BETA

23 Amendments of Ramona Nicole MĂNESCU related to 2016/0133(COD)

Amendment 19 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
(20) In order to ensure full respect for 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 on account of the applicant’s pregnancy or maternity, state of health or old age, should become 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. Separated children, which are also legally considered as unaccompanied minors, is a distinct category that should require specific attention. In order to discourage secondary movements of unaccompanied minors, which are not in their best interests, in the absence of a family member or a relative, the Member State responsible should be that where the unaccompanied minor first has lodged his or her application for international protectionis 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 that that Member State 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. In order to avoid an excessive pressure on the social system of single Member States and ensure a fair sharing of responsibility, the corrective allocation mechanism should include specific provisions for unaccompanied minors. Any decision to transfer an unaccompanied minor should be preceded by an assessment of his/her best interests by staff with the necessary qualifications and expertise.
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 27 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
(24) Any person subject to this regulation should have the rights to an effective remedy, in the form of an appeal or review, pursuant to the applicable legislation. 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 on the basis that he has a family member or, for unaccompanied minors, a relative in another Member State. In order to ensure that international law isand the relevant case-law are 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 or returned. The main 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.
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 34 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
(32) A key based on the size of the population and of the economy of the Member States should be applied as a point of reference in the operation of the corrective allocation mechanism in conjunction with a threshold, so as to enable the mechanism to function as a means of assisting Member States under disproportionate pressure. The application of the corrective allocation for the benefit of a Member State should be triggered automatically where the number of applications for international protection for which a Member State is responsible exceeds 150% of the figure identified in the reference key, but taking in consideration the applicant preference motivated by familiar reunification. In order to comprehensively reflect the efforts of each Member State, the number of persons effectively resettled to that Member State should be added to the number of applications for international protection for the purposes of this calculation. The unaccompanied minors represent a distinct category, and should therefore require specific attention and a distinct key to be applied.
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 44 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
(35) A Member State of allocation may decide not to accept the allocated applicants during a twelve months-period, in which case it should enter this information in the automated system and notify the other Member States, the Commission and the European Union Agency for Asylum. Thereafter the applicants that would have been allocated to that Member State should be allocated to the other Member States instead. The Member State which temporarily does not take part in the corrective allocation should make a solidarity contribution of EUR 250,000 per applicant not accepted to the Member State that was determined as responsible for examining those applications. The Commission should lay down the practical modalities for the implementation of the solidarity contribution mechanism in an implementing act. The European Union Agency for Asylum will monitor and report to the Commission on a yearly basis on the application of the financial solidarity mechanism.deleted
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 62 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) ‘unaccompanied minor’ means a minor who arrives on the territory of the Member States unaccompanied by an adult responsible for him or her, whether by law or by the practice of the Member State concerned, and for as long as he or she is not effectively taken into the care of such an adult; it includes a minor who is left unaccompanied after he or she has entered the territory of Member States, as well as minors who have been separated from both parents or from their previous legal or customary primary care-giver;
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 71 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) examine whether the application for international protection is inadmissible pursuant to Article 33(2) letters b) and c) of Directive 2013/32/EU when a country which is not a Member State is considered as a first country of asylum or as a safe third country for the applicant; andeleted
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 73 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point b – point i
(i) the applicant has the nationality of a third country, or he or she is a stateless person and was formerly habitually resident in that country, designated as a safe country of origin in the EU common list of safe countries of origin established under Regulation [Proposal COM (2015) 452 of 9 September 2015]; ordeleted
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 77 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5
5. The Member State which has examined an application for international protection, including in the cases referred to in paragraph 3, shall be responsible for examining any further representations or a subsequent application of that applicant in accordance with Article 40, 41 and 42 of Directive 2013/32/EU, irrespective of whether the applicant has left or was removed from the territories of the Member States.
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 79 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. Where a person who intends to make an application for international protection has entered irregularly into the territory of the Member States, the application shall be made in the Member State of that first where he or she is presentry. Where a person who intends to make an application for international protection is legally present in a Member State, the application shall be made in that Member State.
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 86 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. The Member State in which the applicant is obliged to be present shall continue the procedures for determining the Member State responsible even when the applicant leaves the territory of that Member State without authorisation or is otherwise not available for the competent authorities of that Member State.
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 92 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) that the right to apply for international protection does not encompass any choice of the applicant which Member State shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection, except when he or she is eligible for family reunification;
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 102 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – 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.
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 106 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Each Member State where an unaccompanied minor is obliged to be present shall ensure that a representative represents and/or assists the unaccompanied minor with respect to the relevant procedures provided for in this Regulation. The representative shall have the qualifications and expertise to ensure that the best interests of the minor are taken into consideration during the procedures carried out under this Regulation. Such representative shall have access to the content of the relevant documents in the applicant’s file including the specific leaflet for unaccompanied minors.
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 108 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
This paragraph shall be without prejudice to the relevant provisions in Article 25 of Directive 2013/32/EU. Due to the vulnerability of this group of applicants, unaccompanied minors should not be transferred to another Member State except if it is in their best interest.
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 115 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4
4. Before transferring an unaccompanied minor to the Member State responsible or, where applicable, to the Member State of allocation, the transferring Member State shall make sure that the Member State responsible or the Member State of allocation takes the measures referred to in Articles 14 and 24 of Directive 2013/33/EU and Article 25 of Directive 2013/32/EU without delay. Any decision to transfer an unaccompanied minor shall be preceded by an assessment of his/her best interests, through a prioritized procedure pursuant to Directive 2013/32/EU. The assessment shall be based on the factors listed in paragraph 3. The assessment shall be done swiftly by staff with the qualifications and expertise to ensure that the best interests of the minor are taken into consideration.
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 121 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. The criteria for determining the Member State responsible shall be applied only once, in the order in which they are set out in this Chapter.
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 125 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – 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 first has lodged his or her application for international protectionis present, unless it is demonstrated that this is not in the best interests of the minor.
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 133 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Where it is established, on the basis of proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists mentioned in Article 25(4) of this Regulation, including the data referred to in Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013], that an applicant has irregularly crossed the border into a Member State by land, sea or air having come from a third country, the Member State thus entered shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection. That responsibility shall cease 12 months after the date on which the irregular border crossing took place.
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 138 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The Member State in which an application for international protection is made and which is carrying out the process of determining the Member State responsible may, at any time before a Member State responsible has been determined, request another Member State to take charge of an applicant in order to bring together any family relations or on the basis of family, cultural or social ties or language skills which would facilitate his or her integration into that other Member State, even where that other Member State is not responsible under the criteria laid down in Articles 10 to 13 and 18. The persons concerned must express their consent in writing.
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 146 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall not hold a person in detention for the sole reason that he or she is subject to the procedure established by this Regulation. Detention shall always remain a measure of last resort and alternatives to detention shall always be a priority. Children shall not to be detained as detention can never be in the child's best interests.
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 159 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37
1. A Member State may, at the end of the three-month period after the entry into force of this Regulation and at the end of each twelve-month period thereafter, enter in the automated system that it will temporarily not take part in the corrective allocation mechanism set out in Chapter VII of this Regulation as a Member State of allocation and notify this to the Member States, the Commission and the European Union Agency for Asylum. 2. The automated system referred to in Article 44(1) shall in that case apply the reference key during this twelve-month period to those Member States with a number of applications for which they are the Member States responsible below their share pursuant to Article 35(1), with the exception of the Member State which entered the information, as well as the benefitting Member State. The automated system referred to in Article 44(1) shall count each application which would have otherwise been allocated to the Member State which entered the information pursuant to Article 36(4) for the share of that Member State. 3. At the end of the twelve-month period referred to in paragraph 2, the automated system shall communicate to the Member State not taking part in the corrective allocation mechanism the number of applicants for whom it would have otherwise been the Member State of allocation. That Member State shall thereafter make a solidarity contribution of EUR 250,000 per each applicant who would have otherwise been allocated to that Member State during the respective twelve-month period. The solidarity contribution shall be paid to the Member State determined as responsible for examining the respective applications. 4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt a decision in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56, lay down the modalities for the implementation of paragraph 3. 5. The European Union Agency for Asylum shall monitor and report to the Commission on a yearly basis on the application of the financial solidarity mechanism.Article 37 deleted Financial solidarity
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 167 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – 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, take back notifications and, if applicable, complying with their obligations under the allocation mechanism . Any Member State may send requests to the Commission and other Member States detailing the necessary assistance, including the necessity of experts and interprets, needed in order to fulfil the obligations arising under this Regulation.
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET
Amendment 168 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall publish a 2. consolidated list of the authorities referred to in paragraph 1 in the Official Journal of the European Union. Where there are amendments thereto, the Commission shall publish once a year an updated consolidated list.
2017/03/28
Committee: AFET