40 Amendments of Nadja HIRSCH related to 2012/2032(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the European Union has committed itself to completing the establishment of a Common European Asylum System (CEAS) in 2012 by setting up a common area of protection and solidarity based on a common asylum procedure and uniform status for people who have been granted international protection;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas solidarity has been recognised as an essential component and a guiding principle of the CEAS from the outset, as well as constituting a core principle in EU law according to which Member States should share both advantages and burdens in an equal and fair manner; recalls the importance of Art. 80 as a legal basis;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Emphasises the central role and horizontal effect of solidarity and responsibility-sharing in the establishment of a CEAS; reiterates the need to ensure the efficient and uniform application of the Union's asylum acquis and implementation of legislation in order to ensure high levels of protection;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that the principle of solidarity and responsibility-sharing is enshrined in the Treaties, and that an effective solidarity framework includes, at the least, the duty on the part of the EU institutions and agencies and the Member States to cooperate in order to find ways to give effect to this principle; Asserts that solidarity is not limited to Member States‘ relations with each other, but is also aimed at asylum seekers and beneficiaries of international protection;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines the fact that there has been a sharpwhile lately the number of asylum seekers has been increasing again, the last decade has seen an overall decrease in the number of asylum applications in the past decade in the EU; highlights that certain Member States face disproportionate asylum requests compared to others, and that asylum applications are unevenly spread across the EU; recalls that in 2011, ten Member States accounted for more than 90 % of asylum applications, that up to the summer of 2011 only 227 beneficiaries of international protection were relocated within the EU from Malta, to six other Member States, and that in 2011 in the whole EU, only 4 125 refugees were resettled to just 10 EU Member States, representing approximately 6.6 % of all persons resettled during that year; stresses that it is crucial to identify these inequalities by, inter alia, comparing absolute numbers and capacity indicators;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Takes the view that although the number of asylum applications is not constant, it is predictable to some extent, especially as regards EU entry points; calls for measures to boost the preparedness of the asylum systems of those Member States located at the main EU entry points, as a sign of practical solidarity;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Calls for optimisation of the use of existing measures, as well as development of new targeted measures and tools in order to respond to ever-changing challenges in a flexible yet effective manner; such optimisation is particularly timely given the acute financial crisis afflicting the EU, which is putting additional strain on Member States' efforts to cope efficiently with asylum procedures, particularly in the case of those receiving disproportionate numbers of asylum seekers;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Regrets the rise of xenophobia and racism and of negative and misinformed assumptions about asylum seekers and refugees accompanying socio-economic insecurity in the EU; taking into account the crucial role of public opinion and society in the functioning of the CEAS, recommends that Member States undertake awareness- raising campaigns on the actual situation of asylum seekers and beneficiaries of international protection, stressing the importance of international protection; recommends working together with civil society to this end in order to benefit from its experience and expertise;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Recalls the need for EASO to provide technical support and specific expertise to Member States when implementing the asylum legislation, and for the European Commission to use the information gathered by the EASO to identify potential shortcomings in Members States‘' asylum systems; underlines, in this respect the importance of presenting regular reports and drawing up action plans in order to promote targeted solutions and recommendations for improving the CEAS and remedying potential deficiencies;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Stresses that EASO's activities should focus on both long-term preventive objectives and short-term reactive measures, in order to respond adequately to different situations; considers, therefore, that while EASO should support capacity-building measures for underdeveloped or dysfunctional asylum systems, it should give priority to emergency situations and to Member States facing particular or disproportionate pressures; emphasises, in this respect, the crucial role of Asylum Expert Teams in assisting with heavy caseloads and backlogs, providing training, undertaking project management, advising and recommending concrete measures, and monitoring and implementing follow-up measures;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Takes note of the recommendation of the Commission and Council regarding inter-agency cooperation between EASO and Frontex, and stresses that the full and swift implementation of Frontex's Fundamental Rights Strategy is a sine qua non for any such cooperation in the context of international protection, including appointing a Human Rights Officer, setting up the consultative forum with civil society, and inviting international organisations to participate in its activities as human rights observer; emphasises that any cooperation must be viewed in the context of increasing protection standards for asylum seekers; stresses that border measures should be applied in a protection-sensitive manner;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13 b. Recognises the need to review EASO's mandate regularly, in order to ensure adequate responsiveness to the different challenges faced by asylum systems; bearing in mind that all action undertaken by EASO depends on Member States' goodwill, suggests considering the possibility of introducing structural safeguards within EASO's mandate so as to ensure that practical cooperation and technical assistance are provided where necessary;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the creation as from 2014 of a simpler and more flexible Asylum and Migration Fund (AMF), which will replace the European Refugee Fund, the European Fund for the Integration of Third-Country Nationals and the European Return Fund; and underlines the need to allocate substantial and sufficient resources to support the protection of beneficiaries of international protection and asylum seekers; stresses, in this respect, the importance of including safeguards within the AMF, in order to prevent excessive allocation of funds to only one policy area at the expense of the CEAS as a whole; recalls that there should always be sufficient resources to fund international protection and solidarity measures for Member States;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Encourages the Member States to make full use of the possibilities available under the European Refugee Fund (ERF) in terms of undertaking targeted actions for the improvement of asylum systems; recommends that the Member States take action to address issues such as cumbersome bureaucratic procedures, absorption delays and liquidity problems, in order to ensure an effective and swift distribution of funds;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Proposes in this respect to reserve, where necessary, a certain percentage of the AMF until half-time revision for measures aimed at helping Member States to fully implement and apply the existing European asylum acquis and to adhere to all international obligations in this field;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Welcomes the home affairs policy dialogues with individual Member States on their use of the funds preceding multiannual programming; recommends reinforcing the partnership principle by including civil society, local authorities and relevant stakeholders both in policy dialogues and in the preparation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the objectives and programmes, since national partners' and civil society actors' experience on the ground is essential for setting realistic priorities and developing sustainable programmes, as well as for purposes of monitoring;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Reiterates the commitment to set up mechanisms based on solidarity that will promote more balanced responsibility- sharing between Member States in receiving persons in need of international protection and bearing the consequences thereof; Believes that the establishment of a clearer and more effective system of financial incentives for Member States participating in relocation activities and proactive strategies aimed at improving the infrastructures of national asylum systems, will havecontribute to the establishment of a level playing field between Member States in terms of reception conditions and protection recognition rates, thus having a long-term positive effect on the convergence of standards in the EU and the quality of the CEAS; recommends that Member States make use of the financial incentives available through the funds for relocation activities;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Underlines the importance of financial responsibility-sharing in the field of asylum, and recommends creating a well- resourced mechanism to compensate Member Statesfor receiving higher numbers of asylum seekers and beneficiaries of international protection, in either absolute or proportional terms, and to help those with less developed asylum systems; considers that further research is required to identify and quantify the real costs of hosting and processing asylum claims; calls, therefore, on the Commission to undertake a study in order to assess the funds that should be allocated according to the responsibility borne by each Member State, on the basis of indicators such as: the number of first asylum applications, the number of positive decisions granting refugee status or subsidiary protection, the number of resettled and relocated refugees, the number of return decisions and operations, and the number of apprehended irregular migrants;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17 c. Urges the Member States, with the assistance of the Commission, to ensure the full exploitation of existing complementarities between other available financial instruments such as the European Social Fund and other Structural Funds, in order to achieve a holistic funding approach for asylum- related policies;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Underlines the problems currently linked to the funding of activities in terms of obstacles to access to accurate information and funding, the setting-up of realistic and tailored objectives and the implementation of effective follow-up measures; suggests introducing safeguards to avoid duplication, the clear allocation of funding, and the thorough examination of activities' added value and the results achieved;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Welcomes the Commission's commitment to performing a comprehensive evaluation of the Dublin system in 2014, reviewing its legal, economic, social and human rights effects; considers that further reflection is needed on the development of an equitable responsibility-sharing mechanism for determining which Member State should be responsible for processing asylum applications;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Considers that the Dublin Regulation, which governs the allocation of responsibility for asylum applications, while placing a disproportionate burden on Member States constituting entry points into the EU, does not provide the means for them to respond adequately to the administrative and financial demands involved; notes that the Dublin system as it has been applied so far has led to the unequal treatment of asylum seekers across the EU while also having an adverse impact on family reunification and integration; stresses, moreover, its shortcomings in terms of efficiency and cost-effectiveness, since more than half of agreed transfers never take place and multiple applications are still the rule; calls on Commission and Member States to ensure that asylum-seekers who are returned to a Member State on the basis of the Dublin-II-Regulation do not receive a worse treatment simply because they are Dublin-II-returnees;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Stresses that the relevant case-law is already in the process of undermining the Dublin system's rationale and that suspending transfers under the Dublin Regulation, while providing an answer to individual cases, fails to overcome the structural shortcomings of the Dublin system as a whole; welcomes, therefore, the efforts to include additional criteria in Dublin II in order to mitigate the system's unwanted adverse effects;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Considers that joint processing could constitute a valuable tool for solidarity and responsibility-sharing in preventing or rectifyingvarious cases, in particular where Member States face significant or sudden influxes of asylum seekers or there is a substantial backlog of applications which delays and undermines the asylum procedure at the expense of asylum applicants; joint processing could prevent or rectify capacity problems, reducinge the burdens and costs related to asylum processing, and ensuringe a more equitable sharing of responsibility for the processing of asylum applications;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Welcomes the feasibility study launched by the Commission to investigate the legal and practical implications of joint processing on Union territory, since clarification is needed with respect to a series of issues, such as the types of situation where joint processing could be useful for asylum seekers and for Member States; the administrative and financial implications of joint processing; the link with the mutual recognition of asylum decisions; the status of persons subject to joint processing; and the link with the relocation of beneficiaries of international protection and the Member State mainly responsible for the processing;
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26 a. Emphasises that joint processing should offer added value with respect to the quality of the decision-making process, ensuring and facilitating fair, efficient and rapid procedures; underlines the fact that improving asylum procedures from the outset (frontloading) can reduce the length and cost of the procedure, therefore benefiting both asylum seekers and Member States;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26 a. Notes that if joint processing is to lead to common decisions, and if those decisions are to be fair and coherent throughout the EU's Common European Asylum System, then the concept of common European lists of save third countries and save countries of origin needs to be introduced and that subsequently those lists must be adopted jointly by Council and Parliament;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)
Paragraph 26 b (new)
26 b. Considers that EASO's role could be valuable in putting together, training and coordinating asylum support teams which would provide assistance, advice, and recommendations for first-instance procedures;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Stresses the importance of projects such as the European Union's Relocation Project for Malta (EUREMA), which relocates beneficiaries of international protection from Malta to other Member States, and advocates developing more initiatives of this kind; welcomes the Commission's commitment to undertake a thorough evaluation of the EUREMA project and submit a proposal for a permanent EU Relocation Scheme;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29 a. Underlines that EU resettlement and intra-EU relocation schemes are complementary measures aimed at reinforcing the protection of asylum seekers and beneficiaries of international protection while showing both intra- and extra-EU solidarity;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29 a. Calls on the Commission to submit a proposal for a permanent intra-EU relocation scheme for beneficiaries of international protection and asylum- seekers, based on a European Distribution Key which takes into consideration objectively verifiable criteria such as a Member State's GDP, population and surface area;
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 b (new)
Paragraph 29 b (new)
29 b. Underlines that the introduction of a European Distribution Key would be without prejudice to each Member State's obligation to fully implement and apply the existing European asylum acquis in terms of qualification for protection, reception conditions and procedural guarantees and to adhere to all international obligations in this field;
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Calls on the Commission to include strong procedural safeguards and clear criteria in its proposal for a permanent EU relocation scheme, in order to guarantee potential beneficiaries‘ best interests recommends involving the host community, civil society and local authorities from the outset in relocation initiatives; ; such safeguards should ensure that beneficiaries are provided with accurate and complete information as to their situation and potential relocation, as well as being given sufficient time and proper conditions enabling them to make an informed decision, that they consent to being relocated, that refusal to be relocated does not prejudice their situation in any way, and that the selection procedure is based on transparent and non-discriminatory criteria; recommends involving the host community, civil society and local authorities from the outset in relocation initiatives as such an inclusive and comprehensive approach is beneficial both to relocated persons and to the receiving Member State;
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Underlines that while relocation can both offer lasting solutions for beneficiaries of international protection and alleviate Member States‘ asylum systems, it must not result in responsibility shifting; insists that relocation should include strong commitments from Member States benefiting from relocation to effectively address protection gaps in their asylum system and to guarantee high levels of protection for those remaining in the sender Member States in terms of reception conditions, asylum procedures and integration;
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31 a. Believes that special attention should be paid to assessing whether relocation efforts are undermined by the transfer of asylum seekers under the Dublin Regulation;
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34 a. Believes that early warning mechanisms introduced to detect and address emerging problems before they lead to crises can constitute a valuable tool; considers, nevertheless, that complementary solutions should also be envisaged, so as to avoid infringing fundamental rights and ensure the proper functioning of asylum systems;
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Stresses that while infringement proceedings can be appropriate under certain circumstances to ensure the proper functioning of a Member State's asylum system, they should be considered a measure of last resort and mustought to be more readily used to draw attention to Member States' responsibilities and their failure to adhere to the existing asylum acquis, they should be accompanied by support measures, operational plans and oversight mechanisms, in order to yield results and not overwhelm already burdened systems;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 a (new)
Paragraph 36 a (new)
36 a. Welcomes the extension of the EU long-term resident directive (2003/109/EC) to cover refugees and beneficiaries of subsidiary protection enabling them to acquire long-term resident status on a basis similar to that applying to other third-country nationals legally resident in the EU for more than five years; considers that while this does not constitute a solidarity measure per se, it does amount to an indirect solidarity measure by potentially contributing to the integration and more equal distribution of beneficiaries of international protection in the EU; calls on the Member States to transpose the amending directive 2011/51/EU into their national law;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Notes that restrictive visa regimes and enhanced border controls can have adverse effects on access to international protection in, as they preventing persons in need from reaching the EU and reiterates the need to apply measures in a protection-sensitive manner; or lead to persons in need of protection choosing dangerous migration routes and exposing themselves to smugglers and traffickers in their attempts to reach the EU; reiterates, therefore, the need to apply measures aimed at preventing unauthorised crossings of the EU's external borders and combating smuggling of and trafficking in human beings in a protection-sensitive manner, paying due regard to the specific situation of persons requesting international protection in the EU;
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. WelcomesRecalls the Commission's commitment to facilitate the orderly arrival of persons in need of protection to the EU, and calls on the Commission to explore new approaches concerning access to asylum procedures; welcomes, in this respect, the Commission's commitment to adopt a ‘"Communication on new approaches concerning access to asylum procedures targeting main transit countries’" by 2013;