76 Amendments of Jeroen LENAERS related to 2016/0132(COD)
Amendment 66 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Biometrics constitute an important element in establishTo ensure high accuracy ing the exact identityidentification of such persons. I, it is necessary to set up a system for the comparison of their fingerprint and facial image data.
Amendment 72 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) To assist Member States overcome challenges relating to non-compliance with the fingerprinting process, this Regulation also permits the comparison of a facial image without fingerprints as a last resortFor the purposes of obtaining high accuracy identification, fingerprints should always be prefered over facial images. To assist Member States in overcoming challenges, where it is impossible to take the fingerprints of the third-country national or stateless person because his or her fingertips are damaged, either intentionally or not, or amputated, this Regulation should also permit the registration and comparison of a facial image without fingerprints. Member States should exhaust all attempts to ensure that fingerprints can be taken from the data-subject before a comparison using a facial image only can be carried out where non-compliance based on reasons not relating to the conditions of the individual's fingertips are given. Where facial images are used in combination with fingerprint data, it allows for the reduction of fingerprints registered while enabling the same result in terms of accuracy of the identification.
Amendment 75 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) The return of third-country nationals who do not have a right to stay in the Union, in accordance with fundamental rights as general principles of Union law as well as international law, including refugee protection and human rights obligations, and in compliance with the provisions of Directive 2008/115/EC26 , is an essential part of the comprehensive efforts to address migration and, in particular, tocornerstone of a fair and efficient Common European Asylum System, also with the purpose of reduceing and deterring irregular migration. TIt is necessary to increase the effectiveness of the Union system tofor the return of illegally staying third- country nationals is needed in order to maintain public trust in the Union migration and aCommon European Asylum sSystem, and should go hand in hand with the effortswhich is fundamental in order to uphold the obligation to protect those in need of protection. _________________ 26 Directive of the European Parliament and 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. 98.
Amendment 82 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) National authorities in the Member States experience difficulties in identifying illegally staying third-country nationals who use deceptive means to avoid their identification and to frustrate the procedures for re-documentation in view of their return and readmission. It is therefore essential to ensure that information on third-country nationals or stateless persons who are found to be staying illegally in the EU are collected and transmitted to Eurodac and are compared also with those collected and transmitted for the purpose of establishing the identity of applicants for international protection and of third- country nationals apprehended in connection with the unlawful crossing of the external borders of the Union, in order to facilitate their identification and re- documentation and to ensure their return and readmission, and to reduce identity fraud. It should also contribute to reducing the length of the administrative procedures necessary for ensuring return and readmission of illegally staying third- country nationals, including the period during which they may be kept in administrative detention awaiting removal. It should also allow identifying third countries of transit, where the illegally staytng third-country national may be readmitted. This is without prejudice to the Schengen Information System (SIS), which remains the fundamental system to ensure cooperation and information exchange on return.
Amendment 87 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) In its Conclusions of 8 October 2015 on the future of return policy, the Council endorsed the initiative announced by the Commission to explore an extension of the scope and purpose of Eurodac to enable the use of data for return purposes27 . Member States should have the necessary tools at their disposal to be able to detect illegal migration to and secondary movements by the identification of illegally staying third- country nationals in the Union. Therefore, the data in Eurodac should be available, subject to the conditions set out in this Regulation, for comparison by the designated authorities of the Member States. _________________ 27 EU Action Plan on return, COM(2015) 453 final.
Amendment 88 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) In its Conclusions of 8 October 2015 on the future of return policy, the Council endorsed the initiative announced by the Commission to explore an extension of the scope and purpose of Eurodac to enable the use of data for return purposes27 . Member States should have the necessary tools at their disposal to be able to detect illegal migration to and secondary movements of illegally staying third- country nationals or stateless persons in the Union. Therefore, the data in Eurodac should be available, subject to the conditions set out in this Regulation, for comparison by the designated authorities of the Member States. _________________ 27 EU Action Plan on return, COM(2015) 453 final.
Amendment 90 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13 a) The European Border and Coast Guard Agency, as established by Regulation (EU) 2016/1624 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a , plays a key role in the Union efforts for a better management of external borders, the prevention of irregular immigration and secondary movement. Consequently, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency should be provided with access to Eurodac data in order to be able to undertake risk analyses to the highest possible standards and assisting Member States with return- related tasks. The processing of those data shall be carried out in compliance with the data protection safeguards provided for in Regulation (EU) 2016/1624. _________________ 1aRegulation (EU) 2016/1624 of the European Parliament and 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 92 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) TIn line with the Commission’s Communication on Stronger and Smarter Information Systems for Borders and Security28 that highlightsed the need to improve the interoperability of information systems as a long-term objective, as also identified by the European Council and the Council. T, the Communication proposes toission set up an Expert Group on Information Systems and Interoperability to address the legal and technical feasibility of achieving interoperability of the information systems for borders and security. T with the main goal of improving the quality of service that Union databases provide to their users, such as better, simpler and quicker access to all relevant information therein and guaranteeing high quality data. Therefore, this group should assess the necessity and proportionality of establishing interoperability withbetween Union information systems such as the Schengen Information Systems (SIS) and, the Visa Information Systems (VIS), and examine if there is a need to revise the legal framework for law enforcement access to EURODAC. _________________ 28Eurodac and new relevant information systems that are currently being developed. _________________ 28 COM(2016) 205 final COM(2016) 205 final
Amendment 96 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14 a (new)
Recital 14 a (new)
(14 a) The Commission proposal1a amending SIS in the field of border checks opens the possibility for using the search with fingerprints in SIS to make immediately available the identity and the status of third-country nationals subject to return decisions. Member States should establish as closely as possible the contact points handling Eurodac comparisons and the national contact points handling supplementary information to SIS. _________________ 1a COM 2016(882) final
Amendment 98 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) It is essential in the fight against terrorist offences and other serious criminal offences for the law enforcement authorities to have the fullest and most up- to-date information if they are to perform their tasks. The information contained in Eurodac is necessary for the purposes of the prevention, detection or, investigation or prosecution of terrorist offences as referred to in Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA29Directive (EU) 2017/... of the European Parliament and of the Council [combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 2005/671/JHA] or of other serious criminal offences as referred to in Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA30 . Therefore, the data in Eurodac should be available, subject to the conditions set out in this Regulation, for comparison by the designated authorities of Member States and the European Police Office (Europol). _________________ 29 Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism (OJ L 164, 22.6.2002, p. 3). 30Council 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 101 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Since Eurodac was originally established to facilitate the application of the Dublin Convention, access to Eurodac for the purposes of preventing, detecting or, investigating or prosecuting terrorist offences or other serious criminal offences constitutes a changefurther development of the original purpose of Eurodac, which. In line with the requirements of Article 52(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, any interferesnce with the fundamental right to respect for the private life of individuals whose personal data are processed in Eurodac. In line with the requirements of Article 52(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, any such interference must be in accordance with the law, which must be formulated with sufficient precision to allow individuals to adjust their conduct and it must protect individuals against arbitrariness and indicate with sufficient clarity the scope of discretion conferred on the competent authorities and the manner of its exercise. Any interference must be necessary to genuinely meet an objective of general interest and proportionate to the legitimate objective it aims to achieve.
Amendment 102 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) This Regulation also lays down the conditions under which requests for comparison of fingerprint, facial image and alphanumeric data with Eurodac data for the purposes of preventing, detecting or investigating terrorist offences or other serious criminal offences should be allowed and the necessary safeguards to ensure the protection of the fundamental right to respect for the private life of individuals whose personal data are processed in Eurodac. The strictness of those conditions reflects the fact that the Eurodac database registers fingerprint, facial image and alphanumeric data of persons who are not presumed to have committed a terrorist offence or other serious criminal offence. Although comparisons based on fingerprint and facial image data result in search results of greater accuracy, it is acknowledged that law enforcement authorities and Europol do not always possess the fingerprint and facial image data of suspects or victims whose case they are investigating, which could hamper their ability to match fingerprints and facial images in databases such as Eurodac. In order to contribute further to the investigations of those authorities and Europol, searches based on alphanumeric data should be allowed in Eurodac in such cases, in particular where those authorities and Europol possess evidence of the criminal suspect or victim's personal details or identity documents.
Amendment 106 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) It is also necessary to require the Member States promptly to take and transmit the fingerprints and facial image data of every applicant for international protection and of every third-country national or stateless person who is apprehended in connection with the irregular crossing of an external border of a Member State or is found to be staying illegally in a Member State , if they are at least six years of age.
Amendment 121 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) It is of the utmost importance for the well-functioning of the Common European Asylum System that a registration rate of 100% is achieved as regards applications for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person, persons apprehended in connection with the unlawful crossing of the external borders of the Union and third-country nationals or stateless persons found illegally staying on its territory. In order to achieve this registration rate, Member States should refer to the Commission's Staff Working Document on Implementation of the Eurodac Regulation as regards the obligation to take fingerprints adopted by the Council on 20 July 201534 , which sets out a best practice approach to taking fingerprints of irregular third-country nationals or stateless persons. Where a Member State's national law allows for the taking of fingerprints by force or coercion as a last resort, those measures must fully respect the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Third-country nationals or stateless persons who are deemed to be vulnerable persons and minors should not be coerced into giving their fingerprints or facial image, except in duly justified circumstances that are permitted under national law. _________________ 34 COM(2015) 150 final, 27.5.2015 COM(2015) 150 final, 27.5.2015
Amendment 123 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) Third-country nationals or stateless persons who have requested international protection in one Member State may try to request international protection in another Member State for many years to come. Therefore, the maximum period during which fingerprint and facial image data should be kept by the Central System should be of considerable lengthIn order to effectively assist in the control of illegal immigration and with the identification of illegally staying third- county nationals or stateless persons, the maximum period during which fingerprint and facial image data should be kept by the Central System should be of considerable length in order to deter third-country nationals or stateless persons who have requested international protection in one Member State from trying to request international protection in another Member State. Given that most third- country nationals or stateless persons who have stayed in the Union for several years will have obtained a settled status or even citizenship of a Member State after that period, a period of ten years should be considered a reasonable period for the storage of fingerprint and facial image data.
Amendment 131 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) In view of successfully preventing and monitoring unauthorised movements of third-country nationals or stateless persons who have no right to stay in the Union, and of taking the necessary measures for successfully enforcing effective return and readmission to third countries in accordance with Directive 2008/115/EC35 and the right to protection of personal data, a period of fiveten years should be considered a necessary period for the storage of fingerprint and facial data. _________________ 35 OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p.98 OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p.98
Amendment 134 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) The storage period should be shorter in certain special situations where there is no need to keep fingerprint and facial image data and all other personal data for that length of time. Fingerprint and facial image data and all other personal data belonging to a third-country national or stateless person should be erased immediately once third- country nationals or stateless persons obtain citizenship of a Member State.
Amendment 136 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) For the purposes of protection of personal data, and to exclude systematic comparisons which should be forbidden, the processing of Eurodac data should only take place in specific cases andThe processing of Eurodac data should only take place in specific cases, in accordance with Union law on the protection of personal data, when it is necessary for the purposes of preventing, detecting or investigating terrorist offences or other serious criminal offences. A specific case exists in particular when the request for comparison is connected to a specific and concrete situation or to a specific and concrete danger associated with a terrorist offence or other serious criminal offence, or to specific persons in respect of whom there are serious grounds for believing that they will commit or have committed any such offence. A specific case also exists when the request for comparison is connected to a person who is the victim of a terrorist offence or other serious criminal offence. The designated authorities and Europol should thus only request a comparison with Eurodac when they have reasonable grounds to believe that such a comparison will provide information that will substantially assist them in preventing, detecting or investigating a terrorist offence or other serious criminal offence.
Amendment 137 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) In addition, access should be allowed only on condition that comparisons witha prior search in the national fingerprint and facial image databases of the Member State and within the automated fingerprinting identification systems of all other Member States under Council Decision 2008/615/JHA36 did not lead to the establishment of the identity of the data subjecthas been conducted. That condition requires the requesting Member State to conduct comparisons with the automated fingerprinting identification systems of all other Member States under Decision 2008/615/JHA which are technically available, unless that Member State can justify that there are reasonable grounds to believe that it would not lead to the establishment of the identity of the data subject. Such reasonable grounds exist in particular where the specific case does not present any operational or investigative link to a given Member State. That condition requires prior legal and technical implementation of Decision 2008/615/JHA by the requesting Member State in the area of fingerprint data, as it should not be permitted to conduct a Eurodac check for law enforcement purposes where those above steps have not been first taken. _________________ 36 Council Decision 2008/615/JHA of 23 June 2008 on the stepping up of cross- border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime (OJ L 210, 6.8.2008, p. 1).
Amendment 138 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
Amendment 141 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
(50) Transfers of personal data obtained by a Member State or Europol pursuant to this Regulation from the Central System to any third country or international organisation or private entity established in or outside the Union should be prohibited, in order to ensure the right to asylum and to safeguard applicants for international protection from having their data disclosed to a third country. This implies that Member States should not transfer information obtained from the Central System concerning: the name(s); date of birth; nationality; the Member State(s) of origin or Member State of allocation; the details of the identity or travel document; ; the place and date of application for international protection; the reference number used by the Member State of origin; the date on which the fingerprints and facial image were taken as well as the date on which the Member State(s) transmitted the data to Eurodac; the operator user ID; and any information relating to any transfer of the data subject under [Regulation (EU) No 604/2013]. That prohibition should be without prejudice to the right of Member States to transfer such data to third countries to which [Regulation (EU) No 604/2013] applies [ in accordance with Regulation (EU) No […/2016]respectively with the national rules adopted pursuant to Directive [2016/…/EU] ], in order to ensure that Member States have the possibility of cooperating with such third countries for the purposes of this Regulation.
Amendment 150 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) assist with the control of illegal immigration to and secondary movements within the Union and with the identification of illegally staying third- country nationals for determiningand stateless persons for determining which Member State is responsible for carrying out the appropriate measures to be taken by Member States, including removal and repatriation of persons residing without authorisationturn of third-country nationals and stateless persons staying illegally.
Amendment 157 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) lay down the conditions under which Member States' designated authorities and the European Police Office (Europol) may request the comparison of fingerprint ands, facial image and alphanumeric data with those stored in the Central System for law enforcement purposes for the prevention, detection or investigation of terrorist offences or of other serious criminal offences .
Amendment 158 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) lay down the conditions under which Member States' designated authorities and the European Police Office (Europol) may request the comparison of fingerprint and facial image data with those stored in the Central System for law enforcement purposes for the prevention, detection or, investigation or prosecution of terrorist offences or of other serious criminal offences . (This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)
Amendment 164 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to the processing of data intended for Eurodac by the Member State of origin in databases set up under the latter's national law, fingerprints and facial image data and other personal data may be processed in Eurodac only for the purposes set out in this Regulation and [Article 34(1) of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013....].
Amendment 168 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. The person referred to in Articles 10(1), 13(1) and 14(1) shall be registered. Therefore, Member States are obliged to take their fingerprints and facial image of persons referred to in Article 10(1), 13(1) and 14(1)s for the purposes of Article 1(1)(a) and (b) of this Regulation and shall impose on the data-subject the requirement to provide his or her fingerprints and a facial image and inform them as such in accordance with Article 30 of this Regulation.
Amendment 184 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3
Article 2 – paragraph 3
3. For the purposes of achieving full registration of all the persons in accordance with paragraph 1, Member States mayshall introduce administrative sanctions, in accordance with their national law, for non-compliance with the fingerprinting process and capturing a facial image in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article. These sanctprocess of taking biometric data. Member States shall make sure that an opportunity for counseling has been provided to the person in order to convince that person to cooperate with the procedure. Sanctions, including the possibility to use means of coercions, shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. In this context, detention should only be used as a means of last resort in order to determine or verify a third-country national's identity.
Amendment 192 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Article 2 – paragraph 4
4. Without prejudice to paragraph 3 of this Article, where enrolment of the fingerprints or facial image is not possible from third-country nationals or stateless persons who are deemed to be vulnerable persons and from a minor due to the conditions of the fingertips or face, the authorities of that Member State shall not use sanctions to coerce the taking of fingerprints or a facial image. A Member State may attempt to re- take the fingerprints or facial image of a minor or vulnerable person who refuses to comply, where the reason for non- compliance is not related to the conditions of the fingertips or facial image or the health of the individual and where it is duly justified to do so. Where a minor, in particular an unaccompanied or separated minor refuses to give their fingerprints or a facial image and there are reasonable grounds to suspect that there are child safeguarding or protection risks, the minor shall be referred to the national child protection authorities and /or national referral mechanisms.
Amendment 200 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) 'illegal stay' means the presence on the territory of a Member State, of a third- country national or stateless person who does not fulfill, or no longer fulfils the conditions of entry as set out in Article 5 of the Schengen Borders Code or other conditions for entry, stay or residence in that Member State;
Amendment 201 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) 'hit' means the existence of a match or matches established by the Central System by comparison between fingerprints and facial image data recorded in the computerised central database and those transmitted by a Member State with regard to a person, without prejudice to the requirement that Member States shall immediately check the results of the comparison pursuant to Article 26(4);
Amendment 206 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point k
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) 'law enforcement' means the prevention, detection or, investigation or prosecution of terrorist offences or of other serious criminal offences;
Amendment 208 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point l
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point l
(l) 'terrorist offences' means the offences under national law which correspond or are equivalent to those referred to in Articles 1 to 4 of Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA;referred to in Articles 3 to 12 of Directive (EU) 2017/... of the European Parliament and of the Council [on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 2005/671/JHA].
Amendment 212 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point o a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point o a (new)
(o a) 'alphanumeric data' means data represented by letters, digits, special characters, spaces and punctuation marks;
Amendment 218 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Eu-LISA shall be permitted to use real personal data of the Eurodac production system for testing and fine-tuning purposes in the following circumstances:
Amendment 221 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
In such cases, the security measures, access control and logging activities at the testing environment shall be equal to the ones for the Eurodac production system. Real personal data adopted for testing shall be rendered anonymous in such a way that the data-subject is no longer identifiable. After completion of the purposes referred to in the first subparagraph, the real personal data shall be permanently erased from the testing environment.
Amendment 223 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c), Member States shall designate the authorities that are authorised to request comparisons with Eurodac data pursuant to this Regulation. Designated authorities shall be authorities of the Member States which are responsible for the prevention, detection or investigation of terrorist offences or of other serious criminal offences. Designated authorities shall not include agencies or units exclusively responsible for intelligence relating to national security.
Amendment 226 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The verifying authority shall ensure that the conditions for requesting comparisons of fingerprints, facial image and alphanumeric data with Eurodac data are fulfilled.
Amendment 227 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Only the verifying authority shall be authorised to forward requests for comparison of fingerprints and, facial images and alphanumeric data to the National Access Point.
Amendment 230 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c), Europol shall designate a specialised unn authority with duly empowered Europol officials to act as its verifyinghich shall be authorised to request access to Eurodac through its designated central access point in order to prevent, detect and investigate terrorist offences or other serious criminal offences. The designated authority, which shall act independently of the designated authoritycentral access point referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article when performing its tasks under this Regulation and shall not receive instructions from the designated authority as regards the outcome of the verification. The unit shall ensure that the conditions for requesting comparisons of fingerprints and facial images with Eurodac data are fulfilled. Europol shall designate in agreement with any Member State the National Access Point of that Member State which shall communicate its requests for comparison of fingerprint and facial image data to the Central Systemdesignated authority shall be an operating unit of Europol.
Amendment 233 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. For the purposes laid down in Article 1 (1)(c), Europol shall designate an operating unit that is authorised to request comparisons with Eurodac data through its designated Nation specialised unit with duly empowered Europol officials as the central Aaccess Ppoint. The designated authority shall be an operating unit of Europol which is competent to collect, store, process, analyse and exchange information to support and strengthen action by Member States in preventing, detecting or invcentral access point shall verify that the conditions to request access to Eurodac laid down in Article 22 are fulfilled. The central access point shall act independently when performing its tasks under this Regulation and shall not receive instructions from the destignating terrorist offences or other serious criminal offences falling within Europol's mandateed authority referred to in paragraph 1 as regards the outcome of the verification.
Amendment 246 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) the number of fingerprint and facial image data which the Central System had to request more than once from the Member States of origin because the fingerprints and facial image data originally transmitted did not lend themselves to comparison using the computerised fingerprint and facial image recognition system;
Amendment 250 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. The monthly statistical data for persons referred to in paragraph1(a) to (h)k) shall be broken down, where possible, by age and sex in order to understand how many minor boys and girls are affected and shall be published and made public by each month. At the end of each year, the yearly statistical data for persons referred to in paragraph 1(a) to (h) shall be published and made public by eu-LISA . The statistics shall contain a breakdown of data for each Member State.
Amendment 257 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Non-compliance with the 72-hour time- limit shall not relieve Member States of the obligation to take and transmit the fingerprints and facial image to the Central System. Where the condition of the fingertips does not allow the taking of the fingerprints of a quality ensuring appropriate comparison under Article 26, the Member State of origin shall retake the fingerprints of the applicant and resend them as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after they have been successfully retaken.
Amendment 271 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph s a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph s a (new)
(s a) in the case of a minor, and in particular when unaccompanied, where applicable, data on family members, such as surname(s), forename(s), data of birth, sex, nationality(ies), place of birth, relation to the minor.
Amendment 302 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. The fingerprint and facial image data of a third- country national or a stateless person as referred to in paragraph 1 shall be transmitted to the Central System and compared with the fingerprint and facial image data of persons fingerprinted for the purposes of Article 10(1), 13(1) and 14(1) transmitted by other Member States and already recorded in the Central System.
Amendment 303 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4
Article 14 – paragraph 4
4. Non-compliance with the 72-hour time-limit referred to in paragraph 32 of this Article shall not relieve Member States of the obligation to take and transmit the fingerprints and facial image data to the Central System. Where the condition of the fingertips does not allow the taking of fingerprints of a quality ensuring appropriate comparison under Article 26, the Member State of origin shall retake the fingerprints of persons apprehended as described in paragraph 1 of this Article, and resend them as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after they have been successfully retaken.
Amendment 306 #
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter 5 – title
Chapter 5 – title
PROCEDURE FOR COMPARISON OF DATA FOR APPLICANTS FOR INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION AND THIRD-COUNTRY NATIONALS AND STATELESS PERSONS APPREHENDED CROSSING THE BORDER IRREGULARLY OR ILLEGALLY STAYING IN THE TERRITORY OF A MEMBER STATE
Amendment 313 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. The Central System shall automatically transmit the hit or the negative result of the comparison to the Member State of origin following the procedures set out in Article 26(4) . Where there is a hit, it shall transmit for all data sets corresponding to the hit the data referred to in Article 12, 13(2) and 14(2) along with, where appropriate, the mark referred to in Article 19(1) and (4) . Where a negative hit result is received, the data referred to in Article 12, 13(2) and 14(2) shall not be transmitted.
Amendment 315 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Amendment 319 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – title
Article 16 – title
Comparison of facial image data only
Amendment 321 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
(1) Where the condition of the fingertips does not allow for the taking of fingerprints of a quality ensuring appropriate comparison under Article 26 or where a person referred to in Article 10(1), 13(1) and 14(1) refuses to comply with the fingerprinting process, a Member State mayshall carry out a comparison of facial image data as a last resort.
Amendment 324 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 4
Article 16 – paragraph 4
(4) The Central System shall automatically transmit the hit or the negative result of the comparison to the Member State of origin following the procedures set out in Article 26(4). Where there is a hit, it shall transmit for all data sets corresponding to the hit the data referred to in Article 12, 13(2) and 14(2) along with, where appropriate, the mark referred to in Article 179(1) and (4). Where a negative hit result is received, the data referred to in Article 12, 13(2) and 14(2) shall not be transmitted.
Amendment 326 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 5
Article 16 – paragraph 5
Amendment 329 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
1. For the purposes laid down in Article 10(1), each set of data relating to an applicant for international protection , as referred to in Article 12, shall be stored in the Central System for ten years from the date on which this or her fingerprints and facial image were taken.
Amendment 336 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. For the purposes laid down in Article 13(1), each set of data relating to a third-country national or stateless person as referred to in Article 13(2) shall be stored in the Central System for fiveten years from the date on which his or her fingerprints and facial image were taken.
Amendment 342 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. For the purposes laid down in Article 14(1), each set of data relating to a third-country national or stateless person as referred to in Article 14(2) shall be stored in the Central System for fiveten years from the date on which his or her fingerprints and facial image were taken.
Amendment 347 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. Data relating to a person who has acquired citizenship of any Member State before expiry of the period referred to in Article 17(1) , (2) or (3) shall be erased as soon as possible from the Central System in accordance with Article 28(4) as soon as the Member State of origin becomes aware that the person concerned has acquired such citizenship.
Amendment 354 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a), the Member State of origin which granted international protection to an applicant for international protection whose data were previously recorded in the Central System pursuant to Article 12 shall mark the relevant data in conformity with the requirements for electronic communication with the Central System established by eu-LISA . That mark shall be stored in the Central System in accordance with Article 17(1) for the purpose of transmission under Articles 15 and 16. The Central System shall , as soon as possible and no later than 72 hours, inform all Member States of origin of the marking of data by another Member State of origin having produced a hit with data which they transmitted relating to persons referred to in Article 10(1), 13(1) or 14(1) . Those Member States of origin shall also mark the corresponding data sets.
Amendment 355 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The data of beneficiaries of international protection stored in the Central System and marked pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article shall be made available for comparison for the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c) for a period of three years after the date on which the data subject was granted international protectionuntil such data is automatically erased from the Central System in accordance with Article 17(4).
Amendment 356 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 357 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3
Article 19 – paragraph 3
3. The Member State of origin shall unmark or unblock data concerning a third-country national or stateless person whose data were previously marked or blocked in accordance with paragraphs 1 or 2 of this Article if his or her status is revoked or ended or the renewal of his or her status is refused under [Articles 14 or 19 of Directive 2011/95/EU].
Amendment 364 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – title
Article 20 – title
Procedure for comparison of fingerprint, facial image and alphanumeric data with Eurodac data
Amendment 367 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c), the designated authorities referred to in Articles 6(1) and 8(2) may submit a reasoned electronic request as provided for in Article 21(1) together with the reference number used by them, to the verifying authority for the transmission for comparison of fingerprint and, facial image and alphanumeric data to the Central System via the National Access Point. Upon receipt of such a request, the verifying authority shall verify whether all the conditions for requesting a comparison referred to in Articles 21 or 22, as appropriate, are fulfilled.
Amendment 369 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
2. Where all the conditions for requesting a comparison referred to in Articles 21 or 22 are fulfilled, the verifying authority shall transmit the request for comparison to the National Access Point which will process it to the Central System in accordance with Articles 15 and 16 for the purpose of comparison with the fingerprint and, facial image and alphanumeric data transmitted to the Central System pursuant to Articles 10(1), 13 (1) and 14(1) .
Amendment 371 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Article 20 – paragraph 4
4. In exceptional cases of urgency where there is a need to prevent an imminent danger associated with a terrorist offence or other serious criminal offence, the verifying authority may transmit the fingerprint, facial image and alphanumeric data to the National Access Point for comparison immediately upon receipt of a request by a designated authority and only verify ex-post whether all the conditions for requesting a comparison referred to in Article 21 or Article 22 are fulfilled, including whether an exceptional case of urgency actually existed. The ex-post verification shall take place without undue delay after the processing of the request.
Amendment 372 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c), designated authorities may submit a reasoned electronic request for the comparison of fingerprint, facial image and alphanumeric data with the data stored in the Central System within the scope of their powers only if comparisons with the following databases did not lead to the establishment of the identity of the data subjectprior check has been conducted in:
Amendment 375 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2
Article 21 – paragraph 2
2. Requests for comparison with Eurodac data shall be limited to searching with fingerprint or, facial image or alphanumeric data.
Amendment 378 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c), Europol's designated authority may submit a reasoned electronic request for the comparison of fingerprint data withquest to access the data stored in the Central System within the limits of Europol's mandate and where necessary for the performance of Europol's tasks only if comparisons with fingerprint data stora prior check has been conducted in any information processing systems that are technically and legally accessible by Europol did not lead to the establishment of the identity of the data subject and where the following cumulative conditions are met:
Amendment 380 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 2
2. Requests for comparison with Eurodac data shall be limited to comparisons of fingerprint and facial image and alphanumeric data.
Amendment 382 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
2. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c), fingerprints and the facial image shall be digitally processed by the Member States and transmitted in the data format as set out in the agreed Interface Control Document , in order to ensure that the comparison can be carried out by means of the computerised fingerprint and facial recognition system.
Amendment 386 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. Fingerprints and the facial image shall be digitally processed and transmitted in the data format as set out in the agreed Interface Control Document . As far as necessary for the efficient operation of the Central System, eu-LISA shall establish the technical requirements for transmission of the data format by Member States to the Central System and vice versa. eu-LISA shall ensure that the fingerprint data and facial images transmitted by the Member States can be compared by the computerised fingerprint and facial recognition system.
Amendment 394 #
1. Member States shall ensure the transmission of fingerprint and facial image data of an appropriate quality for the purpose of comparison by means of the computerised fingerprint and facial recognition system. As far as necessary to ensure that the results of the comparison by the Central System reach a very high level of accuracy, eu-LISA shall define the appropriate quality of transmitted fingerprint and facial image data. The Central System shall, as soon as possible, check the quality of the fingerprint and facial image data transmitted. If fingerprint or facial image data do not lend themselves to comparison using the computerised fingerprint and facial recognition system, the Central System shall inform the Member State concerned. That Member State shall then transmit fingerprint or facial image data of the appropriate quality using the same reference number as the previous set of fingerprint or facial image data.
Amendment 410 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) in relation to a person covered by Article 10(1) or 13(1) or 14(1) , the obligation to have his or her fingerprints and facial image taken;
Amendment 413 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) the right to lodge a complaint to the national supervisory authority.
Amendment 444 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 3
Article 38 – paragraph 3
3. A third-country shall not have direct access to the Central System to compare or transmit fingerprint or facial image data or any other personal data of a third-country national or stateless person and shall not be granted access via a Member State's designated National Access Point.
Amendment 452 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 8 – introductory part
Article 42 – paragraph 8 – introductory part
8. While respecting the provisions of national law on the publication of sensitive information, each Member State and Europol shall prepare annual reports on the effectiveness of the comparison of fingerprint and facial image data with Eurodac data for law enforcement purposes, containing information and statistics on: