parent is legally resident on the territory of the Member State where the dependent person is present, that Member State shall verify whether the childspouse, child, sibling or parent can take care of the dependent person, before making a take charge request pursuant to Article 29.
Amendment 1605 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2
Article 24 – paragraph 2
2. Where the childspouse, child, sibling or parent referred to in paragraph 1 is legally resident in a Member State other than the one where the applicant is present, the Member State responsible shall be the one where the childspouse, child, sibling or parent is legally resident unless the applicant’s health prevents him or her from travelling to that Member State for a significant period of time. In such a case, the Member State responsible shall be the one where the applicant is present. Such Member State shall not be subject to the obligation to bring the child, sibling or parent of the applicant to its territory.
Amendment 1611 #
2020/0279(COD)
3a. In exercising its powers to adopt delegated acts, the Commission shall consult relevant experts including child rights, medical and socio-medical experts including children's rights NGOs.
Amendment 1614 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. By way of derogation from Article 8(1), each Member State may decide to examine an application for international protection by a third-country national or a stateless person. pursuant to Article 1(1) of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, registered with it, even if such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in this RegulationChapter II.
Amendment 1616 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. An applicant may request any Member State to apply this paragraph. Such a request shall be made in writing and shall be duly motivated
Amendment 1617 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Member State in which an application for international protection is registeredmade and which is carrying out the process of determining the Member State responsible, or the Member State responsible, may, at any time before a first decision regarding the substance is taken, request another Member State to take charge of an applicant in order to bring together any family relations, in particular on humanitarian grounds based in particular on family or, cultural or social considerations, language skills or other meaningful links which would facilitate his or her integration even where that other Member State is not responsible under the criteria laid down in Articles 15 to 18 and 24Chapter II. The persons concerned shallmust express their consent in writing.
Amendment 1624 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. An applicant may request a Member State in which the application for international protection was registered to apply paragraph 2. Such a request shall be made in writing, shall be duly motivated and shall be addressed to the competent authorities of the determining Member State with which that application has been registered. The competent authorities of the determining Member State shall ensure that a request of this paragraph is forwarded to the competent authorities responsible in the Member State requested by the applicant. The requested Member State shall indicate, within two weeks of receipt of the request, whether it intends to assume responsibility for the application for international protection. The requested Member State may extend the deadline by two additional weeks if this is notified to the Member State where the application for international protection was lodged in writing. If a reply has not been received within that deadline the request shall be considered to have been accepted.
Amendment 1625 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Where the requested Member State accepts the request in accordance with paragraph 2a, it shall become the Member State responsible. The Member State where the application for international protection was lodged shall ensure that the applicant is transferred to the Member State responsible.
Amendment 1626 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, draw up a common form to be used for the purpose of the procedure referred to in paragraph 2a
Amendment 1628 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 a (new)
Article 25 a (new)
Amendment 1631 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 b (new)
Article 25 b (new)
Article 25 b Light procedure for meaningful links 1. The determining Member State shall swiftly determine a Member State of allocation where there is, prima facie, sufficient indicators showing that an applicant has meaningful links in accordance with Article 19 or 20 with a particular Member State other than the determining Member State. 2. In establishing whether there is sufficient indicators showing that the applicant has meaningful links to a particular Member State in accordance with Article 19 or 20, the determining Member State shall base its determination on the evidence and other information provided by the applicant and shall consult relevant Union databases. The determining Member State shall also ensure that the applicant understands that he or she will not be allowed to stay in the Member State of allocation unless the evidence and information provided can be verified by that Member State. If the information provided by the applicant, or gathered through the relevant Union databases, does not give rise to manifest reasons to doubt that Article 19 or 20 applies for a particular Member State, the determining Member State shall conclude that, prima facie, there are sufficient indicators showing that the links in question meet the requirements of paragraph 1 of this Article. The competent authorities of the Member State where the applicant could have a link in accordance with 19 or 20 shall assist the competent authorities of the determining Member State with answering any questions aiming to clarify whether the alleged links are correct. 3. If the determining Member State considers, pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2, that a particular Member State is likely, prima facie, to be the Member State of allocation in accordance with Article 19 or 20, the determining Member State shall notify the Member State of allocation and the applicant shall be transferred to that Member State. 4. The determining Member State shall transfer all the information provided by the applicant to the Member State of allocation using the 'DubliNet' electronic communication network set up under Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003. 5. The Member State of allocation shall, in accordance with the procedure referred to in paragraph 3, determine whether the conditions in Article 19 or 20 are met. If so, the Member State of allocation shall become the Member State responsible. 6. If it is determined that the conditions are not met, the Member State of allocation shall ensure that the applicant is relocated to another Member State responsible in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 31a.
Amendment 1635 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) take charge, under the conditions laid down in Articles 29, 30 and 35, of an applicant whose has made an application was registeredfor international protection in a different Member State;
Amendment 1638 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) take back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 31 and 35 of this Regulation, an applicant or a third-country national or a stateless person in relation to whom that Member State has been indicated as the Member State responsible under Article 11(1) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation];
Amendment 1644 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 1647 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 1661 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The obligation laid downs specified in Article 26(1), point (b), of this Regulation to take back a third-country national or a stateless person shall cease where it shall cease where the Member State responsible can be established, on the basis, when requested to take charge ofr the update of the data set referred to in Article 11(2)(c) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation], that the person concerned has left the territory of the Member States, on either a compulsoryake back an applicant or another person as referred to in Article 26, that the person concerned has left the territory of the Member States for at least three months, unless the person concerned is in possession orf a voluntary basis, in compliance with a return decisalid residence document issued by the Member State responsible. An application registered after the periond or removal order issued followf absence referred to ing the withdrawal or rejection of the applicationfirst subparagraph shall be regarded as a new application giving rise to a new procedure for determining the Member State responsible.
Amendment 1681 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 28 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. An applicant who is present in another Member State without a residence document or who there makes an application for international protection during the process of determining the Member State responsible, shall be taken back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 31 and 35, by the Member State with which that application was first registered with a view to completing the process of determining the Member State responsible, unless there is a risk of violations of fundamental rights.
Amendment 1697 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1703 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 1705 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Where the applicant is an unaccompanied minor, the determining Member State may, where it considers that it is in the best interest of the minor, minor, for the purpose of calculating the deadlines referred to in the first and second subparagraphs of this paragraph, time shall start to run when a representative has been appointed and when the best interests assessment pursuant to Article 13 has been concluded. Additionally, the determining Member State may continue the procedure for determining the Member State responsible and request another Member State to take charge of the applicant despite the expiry of the time limits laid down in the first and second subparagraphs.
Amendment 1710 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Where the applicant is an unaccompanied minor, or the determining Member State may, where it considers that it is in the best interest of the minorrequest is based on Article 16, 17, 18 or 24 the determining Member State shall, continue the procedure for determining the Member State responsible and request another Member State to take charge of the applicant despite the expiry of the time limits laid down in the first and second subparagraphs.
Amendment 1718 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2
Article 30 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1723 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 30 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. The Commission shall, by means of implementingdelegated acts, establish, and review periodically, two lists, indicating the relevant elements of proof and circumstantial evidence in accordance with the criteria set out in points (a) and (b) of this paragraph. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2).
Amendment 1725 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 4 – point a – point ii
Article 30 – paragraph 4 – point a – point ii
(ii) the Member States shall provide the Committee provided for in Article 67ssion with models of the different types of administrative documents, in accordance with the typology established in the list of formal proofs;
Amendment 1727 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 6
Article 30 – paragraph 6
6. The requested Member State shall acknowledge its responsibility if thafter considering all available circumstantial evidence, is coherent, verifiable and sufficiently detailed to establish responsibilityncluding photos, proof of contact and witness statements to make a fair appraisal of the relationship.
Amendment 1734 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part III – Chapter V – Section III – title
Part III – Chapter V – Section III – title
III Procedures for take back notificationrequests
Amendment 1742 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – title
Article 31 – title
Submitting a take back notificationrequest
Amendment 1749 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 1
1. In a situation referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d) the Member State where the person is present shall make a take back notificationrequest without delay and in any event within two weeks after receiving the Eurodac hit.
Amendment 1756 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 2
2. A take back notificationrequest shall be made using a standard form and shall include proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists referred to in Article 30(4) and/or relevant elements from the statements of the person concerned.
Amendment 1762 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 3
Article 31 – paragraph 3
3. The notifirequested Member State shall aconfirm receipt of the notificationrequest to the Member State which made the notificationrequest within onefour weeks, unless the notifirequested Member State can demonstrate within that time limit that its is not responsibility has ceasedle pursuant to Article 27.
Amendment 1770 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 4
Article 31 – paragraph 4
4. Failure to act within the onefour-week period set out in paragraph 3 shall be tantamount to confirming the receipt of the notificationrequest.
Amendment 1775 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 5
Article 31 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt uniform conditions for the preparation and submission of take back notificationrequests. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2).
Amendment 1777 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 a (new)
Article 31 a (new)
Article 31 a Allocation of applicants with no meaningful links 1. Where the Member State responsible cannot be determined in accordance with the criteria set out in Chapters II, the determining Member State shall communicate to the applicant that his or her application for international protection will be examined by a Member State of allocation. 2. On the basis of the distribution key referred to in Article 54, a short list of five Member States with the lowest number of applicants relative to their share pursuant to that distribution key shall be determined by means of the automated system referred to in Article 45. 3. The determining Member State shall communicate the short list referred to in paragraph 2, together with information about the Member States on that short list, to the applicant. Within five days of that communication the applicant shall be given the opportunity to select a Member State of allocation among the five Member States included in the short list. If the applicant does not select a Member State in accordance with the first subparagraph of this paragraph, the determining Member State shall allocate the applicant to the Member State on the short list with the lowest number of applicants relative to their share pursuant to the distribution key referred to in Article 54 when the list was compiled in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article. 4. Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall apply mutatis mutandis in the case where applicants have registered as families, relatives or groups of applicants having requested to be registered as travelling together. In cases where a unanimous selection cannot be reached between the members of the group, each of the members of the former group shall be able to select a Member State of allocation, from the list drawn up for the former group, in accordance with paragraph 2. Where a selection is not communicated to the determining authorities within the five days, the applicant shall be allocated to the Member State with the lowest number of applicants relative to their share pursuant to the distribution key referred to in Article 54 when the list was compiled in accordance with paragraph 2.
Amendment 1782 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. The determining Member State whose take charge request as regards the applicant referred to in Article 26(1), point (a) was accepted or who made a take back notificationrequest as regards persons referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) and (d) shall take a transfer decision at the latest within one week of the acceptance or notification.
Amendment 1790 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2
Article 32 – paragraph 2
2. Where the requested Member State accepts to take charge of an applicant or to take back a person referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d), the requesting or the notifying Member State shall notify the person concerned in writing without delin 5 days of the decision to transfer him or her to the Member State responsible and, where applicable, of the fact that it will not examine his or her application for international protection.
Amendment 1792 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3
Article 32 – paragraph 3
3. If a legal advisor or other counsellor is representing the person concerned, Member States may choose toshall notify the decision to such legal advisor or counsellor instead of to the person concerned and, where applicable,and communicate the decision to the person concerned.
Amendment 1797 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall ensure that information on persons or entities that may provide legal assistance to the person concerned is communicated to the person concerned together with the decision referred to in paragraph 1, when that information has not been already communicated. Without prejudice to the applicant's right to choose his or her own legal advisor or other counselor at his or her own cost, Member States shall ensure that the person concerned has access to legal assistance and representation and, where necessary, to linguistic assistance and intercultural mediation, at all stages of the procedure provided for in this Regulation
Amendment 1801 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 5
Article 32 – paragraph 5
5. Where the person concerned is not assisted or represented by a legal advisor or other counsellor, Member States shall inform him or her of the main elements of the decision, which shall always include information on the legal remedies available, the right to apply for suspensive effect and the time limits applicable for seeking such remedies and for carrying out the transfer, in a language that the person concerned understands orand is reasonably supposed to understandable to communicate in.
Amendment 1806 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The applicant or another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (a), (b), (c) and (d) shall have the right to an effective remedy enshrined in Article 47 of the Charter, in the form of an appeal or a review, in fact and in law, against a transfer decision or a decision to reject a take charge request, before a court or tribunal.
Amendment 1810 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1816 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2
Article 33 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall provide for a period of twoat least four weeks after the notification of a transfer decision or a decision to reject a take charge request within which the person concerned may exercise his or her right to an effective remedy pursuant to paragraph 1. No transfer shall take place before the decision on the appeal or review is taken.
Amendment 1820 #
2020/0279(COD)
Amendment 1831 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 4
Article 33 – paragraph 4
4. Without prejudice to the applicant's right to choose his or her own legal advisor or other counsellor at his or her own cost, Member States shall ensure that the person concerned has access to legal assistance and representation and, where necessary, to linguistic assistance. and intercultural mediation, at all stages of the procedure provided for in this Regulation.
Amendment 1836 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. Member States shall ensure that legal assistance is granted on request free of charge at the earliest stage possible where the person concerned cannot afford the costs involved. Member States may provide that, as regards fees and other costs, the treatment of persons subject to this Regulation shall not be more favourable than the treatment generally accorded to their nationals in matters pertaining to legal assistance.
Amendment 1840 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1843 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 1849 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 4
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 4
Legal assistance shall include at least the preparation of the required procedural documents and representation before a court or tribunal and may be restricted to legal advisors or counsellors specifically designated by national law to provide assistance and representation.
Amendment 1856 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall not hold a person in detention for the sole reason that he or shbased on this Regulation. If Member States choose ias subject to the procedure established by this Regulationa measure of last resort to detain people, the following safeguards shall apply.
Amendment 1861 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 2
2. Where there is a proven significant risk of absconding, Member States may as a measure of last resort detain the person concerned in order to secure a transfer proceduresdecision after a final transfer decision has been taken and notified in accordance with this Regulation, on the basis of an individual assessment and only in so far as detention is proportional and other less coercive alternative measures cannot be applied effectively, based on an individual assessment of the person’s circumstances. Minors and vulnerable persons shall not be detained. Member States shall accommodate minors, families with minors and vulnerable applicants in non- custodial, community-based placements while their application is processed.
Amendment 1880 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Where an applicant or another person referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d) is detained pursuant to this Article, the period for submitting a take charge request or a take back notificationrequest shall not exceed two weeks from the registration of the application. Where a person is detained at a later stage than the registration of the application, the period for submitting a take charge request or a take back notificationrequest shall not exceed one week from the date on which the person was placed in detention. The Member State carrying out the procedure in accordance with this Regulation shall ask for an urgent reply on a take charge request. Such reply shall be given within one week of receipt of the take charge request. Failure to reply within the one-week period shall be tantamount to accepting the take charge request and shall entail the obligation to take charge of the person, including the obligation to provide for proper arrangements for arrival.
Amendment 1887 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Where a person is detained pursuant to this Article, the transfer of that person from the requesting or notifying Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within four weeks of:
Amendment 1889 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point a
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point a
(a) the date on which the request was accepted or the take back notification was confirmed, or
Amendment 1891 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Where the requesting or notifying Member State fails to comply with the time limits for submitting a take charge request or take back notificationrequest or to take a transfer decision within the time limit laid down in Article 32(1) or where the transfer does not take place within the period of four weeks referred to in the third subparagraph of this paragraph, the person shall no longer be detained. Articles 29, 31 and 35 shall continue to apply accordingly.
Amendment 1896 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 4
Article 34 – paragraph 4
4. Where a person is detained pursuant to this Article, the detention shall be ordered in writing by judicial authorities. The detention order shall state the reasons in fact and in law on which it is based and shall contain a reference to the consideration of the available alternatives and the reasons as to why they could not be applied effectively.
Amendment 1900 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 5
Article 34 – paragraph 5
5. As regards the detention conditions which shall fully respect the person's fundamental rights and the guarantees applicable to applicants detained, in order to secure the transfer procedures to the Member State responsible, Articles 9, 10 and 11 of Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Reception Conditions Directive] shall apply.
Amendment 1907 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The transfer of an applicant or of another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) and (d), from the requesting or notifying Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out in accordance with the national law of the requesting or notifying Member State, after consultation between the Member States concerned, as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within six months of the acceptance of the take charge request or of the confirmation of the take back notification by another Member State or of the final decision on an appeal or review of a transfer decision where there is a suspensive effect in accordance with Article 33(3). TIn the case of take charge request only, that time limit may be extended up to a maximum of one year if the transfer cannot be carried out due to imprisonment of the person concerned.
Amendment 1914 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
If transfers to the Member State responsible are carried out by supervised departure or under escort, Member States shall ensure that they are carried out in a humane manner and with full respect forcompliance with fundamental rights and human dignity.
Amendment 1915 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 1920 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4
The Member State responsible shall inform the requesting or notifying Member State, as appropriate, of the safe arrival of the person concerned or of the fact that he or she did not appear within the set time limit.
Amendment 1924 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Where the transfer does not take place within the time limits set out in paragraph 1, first subparagraph, the Member State responsible shall be relieved of its obligations to take charge of or to take back the person concerned and responsibility shall be transferred to the requesting or notifying Member State.
Amendment 1927 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1938 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1
Article 37 – paragraph 1
1. The Member State carrying out the transfer of an applicant or of another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d), shall communicate to the Member State responsible such personal data concerning the person to be transferred as is adequate, relevantnecessary, proportionate and limited to what is necessary for the sole purposes of ensuring that the competent authorities, in accordance with national law in the Member State responsible, are in a position to provide that person with adequate assistance, including the provision of immediate health care required in order to protect his or her vital interests, to ensure continuity in the protection and rights afforded by this Regulation and by other applicable asylum legal instruments. Those data shall be communicated to the Member State responsible within a reasonable period of time before a transfer is carried out, in order to ensure that its competent authorities in under national law have sufficient time to take the necessary measures.
Amendment 1945 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 37 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) an assessment of the age of an applicant; where relevant
Amendment 1947 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 4
Article 37 – paragraph 4
4. With a view to facilitating the exchange of information between Member States, the Commission shall, by means of implementingdelegated acts, draw up a standard form for the transfer of the data required pursuant to this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure laid down in Article 67(2).
Amendment 1952 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 1
Article 38 – paragraph 1
Amendment 1961 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 2
Article 39 – paragraph 2
2. The transferring Member State shall only transmit the information referred to in paragraph 1 to the Member State responsible after having obtained the explicit consent of the applicant and/or of his or her representative or when such transmission is necessary to protect public health and public security, or, where the person concerned is physically or legally incapable of giving his or her consent, to protect the vital interests of the person concerned or of another person. The lack of consent, including a refusal to consent, shall not constitute an obstacle to the transfer in accordance with Article 9 (2) (h) Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 1962 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 5
Article 39 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall, by means of implementingdelegated acts, adopt uniform conditions and practical arrangements for exchanging the information referred to in paragraph 1. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure laid down in Article 67(2).
Amendment 1964 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. EachThe determining Member State shall communicate to any Member State that sothe responsible Member State, and the other way around, that requests such personal data concerning the person covered by the scope of this Regulation, as is adequate, relevant and limited to what is necessary fornecessary, proportionate and limited to the purpose of:
Amendment 1965 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) personal details of the person concerned, and, where approprinecessary and proportionate, his or her family members, relatives or any other family relations (full name and where appropriaterelevant, former name; nicknames or pseudonyms; nationality, present and former; date and place of birth);
Amendment 1966 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) identity and travel papers (references, validity, date of issue, issuing authority, place of issue, etc.);
Amendment 1967 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) other information necessary for establishing the identity of the person concerned, including biometric data taken of the applicant by the Member State, in particular for the purposes of Article 57(6) of this Regulation, in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation];
Amendment 1970 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) places of residence and routes travelled;
Amendment 1972 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point f
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point f
(f) the place where the application was lodgedmade;
Amendment 1973 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point g
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point g
(g) the date on which any previous application for international protection was lodgedmade, the date on which the current application was registered, the stage reached in the proceedings and the decision taken, if any.
Amendment 1979 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 4
Article 40 – paragraph 4
4. Any request for information shall only be sent in the context of an individual application for international protection or transfer for the purpose of relocation. It shall set out the grounds on which it is based and, where its purpose is to check whether there is a criterion that is likely to entail the responsibility of the requested Member State, shall state on what evidence, including relevant information from reliable sources on the ways and means by which applicants enter the territories of the Member States, or on what specific and verifiable part of the applicant’s statements it is based. Such relevant information from reliable sources is not in itself sufficient to determine the responsibility and the competence of a Member State under this Regulation, but it may contribute to the evaluation of other indications relating to an individual applicant.
Amendment 1985 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1
Article 41 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall notify the Commission without delay of the specific authorities responsible for fulfilling the obligations arising under this Regulation, and any amendments thereto. The Member States shall ensure that those authorities have the necessary resources for carrying out their tasks and in particular for replying within the prescribed time limits to requests for information, requests to take charge, or take back notifications and, if applicable, complying with their obligations under Chapters I-III of Part IV.
Amendment 1990 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 4
Article 41 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish secure electronic transmission channels between the authorities referred to in paragraph 1 and between those authorities and the Asylum Agency for transmitting information, biometric data taken in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation], requests, notifications, replies and all written correspondence and for ensuring that senders automatically receive an electronic proof of delivery. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2).
Amendment 1991 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) solidarity contributions made pursuant to Chapters I-III of Part IV.relocation
Amendment 2005 #
Amendment 2007 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – title
Article 45 – title
Amendment 2019 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Solidarity contributions for the benefit of a Member State under migratory pressure orincluding subject to disembarkations following search and rescue operations shall consist of the following types:
Amendment 2027 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) relocation of applicants who are not subject to the border procedure for the examination of an application for international protection established by Article 41 of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedure Regulation];
Amendment 2031 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 2038 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) relocation of beneficiaries of international protection who have been granted international protection less than three years prior to adoption of an implementing act pursuant to Article 53(1) with the consent of the beneficiary of international protection;
Amendment 2043 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 2059 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 45 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Relocation of applicants for the examination of an application of international protection shall be automatic and obligatory pursuant to the criteria set out in Chapter II and to the distribution key set out in Article 54.
Amendment 2068 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 2
Article 45 – paragraph 2
Amendment 2084 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46
Article 46
Amendment 2089 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1
Article 46 – paragraph 1
Amendment 2100 #
Amendment 2137 #
Amendment 2179 #
Amendment 2201 #
Amendment 2272 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51
Article 51
Amendment 2303 #
Amendment 2355 #
Amendment 2386 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the size of the population (540% weighting);
Amendment 2390 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the total GDP (540% weighting).
Amendment 2396 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) the unemployment rate (20%)
Amendment 2405 #
Amendment 2427 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56
Article 56
Amendment 2449 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 57 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 2451 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 2
Article 57 – paragraph 2
Amendment 2458 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 57 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Where relocation is to be applied, the benefitting Member State shall identify the persons who could be relocated. Where the person concernthe person to be relocated is an applicant for or a beneficiary of international protection, that Member State shall take into account, where applicable, the existence of meaningful links between the person concerned and the Member State of relocation. The applicant shall be fully informed and consulted in the procedure of determination of the meaningful links and shall have the right to challenge a decision. Where meaningful links as defined under this regulation exist in more than one Member State, the applicant shall be able to decide to which Member State to be transferred. Where the identified person to be relocated is a beneficiary for international protection, the person concerned shall be relocated only after that person consented to relocation in writing.
Amendment 2464 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 57 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 2470 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 57 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 2478 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 4
Article 57 – paragraph 4
Amendment 2486 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 6
Article 57 – paragraph 6
Amendment 2492 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 7 – introductory part
Article 57 – paragraph 7 – introductory part
7. Where there are no reasonable grounds to consider the person concerned a danger to its national security or public orderfamily and other meaningful links, the Member State of relocation shall confirm within one week that it will relocate the person concerned.
Amendment 2494 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1
Article 57 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 2511 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 1
Article 58 – paragraph 1
1. The Member State of relocation shall inform the benefitting Member State and the Asylum Agency of the safe arrival of the person concerned or of the fact that he or she did not appear within the set time limit.
Amendment 2514 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 58 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Where tThe Member State of relocation shas relocated an applicant for whom the Member State responsible has not yet been determined, that Member State shall apply the procedures set out in Part III, with the exception of Article 8(2), Article 9(1) and (2), Article 15(5), and Article 21(1) and (2)ll be responsible for examining the application for international protection.
Amendment 2516 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 58 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 2521 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 58 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Where the Member State of relocation has relocated an applicant for whom the benefitting Member State haResponsibility determination after relocation can solely take place under extenuating circumstances, and preoviously been determined as responsible on other grounds than the criteria referred to in Article 57(3) third subparagraph, the responsibility for examining the application for international protection shall be transferred to the Member State of relocationded that all timelines are being respected. The Member State of relocation shall consider all criteria.
Amendment 2526 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 5
Article 58 – paragraph 5
Amendment 2533 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 1
Article 59 – paragraph 1
The benefitting and contributing Member States shall keep the Commission and the Asylum Agency informed on the implementation of solidarity measuradditional relocation pledges taken on a bilateral level including measures of cooperation with a third country.
Amendment 2535 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 1
Article 60 – paragraph 1
Amendment 2547 #
2020/0279(COD)
1. Any processing of personal data under this Regulation shall be subject to relevant Union legislation on data protection, in particular Regulation (EU) 2018/1725, Regulation (EU)2016/679 and, where relevant, Directive (EU) 2016/680. Member States shall implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure the security of personal data processed under this Regulation and in particular to prevent unlawful or unauthorised access or disclosure, alteration or loss of personal data processed.
Amendment 2551 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 62 – paragraph 3
Article 62 – paragraph 3
3. The processing of personal data by the Asylum Agency shall be subject to Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [European Union Asylum Agency]2018/1725, in particular as regards the monitoring ofsupervision by the European Data Protection Supervisor.
Amendment 2566 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 71 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Directive 2003/109/EC
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
With regard to beneficiaries of international protection, as well as beneficiaries of protection under the 1954 Convention relating to Stateless Persons, the required period of legal and continuous residence shall be three years.
Amendment 2576 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 72 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 72 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation 2021/1147
Article 16 – paragraph 5
Article 16 – paragraph 5
5. Member StatesOnly for the purpose to protect the financial interests of the Union, Member States authorities competent in that regard shall keep the information necessary to allow the proper identification of the persons resettled or admitted and of the date of their resettlement or admission, while applicable provisions concerning data retention periods shall prevail. (Article 72 of the Commission proposal contains amendments to the text of the proposal for a regulation establishing the Asylum and Migration Fund (COM(2018)0471). That regulation was subsequently adopted as Regulation (EU) 2021/1147 and several of its provisions were renumbered. Therefore, Article 16 of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Fund], as referred to in Article 72 of the Commission proposal, corresponds to Article 19 of Regulation (EU) 2021/1147.)
Amendment 2585 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 72 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 72 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) 2021/1147
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 2591 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 72 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 72 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) 2021/1147
Article 17 – paragraph 6
Article 17 – paragraph 6
6. Member StatesOnly for the purpose of protecting the financial interests of the Union, Member States authorities competent in that regard shall keep the information necessary to allow the proper identification of the persons transferred and of the date of their transfer, while applicable provisions concerning data retention periods shall prevail. (Article 72 of the Commission proposal contains amendments to the text of the proposal for a regulation establishing the Asylum and Migration Fund (COM(2018)0471). That regulation was subsequently adopted as Regulation (EU) 2021/1147 and several of its provisions were renumbered. Therefore, Article 17 of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Fund], as referred to in Article 72 of the Commission proposal, corresponds to Article 20 of Regulation (EU) 2021/1147.)
Amendment 2598 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I
Annex I
Amendment 2601 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II
Annex II
Amendment 2604 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 1
Annex III – paragraph 1
Formula for the distribution key pursuant to Article 524 of the Regulation:
Amendment 2605 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Annex III – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Amendment 2608 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Annex III – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Amendment 2609 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – paragraph 3 a (new)
Annex III – paragraph 3 a (new)
(c) the unemployment rate (20% weighting)
Amendment 2611 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex IV
Annex IV
Amendment 145 #
Amendment 146 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Title 1
Title 1
Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL introducing a screening of third country nationals at the external borders and amending Regulations (EC) No 767/2008, (EU) 2017/2226, (EU) 2018/1240 and (EU) 2019/817
Amendment 148 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 1
Citation 1
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular points (b) and (d) of Article 77(2) and point (e) of Article 78(2) thereof,
Amendment 150 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The Schengen area was created to achieve the Union’s objective of establishing an area without internal frontiers in which the free movement of persons is ensured, as set out in Article 3(2) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). The good functioning of this area relies on mutual trust between the Member States and efficient, the management of the external border and the full respect of fundamental rights during all related actions and procedures.
Amendment 154 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The rules governing border control of persons crossing the external borders of the Member States of the Union are laid down in Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Schengen Borders Code)21 as adopted under Article 77(2)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). To further develop the Union’s policy with a view to carrying out checks on persons and efficiently monitoring the crossing of external borders referred to in the first paragraph of Article 77 TFEU, additional measures shouldto address situations where third- country nationals manage to avoidhave not been subject to border checks at the external borders, or where third-country nationals are disembarked following search and rescue operations as well as where third-country nationals request international protection at a border crossing point or at any other part of the external borders, without fulfilling entry conditions. The present regulation complements and specifies Regulation (EU) 2016/399 with regard to those three sets of situations. _________________ 21 Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code), OJ L 77, 23.3.2016, p.1.
Amendment 160 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) It is essential to ensure that in those three sets of situations, the third country nationals are screened, in order to facilitate a proper identification and to allow for them being referred efficientlyto be referred to the relevant procedures which, depending on the circumstances, can be the common procedures for international protection or procedures respecting Directive 2008/115/ECas laid down in Regulation (EU) XXXX/202X of the European Parliament and of the Council (the “Return Directive”)22 . The screening should seamlessly complement the checks carried out at the external border or compensate for the fact that those checks have been circumvented by the[Asylum Procedures Regulation]. This is without prejudice to the protection of persons identified as stateless or at risk of statelessness, who should be referred to the competent authorities to determine whether the individual is stateless and offer adequate protection, in accordance with international and national law. Once the Screening is over and if a third -country nationals when crossing the external border. _________________ 22 Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament has clearly denied to apply for international protection and is not eligible to apply for a residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay for compassionate, humanitariand of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals, OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 98r other grounds under Member State legislation or other provisions of Union or international law, then the Member State competent authorities may decide that the person should be returned. In such cases Directive (EU)2008/115/EC (Return Directive) should apply. The screening should seamlessly complement the checks carried out at the external border.
Amendment 168 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Border control is in the interest not only of the Member States at whose external borders it is carried out but of all Member States which have abolished internal border control. Border control should help to combat illegal migration andprotect victims of trafficking of human beings and to prevent any threat to the Member States’ internal security, public policy, public health and international relations. As such, measures taken at the external borders are important elements of a comprehensive approach to migration, allowing to address the challenge of mixed flows of migrants and persons seeking international protectionshould be proportionate to the objectives pursued and enable decisions under this Regulation to be taken on an individual basis.
Amendment 177 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) In accordance with Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, border control consists of border checks carried out at the border crossing points and border surveillance, which is carried out between the border crossing points, in order to prevent third-country nationals from circumventing border checks. In accordance with Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 a person who has crossed a border in an unauthorised manner and who has no right to stay on the territory of the Member State concerned shall be apprehended and made subject to procedures respecting Directive 2008/115/EC. IHowever, also in accordance with Article 3 of the same Regulation (EU) 2016/399, border control should be carried out without prejudice to the rights of refugees and persons requesting international protection, in particular as regards non- refoulement and, in accordance with Article 4, Member States shall, among others, act in full compliance with relevant Union law, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’), relevant international law, including the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees done at Geneva on 28 July 1951 (‘the Geneva Convention’).
Amendment 180 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Border guards are often confronted with situations where third-country nationals, whoithout travel documents, are requesting international protection without travel documents, both following apprehension during border surveillance and during checks at the border crossing points. Moreover, at some border sections the border guards are confronted with large numbers of arrivals can occur at the same time. In suchall circumstances, it is particularly difficult to ensure that all relevant databases are consulted and to immediately determine the appropriate asylum or return procedurethe relevant procedures should take place in compliance with all established safeguards.
Amendment 187 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) In order to ensure a swift handling ofimprove procedures in regards to third- country nationals who try to avoidhave not been subject to border checks or who request international protection at a border crossing point without fulfilling the entry conditions or who are disembarked following a search and rescue or at any other part of the external borders, cooperation, it is necessary to provide a stronger framework for cooperationeded between the different national authorities such as those responsible for border control, for the protection of public health,individual and public health, for child protection and for the examination of the needrequests for international protection and the application of return procedures.
Amendment 192 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
Amendment 195 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) With regard to those persons who apply for international protection, the screening should be followed by antake place during the initial stage of the examination of the needrequest for international protection. It should allow to collect and share with the authorities competent for that examination any information that is relevant for the latter to identify the appropriate procedure for the examination ofThe screening authorities should provide all the information relating to the third country national to the authorities examining their application, thus speeding up that examination. The screening should also ensure for international protection in a way that the third country national has also full knowledge of. The screening should also contribute to identifying vulnerabilities so that persons with special needs are identified at an early stage, so that in order for any special reception and procedural needs arto be fully taken into account in the determination of and the pursuit of the applicable procedure. . However, a third-country national may be identified as a person with special needs even after the screening process has ended and this should then be taken into account.
Amendment 206 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) This Regulation should apply to third-country nationals and stateless persons who are apprehended in connection with the unauthorisedirregular crossings of the external border of a Member State by land, sea or air, except third country nationals for whom the Member State is not required to take the biometric data pursuant to Article 14(1) and (3) of the Eurodac Regulation for reasons other than their age, as well as to persons who have been disembarked following search and rescue operations, regardless of whether they apply or not for international protection. This Regulation should also apply to those who seek international protection at the border crossing points or in transit zones without fulfilling the entry conditions.
Amendment 207 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) The screening should be conducted at or in proximity to the external border, before the persons concerned are authorised to enter the territory. Thewithin the territory of the Member State at any appropriate location that guarantees the proper implementation of Regulation(EU) XXXX/202X of the European Parliament and of the Council [Asylum Procedures Regulation] and of Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council [Reception Conditions Directive] and would ensure that third-country nationals may exercise their rights, including effective access to legal aid. Member States shcould apply measures pursuant to national law to prevent the persons concerned from entdecide that the third country nationals should reside in a specific place but this should not result in their detention, particularly when these are unaccompanied children or children in families who should never be detained as detention is never ing the territory during the screening. In individual cases, where required, this may include detention, subject to the national law regulating that matterbest interests of the child and should never be applied to them. Hence, the use of detention should only be as a last resort, when ordered in writing by judicial or administrative authorities and subject to the relevant Union and national law after an individual examination and vulnerability screening and unless other less coercive measures can be applied effectively in a specific case.
Amendment 214 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12 a) Member States should guarantee access to legal counselling and advice, including free legal aid, as well as to linguistic services and assistance, to all persons subject to the screening. Organisations and persons providing legal counselling should have effective and unimpeded access to the facilities and locations where the screening takes place.
Amendment 216 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 b (new)
Recital 12 b (new)
(12 b) The EDPB-EDPS Joint Opinion 5/2021 names certain technologies that pose a high risk of fundamental rights violations, such as facial recognition in the public space, as well as other biometric surveillance software, emotional recognition software and behavioural recognition software. These technologies are often tested or deployed in or around borders, in the context of border management activities, in and around reception facilities and screening facilities. Third-country nationals should be protected against these intrusive forms of surveillance and violations of fundamental rights.
Amendment 219 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
Amendment 225 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) All persons subject to the screening should be submitted to checks in order to establish their identity and to ascertain that they do not pose a threat to internal security or public health. In the case of persons requesting international protection at border crossing points, the identity and security checks carried out in the context of border checks should be taken into account to avoidaccording Regulation (EU) 2016/399 should not be duplicationed.
Amendment 227 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 a (new)
Recital 15 a (new)
(15 a) Where there are indications that third-country nationals or stateless persons held in detention facilities or present at border crossing points, including transit zones, at external borders, may wish to make an application for international protection, Member States should provide them with information on the possibility to do so. In those detention facilities and crossing points, Member States shall make arrangements for interpretation to the extent necessary to facilitate access to the asylum procedure.
Amendment 229 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) On completion of the screening, the third-country nationals concerned should be referred to the relevant procedure to establish responsibility for examining an application for and to assess the need for international protection, or be made subject to procedures respecting Directive 2008/115 (return directive), as appropriate. The relevantThe information obtained during the screening should be provided to the competent authorities to support the further assessment of each individual case, in full respect of fundamental rights. The procedures established by Directive 2008/115refusal of entry, as defined in Regulation(EU) No 2016/399, should start applying only after the screening has ended. Article 26 and 27 of the Asylum Procedures Regulation should apply only after the screening has ended. This should be without prejudice to the fact that the persons applyingfor persons not having entered yet the territory of the Member States, such as transit areas, and only at official land and air border crossing points. In compliance with the principle of non-refoulement, upon a third-country national’s wish to make an application for international protection, whether this happens at the moment of apprehension, in the course of border control at the border crossing point or at any part of the external borders or during the screening, the person should be considered applicants therefore, from that moment, Regulation(EU) xxxx/xxxx [Asylum Procedure Regulation] and Directive 2013/33/EU [Reception Conditions Directive] apply. Where applicable, persons identified as stateless or at risk of statelessness should also be referred to the competent authorities to determine whether the individual is stateless and offer adequate protection, in accordance with international and national law.
Amendment 235 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) The screening could also be followed by relocation under the mechanism for solidarity established by Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management] where a Member State is contributing to solidarity on a voluntary basis or the applicants for intMember States should relocate applicants for international protection swiftly and without undue delay after the screening, including persons disembarked after search and rescue opernational protection are not subject to the border procedure pursuant tos, under the automatic distribution mechanism established by Regulation (EU) No. XXX/XXX ([Asylum Procedures Regulation)and Migration Management], or under the mechanism addressing situations of crisis established by Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Regulation on situations of crisis]. Unaccompanied minors and families with minors, as well as vulnerable applicants should have their transfers prioritised. The right to family reunification should always be respected.
Amendment 239 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
Amendment 245 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) The screening should be completed as soon as possible, and should not exceed 5 days where it is conducted at the external border and 3 days where it is conducted within the territory of a Member State. Any extension of the 5 days’ time limit should be reserved for exceptional situations at the external borders, where the capacities of the Member State to handle screenings are exceeded for reasons beyond its control such as crisis situations referred to in Article 1 of Regulation XXX/XXX [crisis proposal].
Amendment 249 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
Amendment 253 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) In order to achieve the objectives of the screening, notably the recognition of vulnerabilities, close cooperation should be ensured between the competent national authorities referred to in Article 16 of Regulation 2016/399, and those referred to in Article 5 of the [Asylum Procedures Regulation] as well a. Child protection authorities tshose responsible for carrying out return procedures respecting Directive 2008/115. Child protection authorities should also be closely involved in the screening wherever necessary to ensure thatuld also be closely involved in the screening to ensure that the best interests of the child are duly taken into account throughout the screening. A representative should be appointed to represent and assist the unaccompanied minor during the screening. Where applicable, this representative should be the same as the representative to be appointed in accordance with Article 23 of Directive 2013/33/EU [Reception Conditions Directive]. Member States should seek the cooperation with the monitoring mechanism as established in Article 7 to ensure that all actions and procedures are in compliance with the brest interests of the child are duly taken into account throughout the screening. Member States should be allowed to avail themselves of the support of the relevant agencies, in particular the European Border and Coast Guard Agency and the [European Union Agency for Asylum], within the limits of their mandates. Member States shoulpect of fundamental rights. In addition to the monitoring mechanism, NGOs and Civil Society Organisations specialised in child protection should be granted access to monitor procedures of identification, verification and age assessment. Member States should be allowed to avail themselves of the support of the relevant agencies, in particular the European Border and Coast Guard Agency and the [European Union Agency for Asylum], within the limits of their mandates. The tasks, functions and activities performed by the relevant EU Agencies in support of Member States pursuant to this Regulation should fall under the scope of the independent monitoring mechanism to be established by each Member State in accordance with this Regulation. Member States should also put in place measures to identify potential victims of trafficking of human beings as early as possible to prevent further trafficking, provide them with protection and involve the national Rapporteurs for Anti- trafficking wherever the screening reveals facts relevant for trafficking in line with Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council24 . _________________ 24 Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims, OJ L 101, 15.4.2011, p. 1.
Amendment 260 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) When conducting the screening, the competent authorities should comply with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and ensure the respect for human dignity and should not discriminate against persons on grounds of sex, racial, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinions, membership of a national minority, disability, age or sexual orientation. Particular attention should be paid to the best interests of the childThe best interests of the child should be the primary consideration in the implementation of this Regulation.
Amendment 269 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) In order to ensure compliance with EU and international law, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights, during the screeningin all operations taking place at the external borders and all procedures taking place in the context of migration, each Member State should establish a monitoring mechanism and put in place adequate safeguards for the independence thereof. The monitoring mechanism should cover in particular the respect for fundamental rights in relation to the screeningborder surveillance, the screening, the asylum and return procedures, as well as the respect for the applicable national rules regarding detention and compliance with the principle of non-refoulement as referred to in Article 3(b) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399. The Fundamental Rights Agency should establish general guidance as to the establishment and the independent functioning of such monitoring mechanism. Member States should furthermore be allowencouraged to request the support of the Fundamental Rights Agency for developing their national independent monitoring mechanism. Member States should also be allowed to seek advice from the Fundamental Rights Agency with regard to establishing the methodology for this monitoring mechanism and with regard to appropriate training measures. Member States should also be allowed to invite relevant and competIndependent national, international and non-governmental organisations and bodies to participate in the monitoring, civil society organisations and human rights defenders should participate in the creation, management and operation of the monitoring mechanism and shall be ensured adequate protection when carrying out their work. The independent monitoring mechanism should be without prejudice to the monitoring of fundamental rights provided by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency’s fundamental rights monitors provided for in Regulation (EU) 2019/1896. The Member States should investigate allegations of the breach of the fundamental rights during the screening, including by ensuring that complaints are dealt with expeditiously and in an appropriate way. , the mechanism for the purpose of monitoring the operational and technical application of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) as set out in Article 14 of Regulation (EU) xxxx/xxxx [EU Asylum Agency Regulation] and in addition to the possible monitoring carried out by existing national or international monitoring bodies. The Member States should ensure that national independent authorities involved in the monitoring mechanism and the mechanism itself can properly conduct their work, including by providing access to sites or documents, and by conducting investigations and providing reporting. Member States should investigate allegations of the breach of the fundamental rights, including by ensuring that complaints are dealt with expeditiously and in an appropriate way, including by the establishment of effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties and by procedures that, in cases of breaches of the law, will lead to the identification and sanctioning of those responsible.
Amendment 273 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23 a (new)
Recital 23 a (new)
(23 a) Third-country nationals should be able to enjoy the highest standards of data protection, particularly given their potential vulnerabilities, the sensitivity of the data collected during the screening and the potential consequences of the information provided during the screening for their following procedures. The screening procedure should always be in line with Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Regulation 2018/1725 and, where relevant, Directive 2018/680, including the general principles of data minimisation and purpose limitation. National data protection authorities and the EDPB-EDPS should therefore be closely involved in the implementation of the screening procedures and in the monitoring mechanism foreseen in Article 7.
Amendment 276 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) By the end of the screening, the authorities responsible for the screening should fill in a de-briefing form. The form should be transmitted to the authorities examining applications for international protection or to the authorities competent for return – depending on whom the individual is referred to. In the former case, the authorities responsible f. The form, including the Annex, should have a limited retention period clearly defined and based on the principle that the data should be erased when they are no longer necessary in relation to the purposes for which they are collected or othe screening should also indicate any elements which may seem to be relevant for determining whether the competent authorities should submit the application of the third-country national concerned to an accelerated examination procedure or to the borderrwise processed. The third-country national concerned, should, obtain a copy of the de-briefing form and all information relating to him or her, before this is transmitted to the relevant authorities. The copy should be also in a language that the third-country national understands and should contain all relevant information for the person to exercise their rights to rectify or supplement data or information provided during the screening procedure.
Amendment 281 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24 a (new)
Recital 24 a (new)
(24 a) This Regulation should not prevent Member States from the possibility to, at any moment, decide to grant an autonomous residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay for compassionate, humanitarian or other reasons to a third-country national entering or staying irregularly on their territory. In that event, no return decision should be issued. Where a return decision has already been issued, it shall be withdrawn or suspended for the duration of validity of the residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay.
Amendment 285 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
Amendment 286 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) A pPreliminary health examination and vulnerability checks should be carried out on all persons submittedject to the screening at the external borders with a view to identifying persons in need of immediatea vulnerable situation with special reception needs, including in need of health care or requiring other measures to be taken, for instance isolation on public health grounds. The specific needs of minors and vulnerable persons should be taken into account. If it is clear from the circumstances that such examination is not needed, in particular because the overall condprimary consideration. The preliminary health examination should be carried out by the health authoritiones of the person appears to be very good, the examination should not take place and the person concerned should be informed of that fact. The preliminary health examination should be carried out by the health authorities of the Member State concerned. With regard toMember State concerned, by qualified medical personnel. Member States should ensure the adequate staffing both in terms of numbers of medical professionals and their specific training, in particular as they may be dealing with children and persons having suffered various traumatic events. Preliminary health and vulnerability checks that have not been completed during the screening should be promptly resumed in the subsequent appropriate procedure in which the third- country nationals apprehended within the territory, the preliminary medical examination should be carried out where it is deemed necessary at first sight. concerned will be referred, without prejudice to the mandatory vulnerability checks to be carried out in the those procedures under Regulation (EU) No XX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management Regulation] or Directive 2008/115 (return directive).
Amendment 295 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) During the screening, all persons concerned should be guaranteed a standard of living complying with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and have access to emergency health care and essential treatment of illnesses. Particular attention should be paid to individuals with vulnerabilities, such as pregnant women, elderly persons, single parent families, persons with an immediately identifiable physical or mental disabilityWithout prejudice to Article 14 on refusal of entry, as defined in Regulation(EU) No 2016/399, during the screening all relevant provisions of Regulation(EU) xxxx/xxxx [Asylum Procedure Regulation] and Directive 2013/33/EU [Reception Conditions Directive] apply. Particular attention should be paid to vulnerable persons, such as children, unaccompanied children, pregnant women, elderly persons, single parent families, persons with physical or mental disability, victims of trafficking in human beings, victims of torture and inhumane and degrading treatment, victims of sexual and gender-based violence, persons visibly having suffered psychological or physical trauma and unaccompanied minorpersons with PTSD symptoms and stateless persons. In particular, in case of a minor,children information should be provided in a child-friendly and age appropriate manner and a, where appropriate, a representative should be appointed. All the authorities involved in the performance of the tasks related to the screening should respect human dignity, privacy, and refrain from any discriminating actions or behaviour. The “benefit of the doubt” principle in favour of the minor should always apply when a person’s age is unclear or contested, and no supporting documentation exists that proves his/her age. Age assessment procedures should only be initiated when there is a reasonable doubt that the person is not a minor and should foreground a presumption of minority, respect the best interests of the child and primarily use non-medical procedures. Under no circumstances should age assessment procedures use forced undressing or genitalia examination.
Amendment 301 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Since third-country nationals subject to the screening may not carry the necessary identity and travel documents required for the legal crossing of the external border, an identification procedure should be provided forconducted as part of the screening.
Amendment 304 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) The Common Identity Repository (“CIR”) was established by Regulation (EU) 2019/817 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Interoperability Regulation)25 to facilitate and assist in the correct identification of persons registered in the Entry/Exit System (“EES”), the Visa Information System (“VIS”), the European Travel Information and Authorisation System (“ETIAS”), Eurodac and in the European Criminal Records Information System for third country nationals (“ECRIS-TCN”), including of unknown persons who are unable to identify themselves. For that purpose, the CIR contains only the identity, travel document and biometric data recorded in EES, VIS, ETIAS, Eurodac and ECRIS-TCN, logically separated. Only the personal data strictly necessary to perform an accurate identity check is stored in the CIR. The personal data recorded in the CIR is kept for no longer than strictly necessary for the purposes of the underlying systems and should automatically be deleted where the data are deleted from the underlying systems. Consultation of the CIR enables a reliable and exhaustive identification of persons, by making it possible to consult all identity data present in the EES, VIS, ETIAS, Eurodac and ECRIS-TCN in one go, in a fast and reliable manner, while ensuring a maximum protection of the data and avoiding unnecessary processing or duplication of data. For the purposes of screening and in line with the principles of necessity and proportionality, when querying the CIR only the EES, VIS and Eurodac should be checked. _________________ 25 Regulation (EU) 2019/817 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2019 on establishing a framework for interoperability between EU information systems in the field of borders and visa and amending Regulations (EC) No 767/2008, (EU) 2016/399, (EU) 2017/2226, (EU) 2018/1240, (EU) 2018/1726 and (EU) 2018/1861 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Decisions 2004/512/EC and 2008/633/JHA, OJ L 135, 22.5.2019, p. 27.
Amendment 309 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) In order to establish the identity of the persons subject to the screening, a verification should be initiated in the CIR in the presence of the person during the screening. During that verification, the biometric data of the person should be checked against the data contained in the CIR. Where the biometric data of a person cannot be used or if a query with that data fails, the query could be carried out with identity data of the person in combination with travel document data, where such data are available. In accordance with the principles of necessity and proportionality, and where the query indicates that data on that person are stored in the CIR, Member State authorities should have access to the CIR to consult the identity data, travel document data and biometric data of that person, without the CIR providing any indication as to which EU information system the data belong to. Access to CIR by competent Member States authorities should be limited to the extent that it is strictly necessary for the performance of their specific tasks in accordance with those purposes, and should be proportionate to the objectives pursued.
Amendment 311 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Since the use of the CIR for identification purposes has been limited by Regulation (EU) 2019/817 to facilitating and assisting in the correct identification of persons registered in the EES, VIS, ETIAS, Eurodac and ECRIS- TCN in situations of police checks within the territory of the Member States, that RegulationRegulation (EU) 2019/817 needs to be amended to provide for the additional purpose of using the CIR to identify persons during the screening as established by this Regulation.
Amendment 317 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) The identification of persons during border checks at the border crossing point and any consultation of the databases in the context of border surveillance or police checks in the external border area by the authorities who referred the person concerned to the screening should be considered as part of the screening and should not be repeated, unless there are special circumstances justifying such repetition. The collection of personal data, and in particular the taking of biometric data in accordance with Articles 10, 13 and 14a of Regulation (EU) xxxx/xxxx [Eurodac Regulation], should take place only once as part of the screening.
Amendment 320 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
Amendment 322 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
Amendment 327 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) As the screening concerns persons present at the external border withouho may not fulfilling entry conditions, or disembarked after a search and rescue operawithout prejudice to the right to seek international protection, the security checks as part of the screening should be, at leasts long as they comply with the principles of necessity and proportionality, of a similar level as the checks performed in respect of third country nationals that apply on beforehand for an authorisation to enter the Union for a short stay, whether they are under a visa obligation or not. In this regard, the persons subject to screening should also have the same rights in relation to their data protection as those third-country nationals applying beforehand for an authorisation to enter the Union.
Amendment 333 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) It follows from the reasoning developed in recital (36) that aAs regards persons subject to the screening, automated verifications for security purposes should be carried out against the same systems as is provided for applicants for a visa or for a travel authorisation under the European Travel Information and Authorisation System: the VIS, EES, ETIAS, SIS, ECRIS-TCN, Europol and Interpol’s SLTD and TDAWN. Persons submitted to the screening should also be checked against ECRIS-TCN as regards persons convicted in relation to terrorist offences and other forms of serious criminal offences, Europol data referred to in the preceding recital 38, the Interpol’s Lost and Stolen Travel Documents database and Travel Documents Associated with Notices databases (TDAWN)VIS, EES, SIS, Europol and Interpol’s SLTD.
Amendment 334 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Those checks should be conducted in a manner that ensures that only data necessary for carrying out the security checks is retrieved from those databases. With regard to persons who have requested international protection at a border crossing point, the consultation of databases for the security check as part of the screening should focus on the databases that were not consulted during the border checks at the external border, thus avoidingare consulted and that does not allow for repeated consultations.
Amendment 337 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) Where justified for the purpose of the security check, the screening could also include verification of objects in the possession of third-country nationals, in accordance with national law. In any case, verification of objects and, more in general, the screening should not include the accessing of electronic devices in the possession of third-country nationals nor access to their private communications or social media accounts. Any measures applied in this context should be proportionate and should respect the human dignity of the persons subject to the screening. The authorities involved should ensure that the fundamental rights of the individuals concerned are respected, including the right to protection of personal data and freedom of expression.
Amendment 341 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
Amendment 344 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) The European search portal (ESP) established by Regulation (EU) 2019/817 should be used to carry out the searches against the European databases, EES, ETIAS, VIS and ECRIS-TCN,ES and the VIS for identification or for the purpose of security checks, as applicable.
Amendment 347 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) Since the effective implementation of the screening is dependent upon correct identification of the individuals concerned and of their security background, the consultation of European databases for that purpose is justified by the same objectives for which each of those databases has been established, that is to say, the effective management of the Union's external borders, the internal security of the Union andThe consultation of European databases for the purpose of identification and security checks during the screening can be justified to the extent that it is strictly necessary for achieving that purpose and in accordance with the effobjective implementation of the Union's for which each of those databases hasylum and return policies been established.
Amendment 349 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
Recital 45
(45) Since the objectives of this Regulation, namely the strengthening of the controlidentification of persons who are about to enter the Schengen area and their referral to the appropriate procedures, cannot be achieved by Member States acting alone, it is necessary to establish common rules at Union level. Thus, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.
Amendment 356 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Regulation establishes the screening at the external borders of the Member States of alla procedure for the screening of third-country nationals who have crossed the external border in an unauthorisedirregular manner, ofor those who have applied for international protection during border checks without fulfilling entry conditions, as well as for those disembarked after a search and rescue operation, before they are referred to the appropriate procedure.
Amendment 364 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Amendment 368 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3
Article 1 – paragraph 3
The objectpurpose of the screening shall be the identification ofo seek to identify all third-country nationals subject to it and theo verification against relevant databases that the persons subject to it do not pose a threat to internal security. The screening shall also entail health checks, where appropriate, to identify persons vulnerable and in they whether the persons subject to it are registered in any of the relevant databases. The screening shall also include mandatory health and vulnerability checks to begin the process of identifying vulnerable persons, those with special reception or procedural needs, and those in need of health care, as well the as persones possibly posing a threat to public health. Those checks shall contribute to referring such persons to the appropriate procedure.
Amendment 377 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 4
Article 1 – paragraph 4
Amendment 380 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 4 a (new)
When applying this Regulation, Member States shall act in full compliance with relevant Union law, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’), relevant international law, including the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees done at Geneva on 28 July 1951 (‘the Geneva Convention’), obligations related to access to international protection, in particular the principle of non-refoulement, and fundamental rights. In accordance with the general principles of Union law, decisions under this Regulation shall be taken on an individual basis and be subject to effective remedies. The best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration when implementing this Regulation.
Amendment 382 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Amendment 384 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
2 a. 'refusal of entry' has the meaning of the term and entails the obligations as defined in Article 14 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 and, for the purposes of this Regulation it shall only apply to third- country nationals who have not yet entered the territory of the Member States and are at an official land or air border crossing point;
Amendment 385 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
4 a. ‘biometric data’ means fingerprint data for the purposes of this Regulation;
Amendment 390 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)
5 a. ‘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 1954;
Amendment 392 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 b (new)
5 b. 'representative' means a person or an organisation, including a public authority designated by the competent authorities or bodies, with the necessary skills and expertise, including regarding the treatment and specific needs of minors, to represent, assist and act on behalf of an unaccompanied minor, as applicable, in order to safeguard his or her best interests and general well-being and so that the unaccompanied minor can benefit from the rights and comply with the obligations under this Regulation;
Amendment 395 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 c (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 c (new)
5 c. 'person with special needs': means a person who is in need of special conditions or guarantees in order to benefit from the rights and comply with the obligations provided for in this Regulation;
Amendment 396 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 d (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 d (new)
5 d. 'child' means every human being below the age of eighteen years as defined in the Convention on the Rights of the Child as adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 44/25 of 20 November1989 and entered into force 2 September 1990;
Amendment 397 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 e (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 e (new)
5 e. ‘persons in a vulnerable situation” means persons facing a diminished capacity to resist, cope with, or recover from violence, exploitation, abuse or violations of their rights due to the presence of individual, community, household, structural or situational factors and circumstances that increase the risk of, and exposure to, such violence, exploitation, abuse, or rights violations, or due to the absence of factors that protect against such violence, exploitation, abuse and rights violations, such as minors, unaccompanied minors, disabled people, elderly people, pregnant women, single parents with minor children, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex persons, persons belonging to religious minorities, non-believers, and persons who have been subjected to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual and gender based violence;
Amendment 398 #
Amendment 405 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) are apprehended in connection with an unauthorisedirregular crossing of the external borders of a Member State by land, sea or air, except third country nationals for whom, for reasons other than their age, the Member State is not required to take the biometric data pursuant to Article 14(1) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 603/2013 for reasons other than their age, or
Amendment 415 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. The screening shall also apply to all third-country nationals who apply for international protection at external border crossing points or at any other part of the external borders or in transit zones and who do not fulfil the entry conditions set out in Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399.
Amendment 419 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. During the screening the provisions of Regulation (EU) xxxx/202x [Asylum Procedure Regulation] and of Directive 2013/33/EU [Reception Conditions Directive] shall apply for all third-country nationals from the moment that they express their wish to apply for international protection.
Amendment 421 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4
Article 4
Amendment 424 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Amendment 439 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5
Article 5
Amendment 447 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. In the cases referred to in Article 3, the screening shall be conducted at locations situated at or in proximity to the external borders. The screening shall be conducted in adequate and official facilities within the territory of the Member States where third-country nationals shall have access to appropriate services, including legal advice, free legal aid and linguistic assistance. Member States shall ensure that specialised international, non- governmental and civil society organisations and persons providing advice and counselling shall have effective access to third-country nationals in the facilities and locations where the screening takes place, in particular to those held in detention facilities or present at the border crossing points, including transit zones, at external borders. Member States may decide that the third- country nationals shall reside in a specific place but this shall not result in their detention, particularly when these are unaccompanied children or children in families or persons in situation of vulnerability. During the screening, detention must be a measure of last resort and must be necessary, reasonable and proportionate to a legitimate aim.If there are grounds to deprive a person of their liberty, alternatives to detention should always be considered first. Member States shall only use detention subject to EU and national law, on individual basis, following written judicial or administrative decision, as last resort and, when they do, they shall ensure that conditions are in line with Directive 2013/33/EU [Receptions Conditions Directive].The detention order shall be translated to a language the third-country national concerned can understand. When it proves necessary and on the basis of an individual assessment, Member States may detain a person undergoing screening who has applied for international protection, if other less coercive alternative measures cannot be applied effectively only on the grounds spelled out in Article 8(3) of the Directive 2013/33/EU [Reception Conditions Directive]. When it proves necessary and on the basis of an individual assessment, Member States may detain a person undergoing screening who has not applied for international protection, if other less coercive alternative measures cannot be applied.The person shall have access to an effective appeal procedure and to legal advice.Requirements concerning the detention decision and appeal shall comply with Article 9 of the Directive 2013/33/EU [Reception Conditions Directive] and Article 15 of the Directive2008/115/EC [Return Directive]. Minors and other individuals in a situation of vulnerability shall never be detained.
Amendment 452 #
2020/0278(COD)
1 a. In order to comply with the provisions of paragraph 1 of this Article, and in addition to representatives of the independent monitoring mechanism foreseen in Article 7, Member States shall ensure that organisations and persons providing advice and counselling, including free legal aid, shall have effective access to third-country nationals, in particular to those held in detention facilities or present at the border crossing points, including transit zones, at external borders.
Amendment 453 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Third-country nationals shall not be subject to intrusive biometric surveillance technologies, such as facial recognition, emotional recognition and behavioural recognition software nor predictive analytics, risk assessments and biometric categorisation in the context of border management activities, in or around the reception or screening facilities or during the screening. The use of language recognition software, lie detection systems or long-range acoustic devices shall be prohibited.
Amendment 455 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Amendment 461 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. In the cases referred to in Article 3, the screening shall be carried out without delay and shall in any case be completed within 5 days from the apprehension i. Upon the external border area, the disembarkatipiry of the 5-day period, the person ins the territory of the Member State concerned oro be referred without further delay to the relevant procedure pursuant to Article 14, even if the pscresentation at the border crossing pointing has not been completed, without preju-dice to medical and vulnerability checks. In exceptional circumstances, where a disproportionate number of third-country nationals needs to be subject to the screening at the same time, making it impossible in practice to conclude the screening within that time- limit, the period of 5 days may be extended by a maximum of an additional 5 daysn the screening shall not take place and the third-country nationals shall be directly referred to the normal asylum procedure.
Amendment 469 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Amendment 474 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Amendment 477 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Member States shall ensure, at all times even during exceptional circumstances, including in emergency situations, that all persons subject to the screening are accorded a standard of living which guarantees their subsistence, protects their physical and mental health and respects their rights under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Persons shall be accommodated with the standards and provisions of Directive (EU) xxx/xxx (Receptions Conditions Directive).
Amendment 482 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 6 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 6 – point c
(c) registration of biometric data in the appropriate databases as referred to in Article 14(6), to the extent it has not occurred yetaccordance with Regulation (EU) xxxx/xxxx [Eurodac Regulation];
Amendment 490 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 7 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 7 – introductory part
7. Member States shall designate competent authorities to carry out the screening. They shall deploy appropriate staff and sufficient resources to carry out the screening in an efficient way. All the staff of the authorities carrying out the screening shall have the adequate training in order to be fully aware of international human rights and refugee law and the CEAS, to be able to comply with the Fundamental Rights Charter in all proceedings and to be able to identify and treat accordingly persons with special needs. Member States must ensure that staff of the Asylum authorities is involved in the screening so that, even in cases where a third-country national has not submitted an official application for international protection, this need can be recognised and that there can be an adequate assessment of the applicability of the concepts of first country of asylum and safe third country.
Amendment 493 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall designate qualified medical staffprofessionals to carry out the health check provided for in Article 9 and always in compliance with Articles 1, 3 and 4 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Medical professionals shall be trained in order to be able to properly identify vulnerabilities and persons with special needs and to refer them accordingly. National child protection authorities and national anti- trafficking rapporteurs shall also be involved, where appropriate. Member states shall also designate trafficking protection officers that would support the early identification of potential victims and ensure their protection.
Amendment 500 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2
The competent authorities may be assisted or supported in the performance of the screening by experts or liaison officers and teams deployed by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency and the [European Union Agency for Asylum] within the limits of their mandates, insofar as the specific staff has the training and qualifications as set out in the above two subparagraphs. The role, powers, tasks, responsibilities and activities, including the processing of personal data, of the two Agencies shall be clearly defined, confined to support tasks, and open to external scrutiny, including via an effective complaints mechanisms and by the independent monitoring mechanism foreseen in Article 7.
Amendment 503 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Member states shall put in place specific safeguards, such as: (a) appoint as soon as possible and before the screening starts, a representative when an unaccompanied minor, or a person declaring to be an unaccompanied minor, is concerned; (b) always apply the “benefit of the doubt” principle in favour of the minor when a person’s age is unclear or contested and no supporting documentation exists that proves his/her age.Hence, treat as a minor any person regarding whom there are reasons to believe that they are a minor as well as any person declaring to be a minor, unless and until an age assessment or documentation proves otherwise.Age assessment procedures shall take place only when there is a reasonable doubt that the person is not a minor, they shall respect the best interests of the child and primarily use non-medical procedures and, under no circumstances, shall they use forced undressing or genitalia examination; (c) ensuring that, in addition to the monitoring mechanism referred to Article 7, non-governmental and civil society organisations specialised in child protection shall access to monitor procedures of identification, verification and age assessment; (d) screenings of unaccompanied children and children with their families are carried out in appropriate facilities for the reception of unaccompanied minors or of families on the territory of Member States, within the mainstream system of protection for minors; (e) ensure that the statements of minors only form the basis of the de-briefing form if they are assisted by their parent(s) or a representative; (f) ensure the third-country national concerned can have access to and correct information included in the de-briefing form; (g) ensure that all third country nationals concerned have access to free legal aid.
Amendment 506 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall adopt relevant provisions to investigateensuring: - constant monitoring and assessment of fundamental rights compliance of border management activities in their territories or by their authorities, including border surveillance, screening, asylum and return procedures, - prompt investigation of all allegations of non-respect ofor fundamental rights in relation to the screening. , - prosecution at all instances in which such allegations are substantiated by independent fact-finding, - penalising violations of fundamental rights, including those of irregular migrants, with proportionate, effective and dissuasive sanctions.
Amendment 515 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. EFor the purposes of paragraph 1, each Member State shall establishtask an independent monitoring mechanism with
Amendment 519 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – indent -1 (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – indent -1 (new)
-1 monitoring on an on-going basis, including during emergency situations, all border management activities in its territories; whether performed by national authorities or relevant EU agencies, as well as any such activities performed by national authorities outside its territories,
Amendment 520 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – indent -1 (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – indent -1 (new)
-1 assessing if the activities observed are compliant with applicable national, Union and international law,
Amendment 524 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – indent 1
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – indent 1
— to ensureing compliance with EUnational, Union and international law, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights, during the screening;border surveillance, screening, asylum, return and border procedures,
Amendment 527 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – indent 1 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – indent 1 a (new)
- ensuring that allegations of non- respect for fundamental rights, including in relation to access to the asylum procedure and non-compliance with the principle of non-refoulement, are dealt with effectively and without undue delay.
Amendment 532 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – indent 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – indent 2
— where applicable, to ensureing compliance with national and Union rules on detention of the person concernedmigrants, in particular concerning the grounds and the duration, the necessity and proportionality as well as the duration, the conditions, including access to free legal aid, of the detention;
Amendment 534 #
2020/0278(COD)
- reporting publicly on all cases of non-compliance it may find,
Amendment 539 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – indent 3
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – indent 3
— to ensure that allegations of non- respect for fundamental rights in relation to the screening, including in relriggering and conducting investigations to accssess to the asylum procedure and non- compliance with the principle of non- refoulement, are dealt with effectively and without undue delay.violation of fundamental rights,
Amendment 543 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – indent 3 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – indent 3 a (new)
- handing over to the national prosecuting authorities all evidence it has been able to gather on individual cases of fundamental rights breaches,
Amendment 545 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – indent 3 c (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – indent 3 c (new)
- monitoring the effectiveness of prosecutions into and, if appropriate, the sanctioning of violations of fundamental rights of migrants.
Amendment 548 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph -1 (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph -1 (new)
-1 The independent monitoring mechanisms shall issue recommendations to Member States and EU agencies as referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, and shall report annually and publicly to the national parliaments on their findings and recommendations and on the measures taken to implement their recommendations.
Amendment 550 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall put in place adequate safeguards to guarantee the independence of the mechanism. ensure that the independent monitoring mechanism can carry out its work ensuring, as a minimum, the recommendations of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT). In particular, Member States and, where appropriate the relevant EU agencies, shall ensure that the independent monitoring mechanism is at all times: - able to receive and act upon information received from international organisations, non-governmental organisations, journalists, EU agencies and institutions even if they are not part of the mechanism, and all affected individuals even if they are not present in the respective Member State or in EU territory, - granted unhindered access to any location and area, including blue and green borders as well as police stations, detention and reception facilities, which it considers relevant for fulfilling its mandate, to perform periodic, unlimited in number and unrestricted announced as well as unannounced visits, - granted access to all equipment used in the context of border management and receive information on its use, - granted access to all documents, files and recordings of relevance to its mission and be allowed to make or receive copies even of those for which they have to ensure due confidentiality, - able to receive complaints from individuals who allege violations of their fundamental rights, or their representatives, regardless of the timing of the alleged incidents or the location of the individual at the time of the complaint, - has the power to have unhindered access and hear witnesses all individuals who allege having witnessed violations of fundamental rights or who allege violation of their fundamental rights, in full respect of confidentiality.
Amendment 561 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 562 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 570 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 573 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
In order to monitor compliance with fundamental rights a specific independent complaint mechanism shall be set up by the involved national and international authorities and bodies, for third-country nationals, including the ones who have not been granted 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. In Member States where such a complaint mechanism already exists within independent national human rights mechanisms then they could be used instead of setting up a new one. The staff of this mechanism, including those operating the hotline, shall not be criminalised by Member States on the grounds of their work therein.
Amendment 578 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 b (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 b (new)
Member States shall provide information, in writing and orally, about the mechanism to potentially affected individuals in a concise, transparent, intelligible and easily accessible form, using clear and plain language that the affected individual understands.
Amendment 579 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 c (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 c (new)
Once the independence and appropriate powers of the mechanism verified by the Fundamental Rights Agency, the mechanism shall receive funding from the Integrated Border Management Fund: Instrument for financial support for border management and visa (BMVI) and other EU funding sources and shall be financially independent from the member State in which it operates.
Amendment 580 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 d (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 d (new)
The mechanism shall, every year, publicly report on its findings and recommendations, including on steps taken to hold those responsible of violations of fundamental rights to account. These reports shall contribute to the assessment of compliance with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights as per Regulation (EU) 2018/0196 (Common Provisions Regulation) Article 11(1) and Annex III.
Amendment 582 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. TMember States shall inform, in a clear and comprehensive manner in a language they understand, all third- country nationals subject to the screening shall be succinctly informed about the purposeabout its purpose, duration and the modalities of the screeningas well as of their rights, such as:
Amendment 585 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the steps and, purpose, duration and the modalities of the screening as well as possible outcomes of the screening;
Amendment 589 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the rights and obligations of third country nationals during the screening, including the obligation on them to remain in the designated facilities during the screening.
Amendment 591 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) on their right to contact and be visited by organisations, bodies, and individuals, as referred to in Article 8 which provide information and legal assistance and on their right to contact the monitoring mechanism foreseen in Article 7;
Amendment 594 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
Amendment 595 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b c (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b c (new)
(b c) their right and the modalities to apply for international protection or other forms of protection according to national law as well as the relocation procedure under the automatic distribution mechanism established by Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX[Asylum and Migration Management];
Amendment 605 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. DurAt the beginning of the screening, they shall also, as appropriate, receive informationMember States shall provide clear information in a language that each person subject to screening understands, on:
Amendment 606 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the applicable rules on the conditions of entry for third-country nationals in accordance with Regulation (No) 2016/399 [Schengen Border Code], as well as on other conditions of entry, stay and residence of the Member State concerned, to the extent this information has not been given already;
Amendment 610 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) the obligation for illegally staying third-country nationals, where appropriate, to return in accordance with Directive XXXXX [Return Directive];
Amendment 612 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point f
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point f
(f) the informationrights referred to in Article 13 and 15 to 19 included of the Regulation (EU) 2016/67935 [GDPR]. , in Article13 of the Directive (EU) 2016/680 [Police Directive] and in Article 15 of the Regulation (EU) 2018/1725. _________________ 35 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), OJ L 119, 4.5.2016
Amendment 615 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3
Article 8 – paragraph 3
3. The information provided during the screening shall be given in a language and a format which the third-country national understands or is reasonably supposed to understand. The information shall be given in writing and, in exceptional circumstances, where necessary, orally using interpretation services. It shall be provided in an appropriate manner taking into account the age and the gender of the person orally using interpretation services and clear language, including with the support of adequately trained cultural mediators. It shall be provided in an appropriate manner taking into account the age and the gender of the person, by appropriately trained professionals and at the presence of the representative appointed pursuant to Article 9a in case of unaccompanied minors.
Amendment 621 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. For those third-country nationals seeking international protection, this information may be provided at the same time as the information as laid down in Article 8(2) of Regulation (EU) xxxx/xxxx [Asylum Procedure Regulation]. The responsible authorities shall make the necessary arrangements for interpretation services and, where necessary and appropriate, for cultural mediation services to be available to facilitate access to the procedure for international protection.
Amendment 625 #
2020/0278(COD)
4. Member States mayshall authorise relevant and competent national, international and non-governmental organisations and bodies to provide third country nationalsand human rights defenders to access the relevant facilities in order to provide third country nationals, in safe and appropriate conditions, with information under this article during the screening according to the provisions established by national law.
Amendment 629 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 a (new)
Article 8 a (new)
Article 8 a Right to information and rectification 1. Third-country nationals subject to the screening will receive a copy of all personal data processed and information registered about them under this Regulation in electronic form and on paper directly after the screening procedure. Third-country nationals will have the right to obtain another copy of all personal data processed and information registered about them under this Regulation for as long as the information is stored. 2. Third-country nationals subject to the screening shall have the right to know the exact retention period of all their stored and processed data, included in the form or its Annex. In addition, they shall have the right to rectify or supplement the personal data collected during the screening procedure or any information they have supplied during the screening procedure, particularly those referred to in Articles 10 and in the debriefing form in Article 13 of this Regulation.
Amendment 632 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. TAll third-country nationals submitted to the screening referred to in Article 3 shall be subject to a preliminary medical examination with a view to identifying any needs for immediate care or isolation on public health grounds, unless, based on the circumstances concerning the general state of the individual third-country nationals concerned and the grounds for directing them to the screening, the relevant competent authorities are satisfied that no preliminary medical screening is necessary. In that case, they shall inform those persons accordinglyby qualified and adequately trained medical professionals with a view to identifying any needs for health care or isolation on public health grounds.
Amendment 637 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. For those third-country nationals seeking international protection, the health check referred to in the first subparagraph may form part of the medical examination as laid down in Article 23 of Regulation (EU) xxxx/xxxx [Asylum Procedure Regulation].
Amendment 639 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Where relevant, itThe medical professionals shall be checked whether the persons referred to in paragraph 1 are in a vulnerable situation, or are victims of torture or other degrading and inhuman treatment , are stateless or at risk of statelesness, or have special reception or procedural needs within the meaning of Article 201 of the [recast] Reception Conditions Directive and Article 20 of Regulation (EU) xxxx/xxxx [Asylum Procedure Regulation].
Amendment 642 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Where a person claims not to have any nationality or when there are reasonable grounds to believe a person may be stateless, this should be clearly registered pending a full determination of whether the person is stateless in a separate procedure.
Amendment 645 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. Where there are indications of vulnerabilities or special reception or procedural needs, the third-country national concerned shall receive timely and adequate support in view of their physical and mental health in adequate facilities within the territory of the Member State. Minors and persons identified as vulnerable or with special needs shall have access to the same level of support as applicants for international protection have under Chapter IV of the Reception Conditions Directive and, if they apply for international protection, they should be referred to the normal asylum procedure.They shall not be subject to detention. In the case of minors, support shall be given in a child-friendly manner by personnel adequately trained and qualified to deal with minors, and in cooperation with child protection authorities.
Amendment 647 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. In the case of unaccompanied minors Member States shall appoint a representative to assist and represent the minor and he or she shall be informed thereof.Where applicable, this representative shall be the same as the representative to be appointed in accordance with Article 23 of Directive (EU) XXX/XXX [Reception Conditions Directive].The unaccompanied minor shall be informed immediately of the appointment of the representative. The representative shall perform his or her duties in accordance with the principle of the best interests of the child and shall have the necessary expertise to that end. In order to ensure the minor’s well-being and social development the person acting as representative shall be changed only when necessary.Organisations or individuals whose interests conflict or could potentially conflict with those of the unaccompanied minors hall not be eligible to become representatives. Member States shall place a natural person who is designated as representative or the person referred to in Article 23, paragraph 1, first subparagraph, point (a), of Directive (EU) XXX/XXX [Reception Conditions Directive] in charge of a proportionate and limited number of unaccompanied minors at the same time to ensure that he or she is able to perform his or her tasks effectively.
Amendment 651 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4
Article 9 – paragraph 4
Amendment 657 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. To the extent it has not yet occurred during the application of Article 8 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, the identity of third-country nationals submitted to the screening pursuant to Article 3 or Article 5 shall be verified or established, by using in particular the following, in combination with national and European databaseswhere applicable the following:
Amendment 660 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) data or information provided by or obtained from the third-country national concerned; and
Amendment 668 #
2020/0278(COD)
2. For the purpose of verification or the identification referred to in paragraph 1, the competent authorities shall query any relevant national databases as well as the common identity repository (CIR) referred to in Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2019/817. The biometric data of a third- country national taken live during the screening, as well as the identit shall be taken only once for the purposes of this Regulation and their registration in Eurodac. No force or coercion shall be used to ensure the taking of third-country dnata and, where available, travel document data shall be used to that enionals’ personal data, including biometric data. The use of biometric data provided during the screening for the purposes of training, deploying or using biometric identification systems in publicly accessible places, at or around borders or in and around reception facilities shall be prohibited.
Amendment 675 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. Third -country nationals submitted to the screening pursuant to Article 3 or Article 5 shall undergo a security check to verify that they do not constitute a threat to internal securitywhether they are also registered in any of the relevant databases. The security check may cover both the third-country nationals and the objects in their possession. The law of the Member State concerned shall apply to any searches carried outas well as the principles of necessity and proportionality shall apply to any searches carried out. The security check shall not include access to electronic devices in the possession of third-country nationals nor access to their private communications or social media accounts. The security check shall also be part of the elements and actions possible to be scrutinised by the monitoring mechanism referred to in Article 7.
Amendment 681 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. For the purpose of conducting the security check referred to in paragraph 1, and to the extent that theyse checks have not yet done soalready taken place in accordance with Article 8(3), point (a)(vi), of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, the competent authorities shall query relevant national and Union databases, in particular the Schengen Information System (SIS).
Amendment 683 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Amendment 687 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Article 11 – paragraph 4
4. As regards the consultation of EES, ETIAS and VIS pursuant to paragraph 3, the retrieved data shall be limited to indicating refusals of a travel authorisation, refusals of entry, or decisions to refuse, annul or revoke a visa or residence permit, which are based on security grounds. Access to CIR and use of ESP by competent authorities shall be limited to the extent that this is strictly necessary for the performance of their specific tasks in accordance with those purposes, and shall be proportionate to the objectives pursued.
Amendment 693 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Amendment 695 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3
Article 12 – paragraph 3
Amendment 698 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4
Article 12 – paragraph 4
Amendment 699 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 5
Article 12 – paragraph 5
Amendment 705 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
On completion of the screening, the competent authorities shall, with regard to the persons referred to in Article 3 and in Article 5, complete the form in Annex I containing:
Amendment 707 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) name, date and place of birth and sex/gender;
Amendment 711 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) their initial indication of nationalities or statelesness, countries of residence prior to arrival and languages spoken;
Amendment 714 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) information on the health and vulnerability checks performed in accordance with Article 9 and if they entail special reception or procedural needs and, where appropriate, the fact that those checks have not been completed during the screening procedure;
Amendment 718 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) reason for unauthorised arrival, entry, and, where appropriate illegal stay or residence, includingwhich screening has been performed and information on whether the person made an application for international protection;
Amendment 720 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(c a) information as to whether the third-country national has family members or relatives located on the territory of any of the Member States;
Amendment 725 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 728 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point e
Amendment 732 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The procedure should ensure that the person exercises his or her right to be heard and to an adequate remedy. The de- briefing form should be an administrative decision amenable to appeal. The person should receive a copy of the de-briefing form in a language that they understand and be able to comment on the information contained therein. The person should be assisted by an interpreter. The person should also have access to an appeal procedure to contest any information provided in the form and should be advised about appeal channels.
Amendment 735 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 b (new)
The form shall be drafted in a language which the third-country national understands and behanded over to the person concerned before transmitting it to the relevant authorities referred to in Article 14, in order to allow the third- country national to rebut the representation of the facts included in the form and effectively exercise the rights enshrined in Articles 15, 16, 22 and 77 of GDPR.Competent authorities shall record in the form any remark or objection from the third-country national concerning the accuracy of data and information included therein. Information included in the form shall be also provided orally, with the support of an interpreter where necessary. In case of unaccompanied minors, information shall be provided and the form shall be handed over at the presence of the representative appointed pursuant to Article 9.
Amendment 741 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 761 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
In cases not related to search and rescue operations, entry may be refused in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation 2016/399. and only for third-country nationals who have not yet entered the territory of the Member State and are at a land or air official border crossing point, entry may be refused in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation 2016/399 which, entails, among others, that the third- country national shall receive a substantiated decision stating the precise reasons for the refusal of entry and shall have the right to appeal.
Amendment 767 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. Third-country nationals who have expressed the wish, make or have made an application for international protection shall be referred to the competent authorities referred to in Article XY of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedure Regulation], together with the form referred to in Article 13 of this Regulation. On that occasion, the authorities conducting the screening shall point in the de-briefing form to any elements which seem at first sight to be relevant to refer the third-country nationals concerned in in order for the asylum procedures foreseen in that Regulation to thbe accelerated examination procedure or the border procedurepplied.
Amendment 773 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4
Article 14 – paragraph 4
Amendment 775 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 5
Article 14 – paragraph 5
Amendment 778 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. The decision on referral, as regulated under this Article, shall be provided in a written document, to which the de-briefing form is to be appended.The written referral decision shall contain the reasons in fact and law for the choice of the procedure and shall be subject to an appeal.The person concerned shall have access to legal assistance to be able to seek a remedy. In addition to the above and in order for the person to be in a position to effectively exercise the rights referred to in Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 [GDPR], in Article 13 of Directive (EU) 2016/680 [Police Directive] and in Article 15 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725, in particular the right to request from the data controller access to and rectification or erasure of personal data and the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority, the person concerned shall be provided with a copy of the form at the same time as it is transmitted to the relevant authorities as referred to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of this Article.
Amendment 779 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6
Article 14 – paragraph 6
Amendment 781 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 7
Article 14 – paragraph 7
7. Where the third country nationals referred to in Article(s) 3(1) and Article 5subject to screening procedures are referred to anthe appropriate procedure regarding asylum or return, the screening ends. Where not all the checks have been completed within the deadlines referred to in Article 6(3) and (5), the screening shall nevertheless end with regard to that person, who shall be referred to a relevant procedure. Where it becomes apparent during the screening that the third- country national concerned fulfils the entry conditions set out in Article 6 of Regulation (EU)2016/399, the screening shall end. Health and vulnerability checks that could not be completed shall be promptly resumed in the next procedure to ensure the persons' specific reception or procedural needs are taken into account.
Amendment 786 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. The third-country national concerned shall be afforded an effective remedy to appeal against or seek review of the outcome of the screening before a competent judicial or administrative authority or a competent body composed of members who are impartial and who enjoy safeguards of independence. Notwithstanding the above provisions, persons identified as stateless or at risk of statelessness during the screening 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.
Amendment 790 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 a (new)
Article 14 a (new)
Article 14 a After the Screening 1. Once the Screening procedure is over, Member States competent authorities may decide to return a third-country national if they have clearly denied to apply for international protection and are not eligible to apply for a residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay for compassionate, humanitarian or other grounds under Member State legislation or other provisions of Union or international law. In these cases, Directive (EU)2008/115/EC (Return Directive) shall apply entailing all the relevant obligations for the Member States and safeguards for the third- country nationals. 2. The application of Directive (EU) 2008/115/EC (Return Directive) shall take place without prejudice to Article 6(5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 and paragraph 7(a) of this Article and the principle of non-refoulement and other fundamental rights obligations under the Charter of Fundamental Rights and other EU and international obligations and without prejudice to Article 6(4) of Directive 2008/115. 3. In cases affecting minors, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration. This requires that procedures respecting Directive (EU) 2008/115/EC (Return Directive) may only be applied after a documented best interests of the child procedure is carried out by a multidisciplinary team assessing and identifying a durable solution. If the procedure concludes that return is considered to be in the best interests of the child, priority should be given to implementation through voluntary departure with child-specific assistance.
Amendment 792 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16
Article 16
Regulation (EC) No 767/2008
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Amendment 794 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17
Article 17
Regulation (EU) 2017/2226
Article 6(1) – Article 9(1) – Article 9(4)
Article 6(1) – Article 9(1) – Article 9(4)
Amendments to Regulation (EU) Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 is amended as follows: (1) In Article 6(1), the following point (1) is added: ‘‘(1) support the objectives of the screening established by Regulation (EU) 2020/XXX of the European Parliament and of the Council38 , in particular for the checks provided under Article 10 thereof. (a) paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: ‘2a. The competent authorities referred to in Article 5(6) of Regulation (EU) 2020/XXX shall have access to the EES to consult data.; ‘Access to the EES data stored in the CIR shall be reserved exclusively for the duly authorised staff of the national authorities of each Member State and for the duly authorised staff of the Union agencies that are competent for the purposes laid down in Article 20, Article 20a and Article 21 of Regulation (EU) 2019/817. Such access shall be limited according to the extent that the data are required for the performance of their tasks for those purposes, and proportionate to the objectives pursued. _________________ 38 Regulation (EU) No XXX of the European Parliament and of the Council of [...] introducing a screening of third country nationals at the external borders and amending Regulations (EC) No 767/2008, (EU) 2017/2226, (EU) 2018/1240 and (EU) 2019/817].rticle 17 deleted 2017/2226
Amendment 797 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18
Article 18
Regulation (EU) 2018/1240
Article 4(a) – Article 13(5)
Article 4(a) – Article 13(5)
Amendment 798 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2019/817
Article 17
Article 17
A common identity repository (CIR), creating an individual file for each person that is registered in the EES, VIS, ETIAS, Eurodac or ECRIS-TCN containing the data referred to in Article 18, is established for the purpose of facilitating and assisting in the correct identification of persons registered in the EES, VIS, ETIAS, Eurodac and ECRIS-TCN in accordance with Article 20 and 20a, of supporting the functioning of the MID in accordance with Article 21 and of facilitating and streamlining access by designated authorities and Europol to the EES, VIS, ETIAS and Eurodac, where necessary for the prevention, detection or investigation of terrorist offences or other serious criminal offences in accordance with Article 22. For the purposes of Regulation(EU) No XXX/XXX [Screening Regulation] the query of the CIR shall only check against the EES, the VIS and the Eurodac.
Amendment 804 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
[Threewo years after entry into force, the Commission shall report on the implementation of the measures set out in this Regulation. The Report shall be also presented to the European Parliament and shall be public.]
Amendment 806 #
2020/0278(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
No sooner than [fivetwo] years after the date of application of this Regulation, and every fivetwo years thereafter, the Commission shall carry out an evaluation of this Regulation. The Commission shall present a Report on the main findings to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee on its main findings, including the impact of the provisions of this Regulation on the fundamental rights and freedoms enshrined in the EU Charter of fundamental rights, as well as their added value vis-à-vis the EU asylum and Schengen acquis as a whole. Member States shall provide the Commission all information necessary for the preparation of that report, at the latest six months before the [fivetwo] years’ time limit expires.
Amendment 82 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
(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 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
Amendment 124 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
Amendment 150 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
Amendment 158 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
Amendment 165 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
Amendment 180 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 214 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 x (new)
Recital 12 x (new)
(12x) The examination procedure should be used for the adoption of a standard form for the exchange of relevant information on unaccompanied minors; of uniform conditions for the consultation and exchange of information on minors and dependent persons; of uniform conditions on the preparation and submission of take charge requests and take back notifications; of two lists of relevant elements of proof and circumstantial evidence, and the periodical revision thereof; of a laissez- passer for take charge requests; of uniform conditions for the consultation and exchange of information regarding transfers; of a standard form for the exchange of data before a transfer; of a common health certificate; of uniform conditions and practical arrangements for the exchange of information on a person’s health data before a transfer, and of secure electronic transmission channels for the transmission of requests.
Amendment 215 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
Amendment 220 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
Amendment 227 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
Amendment 233 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
Amendment 241 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
Amendment 247 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
Amendment 255 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
Amendment 264 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
Amendment 277 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
Amendment 294 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
Amendment 306 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
Amendment 310 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
Amendment 320 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
Amendment 331 #
2020/0277(COD)
(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 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
Amendment 345 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
Amendment 353 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
Amendment 356 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
Amendment 362 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
Amendment 370 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
Amendment 392 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
Amendment 395 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 434 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter II – title
Chapter II – title
II Solidarity mechanismDetermination of the situation of emergency
Amendment 438 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2
Article 2
Amendment 469 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
Amendment 514 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 b (new)
Article 3 b (new)
Amendment 520 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 c (new)
Article 3 c (new)
Amendment 523 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 e (new)
Article 3 e (new)
Amendment 529 #
2020/0277(COD)
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 #
2020/0277(COD)
Amendment 567 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6
Article 6
Amendment 575 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7
Article 7
Amendment 582 #
Amendment 591 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9
Article 9
Amendment 602 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter V – title
Chapter V – title
V Granting of immediateprima facie international protection
Amendment 608 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10
Article 10
Amendment 659 #
2020/0277(COD)
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.
Amendment 661 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 b (new)
Article 10 b (new)
Article 10 b Monitoring of the implementation of this regulation and fundamental rights 1. The Commission shall monitor the implementation of this Regulation through quarterly reports on persons being transferred to the different Member States and on the numbers of persons being granted prima facie international protection. This data shall be disaggregated by age, nationality, gender. In the event of delays in the implementation of relocation obligations, the Commission shall invite the Member States to fulfil their obligations within a period of less than 3 months. 2. On the basis of the annual Commission's yearly report on the implementation of EU asylum acquis to be provided under Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management Regulation] as well as reports of the Asylum Agency, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, the Council of Europe, UNHCR and other relevant stakeholders, the European Commission shall initiate infringement procedures in the event of repeated failure to comply with their relocation obligations under this Regulation or significant deficiencies are found in the management of procedures for examining asylum applications or reception measures of third country nationals or stateless persons who have been transferred. 3. All border management activities in Member States territories during emergency situations, whether performed by national authorities or relevant EU agencies, as well as any such activities performed by national authorities outside its territories and measures taken by Member States in emergency situations in asylum shall be monitored under the independent monitoring mechanism set up in Article 7 of the Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Screening Regulation].
Amendment 4 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the proposal for a Council regulation represents a step forward in making the work of the Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) more effective by enabling it to operate fully in all areas of Union competence and by clarifying its tasks and working methods;
Amendment 12 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the role of the FRA as an independent and fully-fledged EU agency and fundamental rights watchdog should be further strengthened and its mandate enlarged;
Amendment 13 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Amendment 16 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas EU ambitions for developing a stronger external dimension should be reflected in the further involvement of the FRA in the monitoring and scrutiny of the acts and activities of the Union and its Member States in the area of the common foreign and security policy, and in particular the common security and defence policy which falls under its aegis;
Amendment 21 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas in a globalised world, international cooperation with third countriest is increasingly important in order to guarantee sufficientfull protection of fundamental rights within the framework of international cooperation with third countries;
Amendment 23 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Amendment 27 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas building trust among EU citizens in the work of police and justice authorities can only be achieved when the acts and activities of the Union and its Member States are sufficicarefully and consistently monitored and scrutinised to ensure that they are in line with fundamental values, andand swiftly brought into line with fundamental rights obligations when breaches occur; whereas breaches of fundamental rights in the area of policing and justice have grave consequences for those affected; whereas therefore FRA activity in the area of freedom, security and justice is therefore of the utmost importance;
Amendment 37 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. AcknowledgeConsiders the objective of the FRA in providing information, assistance and expertise on fundamental rights and in defending and protecting fundamental rights in the EU to be of the utmost importance; underlines its role as a facilitator in supporting the Union and its Member States when taking measures or formulating courses of action relating to fundamental rights;
Amendment 41 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Encourages the Commission, the Council and the European Parliament to systematically use the data produced by FRA in policy making;
Amendment 42 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that antisemitism is aracism and xenophobia are complex phenomenona and requires a holistic response across policy areas; recalls that the rise of Jew-hatred and antisemitismany form of discrimination poses a threat to our democratic values; notes with serious concern the increase in antisemitic hate speech; stresses the need for action in that regard; regrets that although there were some policy developments regarding antisemitism at EU level recently, very few developments addressed racism and xenophobia; stresses that some Member States adopted policies to better address racism and to encourage people to report hate crime, but assessing their impact remains difficult; notes with serious concern that people with minority backgrounds and migrants continued to experience harassment, violence and ethnic and racial discrimination in different areas of life in the EU, and that discriminatory ethnic profiling remains a persistent challenge in a number of Member States1a; _________________ 1aFRA's Fundamental Rights Report 2020, Page 59
Amendment 50 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Reaffirms its strong willingness to enable the FRA to operate fully in all areas of Union competence and to fulfil its role as designed by the EU legislators, and therefore to identify the principles and conditions under which it might give its consent;
Amendment 53 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Regrets that the annual budget of the agency has been static since 2013 while the budgets of other agencies such as Frontex have seen steep increases, and calls on the Commission to allocate an increased budget to allow the Agency to implement new projects identified by the Agency following its stakeholder consultation process, as well as to increase its capacity to monitor the application of fundamental rights and fundamental rights violations;
Amendment 61 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point i – paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 4 – point i – paragraph 1 a (new)
Strongly insists that the Agency is competent in the area of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters;
Amendment 62 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point i a (new)
Paragraph 4 – point i a (new)
(i a) Believes that FRA should be empowered to intervene at its own initiative in the legislative processes;
Amendment 63 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point i b (new)
Paragraph 4 – point i b (new)
(i b) Recalls that FRA is also competent to provide input and advice in the context of Article 7 TEU proceedings, and believes that it should carry out a regular monitoring exercise and produce periodic reports on the situation of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights in the EU and its Member States, and that such reports should be taken into account in the Article 7 TEU proceedings and by national and European authorities;
Amendment 64 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point i c (new)
Paragraph 4 – point i c (new)
(i c) Regrets the absence of an explicit coordinating role for the FRA in identifying the main positive and negative developments in each Member States in the new Regulation on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States, and urges the Commission to take the necessary steps to provide for an expanded role for the FRA in same;
Amendment 68 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point ii – paragraph 1
Paragraph 4 – point ii – paragraph 1
Observer membership should not be restricted to candidate countries or countries with a Stabilisation and Association Agreement, but should be open to other third countries, such as European Economic Area/European Free Trade Association countries, or the UK post- Brexit and countries covered by the European neighbourhood policy;
Amendment 70 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point iii – paragraph 1
Paragraph 4 – point iii – paragraph 1
Amendment 80 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point iii a (new)
Paragraph 4 – point iii a (new)
(iii a) Believes that the FRA should have an enhanced operational role in regard to monitoring respect for fundamental rights at the external borders of the European Union;
Amendment 83 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point iv – paragraph 1
Paragraph 4 – point iv – paragraph 1
The proposal by the Commission to discontinue the previouscurrent five-year Multiannual Framework should be taken on board; the FRA should prepare its programming in close consultation with the FRA national liaison officers, in order to coordinate the work in the best possible way with the respective national authorities; the draft programming document should be sent to the competent Council preparatory body and the European Parliament for discussion, and in the light of the outcome of these discussions, the Director of the FRA mustshould submit the draft programming document to the FRA Management Board for adoption;
Amendment 86 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – introductory part
Paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. Calls on the Commission to consider a broader revision of the FRA Regulation following a thorough impact assessment, in order to strengthen the independence of the FRA; calls for the Commission to reflect in particular uncil to also take into account the following considerations when amending the FRA Regulation:
Amendment 96 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point i – paragraph 1
Paragraph 5 – point i – paragraph 1
As is the case with many other EU agencies, the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs should have the right to nominate one additional member of the FRA Management Board; members of the Management Board should have the right to be reappointed once, and the restriction on non-consecutive terms is unnecessary;
Amendment 103 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point iii – paragraph 1
Paragraph 5 – point iii – paragraph 1
Upon the request of the Council, the Commission or Parliament, the FRA should be able to carry out scientific research, surveys, and preparatory and feasibility studies and formulate and publish conclusions and opinions on specific thematic topics; this should also be possible on the initiative of the FRA, and not only upon the request of an EU institution; furthermore, individual Member States or a group of Member States should have the right of initiative;
Amendment 110 #
2020/0112R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Calls on the Commission to carry out in the near future a more comprehensive and ambitious revision of the FRA Regulation following a thorough impact assessment, with a view to expanding the mandate and strengthening the independence of the FRA;
Amendment 9 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 a (new)
Citation 12 a (new)
- having regard to Directive 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on the Presumption of Innocence,
Amendment 12 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 19
Citation 19
Amendment 21 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the EAW is a simplified and fast-track judicial surrender procedure which was adopted in haste after 9/11 and which has, since its launch, has beenbecome the flagship and most commonly used instrument for mutual recognition in criminal matters;
Amendment 23 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the EAW is a success and has replaced extraditions with transfsurrenders; whereas transfers have been shortened to 4he duration of surrender procedures decreased to 40 days on average in 2017 from 50 days on average in2016 where the individual does not consent; whereas some Member States reported surrender procedures lasting up to 90 days where the individual does not consent1a; _________________ 1aReplies to questionnaire on quantitative information on the practical operation of theEuropean arrest warrant – Year 2017, SWD(2019) 318 final.
Amendment 28 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas EU judicial cooperation on criminal matters is based on mutual recognition introducformulated by the 1999 Tampere European Council; whereas the Treaty of Lisbon significantly changed the EU’s prerogativesconstitutional setting and provided an explicit legal basis for rules and procedures for ensuring mutual recognition of all forms of judgments and judicial decisions in Article 82 TFEU;
Amendment 29 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas mutual recognition is not a new but was developed in the area of free movement of goods, persons, services and capital (Cassis de Dijon logic)concept developed in the AFSJ, but was initially developed in the internal market (Cassis de Dijon logic); whereas, however, mutual recognition in the AFSJ has specific peculiarities, given the implications for fundamental rights and national sovereignty and the extent to which it needs to be facilitated by the harmonisation of substantive and procedural criminal law, particularly as regards procedural safeguards;
Amendment 34 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas mutual recognition means the direct recognition of judicial decisions from at a judicial decision should not be refused only on the basis that it is issued in another Member States, with non- recognition as an exception; whereas it also entail based on the grounds for refusal laid down by a legal instrument; whereas it requires cooperation between the competent judicial authorities;
Amendment 36 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas mutual recognition is a consequence of mutual trustpresupposes a high level of mutual trust between Member States, which should be based on a common understanding of the rule of law and fundamental rights; whereas reinforcing trust is key for the EAW to operate smoothly;
Amendment 39 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the EAW is the foundation for establishing an area of fone tool used in the consolidation of an area of freedom, security and justice; whereas Article 6 TEU on the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, security and justiceArticle 8 TFEU, Article 15(3) TFEU, Article 16 TFEU, and Articles 18 to 25 TFEU are crucial elements of the framework of the AFSJ; whereas itsthe incorrect application of the EAW could have devastnegatingve effects on the functioning of the Schengen area and on fundamental rights;
Amendment 43 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas a Union of equality that protects must ensure protection for all victims of crime12 ; rom fundamental rights violation for all, including suspects, convicts, and victims of crime12 ; whereas the EU has adopted instruments that aim to strengthen victims’ rights, which do not prescribe detention and surrender of suspects or convicted persons; _________________ 12EU Strategy on victims’ rights (2020- 25).
Amendment 46 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas most issues raised by the application of the EAW have been to some extent clarified by the CJEU, such as ne bis in idem13 , judicial authority14 , primacy and EU harmonisation15 , independence of the judiciary16 , fundamental rights17 , double criminality18, grounds for refusal, and the extradition of EU citizens to third countries19 ; _________________ 13 C-261/09, Mantello. 14 C-453/16 PPU, Özçelik; C-452/16 PPU, Poltorak; C-477/16 PPU, Kovalkovas; Joined Cases C-508/18 and C-82/19 PPU, OG and PI. 15C-399/11, Melloni or C-42/17, M.A.S. and M.B. 16C-216/18 PPU, Minister for Justice and Equality. 17Joined Cases C-404/15 and C-659/15 PPU, Aranyosi and Căldăraru; C-128/18, Dorobantu. 18 C-289/15, Grundza. 19C-182/15, Petruhhin, judgment of 6 September 2016; C-191/16, Pisciotti, judgment of 10 April 2018; C-247/17 Raugevicius, judgment of 13 November 2018 and C-897/19 PPU, Ruska Federacija, Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 2 April 2020, etc.
Amendment 47 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas double criminality is a concept of international extradition and, although theoretically is scarcely compatible with mutual recognition; whereas the list of offences without a double criminality check should be reassessed; whereas in its initi, in practice it may be an important safeguard for requested persons; whereas double criminality is only an optional pgroposal, the Commission sought an exhaustive list for which surrender could be refused (‘negative list’)und for refusal of the EAW and is rarely invoked by executing authorities; whereas the list of offences without a double criminality already includes a broad array of offences, many of which are not highly harmonised in the EU Member States yet;
Amendment 52 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas the concept of mutual recognition needsas such would not require the harmonisation of criminal material law and procedure, but the practice of judicial cooperation has shown that common standards and definitions are necessary to facilitate mutual recognition, as acknowledged by Art. 82(2) TFEU; whereas some progress has been made in the last few years, such asfor example with the six directives on procedural rights, Directive 2012/29/EU on victims’ rights20 , and the harmonisation of criminal offences; _________________ 20and the harmonisation of some criminal offences; whereas, however, the six directives on procedural safeguards are scarcely implemented and contain only minimum standards, which are not sufficient to ensure an effective and high quality legal defence, especially when facing surrender proceedings; OJ L 315, 14.11.2012, p. 57.
Amendment 56 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
Recital K a (new)
K a. Whereas increasing procedural safeguards for suspects should not only be instrumental to facilitate mutual recognition, but should rather be a EU priority in itself, also in order to uphold the values that EU proclaims it stands for;
Amendment 57 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas there are difficulties with Commission has stressed that there are difficulties in the implementation of certain provisions of Directive 2013/48/EU on the right of access to a lawyer and the EAW, in particular as regards the possibility of accessing a lawyer both in the executing and the issuing Member State; whereas the transposition of the other Directives on procedural safeguards containing specific provisions on the EAW (Directive 2010/64EU; Directive 2012/13/EU; Directive 2016/800/EU; Directive 2016/1919/EU) has been inadequate so far; whereas such a low level of implementation makes equality of arms between prosecution and defence utopian and impossible;
Amendment 58 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas other instruments have clarified some EAW issues, such as Directive 2014/41/EU on the European Investigation Order21, and Regulation (EU) 1805/2018 on the mutual recognition of freezing and confiscation orders22 , have applied the mutual recognition principles to other types of judicial decisions; whereas these instruments, contrary to the EAW, explicitly provide for a ground for refusal based on a potential violation of fundamental rights in the issuing Member State; _________________ 21 OJ L 130, 1.5.2014, p. 1. 22 OJ L 303, 28.11.2018, p. 1.
Amendment 60 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M a (new)
Recital M a (new)
M a. Whereas the 2009 EU Roadmap for Criminal Procedural Rights recognises that ‘excessively long periods of pre-trial detention are detrimental for the individual, can prejudice judicial cooperation between the Member States and do not represent the values for which the European Union stands’; whereas 25% of prisoners suffer from violence each year, their access to justice is often limited, and they are isolated, stigmatised and have limited access to information2a; _________________ 2a EU Strategy on Victims’ Rights, COM/2020/258
Amendment 61 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M b (new)
Recital M b (new)
M b. Whereas prison conditions in many Member States are far from being acceptable in a Union founded on the values enshrined in Art. 2 TEU;
Amendment 62 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M c (new)
Recital M c (new)
M c. Whereas the rule of law is deteriorating in some Member States; whereas violations of fundamental rights in the criminal justice context happen in most Member States, as identified by numerous judgments of the European Court of Human Rights;
Amendment 63 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M d (new)
Recital M d (new)
M d. Whereas mutual trust cannot be blind trust, nor it can be taken for granted, but needs to be earned and constantly nourished;
Amendment 64 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M e (new)
Recital M e (new)
M e. Whereas in 2014 the European Parliament called, inter alia, for the introduction of a mandatory refusal ground where there are substantial grounds to believe that the execution of the measure would be incompatible with the executing Member State’s obligation in accordance with Art. 6 TEU and the CFREU3a; _________________ 3aEuropean Parliament resolution of 27 February 2014 with recommendations to the Commission on the review of the European Arrest Warrant (2013/2109(INL))
Amendment 65 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M f (new)
Recital M f (new)
M f. Whereas in 2017, fundamental rights issues led to refusal to surrender in 109 cases;
Amendment 66 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
N. whereas mutual recognition requires practitioners, including criminal lawyers, to be trained in EU law;
Amendment 69 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital P
Recital P
P. whereas data comparisons shows a trend of increased EAWthe available data shows a trend of increased EAWs, with the number of EAWs issued increasing year-on-year in every year between 2010 and 2017, which represents a cause for concern with regard to proportionality, especially considering that EAWs are widely issued for less serious offences;
Amendment 71 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Recital Q
Q. whereas a harmonisedfull and correct EAW implementation will prevent forum shoppingin all Member States is necessary to properly assess the functioning of the relevant legislative instruments and the need for possible amendments;
Amendment 74 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Points out that the EAW is a major achievement and an effecn effective and useful instrument to bring perpetrators of serious crimes to justivce and indispensable instrument; statin the Member State where criminal proceedings have taken or are taking place; recognises that the EAW has substantiallyfacilitated and improved cooperation on surrenders;
Amendment 78 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes the existence of particular problems; finds that these do not necessarily call the system into question but call into question national criminal justice policies and approaches to detention, in particular pre-trial detention and detention pending surrender;
Amendment 85 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that such problems relate to prison conditions, proportionality, the execution of custodial sentences23 , time limits24 and in absentia decisions; acknowledges that certain casthe independence of judicial authorities, raised the issue of double criminality25 espect for rule of law and fundamental rights; _________________ 23 CJEU, C-579/15, Popławski. 24 CJEU, C-168/13 PPU, Jeremy F. 25With guidance from C-289/15, Grundza, referring to Council Framework Decision 2008/909/JHA.
Amendment 89 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that some issues were solvaddressed by a combination of soft law (EAW handbook), mutual assessments, the assistance of Eurojust, CJEU case law and supplementing legislation (Framework Decision 2009/299/JHA and Directive 2013/48/EU);
Amendment 90 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 95 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that the Treaties (Protocols 21 and 22) provide special status for two Member States – Ireland has an opt-in option and Denmark does not take part in EU criminal law; highlights the importance of ensuring consistency on JHA;
Amendment 98 #
2019/2207(INI)
7. UnderlineInsists that the EAW should not be misused for minor offences or for purposes that do not necessarily require people to be detained, such as initial questioning of suspects and pre-trial questioning; urges the use of less intrusive legal instruments such as the European Investigation Order; points out that issuing authorities should carry out proportionality checks; considers that in exceptional circumstances the executing authority should be allowed to carry out a proportionality check in order to suggest the adoption of a less intrusive measure;
Amendment 101 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Highlights that according to the CJEU, the refusal to execute an EAW is an exception to mutual recognition and must be interpreted strictly26 ; _________________ 26 See, for example, highlights that the CJEU has also acknowledged that, subject to certain conditions, the executing judicial authority has the power to bring the surrender procedure to an end where surrender may result in the requested person being subject to inhuman or degrading treatment within the meaning of Article 4 of the Charter4a or where there is a real risk of breach of the fundamental right to a fair trial guaranteed by the second paragraph of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, on account of systemic or generalised deficiencies concerning the independence of the issuing Member State’s judiciary5a; _________________ 4aCase C-404/15and C-659/15 PPU, Aranyosi and Căldăraru EU:C:2016:198,paragraph 104. 5aCase C-216/18 PPU, Minister for Justice and Equality.
Amendment 105 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Commission to provide fobetter uanderstandable clearer data, as the existing data is confusing and can offer a false impression of the (non)efficiencyoperation of EAWs; calls onurges Member States to collect and transfer data to the Commission; reiterates its call to the Commission to request from Member States comprehensive data relating to the operation of the EAW mechanism and to include such data in its next implementation report;
Amendment 109 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Points out that a double criminality check limits mutual recognition and, according to the CJEU, must be interpreted restrictively; notes that mutual recognition should ideally work automatically27 ; _________________ 27See, for example, the Commission communication of 26 July 2000 on the Mnot be refused, unless there are the conditions to invoke one of the grounds for refusal exhaustively listed in the EAW FD or unless there are other circumstances in which, as recognised by the CJEU, limitations may be placed on the principles of mutual Rrecognition of Final Decisions in Criminal Matters (COM(2000)0495).and mutual trust between Member States;
Amendment 122 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission to analyse common offences in the Member States and to assess the possibility of expandStresses that, as regards offences not included ing the list of offences that do not require a double criminality check; highlights the importance of assessing the inclusion of additional offences such as particular environmental crimes (e.g. ship-source pollu, executing authorities have the option to refuse to execute the EAW if the act on which the EAW is based does not constitute an offence under the law of the executing Member State, but are not obliged to do so; highlights, therefore, that including additional offences), hate crimes, sexual abuse, offences committed through digital means such as identity theft, offences against public order and the constitutional integrity of the Member St in that list is not a priority; stresses the important role of such a limited optional ground for refusal as a ‘safety net’, especially considering that, contrary to traditional extradition treaties, crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimthe EAW FD makes no exception for political offences;
Amendment 127 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. CRecalls on the Commission to analyse the possibility of reducing the three-year threshold in Article 2(2) of the EAW for certain offences, such as trafficking in human beings and sexual exploitation of children and child pornographythat the three-year threshold in Article 2(2) of the EAW aims to ensure the proportionality of EAW;
Amendment 131 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 135 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission to clarify accessory or relatedonsider updating the Handbook, including the indication of Member States that allow surrender for offences punishable by a lower sanction than the threshold set out in Article2(1) when they are accessory to the main offences that meet that threshold; in this regard, recalls that the EAW does not regulate surrender for accessory or related offences and that, therefore, if the executing Member State does not surrender for accessory offences, the rule of speciality might preclude the issuing Member State from prosecuting those offences;
Amendment 137 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses the importance of defining more precisely the duties and competencies of the national authorities and EU bodies involved in EAW procedures and ensuring that they are specialised and have practical experience; affirms that a broadconsiders that the margin of discretion for the executing authority is scarcelyprovided by Art. 4 EAW is compatible with mutual recognition; considers that discretion should be limited in cases of double criminality, since it allows a judicial authority to take a balanced decision limiting a person’s freedom - for example whether the requested person should serve the sentence where he or she resides - and represents a safeguard against automatic recognition; affirms that the improvement of rule of law, fundamental rights, prison conditions, and practitioner’s knowledge of other legal systems, will contribute to strengthening mutual trust and mutual recognition more than the abolishing the executing authorities’ discretion;
Amendment 144 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls on the Member States to implement the EAW, and alternatives well as other legal instruments on criminal matters in a timely and proper fashion; Stresses that instruments such as the FD on Transfer of Prisoners, the FD on Probation and Alternative Sanctions, the European Investigation Order, the European Supervision Order, the Council of Europe Convention on the Transfer of Proceedings in Criminal Matters, both complement the EAW and provide useful and less intrusive alternatives to it; stresses that the EAW should only be used if all other alternative options have been exhausted; Urges MemberStates’ authorities, where possible, to use such instruments instead of issuing an EAW;
Amendment 148 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Notes the Commission’s worrisome report on the implementation of Directive 2013/48/EU on the right of access to a lawyer in EAW proceedings; calls on, which concludes, inter alia, that ‘The legislation in four Member States does not at all reflect the right of requested persons to appoint a lawyer in the issuing Member State. Some five Member States do not clearly ensure that requested persons receive information about this right without undue delay... The legislation in 10 Member States does not transpose the requirement for the competent authority of the issuing Member State to provide without undue delay the requested persons with information to help them appoint a lawyer there’ (p. 18); urges the Commission to continue to assess Member States’ compliance with the directive and to take appropriate measures, including infringement proceedings, to ensure conformity with its provisions; urges the Commission to step up the efforts to ensure a full implementation of all Directives on procedural safeguards, in order to make sure that requested persons can have recourse to effective defence in cross-border proceedings, which should be free of charge if they have insufficient means; urges the Commission also to bring forward legislation to establish minimum rules on the protection of procedural rights of vulnerable suspects and accused persons in light of the inadequate implementation of the Commission Recommendation of 27 November 2013 on procedural safeguards for vulnerable persons suspected or accused in criminal proceedings, in particular with respect to vulnerable adults;
Amendment 162 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls on the Commission to launch a training platform for experts and practitioners on mutual recognition instruments, including the EAW; affirms that it should provide them with knowledge about the close relationship between instruments, including a common space to exchange experiences; Stresses that in order to ensure equality of arms, lawyers should have access to targeted, accessible and affordable training; calls on the Commission to promote and facilitate the provision of such training;
Amendment 165 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23 a. Calls on the Commission to facilitate the establishment of a network of defence lawyers working on European criminal justice and extradition matters and to provide adequate funding to them;
Amendment 167 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Notes that cooperation between authorities, including compliance on fundamental rights, canmay be improved by using secure technology and digitalisation; welcomes the establishment of the FRA Criminal Detention Database; requests that a centralised database be developed on national EAW application (as with other areas of EU law)28 ; _________________ 28See the EPRS European Implementation Assessment of June 2020 on the EAW.
Amendment 170 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Calls on the CommissionEmphasises that, should the Commission decide to propose legislative acts to strengthen procedural safeguards, it is essential to conduct wide consultations and to take account of the opinions of national parliaments in line with Protocol 2, as their participation provides a democratic check on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality in EU criminal law;
Amendment 175 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Notes that although Article 7(1) TEU can affect mutual recognition, according to the CJEUexisting CJEU case law, the executing authority must assess in each specific case whether there are substantial grounds for believing that, following the surrender, the person will run the risk of having their fundamental rights contravened; undnotes, however, that the CJEU will soon clarify the consequences of systemic and generalines that the triggering of Article 7(1) TEU does not amount to automatic non-sed deficiencies relating to the independence of the issuing Member State’s judiciary, even in the absence of specific concerns related to the requested person’s personal situation (cases C-354/20 PPU andC-412/20 PPU); underlines that Recital 10 of the EAW provides that the implementation of the EAW in one Member State may only be suspended following the Council determination of a serious and persistent breach pursuant to Art. 7(1); stresses, however, that the triggering of Article 7(1) TEU by the Commission or the EP may have an impact on mutual recognition;
Amendment 180 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27 a. Highlights that the CJEU has recognised that - although not explicitly provided in the EAW FD - in certain circumstances the EAW should be refused if there is a risk of a requested person’s fundamental rights being violated in the executing country, due to inhumane prison conditions (C-404/15and C-659/15 PPU as regards Art. 4 CFREU) or non- independent judiciaries (C-216/18 PPU as regards Art. 47 CFREU); stresses that the surrender to another Member State may also lead to other types of violations of the right to a fair trial, or to violations of the essence of other fundamental rights, such as the right to health care (Art. 35 CFREU) or the right to education in the case of children subject to EAW proceedings (Art. 14 CFREU); calls on the Member State's executing authority, therefore, to bear in mind the potential violations of all fundamental rights and to verify whether there are substantial grounds to believe that the surrender ‘would be incompatible with the executing State's obligations in accordance with Article 6 TEU and the Charter’, as expressly provided for by more recent instruments on judicial cooperation in criminal matters;
Amendment 181 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 b (new)
Paragraph 27 b (new)
27 b. Highlights the link between detention conditions and EAW measures and reminds Member States that Article 3 of the ECHR and the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) impose on the Member States not only negative obligations, by banning them from subjecting prisoners to inhuman and degrading treatment, but also positive obligations, by requiring them to ensure that prison conditions are consistent with human dignity, and that thorough, effective investigations are carried out if such rights are violated; calls on Member States to take particular account of the rights of vulnerable persons and in general to thoroughly examine alternatives to detention;
Amendment 182 #
2019/2207(INI)
27 c. In order to ensure the effectiveness of the mutual recognition framework, calls on the Commission to explore the legal and financial means available at Union level to improve standards of detention, including legislative proposals on the conditions of pre-trial detention;
Amendment 183 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 d (new)
Paragraph 27 d (new)
27 d. Calls on Member States to ensure, in accordance with the Charter, the established case-law of the ECJ and the ECtHR, that everyone whose rights and freedoms are violated by a decision, action or omission in the application of the EAW has the right to an effective remedy before a tribunal;
Amendment 193 #
2019/2207(INI)
29. Calls on the Commission to issue supplementing instruments on procedural rights, such as on admissibility and prison conditions in pre-trial detention, matching or surpassing CoEuncil of Europe standards, including time limits on pre-trial detention; states that the Commission should aim for the highest standards;
Amendment 199 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Calls on the Commission to provide an assessment of ne bis in idem and possible legislative actionconflicts of jurisdiction, with a view to possible legislative actions pursuant to Art. 82(1) TFEU;
Amendment 202 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Points out that shortcomings with the EAW can lead to a denial of access to justice and a lack of protection for victims; emphasises that impunity, as a result of deficiencies in judicial cooperation, has a very negative impact on the rule of law, judicial systems and societydeficiencies in judicial cooperation might run counter to the interests of victims;
Amendment 209 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. States that the EAW is effective; believes, however, that the main issue relates to coherenceeffectiveness is not the only or main criterion to assess an instrument that is used to limit personal freedom;
Amendment 213 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Calls on the Commission to provide for a coherent policy on mutual recognition to avoid different answers to the same issu, which takes into account the CJEU case law, the current level of harmonisation of Member States criminal law and procedure, and the existing risks of fundamental rights violations in several Member States;
Amendment 217 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Calls on the Commission to conduct a cross-case study of instruments so as to prevent abnormalities, as with the rules on transfer of prisoners and EAWsensure their coordination and correct interplay, for example as regards the rules on transfer of prisoners and EAWs, in order to avoid national authorities issuing EAWs when other instruments could provide a more proportionate and less-intrusive solution;
Amendment 221 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. States that coherency issues must be addressed bythe identified issues related to the implementation of the EAW FD can be addressed by a combination of practical measures (training of practitioners), soft law (handbooks and recommendations), very targeted legislation (the definition of judicial authority, ne bis in idem, fundamental rights, etc.) and supplementing legislation (pre-trial detention); considers that the Commission should work towards a full and correct implementation of the EAW in all Member States before presenting new legislative proposals aiming at amending the Framework Decision; stresses that the introduction, in national law, of an explicit ground for non- execution based on the violation of fundamental rights cannot be considered as an incorrect transposition of the EAW FD and that, therefore, the Commission should not launch infringement procedures with regard to this specific aspect;
Amendment 228 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Recommends, in the medium term, the promotion of an EU judicial cooperation code in criminal matters to guarantee legal certainty and the coherence of the various extant EU instruments;
Amendment 4 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 3
Citation 3
— having regard to Articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 18, 19 and 1847 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
Amendment 8 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4
Citation 4
— having regard to Articles 2, 3, 5, 8 and 813 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR),
Amendment 11 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 12
Citation 12
— having regard to the judgements of the European Court of Human Rights related to Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, and in particular Sharifi v. Austria of 5 December 2013 (Chamber judgment), Mohammadi v. Austria of 3 July 2014 (Chamber judgment), Sharifi and Others v. Italy and Greece of 21 October 2014 (Chamber judgment), and Tarakhel v. Switzerland of 4 November 2014 (Grand Chamber judgment), and M.S.S. v Belgium and Greece of 21 November 2011 (Grand Chamber judgment) related to Regulation (EC) No 343/2003;
Amendment 18 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas 2.5 million people applied for asylum in the European Union in the period 2015-2016, a fourfold increase compared to 2012-2013in 2015, 1,393,920 asylum seekers applied for international protection in the EU+; whereas in 2016 1,292,740 asylum seekers applied for international protection in the EU+; whereas in 2017, 735,005 asylum seekers applied for international protection in the EU+; whereas in 2018, 665,920 asylum seekers applied for international protection in the EU+; whereas in 2019, 738,425 asylum seekers applied for international protection in the EU+;
Amendment 25 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas there were 145 000 decisions on Dublin requests issued in 2019;
Amendment 31 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas one-third of the Member States currently play host to 90% of asylum seekers;
Amendment 34 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the Dublin regulation is based on the core assumption that asylum seekers are afforded equal rights across Member States and that each claim gets a fair examination, wherever the claim is lodged in the EU; whereas this is far from being a reality in the EU;
Amendment 40 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas in the case of most asylum applications the deadlineshierarchical criteria laid down as part of Dublin procedures are not followed, the deadlines are not met and transfers are not carried out;
Amendment 44 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas studies on the implementation of the Dublin III regulation highlight routine disregard towards family provisions and incorrect application of the principle of the best interest of the child, which have resulted in unnecessary and unreasonable transfer procedures;
Amendment 45 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas the provisions on dependent persons (Article 16) and the discretionary clauses (Article 17) could be widely used to support family unity;
Amendment 49 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C c (new)
Recital C c (new)
Cc. whereas the preventive action provision of the Dublin III regulation (Article 33) has never been used;
Amendment 50 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C d (new)
Recital C d (new)
Cd. whereas there has been scarce use of the humanitarian and discretionary clauses; whereas these clauses provide reasonable solutions for relocations, including following disembarkations;
Amendment 52 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C e (new)
Recital C e (new)
Ce. whereas coercion in the context of the implementation of the Dublin III regulation by domestic authorities should be avoided; whereas the elimination of coercion, either to achieve a transfer or in relation to detention, would minimise human suffering and considerably reduce financial and operational costs of transfers;
Amendment 54 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C f (new)
Recital C f (new)
Cf. whereas administrative arrangements concluded between Germany and different Member States raise legal concerns, including on the deprivation of procedural safeguards entitled under the Dublin regulation, access to the asylum procedure post- transfer and compliance with human rights; whereas the informal arrangement by which Dublin family transfers from Greece to Germany were capped at 70 persons per month for a certain period of time has caused great human suffering by delaying family reunification;
Amendment 57 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C g (new)
Recital C g (new)
Cg. whereas there is lack of compliance as regards procedural guarantees and safeguards for asylum seekers, especially for children; whereas adequate information is not systematically and consistently provided;
Amendment 58 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C h (new)
Recital C h (new)
Ch. whereas the length of the procedures and the lack of predictable outcomes coupled with poor reception conditions and social precarity have impacts on the well being of the asylum- seekers who in many cases have experiences traumatic experiences back home and/or on their way to reach the EU;
Amendment 60 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas there have been significant shortcomings in the implementation of the Dublin III Regulation, including during the COVID-19 crisis, undermining the right to international protection and leading to violations of fundamental rights; whereas some of the flaws are inherent to the design of the Dublin regulation and can not be solved through implementation alone ;
Amendment 66 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas flaws in the implementation of the recast Asylum Procedures Directive (2013/32/EU), the recast Reception Directive (2013/33/EU) and the recast Qualification directive (2011/95/EU) have had an impact on the implementation of the Dublin regulation; whereas the European Commission should strengthen its work to ensure Member states compliance with these Directives, including through infringement procedures;
Amendment 72 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas secondary movements are largely due to asylum-seekers social connections with specific countries, protection-based concerns, health reasons and systematic deficiencies in the asylum systems where applications are made;
Amendment 73 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D c (new)
Recital D c (new)
Dc. whereas the use of detention and coercive measures raise concerns on the asylum seekers' right to liberty, dignity and physical integrity;
Amendment 74 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D d (new)
Recital D d (new)
Dd. whereas the direct and indirect costs of implementing the Dublin III regulation represented approximately 1 billion euros in 2014 according to the European Commission; whereas these costs were estimated at 2.5-4.9 billion by the EPRS in 2018;
Amendment 75 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1
Subheading 1
Incorporating the principle of solidarity into the management of asylum seekersCommon European Asylum System
Amendment 91 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that the Dublin system places a significant burden on a minority of Member States, in particular when influxes of migrants occur; takes the view that the EU therefore needs adisproportionate responsibility on a minority of Member States; takes the view that the EU therefore needs fairer rules for allocation of responsibility and/or a permanent solidarity mechanism which makes for fair sharing of burdens and responsibility among Member States, including through relocation on the basis of fair, clear and objective criteria of asylum seekers who are manifestly eligible for asylum;
Amendment 108 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that ad hoc agreements are no substitute for a harmonised and sustainable policy at EU level; deplores the fact thatRecalls its adopted legislative Resolution on the Dublin IV recast adopted on 6 November 2017; deplores the fact that the Council did not adopt a position on this recast and therefore blocked efforts to overhaul the Dublin III Regulation have been blocked in the Council;
Amendment 112 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Restates its full support to the position adopted by the European Parliament on the Dublin IV recast that was proposing a system based on a fair sharing of responsibility through a permanent and automatic relocation mechanism without thresholds;
Amendment 113 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Amendment 119 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that the mechanism for early warning, preparedness and crisis management tool provided foras set out in Article 33 didhas not provide effective support to the Member States, nor did it offer a response to the consequences of the COVID-19 crisis; considers that a solidarity-based crisis management mechanism, endowed with a financial instrument managed by the Commission, should be established to ensure continuity of the right of asylum in the EU under the best possible conditionsbeen applied to date; notes also the provisions set out in the Temporary Protection Directive that aimed at dealing with mass influxes of people in need of international protection, that has yet to be invoked;
Amendment 132 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Member States to makexpand the use of the discretionary clause in Article 17 when exceptional circumstances so warrant, for example to relocate asylum seekers currently living in the Greek hotspots in an atmosphere of extreme tension and to provide decent reception conditionto address challenging situations, including as a tool for responsibility-sharing in situations of large numbers of spontaneous arrivals and in the specific context of sea arrivals and disembarkation procedures;
Amendment 139 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 152 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. HighlightNotes the significant operational backing for Dublin procedures provided by the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) in the hotspots; calls on the Commission and the Member States to facilitate the work of EASO staff by allowing the interviews iner to speak a language other than that of the country in which they are conducted; calls for the establishment of a European Asylum Agency, with sufficient financial and human resources while ensuring that the applicant is provided with interpretation in a language he or she understands; stresses the need for EASO to abide in its operational work with the highest standards and put the interests of applicants in need of international protection, including the best interest of the child, at the heart of its work;
Amendment 158 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Urges adequate organisation and staffing of the European Dublin units to streamline the completion of Dublin- related procedures, particularly those related to establishing family links and the application of other criteria which link an asylum-seeker to a particular Member State;
Amendment 167 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Points out that the protection of fundamental rights must be at the heart of the measures taken to implement the Dublin III Regulation, including the protection of children, victims of trafficking and othe mostr vulnerable persons;
Amendment 170 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Points out the worrying human cost of the Dublin regulation on asylum- seekers whereby transfers to the first country of entry can create severe anxiety for asylum-seekers whose mental health is already weakened by the traumas from what they have experienced back home and on the journey, as well as often poor reception conditions in the first Member State of entry;
Amendment 179 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Commission to monitor compliance with the hierarchy of criteria more closely; regards it as essential to clarify the conditions for applyingenable a better use of the family reunification criterion and toprovisions, including by harmonise theing standards of proof requiredacross Member States towards less stringent standards; calls on the Member States and the Commission to protect the best interests of the children and to clarify, who should never be detained because of his or her family immigration status ; calls to expand the sources used for the crmoniteoria for keeping children in detentionng and identification of unlawful practices to include information provided by international and non-governmental organisations where it is reliable, up-to- date and specific;
Amendment 187 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Stresses that Dublin transfers must be carried out in a way that under no circumstances exposes individuals to a risk of refoulement or inhumane or degrading treatment, irrespective of whether the asylum system of the country of return is affected by systemic deficiencies;
Amendment 196 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3
Subheading 3
Simplify procedures and significantly, reduce processing times and uphold the right to an effective remedy
Amendment 205 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that the number of transfer procedures has increased significantly, generating considerable human, material and financial costs; deplornotes, however, the fact that in only 11% of cases are transfers actually carried out, a further factor in the permanent overloading of asylum systems; stress; notes the lack of cooperation and information-sharing between Member States; regards efforts to combat secencourages Member States to apply the discretiondary movements as essential in order to reduce the number of transfer requests; proposes thatclause of Article 17 more swiftly, in cases where it becomes evident that transfers can not be carried out, or where the coinditions which trigger transfer procedures be clarified and harmonisedvidual situation of the applicant requires so;
Amendment 214 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 227 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Considers that providing asylum seekers with legal assistance in connection with Dublin procedures, in particular in the hotspots, would simplify the process of obtaining asylum would enhance rights-compliant procedures and improve decision- making; calls on the Member States to improve the information made available to asylum seekers on the complex Dublin procedures, to ensure that it is clear and accessible to everyone;
Amendment 233 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 4
Subheading 4
A single asylum applicationrights-centred application of Dublin arrangements in the EU
Amendment 241 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. StressNotes that the principle of a single asylum application in the EU is consistently flouted, a state of affairs at odds withthat was the very purpose of the Dublin III Regulation; consider is that the competent national authorities should share their relevant information on a European database such as Eurodac, in order to speed up procedures and prevent multiple asylum applications, while protecting personal datampered by various factors, including poor reception conditions in many first Member States of arrivals due to overcrowding, lengthy and failed family reunification procedures, xenophobia in countries of arrivals, as well as flaws in asylum procedures in some countries;
Amendment 244 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 262 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 271 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 279 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 289 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Deplores the fact that the Commission has still not published its Article 46 assessment report; calls on the Commission to ensure thatavoid applying the Dublin III Regulation is implemented more effectivelyn an ineffective, costly or unreasonable manner;
Amendment 290 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Calls on the European Commission and Member States to consult non-governmental organisations, including migrant and refugee organisations representing persons subject to the Dublin regulation;
Amendment 35 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 18 a (new)
Citation 18 a (new)
– having regard to Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2019 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law,
Amendment 56 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 24 a (new)
Citation 24 a (new)
– having regard to the FRA report entitled ‘Roma women in nine EU countries’,
Amendment 74 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 32 a (new)
Citation 32 a (new)
– having regard to the FRA report entitled ‘Combating child poverty: an issue of fundamental rights‘,
Amendment 108 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)
Recital -A (new)
-A. whereas the EU is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities, as set out in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union and as reflected in the Charter and embedded in international human rights treaties; whereas the Charter is part of EU primary law;
Amendment 109 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -A a (new)
Recital -A a (new)
-Aa. whereas respect for the rule of law is a prerequisite for the protection of fundamental rights and whereas Member States have the ultimate responsibility of safeguarding the human rights of all people;
Amendment 111 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the EU is not merely a monetary union, but also a social one, as enshrined in the Charter, the European Convention on Human Rights, the European Social Charter and the European Pillar of Social Rights and other legislation which focuses on the protection of human and fundamental rights in Europe; whereas Article 151 TFEU refers to fundamental social rights such as those set out in the European Social Charter; whereas the Union has still not acceded to the ECHR, in spite of its obligation to do so under Article 6(2) TEU;
Amendment 121 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the European Commission Special Eurobarometer of March 2019 shows that awareness of the Charter remains low;
Amendment 127 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas in the years 2018 and 2019, the EU has faced serious and multifaceted challenges in relation to the protection of fundamental rights, the rule of law and democracy, which are all intrinsically connected;
Amendment 131 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
Ac. whereas the EU and the Member States have shared competencies in the area of housing; whereas both a national and an EU level strategy is needed; whereas housing is not a commodity, but a necessity, without which citizens cannot fully participate in society and access fundamental rights; whereas homelessness is a situation that deprives individuals of human rights, and is itself a violation of human rights; whereas there is an unacceptable trend of rising evictions and homelessness across the EU;
Amendment 136 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A d (new)
Recital A d (new)
Ad. whereas the rise of precarious employment, such as involuntary part- time and fixed-term contract work, zero- hour contracts, unpaid internships and traineeships, ‘gig-economy’ work and ‘self-employment’ style contracts is deeply concerning; and whereas such forms of employment may not adequately respect the rights enshrined in Article 31 of the Charter, or the right of workers to engage in collective bargaining, which is an important tool for workers to secure their fundamental rights;
Amendment 141 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A e (new)
Recital A e (new)
Ae. whereas the ECtHR has established that various types of environmental degradation can result in violations of human rights, such as the right to life, to private and family life, the prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment, and the peaceful enjoyment of the home;
Amendment 145 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A f (new)
Recital A f (new)
Af. whereas the present decade is witnessing a visible and organised offensive at the global and European level against gender equality and women’s rights, including sexual and reproductive rights;
Amendment 147 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A g (new)
Recital A g (new)
Ag. whereas in recent years some Member States have sought to roll back on sexual and reproductive health and rights, such as existing legal protections for women’s access to abortion care, including the introduction of regressive pre-conditions before abortions can take place, such as mandatory biased counselling or waiting periods, not ensuring that barriers that impede access to abortion in practice are eradicated, as well as attempts to fully ban abortion or remove existing legal grounds for abortion; whereas, however, there have also been progressive liberalizing reforms in some Member States;
Amendment 169 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas there has been an increase of hatred and discrimination targeting Muslims in Europe; whereas the FRA pointed out in its 2019 report that discriminatory institutional practices, policies and laws occurred in many countries; whereas there is a growing risk of a discriminatory impact of anti- terrorism policy on Muslim communities; whereas the FRA created in December 2018 the first dedicated data-base on anti- Muslim hatred;
Amendment 176 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)
Recital B c (new)
Bc. whereas structural anti-Gypsyism and sustained socio-economic inequalities affect Roma in areas such as housing, healthcare, employment and education; whereas Roma continue to be denied or disadvantaged in their access to safe drinking water and sanitation; whereas Roma people suffer increased hate speech in public, in social media and by politicians; whereas, in January 2019, the European Committee of Social Rights (ECSR) repeated its concerns about the climate of racism in Italy, “particularly with regard to racist misleading propaganda against Roma and Sinti indirectly allowed or directly emanating from the authorities”; whereas the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights raised also concerns about the situation in Bulgaria22a; __________________ 22a https://go.coe.int/7Cwol
Amendment 178 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B d (new)
Recital B d (new)
Bd. whereas despite the European Commission’s repeated insistences that Member States must bring an end to school segregation of Roma pupils; rulings from national courts, and precedent setting judgments from the European Court of Human Rights; and on-going infringement procedures against Hungary, Czech Republic and Slovakia, Roma children are still denied access to quality integrated education;
Amendment 179 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B e (new)
Recital B e (new)
Be. whereas the 2018 FRA report entitled 'Being Black in the EU'1a pointed out that significant proportions of people of African descent had experienced in the previous 5 years racially motivated harassment and violence, racial profiling by police and discrimination in all areas of life; __________________ 1a https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra _uploads/fra-2018-being-black-in-the- eu_en.pdf
Amendment 180 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B f (new)
Recital B f (new)
Bf. whereas there remain systemic obstacles which seriously hinder the effective protection of the rights of persons with disabilities; whereas specific concerns have been expressed in 2018 by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights on the situation in some Member States;
Amendment 181 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B g (new)
Recital B g (new)
Bg. whereas freedom of expression and freedom and pluralism of the media are enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR); whereas media freedom, pluralism and independence are vital to the democratic functioning of the EU and its Member States;
Amendment 188 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Amendment 190 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas Article 11 of the ECHR and Article 12 of the Charter state that everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association, including the right to form and join trade unions for the protection of their interests; whereas in democratic societies, freedom of assembly is one of the instruments by which people can participate in the public debate and bring about social change;
Amendment 198 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Amendment 199 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas the space for civil society is shrinking in certain Member States such as Hungary, Poland, Bulgaria and Romania; whereas Member States are responsible for ensuring that the rights of civil society organisations and human rights defenders are not restricted, and that a conducive legislative and regulatory environment is in place, as reinforced in the recently adopted Council conclusions on the Charter of Fundamental Rights after 10 Years: State of Play and Future Work; whereas Member States should also support the work of civil society organisations through sufficient funding and ensure that there are mechanisms for fruitful cooperation with them;
Amendment 200 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D c (new)
Recital D c (new)
Dc. whereas in 2018 and 2019 it has been proven that major social media companies, in violation of existing data protection law, have granted third-party applications access to users personal data, and that personal data has been increasingly abused for behavioural prediction and manipulation, including for electoral campaigning purposes;
Amendment 207 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Amendment 210 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Recital E b (new)
E b. whereas individuals faced charges related to assistance they provided to migrants and asylum seekers in several EU countries, including Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, as well as Italy, demonstrating the worrying trend of criminalizing humanitarian assistance to migrants and asylum seekers;
Amendment 232 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas corruption constitutes a serious threat to democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights and harms all Member States and the EU as a whole; whereas the implementation of the anti- corruption legal framework remains uneven among Member States;
Amendment 296 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Commission to look into what steps are needed for accession by the European Union to the European Social Charter, and to propose a timeframe for achieving that objective;
Amendment 338 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Strongly affirms that the denial of sexual and reproductive health and rights services is a form of violence against women and girls and stresses that the ECtHR has ruled on different occasions that restrictive abortion laws and preventing access to legal abortion violates the human rights of women; reiterates that the refusal by medical professionals to provide the full range of reproductive and sexual health services on personal grounds must not infringe on the right of women or girls to access reproductive care; calls on the Commission to include the need to uphold sexual and reproductive health and rights in its Fundamental Rights Strategy, as well as in any mechanisms to monitor compliance with Article 2 TEU in the Member States;
Amendment 401 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Amendment 414 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Calls on the EU institutions and Member states to follow-up on the recommendations made by the European Parliament in its resolution of 8 February 2019 on the rights of intersex people;
Amendment 419 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Calls on the EU institutions and Member states to follow-up on the recommendations made by the European Parliament on its resolution of 26 March 2019 on fundamental rights of people of African descent in Europe; calls especially on national authorities to develop policies and measures to tackle discrimination and racial profiling;
Amendment 423 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 d (new)
Paragraph 8 d (new)
8d. Reiterates its call on the Council to urgently conclude the EU ratification of the Istanbul Convention on the basis of a broad accession without any limitations, and to advocate its ratification by all the Member States; recalls that EU accession to the Istanbul Convention does not exempt Member States from national ratification of the Convention;
Amendment 431 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 e (new)
Paragraph 8 e (new)
8e. Calls on the European Commission and Member States to focus on measures combating antigypsyism in the post-2020 EU Roma strategic Framework, hand-in-hand with focusing on inclusion measures;
Amendment 435 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 f (new)
Paragraph 8 f (new)
8f. Reiterates its call on the Commission and the Council to relaunch and conclude without delay the negotiations on the Proposal for a Directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation;
Amendment 437 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 g (new)
Paragraph 8 g (new)
Amendment 482 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Is concerned about the fact that the Member States have different thresholds for the use of force and weapons by law enforcement authorities for maintaining public order; urges the prohibition of certain types of less-lethal weapons and devices for maintaining public order, such as tear gas, stun grenades and LBD 40 launchers; calls on Member States to refrain from adopting restrictive laws concerning freedom of assembly;
Amendment 484 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Is deeply concerned about the increasingly shrinking space for independent civil society in some Member States; recalls the importance of ensuring adequate funding to support civil society activities; , in particular for women's rights organisations and human rights defenders, including unreasonable administrative burdens, limiting access to funding, as well as restrictions on freedom of assembly and organisation; recalls the importance of ensuring adequate funding to support the activities of civil society organisations working at national, regional and local level, including through the Rights and Values programme, the funding of which should be significantly increased, as previously asked for by the European Parliament;
Amendment 520 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 c (new)
Paragraph 11 c (new)
11c. Condemns that some Member States have adopted laws, policies and practices that undermine the effective protection of the human rights of refugees, asylum seekers and migrants, on land and at sea; calls on the European Commission and Member States to put the human rights of migrants, asylum seekers and refugees, as well as the principle of responsibility sharing, at the centre of its migration and asylum policies;
Amendment 558 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Calls for the suspension of the cooperation with the so-called Libyan coast guards, including of European naval and maritime assets that has resulted in the return of thousands of people to an unsafe country in violation of the right to non-refoulement;
Amendment 574 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Calls on the Commission to monitor all Article 2 TEU violations, in particular those affecting fundamental rights, in the framework of its announced rule of law review cycle; reiterates the critical need for an EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights as proposed by Parliament, including an annual independent, evidence-based and non- discriminatory review assessing all Member States' compliance with Article 2 TEU;
Amendment 594 #
2019/2199(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Recalls the obligation laid down in article 6 TEU to accede to the ECHR; calls the Commission to take the necessary steps to eliminate the legal barriers that prevent the conclusion of the accession process, and to present a new draft agreement for the accession of the EU to the ECHR providing positive solutions to the objections raised by the CJEU in Opinion 2/13 of 18 December2014; considers that its completion would introduce further safeguards protecting the fundamental rights of EU citizens and residents and provide an additional mechanism for enforcing human rights, namely the possibility of lodging a complaint with the ECtHR in relation to a violation of human rights derived from an act by an EU institution or a Member State implementing EU law, falling within the remit of the ECHR; is of the opinion that ECtHR case law will thus provide extra input for current and future EU action on the respect for, and promotion of, human rights and fundamental freedoms in the areas of civil liberties, justice and home affairs, in addition to the case law of the CJEU in this field;
Amendment 2 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the European Green Deal sets the target of a climate-neutral European Union by 2050, thereby putting the climate emergency at the centre of all the Union’s programmes and policies; believes that the European Green Deal needs to be more ambitious, particularly in regard to setting a 2030 reduction target of, at the bare minimum, 55%;
Amendment 8 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas education, sport, volunteering and culture play a fundamental role in the green transition as regards awareness-raising, learning, communication and the sharing of knowledge, and whereas the potential they offer can be exploited to develop innovative ways of tackling environmental challenges; whereas these sectors provide low-carbon and high-quality jobs;
Amendment 14 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas, although these programmes do not primarily focus on the environment, they nonetheless contribute to the green transition through their substance and scope and have an environmental impact like all economic activities, so that their essential nature should be preserved;
Amendment 16 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the objectives and the very nature of the ESC give young people the opportunity to takeshare knowledge on taking practical action to protect the environment and on activism;
Amendment 18 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the experience of mobility offered by these programmes can change everyday behaviourbe a transformative experience for young people, and whereas mobility of this kind should therefore be encouraged;
Amendment 23 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas Creative Europe has a role to play in promoting culture and the audiovisual media, which can help raise people’s awareness of environmental issues, organise activism and are also a unique source of creative solutions;
Amendment 33 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas the aim, under the current multiannual financial framework, of devoting 205% of expenditure to climate protection measures cannot be achieved if the data and instruments needed to measure the contribution of the programmes to meeting this aim are not available, and whereas they must therefore be put in place as a matter of urgency;
Amendment 38 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
N. whereas there are currently few incentives – particularly of a financial nature – to encourage participants in the three programmes to shift to more environmentally friendly means of transport; whereas more environmentally friendly means of transport tend to be the least accessible and affordable and whereas participants in these programmes tend to have less financial means;
Amendment 55 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to record systematically the means of transport used so that participants’ individual CO2 emissions can be calculatedas to take measures to reduce programme-specific emissions; takes the view that the Mobility Tool should be used for this purpose and that use of the Tool should be extended to cover all parts of Erasmus+ and the ESC; calls on the Commission to make a similar calculation tool available for journeys undertaken in connection with the Creative Europe programme; provided that data protection is fully respected;
Amendment 69 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the main stakeholders in the programmes to inform participants of examples of good practice which they can employ in their everyday lives, perhaps by means of a digital appby the most efficient and direct way possible;
Amendment 76 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission and on national and regional agencies and offices to take account of the environmental aspects of projects and to evaluate projects accordingly;
Amendment 81 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Urges the Commission to make it possible for participants to choose the least-polluting means of transport, but at the same time not to stigmatise or exclude participants for whom air travel is the only option; calls for special attention to be paid to the outermost regions in this regard and to examine more environmentally-friendly modes of transport particularly for these regions;
Amendment 88 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to revise the current financial rules so that the additional costs and journey times associated with the use of more environmentally friendly means of transport can be offproperly reimbursetd; insists that the additional costs be reimbursed in full;
Amendment 89 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Urges Member States and regions to widen the offer of the most environmentally friendly means of transport;
Amendment 91 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Commission – particularly in the light of its European Year of Rail in 2021 – to enter into partnerships with European rail and bus companieoperators so that participants are eligible for discounted fares;
Amendment 93 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls on the Commission, along with Member States and regions with education and university competences, to design and provide a financial assistance scheme to those students who cannot afford the costs of the Erasmus+, ESC and Creative Europe programmes or the cost of the transport means, as long as they meet the most environmental friendly standards;
Amendment 99 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Commission to include respect and protection for the environment among the principles set out in the Erasmus+ Higher Education Charter; urges the Commission to apply this approach to the whole programme and to take action to achieve it;
Amendment 103 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Emphasises the potential of the European Universities and Vocational Education and Training Centres of Excellence, as they could be encouraged to introduce programmes of excellence for teaching and training in environmental issues, provided sufficient; emphasises that the Commission should ensure enough funding is available to achieve this;
Amendment 106 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls on the Commission to introduce Environmental Protection and Fighting Climate Change at the core of all the programmes as a transversal skill;
Amendment 109 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Notes that the future European Student Card can do much to make participation in the Erasmus+ programme more environmentally friendly; calls on the Commission to bring forward the date of introduction of the European Student Card, which is set at 2025;
Amendment 124 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that encouraging mobility among the staff of local sports organisations would help make them aware of more environmentally friendly ways of organising sports events and encourage environmental activism; calls for greater emphasis to be placed on environmental issues when the European Week of Sport takes place;
Amendment 137 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on the national, regional and local authorities involved in the ESC to support and actively advise organisations responsible for sending and receiving participants; stresses that they are also able to identify the scope for and set up environmental projects in situ;
Amendment 138 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Calls on the authorities involved to extend the offer of traineeships related to environmental issues and to introduce environmental education and environmental impact into the scope of every project;
Amendment 139 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18b. Calls on the Commission to introduce Environmental Protection and Environmental Education as the one of the key principles of the ESC programme;
Amendment 143 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Commission to draw up, together with the national and regional offices, a charter setting out the environmental principles which every participant in the programme must observe;
Amendment 146 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls on the Commission to publish a ‘n ambitious ’good environmental practice’ guide covering audiovisual and cultural production, dissemination and event organisation, with a particular focus on transport, energy and waste management and with the aim of making the practices concerned standard for all projects financed by the programme; calls on the Commission to develop a tool to evaluate the environmental impact of cultural events;
Amendment 158 #
2019/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Calls on the Commission to authorise, as a trans-sectoral measure, the establishment of a European network of environmental consultants to advise project developers and draw up annual reports, with the aim of maintaining transparency and sharing best practices;
Amendment 13 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to monitor in particular sectors characterised by a high degree of job insecurity, in order to prevent the abuse of workers in areas such as temporary work in the agricultural sector, and posted workers, where seasonal workers face abusive employment conditions that in some cases violate not only labour rights, but also workers’ fundamental rights;
Amendment 21 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes with concern that, according to the European Social Policy Network, some 9.4 % of workers in the EU are at risk of poverty, representing some 20.5 million people; highlights the important differences between the Member States and regions, and underlines the need to establish policies and law at EU level to reverse this situation, in order to prevent further social polarisation in the EU; warns that this situation will be aggravated as a result of the COVID-19 crisis, and urges the Commission to protect these workers; calls on the Commission, following the resolution adopted by the European Parliament on 24th October 2017, to introduce a binding EU framework that sets an adequate minimum income across Europe, in order to tackle inequalities.
Amendment 31 #
2019/2188(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that women continue to earn 16 % less than men in the EU and have the highest rates of job insecurity; likewise, women suffer higher rates of part-time jobs and are majority in sectors such as care, which are at the same time sectors highly undervalued and unpaid; calls on the Member States to put legislation and strategies in place to ensure equality, and urges the Commission to pay particular attention to compliance with EU labour law;
Amendment 3 #
2019/2098(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Takes note that the Court found that the payments underlying the accounts were legal and regular for all agencies except for EASO, for which a qualified opinion was issued due to irregularities on public procurement procedures and related payments; notes that corrective actions launched by EASO in response to the Court’s findings for the year 2017 regarding its governance and internal control arrangements were still ongoing at the end of 2018; highlights especially that the majority of vacancies opened in 2017 were still not filled at the end of 2018; notes that the Court has identified a horizontal trend across agencies in the use of external staff hired in IT consultancy roles; calls for this dependency on external recruitment in this important area to be addressed; deplores that the legality and regularity of payments only slowly improved in 2018 due to the lack of proper management attention; regrets that a major procurement procedure (EUR 50 million) carried out by EASO in 2018 was again irregular due to major procedural weaknesses; acknowledges that the new Executive Director has already taken actions to improve the management of EASO and shows strong commitment to address the organisational flaws within EASO as a matter of priority; urges EASO to uphold this commitment and to report back to the Parliament´s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs on a regular basis;
Amendment 6 #
2019/2098(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Deplores the lack of ‘emphasis on the matter’ with regard to JHA agencies, with the exception of FRONTEX; notes that FRONTEX reimbursed EUR 60 million of equipment-related expenditure without proper ex ante controls; stresses that ex ante controls are rendered ineffective if expenses are reimbursed without prior verification of whether the expenses are justified; notes as well that FRONTEX did not carry out ex post verifications to compensate the weakness of its ex ante procedure; considers this proceeding highly problematic and calls for an immediate action to resolve this problem and to prevent it in the future, particularly in light of its significant budget increase in the coming years; urges FRONTEX to revisit its financing scheme for equipment- related expenditure and to significantly strengthen its internal controls to ensure that reimbursements are granted for expenses actually incurred;
Amendment 5 #
2019/2097(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that the current practice according to which the Agency may only recruit the necessary staff for the implementation of a legal act once that act is in force stretches the Agency’s core team capabilities and therefore carries the risk of preventing the Agency from sustaining a good performance in its daily activities; notes that the Court has identified a horizontal trend across agencies in the use of external staff hired in IT consultancy roles; calls for the Agency's dependence, as the agency responsible for large-scale IT systems in the Union, on external recruitment in this area to be addressed; calls, therefore, on the Commission to allow for the front-loading of some of the staff foreseen in a proposal for a legal act to allow the Agency to prepare the work required for the implementation of that legal act; urges further the Agency to fulfil all posts with permanent staff;
Amendment 11 #
2019/2096(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Is alarmed by the Court’s finding that the human resources situation at the Office had deteriorated exponentially as of end-2017 and that the majority of vacancies, most notably for managers in the administration department, were still not filled at the end of 2018; regrets that for now at least two years in a row the human resources situation of the Office is not resolved; urges the Office to take immediate action towards finding a permanent and sustainable solution for this; urges the Office to give priority to filling the vacant mid-management posts with highly qualified permanent staff, in order to train the other new staff members;
Amendment 4 #
2019/2088(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Notes that the current proportion of women on the Europol Management Board is 11 out of 55 members (20%); asks the Agency to take measures to ensure better gender balance within its senior management;
Amendment 10 #
2019/2088(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Regrets the Court’s finding of weaknesses in contract management as well as ex ante controls linked to the Agency’s irregular prolongation and amendment of a framework contract on the provision of business travel services after it had expired; notes that the amendment introduced new price aspects not covered by the initial public procurement procedure and that the irregular payments in relation to the contract amounted to 22,188 EUR in 2018; takes note of Europol’s objection to the Court’s finding regarding contract management and ex ante controls and its commitment to due diligence as well as to sound financial management but stresses that such irregularities should be avoidednot happen in the future; urges the Agency to betterfully respect the Financial Regulation in order to strengthen its internal financial management controls accordingly;
Amendment 12 #
2019/2088(DEC)
6. Notes that the Court has identified a horizontal trend across agencies in the use of external staff hired in IT consultancy roles; calls for this dependency on external recruitment in this important area to be addressed; encourages the Agency to act on the single outstanding recommendation of the Court, namely to publish its vacancy notices on the website of the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO); strongly encourages Europol to further develop cooperation between the other institutions, agencies, offices and bodies of the Union with a view to internalising IT roles in the field of Justice and Home Affairs;
Amendment 8 #
2019/2083(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Nnotes the continuously high level of carry-overs to 2019 (EUR 83 million EUR or 29 %) and cancelled budget carry- overs (EUR 11 million or 12 %), which were linked to the challenges in meeting the establishment plan, the delay in the launch of the building of the new premises and the multi-annual nature of ICT projects and the overestimation of the scale and cost of activities by cooperating countries; expresses its concerns as regards the part of the budget that could not be absorbed by the Agency; expects the Agency and the cooperating states to improve their budget estimates with a view to decrease the carry- overs in 2019; welcomes the fact that the Agency has adopted new rules on whistleblowing, launched a new simplified financing scheme, introduced an ex-post control system covering all types of expenditure and modified its system of ex- ante checks; regrets, however, that the Agency has still not addressed the problem reported by the Court since 2014 with regard to insufficient proof of actual costs for equipment-related expenditure claimed by cooperating Member States; notes the steps taken by the Agency to address this issue but urges the Agency to adequately respond to the comments of the Court given that equipment-related expenditure amounted to EUR 60 million or 35 % of the Agency’s operational expenditure in 2018;
Amendment 25 #
2019/2083(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Recalls that, in accordance with point (b) of Article 22(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1624 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a, the coordinating officer of the Agency is to monitor the correct implementation of the operational plan, including as regards the protection of fundamental rights, and report to the Agency thereon; urgently calls, in that regard, for systematic reporting on violations of fundamental rights that occurred at borders where the Agency is present, including where those violations were committed by officers who do not belong to the Agency, as it has an impact on the overall respect of fundamental rights of European border and coast guard operations; calls for particular attention to be paid to potential push-backs and violence; urges the Agency to report those violations to the fundamental rights officer, who should take appropriate action, including possible suspension of European border and coast guard operations in area concerned; _________________ 1aRegulation (EU) 2016/1624 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 September 2016 on the European Border and Coast Guard and amending Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Regulation (EC) No 863/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Council Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004 and Council Decision 2005/267/EC (OJ L 251, 16.9.2016, p. 1).
Amendment 3 #
2019/2082(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes with concern that CEPOL continues to suffer from a high staff turnover and a limited number of applications from other Member States; reiterates its worries that this might impact the operations of the Agency; notes in this regard that the Staff Regulations offer the necessary flexibility for labour market conditions prevailing in the Union to be taken into account when recruiting officials in order to address the specific needs of the institutions; calls on CEPOL to take measures to improve the situation; urges the Agency to take into account the geographical balance when recruiting new staff;
Amendment 8 #
2019/2074(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Strongly encourages Eurojust to further develop cooperation projects with the other Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies in the field of justice and home affairs;
Amendment 10 #
2019/2074(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that the Court has identified a horizontal trend across agencies in the use of external staff hired in IT consultancy roles; calls for this dependency on external recruitment in this important area to be addressed; encourages Eurojust to act upon the single outstanding recommendation of the Court regarding the publication of vacancy notices on the European Personnel Selection Office website.; strongly encourages Eurojust to further develop cooperation with other Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies, with a view to internalising IT roles in the field of justice and home affairs;
Amendment 2 #
2019/2069(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Acknowledges the Centre’s efforts to adopt a more agile work culture, including more orientation towards project management; notes that the Centre has used four interim workers provided by a temporary work agency to compensate for the reduction of its statutory staff; deplores that the relevant framework contract did not explicitly require the full respect of Union law and relevant national law and that the temporary workers were paid significantly less than the statutory staff; takes note that in its reply, the Centre states that the applicable Union and Portuguese law have been respected and that the lower salary was due to a lower level of responsibilities; welcomes the Centre’s intention to nevertheless reassess its policy for the use of temporary workers to further rationalise the latter in line with its operating needs and the relevant legal framework; urges the Centre to employ as much as possible permanent staff;
Amendment 14 #
2019/2068(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Encourages the Agency to intensify its cooperation with international organisations, such as the Council of Europe and the United Nations, in order to find and use synergies, whenever possible.
Amendment 7 #
2019/2055(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. WelcomNotes the Court’s special reports on the European Union Emergency Trust Fund for Africa1 (‘EUTF for Africa’) and on the Facility for Refugees in Turkey2 (‘Turkey Ffacility’); takes note of the Court’sexpresses concerns regarding findings that the EUTF for Africa, which support activities in 26 African countries, is a flexible tool that is faster in launching projects than traditional funding instruments but lacks focus to efficiently steer action towards addressing the unprecedented challenges it faces and that the selection of projects is not fully consistent and clear; considers that the Commission should review the design of the EUTF for Africa, in particular to increase its focus and accelerate its implementation, with a view to making it more effectivewith a view to making it more inclusive and responsive to the needs of displaced people, migrants and host communities; notes the Court’s finding that the first tranche of EUR 3 billion (out of a total of EUR 6 billion) mobilised under the Turkey Facility provided a swift response to the refugee crisis but only half of the projects achieved the expected outcomes; believes that the efficiency of cash-assistance projects should be improved; urges the Commission to act upon the Court’s recommendations, including for more investments in municipalemergency infrastructure and socio- economic support to address refugees’ needs and the development of a strategy to transition from humanitarian to development assistance;rights and needs; urges the Commission to propose clear guidelines on the appropriate situations in which special facilities should be established and to report in detail about the funding that has been allocated under this facility so far. _________________ 1Special report 32 /2018 “European Union Emergency Trust Fund for Africa: Flexible but lacking focus”. 2Special report 27/2018 “The Facility for Refugees in Turkey: helpful support, but improvements needed to deliver more value for money”.
Amendment 10 #
2019/2055(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes that the Court did not find major flaws in the Commission’s clearance procedures regarding the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) and ISF and that it agrees with the Commission's clearance decisions; deplores, however, that three out of the 18 transactions examined by the Court contained errors, of which one shared management transaction under AMIF showed an highly disturbing error rate of 9,4 %; urges the Commission to address the systemic weaknesses identified by the Court, such as a lack of ex post checks of supporting documents in case of ex ante administrative checks of payment claims; calls on the Member States to improve legality and regularity checks of the procurement procedures organised by beneficiaries of funds.