Activites

• 2003/12/06 Additional information
• 2003/10/03 Final act published in Official Journal
  • Directive 2003/86
  • OJ L 251 03.10.2003, p. 0012-0018
• #2525
• 2003/09/22 Council Meeting
• 2003/09/22 End of procedure in Parliament
• 2003/09/22 Act adopted by Council after consultation of Parliament
• 2003/04/09 Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
  • T5-0179/2003 summary

    The European Parliament adopted a resolution based on the report by Carmen CERDEIRA MORTERERO (PES, Spain) and made several amendments to the Commission's proposal. (Please refer to the document dated 19/03/03). Member States must provide for penalties in case of infringements, and the Commission must report every five years on the application of the Directive.�

• 2003/04/08 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
• 2003/03/19 Committee report tabled for plenary, reconsultation
  • A5-0086/2003
• 2003/03/19 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
• #2489
• 2003/02/27 Council Meeting
  • 2489 summary

    The Council defined a general approach on the Directive on the right to family reunification, which will become the first legal instrument adopted by the Community in the area of legal immigration. The purpose of the Directive is to determine the conditions under which family members of a third-country national, who resides lawfully in the territory of a Member State and has reasonable prospects of obtaining the right of permanent residence, can enter into and reside in that Member State in order to preserve the family unit, whether the family relationship arose before or after the resident's entry. According to the text agreed, the Member States shall authorise the entry and residence of the following family members: - the sponsor's spouse; - the minor children of the sponsor and of his/her spouse, including children adopted in accordance with a decision taken by the competent authority in the Member State concerned or a decision which is automatically enforceable due to international obligations of that Member State or must be recognised in accordance with international obligations; - the minor children including adopted children of the sponsor where the sponsor has custody and the children are dependent on him or her. Member States may authorise the reunification of children of whom custody is shared, provided the other party sharing custody has given his or her agreement. - the minor children including adopted children of the spouse where the spouse has custody and the children are dependent on him or her. Member States may authorise the reunification of children of whom custody is shared, provided the other party sharing custody has given his or her agreement. The minor children referred to in this Article must be below the age of majority set by the law of the Member State concerned and must not be married. By way of derogation, where a child is aged over 12 years and arrives independently from the rest of his/her family, the Member State may, before authorising entry and residence under this Directive, verify whether he or she meets a condition for integration provided for by its existing legislation on the date of implementation of this Directive. The Member States may, by law or regulation, authorise the entry and residence of the following family members: - first-degree relatives in the direct ascending line of the sponsor or his or her spouse, where they are dependent on them and do not enjoy proper family support in the country of origin; - the adult unmarried children of the sponsor or his or her spouse, where they are objectively unable to provide for their own needs on account of their state of health. The Member States may, by law or regulation, authorise the entry and residence of the unmarried partner, being a third-country national, with whom the sponsor is in a duly attested stable long-term relationship, or of a third-country national who is bound to the sponsor by a registered partnership, and the unmarried minor children, including adopted children, as well as the adult unmarried children who are objectively unable to provide for their own needs on account of their state of health, of such persons. Member States may decide that registered partners are treated equally as spouses with respect to family reunification. In the event of a polygamous marriage, where the sponsor already has a spouse living with him in the territory of a Member State, the Member State concerned shall not authorise the family reunification of a further spouse. Member States may limit the family reunification of minor children of a further spouse and the sponsor. In order to ensure better integration and to prevent involuntary marriages, Member States may require the sponsor and his/her spouse to be of a minimum age, and at maximum the age of 21, before the spouse is able to join him/her. By way of derogation, Member States may request that the applications concerning family reunification of minor children have to be submitted the age of 15, as provided for by its existent legislation on the date of implementation of this Directive. If the application is submitted after the age of 15, the Member States which decide to apply this derogation shall authorise the entry and residence of such children on grounds other than family reunification. It is recalled that the first proposal was presented by the Commission in January 2000. A second amended proposal was submitted by the Commission in May 2002. The European Council of Seville invited the Council to adopt this Directive by June 2003.�

• #X017
• 2002/11/28 Council Meeting
• 2002/05/23 Formal reconsultation of Parliament
• 2002/05/02 Amended legislative proposal for reconsultation published
  • COM(2002)0225 summary

    Following the conclusions of the Laeken European Council, the Commission takes a new approach to the points still outstanding. It is concerned to preserve what has been achieved in the last two years' negotiations and therefore, has incorporated the compromises reached in Council. There are several stages to be gone through and the amended proposal is only the first of these. It is inspired by a concern for flexibility on the basis of two main parameters. First, as regards substance, the use of a standstill clause. Second, as regards the time-frame, a deadline for the next stage. The standstill clause will ensure that Member States do not use the new derogations if their legislation at the time of adoption of the Directive did not already provide for them. The objective is to ensure that the Directive does not operate paradoxically as a source of fresh divergence among the Member States. The deadline clause means that the deadline will now be set for the next stage of harmonisation of legislation governing admission for the purposes of family reunification. On this date - two years after the transposition of the Directive - the provisions that offer the greatest degree of flexibility, which are those that lie at the heart of the negotiations, will have priority for review so as to achieve progress towards harmonisation of admissions policy. The main changes necessitated by the new approach: -the former Article 4 provided for alignment of family reunification of Union citizens not covered by Community law on free movement of persons with that of citizens who have exericesed their right to free movement. It has been deleted as work had begun on recasting Community law on free movement of persons. -the provision concerning the age up to which children may be reunified has been revised to provide a specific exception for certain pieces of national legislation. By way of derogation from the right to reunifaction for minor children: where a child is aged over 12 years, the Member State may, before authorising entry and residence, verify whether the child meets a condition for integration provided for by its existing legislation on the date of adoption of the Directive. At the same time, a provision has been inserted in the Chapter on refugees specifying that the age limit for reunifying children may under no circumstances be lowered. The provision on children will have priority for review two years after the Directive has been transposed. -resources may be checked after reunification, when family members' residence documents are up for renewal. The deadline clause provides for a review of this question. -One Article provides that Member States may require the applicant to have stayed lawfully on their territory for not more than two years before having family members join him. There is a tightly limited derogation, applicable solely where national legislation already existed when the Directive was adopted. It allows authorisations to enter for the purposes of family reunification to be spread over several years, depending on the reception capacity of the Member State concerned. This period may in no case exceed three years. This provision will also have priority for review two years after the Directive has been transposed. -the period of validity of the residence document issued tofamily members being reunified with a person entitled to stay permanently has been revised to refer to the proposal for a directive on the status of long-term residents, thus reinforcing consistency. Family members will now obtain long-term resident status on the basis of the same criteria as the person with whom they are reunified. Member States are free to give more favourable treatment. There is a review two years after transposition. -to improve consistency with the long-term residence status proposal, the upper limit for the grant of autonomous status of family members is set at five years residence. This will harmonise the period for obtaining permanent residence documents and autonomous status and will allow adequate flexibility to reflect different national situations.�

  • DG [{'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/justice/', 'title': 'Justice'}],
• #2370
• 2001/09/27 Council Meeting
  • 2370
• #2350
• 2001/05/28 Council Meeting
  • 2350 summary

    The Council held a general discussion on the principles concerning a draft directive on family reunification, addressing in particular questions relating of the scope of application of the proposal- definition of family members to be covered by the Directive- and certain time limits placed on the rights and obligations of persons benefiting from the right to family reunification and their sponsors. The Council noted that outstanding issues still remained which required further work with a view to reaching a general consensus on the text.�

• #X014
• 2001/03/15 Council Meeting
• #X013
• 2000/11/30 Council Meeting
• 2000/10/10 Modified legislative proposal published
  • COM(2000)0624 summary

    This document concerns an amended proposal for a Council Directive on the right to family reunification. The European Parliament adopted 17 amendments in total and the Commission can accept most of them in full or in part, in some cases, subject to a change of wording. Moreover, the amendments are completely in line with the Commission's approach and complement and enrich the Directive. One amendment restricts the scope of this Directive. It excludes persons enjoying a subsidiary form of protection and calls for the adoption without delay of a proposal on their admission and residence. The Commission accepts this amendment and has changed the relevant articles accordingly. It considers that persons in this category must have the right to family reunification and need protection; however, it recognises that the absence of a harmonised concept of subsidiary protection at Community level constitutes an obstacle to their inclusion in the proposed Directive. As a result of the Tampere European Council summit of October 1999, the Scoreboard presented by the Commission in March 2000 and endorsed by the Council envisages the adoption by 2004 of a proposal on the status of persons enjoying subsidiary forms of protection. The Commission intends to make such a proposal next year, which could also cover family reunification for this category of third-country nationals. 8 recitals were accepted in full or in part and relate to the following: - the establishment of an area of freedom, security and justice; - the citing of Article 63(3)(a) of the EC Treaty in its entirety; - the need to have access to statistical data and information in order to be able to evaluate migration flows; - family reunification; - persons enjoying a subsidiary form of protection - the nature of the dependence on the applicant of relatives; - transparency of procedures for national administrations; - prevention of breaches of procedure. In addition, 7 other amendments were accepted resulting in the amendment of several articles of the proposed Directive. These amendments related to the following areas: - the exclusion of persons enjoying subsidiary forms of protection from the scope of the Directive; - several applications for several members of their families; - quality and assessment of accomodation; - resources the applicant may be required to provide; - prohibition on access to employment and vocational training by relatives in the ascending line or the children of full age.�

  • DG [{'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/justice/', 'title': 'Justice'}],
• 2000/09/06 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
  • T5-0362/2000 summary

    In approving the report drafted by Mr Graham R. WATSON (ELDR, Uk), the European Parliament has adopted, under consultation procedure, the proposal for a Council Directive on the right to family reunification. A number of amendments were adopted, firstly, to ensure that Member States introduce a more liberal legislation if they so choose and to prevent any weakening of existing protection for family reunification. Secondly, to clarify and tighten up the text in various parts.�

• 2000/07/13 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • A5-0201/2000
• #2266
• 2000/05/29 Council Meeting
  • 2266
• 2000/02/18 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
• 1999/12/01 Legislative proposal published
  • COM(1999)0638 summary

    PURPOSE : To present a draft directive on family reunification of third country nationals. CONTENT : A common immigration policy has been given impetus and legal base by the provisions of the Amsterdam Treaty. As a starting point, the Commission considers that zero immigration mentioned in past Community discussion was never justified. The policy was not fully implemented for two main reasons: in the short and medium term, immigration facilities such as family reunion should not be interrupted and there are branches of industry that are short of manpower. Member States wish to maintain their privileged relationship with certain non-member countries. In the long term, there is the issue of population ageing and all that this entails in terms of welfare protection and the funding of pension schemes. The Tampere Council in October 1999 reiterated that the Union must offer fair treatment to third-country nationals residing lawfully in the territory of its Member State. This proposal establishes a right to family reunification for third country nationals residing lawfully in a Member State; it also establishes this right for Union citizens not exercising their right to free movement. This right is not absolute: its exercise is subject to respect for the practical and procedural conditions determined by the proposed Directive. The main points of the draft Directive: Scope · The applicants for reunion must belong to one of the categories listed. These include third country nationals residing lawfully in the Union and holding a residence permit valid for at least one year. Other eligible applicants are refugees, persons enjoying subsidiary protection and citizens of the Union not exercising his right to free movement, if the applicant·s family are third-country nationals, irrespective of their legal status. The Directive shall not apply to family members of Union citizens exercising their right to free movement of persons. Family members · this includes spouses and children, and relatives in the ascending line. In the latter case, it must be shown that they have no family support in the country of origin and are dependent on the applicant. Submission and examination of the applicant · It is the applicant who files for reunion and provides documentary evidence. Refugees, who have often had to flee without the necessary documents should not be penalised and rules should be relaxed to accept other forms of evidence, such as testimony. Practical conditions · Member States have discretionary powers in relation to public health, public policy and domestic security. This power is not unlimited, and must be defined, with reasons given for its exercise. The applicant may be asked to prove that he has adequate accommodation, sickness insurance covering all risks, and stable and adequate resources. The evaluation criteria are strictly defined. Refugees and persons enjoying subsidiary protection cannot be subjected to the same additional conditions. Member States may set a qualifying period not exceeding one year. Again, this measure is not applicable to refugees and persons enjoying subsidiary protection. Penalties · the cases in which penalties are incurred areenumerated exhaustively and include fraud, falsification of documents, marriages and adoptions of convenience.�

  • DG [{'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/justice/', 'title': 'Justice'}],

Documents

• Legislative proposal published: COM(1999)0638
• Debate in Council: 2266
• Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A5-0201/2000
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T5-0362/2000
• Modified legislative proposal published: COM(2000)0624
• Debate in Council: 2350
• Debate in Council: 2370
• Amended legislative proposal for reconsultation published: COM(2002)0225
• Debate in Council: 2489
• Committee report tabled for plenary, reconsultation: A5-0086/2003
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T5-0179/2003
• : Directive 2003/86
• : OJ L 251 03.10.2003, p. 0012-0018

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)