Activities of Filiz HYUSMENOVA related to 2018/2092(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Full application of the provisions of the Schengen acquis in Bulgaria and Romania (debate) BG
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the full application of the provisions of the Schengen acquis in Bulgaria and Romania: abolition of checks at internal land, sea and air borders PDF (386 KB) DOC (59 KB)
Amendments (13)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
Citation 7 a (new)
- having regard to the study by the European Parliament Research Service on 'The Cost of Non Schengen': Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs aspects' of 26 September 2016,
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
- having regard to the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th annual reports by the European Commission on the functioning of the Schengen area,
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the completion of the Schengen evaluation process for Bulgaria and Romania and the state of preparedness of the two countries to implement all the provisions of the Schengen acquis were confirmed by the Council in its conclusions of 9 and 10 June 2011; whereas according to Bulgaria and Romania's accession treaties and the existing EU framework, these were the only prerequisites for the accession to the Schengen area; whereas in its draft decision of 8 July 2011, the Council verified that the necessary conditions for the application of the Schengen acquis had been met in all areas, namely data protection, air borders, land borders, police cooperation, the Schengen Information System, sea borders and visas; whereas Bulgaria and Romania’s state of preparedness to apply the Schengen acquis in full has been acknowledged by the Commission and Parliament, most recently in the Commission communication of 27 September 2017 and Parliament’s resolution of 30 May 2018;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital А
Recital А
A. whereas the completion of the Schengen evaluation process for Bulgaria and Romania and the state of preparedness of the two countries to implement all the provisions of the Schengen acquis were confirmed by the Council in its conclusions of 9 and 10 June 2011; whereas in its draft decision of 8 July 2011, the Council verified that the necessary conditions for the application of the Schengen acquis had been met in all areas, namely data protection, air borders, land borders, police cooperation, the Schengen Information System, sea borders and visas; whereas Bulgaria and Romania’s state of preparedness to apply the Schengen acquis in full has been acknowledged many times by the Commission and Parliament, - in the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th annual reports on the functioning of the Schengen area, and most recently in the Commission communication of 27 September 2017 and Parliament’s resolution of 30 May 2018;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital В a (new)
Recital В a (new)
Ca. whereas at the European Council of 1-2 March 2012 the heads of state and government emphasised that all legal conditions had been met for the decision on the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the Schengen area to be taken, and called on the Justice and Home Affairs Council to adopt such a decision in September 2012;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Г
Recital Г
D. whereas in its conclusions the Justice and Home Affairs Council confirmed on multiple occasions its commitment to base any future decision on the abolition of checks at internal borders for Bulgaria and Romania on a two-step approach; and whereas the adoption of that decision by the Justice and Home Affairs Council has been repeatedly deferred;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
F a. Whereas according to a study1a by the European Parliament's Research Service "the costs linked with the reintroduction of border controls could range between €0.05 billion and €20 billion in one-off costs and between €2 billion and €4 billion in annual operating costs. This amounts to around 0.02%-0.03 % of the Schengen area GDP." Whereas this estimation concerns the reintroduction of border controls within the Schengen border-free zone, an equivalent ratio of financial losses and lost profit could be inferred for the South- East region of Europe, where border checks between Member States persist unduly. _________________ 1a The Cost of Non-Schengen: Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs aspects, EPRS, PE 581.387 - September 2016
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Expresses concern that the introduction of a two-step approach could negatively impact the future enlargement of the Schengen area; emphasises that the failure to reach consensus in the Council calls into question the credibility of the EU and continuously erodes public support for common EU policies by demonstrating unequal treatment of Member States and their citizens and introducing artificial lines of division within the Union by referring to legally non-existing conditions; voices its concern that such practices contribute to the rise of populism and nationalism across the continent, which poses a fundamental challenge to the functioning of the EU;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines the fact that the free movement of persons across internal borders is one of the main achievements of the EU; stresses that the enlargement of the Schengen area should not be negatively impacted by shortcomings in other EU policies, such as the Common European Asylum System; Points out that transport operations from and to some of Europe's largest southern civil fleet and freight ports, as well as the import and exports to and from the two countries and Schengen locked Greece are impacted by the waiting time on internal EU border crossing points, providing for lost benefits, increased spending and tapping the potential for European businesses and the European economy.
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines the fact that the free movement of persons across internal borders and the incorporation of the Schengen acquis into the EU legal framework is one of the main achievements of the EU; stresses that the enlargement of the Schengen area should not be negatively impacted by shortcomings in other EU policies, such as the Common European Asylum System;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the adoption of the Council decision of 12 October 2017 granting Bulgaria and Romania passive access to the Visa Information System and the Council’s proposal for the full application of the remaining provisions of the Schengen acquis relating to the Schengen Information System in both Member States; regrets the fact that the adoption of these decisions did not immediately follow verification of the successful completion of the Schengen evaluation process in 2011, but was initiated as an ad-hoc measure to ensure compliance with the preconditions for the implementation of the Entry/Exit System, expected to be operational by 2020; considers that these legal acts constitute a step towards closing information gaps between those Member States applying the Schengen acquis in full and those applying it partially; firmly insists that the adoption of these acts should not serve to further delay the abolition of checks at internal land, sea and air borders; notesConsiders that the partial passive access to the Visa Information System, being a temporary measure could potentially lead to vulnerabilities in the long run, as it does not allow for the completion of full interoperability of all information systems in area of justice and home affairs between all EU Member States; notes in addition that with the adoption of these decisions, Bulgaria and Romania will share all the responsibilities and obligations, but not all the benefits, of fully fledged Schengen area membership;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that with regard to the full application of the Schengen acquis, the criteria applicable to all Member States are clearly defined in the European legislative framework; also emphasises that no additional criteria should be introduced or links to other Union mechanisms and policies made, other than the specified prerequisites laid down in the 2005 Act of Accession; calls on the Member States to take a decision on the enlargement of the Schengen area solely on the basis of fulfilment of the relevant conditions for applying the Schengen acquis following the completion of the Schengen evaluation process;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that with regard to the full application of the Schengen acquis, no additional criteria should be introduced or links to other Union mechanisms and policies made, other than the specified prerequisites laid down in the 2005 Act of Accession; calls on the Member States to take a decision on the enlargement of the Schengen area solely on the basis of fulfilment of the relevant conditions for applying the Schengen acquis following the completion of the Schengen evaluation process in 2011;