| 1614 |
2016/0133(COD)
2017/02/16
BUDG
538 amendments...
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d (d) ‘examination of an application for international protection’ means any examination of, or decision or ruling concerning, an application for international protection by the competent authorities in accordance with Directive 2013/32/EU and Directive 2011/95/EU, except for procedures for determining the Member State responsible in accordance with this Regulation;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e (e) ‘withdrawal of an application for international protection’ means the actions by which the applicant terminates the procedures initiated by the submission of his or her application for international protection, in accordance with Directive 2013/32/EU, either explicitly or tacitly;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f (f) ‘beneficiary of international protection’ means a third-country national or a stateless person who has been granted international protection as defined in Article 2(a) of Directive 2011/95/EU;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g (g) ‘family members’ means, insofar as the family already existed before the applicant arrived on the territory of the Member States , the following members of the applicant’s family who are present on the territory of the Member States: -the spouse of the applicant or his or her unmarried partner in a stable relationship, where the law or practice of the Member State concerned treats unmarried couples in a way comparable to married couples under its law relating to third-country nationals, -the minor children of couples referred to in the first indent or of the applicant, on condition that they are unmarried and regardless of whether they were born in or out of wedlock or adopted as defined under national law, -when the applicant is a minor and unmarried, the father, mother or another adult responsible for the applicant, whether by law or by the practice of the Member State where the adult is present, -when the beneficiary of international protection is a minor and unmarried, the father, mother or another adult responsible for him or her whether by law or by the practice of the Member State where the beneficiary is present, -the sibling or siblings of the applicant;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – indent 1 - the spouse of the applicant or his or her unmarried partner in a stable relationship, where the law or practice of the Member State concerned treats unmarried couples in a way comparable to married couples under its law relating to third-country nationals,deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – indent 2 - the minor children of couples referred to in the first indent or of the applicant, on condition that they are unmarried and regardless of whether they were born in or out of wedlock or adopted as defined under national law,deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – indent 3 - when the applicant is a minor and unmarried, the father, mother or another adult responsible for the applicant, whether by law or by the practice of the Member State where the adult is present,deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – indent 4 - when the beneficiary of international protection is a minor and unmarried, the father, mother or another adult responsible for him or her whether by law or by the practice of the Member State where the beneficiary is present,deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – indent 5 - the sibling or siblings of the applicant;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h (h) ‘relative’ means the applicant’s adult aunt or uncle or grandparent who is present in the territory of a Member State, regardless of whether the applicant was born in or out of wedlock or adopted as defined under national law;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i (i) ‘minor’ means a third-country national or a stateless person below the age of 18 years;deleted
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;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point j a (new) (ja) the minor must undergo a biological test which proves beyond doubt that he or she is a minor;
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k (k) ‘representative’ means a person or an organisation appointed by the competent bodies in order to assist and represent an unaccompanied minor in procedures provided for in this Regulation with a view to ensuring the best interests of the child and exercising legal capacity for the minor where necessary. Where an organisation is appointed as a representative, it shall designate a person responsible for carrying out its duties in respect of the minor, in accordance with this Regulation;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point l (l) ‘residence document’ means any authorisation issued by the authorities of a Member State authorising a third- country national or a stateless person to stay on its territory, including the documents substantiating the authorisation to remain on the territory under temporary protection arrangements or until the circumstances preventing a removal order from being carried out no longer apply, with the exception of visas and residence authorisations issued during the period required to determine the Member State responsible as established in this Regulation or during the examination of an application for international protection or an application for a residence permit;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point m (m) ‘visa’ means the authorisation or decision of a Member State required for transit or entry for an intended stay in that Member State or in several Member States. The nature of the visa shall be determined in accordance with the following definitions: -‘long-stay visa’ means an authorisation or decision issued by one of the Member States in accordance with its national law or Union law required for entry for an intended stay in that Member State of more than three months, -‘short-stay visa’ means an authorisation or decision of a Member State with a view to transit through or an intended stay on the territory of one or more or all the Member States of a duration of no more than three months in any six-month period beginning on the date of first entry on the territory of the Member States, -‘airport transit visa’ means a visa valid for transit through the international transit areas of one or more airports of the Member States;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point m – indent 1 - ‘long-stay visa’ means an authorisation or decision issued by one of the Member States in accordance with its national law or Union law required for entry for an intended stay in that Member State of more than three months,deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point m – indent 2 - ‘short-stay visa’ means an authorisation or decision of a Member State with a view to transit through or an intended stay on the territory of one or more or all the Member States of a duration of no more than three months in any six-month period beginning on the date of first entry on the territory of the Member States,deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point m – indent 3 - ‘airport transit visa’ means a visa valid for transit through the international transit areas of one or more airports of the Member States;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point n (n) ‘risk of absconding’ means the existence of reasons in an individual case, which are based on objective criteria defined by law, to believe that an applicant or a third-country national or a stateless person who is subject to a transfer procedure may abscond;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o (o) 'benefitting Member State' means the Member State benefitting from the corrective allocation mechanism set out in Chapter VII of this Regulation and carrying out the allocation of the applicant;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point p (p) ‘Member State of allocation’ means the Member States to which an applicant will be allocated under the allocation mechanism set out in Chapter VII of this Regulation;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q (q) ‘resettled person’ means a person subject to the process of resettlement whereby, on a request from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (‘UNHCR’) based on a person’s need for international protection, third-country nationals are transferred from a third country and established in a Member State where they are permitted to reside with one of the following statuses: (i)‘refugee status’ within the meaning of point (e) of Article 2 of Directive 2011/95/EU; (ii)‘subsidiary protection status’ within the meaning of point (g) of Article 2 of Directive 2011/95/EU; or (iii)any other status which offers similar rights and benefits under national and Union law as those referred to in points (i) and (ii);deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q – point i (i) ‘refugee status’ within the meaning of point (e) of Article 2 of Directive 2011/95/EU;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q – point ii (ii) ‘subsidiary protection status’ within the meaning of point (g) of Article 2 of Directive 2011/95/EU; ordeleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q – point iii (iii) any other status which offers similar rights and benefits under national and Union law as those referred to in points (i) and (ii);deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point r (r) ‘European Union Agency for Asylum' means the Agency as established by Regulation (EU) [Proposal for a Regulation on the European Union Agency for Asylum and repealing Regulation (EU) No 439/2010].deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 [...]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall examine any application for international protection by a third-country national or a stateless person who applies on the territory of any one of them, including at the border or in the transit zones. The application shall be examined by a single Member State, which shall be the one which the criteria set out in Chapter III indicate is responsible.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 2. Where no Member State responsible can be designated on the basis of the criteria listed in this Regulation, the first Member State in which the application for international protection was lodged shall be responsible for examining it. Where it is impossible to transfer an applicant to the Member State primarily designated as responsible because there are substantial grounds for believing that there are systemic flaws in the asylum procedure and in the reception conditions for applicants in that Member State, resulting in a risk of inhuman or degrading treatment within the meaning of Article 4 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the determining Member State shall continue to examine the criteria set out in Chapter III in order to establish whether another Member State can be designated as responsible. Where the transfer cannot be made pursuant to this paragraph to any Member State designated on the basis of the criteria set out in Chapter III or to the first Member State with which the application was lodged, the determining Member State shall become the Member State responsible.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 Where no Member State responsible can be designated on the basis of the criteria listed in this Regulation, the first Member State in which the application for international protection was lodged shall be responsible for examining it.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 Where it is impossible to transfer an applicant to the Member State primarily designated as responsible because there are substantial grounds for believing that there are systemic flaws in the asylum procedure and in the reception conditions for applicants in that Member State, resulting in a risk of inhuman or degrading treatment within the meaning of Article 4 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the determining Member State shall continue to examine the criteria set out in Chapter III in order to establish whether another Member State can be designated as responsible.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 Where the transfer cannot be made pursuant to this paragraph to any Member State designated on the basis of the criteria set out in Chapter III or to the first Member State with which the application was lodged, the determining Member State shall become the Member State responsible.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 3. Before applying the criteria for determining a Member State responsible in accordance with Chapters III and IV, the first Member State in which the application for international protection was lodged shall: (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; and (b)examine the application in accelerated procedure pursuant to Article 31(8) of Directive 2013/32/EU when the following grounds apply: (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]; or (ii)the applicant may, for serious reasons, be considered a danger to the national security or public order of the Member State, or the applicant has been forcibly expelled for serious reasons of public security or public order under national law.deleted
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
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point b (b) examine the application in accelerated procedure pursuant to Article 31(8) of Directive 2013/32/EU when the following grounds apply: (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]; or (ii)the applicant may, for serious reasons, be considered a danger to the national security or public order of the Member State, or the applicant has been forcibly expelled for serious reasons of public security or public order under national law.deleted
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
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point b – point ii (ii) the applicant may, for serious reasons, be considered a danger to the national security or public order of the Member State, or the applicant has been forcibly expelled for serious reasons of public security or public order under national law.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4 4. Where the Member State considers an application inadmissible or examines an application in accelerated procedure pursuant to paragraph 3, that Member State shall be considered the Member State responsible.deleted
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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 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 entry. 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. 2.The applicant shall submit as soon as possible and at the latest during the interview pursuant to Article 7, all the elements and information relevant for determining the Member State responsible and cooperate with the competent authorities of the Member States. 3.The applicant shall: (a)comply with a transfer decision notified to him or her in accordance with paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 27 and point (b) of Article 38; (b)be present and available to the competent authorities in the Member State of application, respectively in the Member State to which he or she is transferred.Article 4 deleted Obligations of the applicant
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 entry. 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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 2. The applicant shall submit as soon as possible and at the latest during the interview pursuant to Article 7, all the elements and information relevant for determining the Member State responsible and cooperate with the competent authorities of the Member States.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 3. The applicant shall: (a)comply with a transfer decision notified to him or her in accordance with paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 27 and point (b) of Article 38; (b)be present and available to the competent authorities in the Member State of application, respectively in the Member State to which he or she is transferred.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point a (a) comply with a transfer decision notified to him or her in accordance with paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 27 and point (b) of Article 38;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point b (b) be present and available to the competent authorities in the Member State of application, respectively in the Member State to which he or she is transferrdeleted.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 Consequences of non-compliance 1.If an applicant does not comply with the obligation set out in Article 4(1), the Member State responsible in accordance with this Regulation shall examine the application in an accelerated procedure, in accordance with Article 31(8) of Directive 2013/32/EU. 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. 3.The applicant shall not be entitled to the reception conditions set out in Articles 14 to 19 of Directive 2013/33/EU, with the exception of emergency health care, during the procedures under this Regulation in any Member State other than the one in which he or she is required to be present. 4.The competent authorities shall take into account elements and information relevant for determining the Member State responsible only insofar as these were submitted within the deadline set out in Article 4(2).Article 5 deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 1. If an applicant does not comply with the obligation set out in Article 4(1), the Member State responsible in accordance with this Regulation shall examine the application in an accelerated procedure, in accordance with Article 31(8) of Directive 2013/32/EU.deleted
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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 3. The applicant shall not be entitled to the reception conditions set out in Articles 14 to 19 of Directive 2013/33/EU, with the exception of emergency health care, during the procedures under this Regulation in any Member State other than the one in which he or she is required to be present.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 4. The competent authorities shall take into account elements and information relevant for determining the Member State responsible only insofar as these were submitted within the deadline set out in Article 4(2).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 [...]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 [...]deleted
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;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) of the objectives of this Regulation and the consequences of making another application in a different Member State as well as the consequences of leaving the Member State where he or she is obliged to be present during the phases in which the Member State responsible under this Regulation is being determined and the application for international protection is being examined , in particular that the applicant shall not be entitled to the reception conditions set out in Articles 14 to 19 of Directive 2013/33/EU in any Member State other than the one where he or she is required to be present, with the exception of emergency health care ;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) of the criteria and the procedures for determining the Member State responsible, the hierarchy of such criteria in the different steps of the procedure and their duration;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d (d) of the personal interview pursuant to Article 7 and the obligation of submitting and substantiating information regarding the presence of family members, relatives or any other family relations in the Member States, including the means by which the applicant can submit such information;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e (e) of the possibility to challenge a transfer decision within 7 days after notification and of the fact that this challenge shall be limited to an assessment of whether Articles 3(2) in relation to the existence of a risk of inhuman or degrading treatment or Articles 10 to 13 and 18 are infringed upon ;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e (e) of the possibility to challenge a transfer decision within 72 days after notification and of the fact that this challenge shall be limited to an assessment of whether Articles 3(2) in relation to the existence of a risk of inhuman or degrading treatment or Articles 10 to 13 and 18 are infringed upon ;
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f (f) that the competent authorities of Member States and the European Union Agency for Asylum process personal data of the applicant including for the exchange of data on him or her for the sole purpose of implementing their obligations arising under this Regulation;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g (g) of the categories of personal data concerndeleted;
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h (h) of the right of access to data relating to him or her and the right to request that such data be corrected if inaccurate or be deleted if unlawfully processed, as well as the procedures for exercising those rights, including the contact details of the authorities referred to in Article 47 and of the national data protection authorities responsible for hearing claims concerning the protection of personal data , and of the contact details of the data protection officer;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i (i) where applicable, of the allocation procedure set out in Chapter VII.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 2. The information referred to in paragraph 1 shall be provided in writing in a language that the applicant understands or is reasonably supposed to understand. Member States shall use the common leaflet drawn up pursuant to paragraph 3 for that purpose. Where necessary for the proper understanding of the applicant, the information shall also be supplied orally, for example in connection with the personal interview as referred to in Article 7.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 The information referred to in paragraph 1 shall be provided in writing in a language that the applicant understands or is reasonably supposed to understand. Member States shall use the common leaflet drawn up pursuant to paragraph 3 for that purpose.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 Where necessary for the proper understanding of the applicant, the information shall also be supplied orally, for example in connection with the personal interview as referred to in Article 7.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 3. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, draw up a common leaflet, as well as a specific leaflet for unaccompanied minors, containing at least the information referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article. This common leaflet shall also include information regarding the application of Regulation (EU) [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation No 603/2013] and, in particular, the purpose for which the data of an applicant may be processed within Eurodac. The common leaflet shall be established in such a manner as to enable Member States to complete it with additional Member State-specific information. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2) of this Regulation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 1.In order to facilitate the process of determining the Member State responsible, the determining Member State shall conduct a personal interview with the applicant , unless the applicant has absconded or the information provided by the applicant pursuant to Article 4(2) is sufficient for determining the Member State responsible . The interview shall also allow the proper understanding of the information supplied to the applicant in accordance with Article 6. 2.The personal interview shall take place in a timely manner and, in any event, before any take charge request pursuant to Article 24 is made . 3.The personal interview shall be conducted in a language that the applicant understands or is reasonably supposed to understand and in which he or she is able to communicate. Where necessary, Member States shall have recourse to an interpreter who is able to ensure appropriate communication between the applicant and the person conducting the personal interview. 4.The personal interview shall take place under conditions which ensure appropriate confidentiality. It shall be conducted by a qualified person under national law. 5.The Member State conducting the personal interview shall make a written summary thereof which shall contain at least the main information supplied by the applicant at the interview. This summary may either take the form of a report or a standard form. The Member State shall ensure that the applicant and/or the legal advisor or other counsellor who is representing the applicant have timely access to the summary.Article 7 deleted Personal interview
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 1. In order to facilitate the process of determining the Member State responsible, the determining Member State shall conduct a personal interview with the applicant , unless the applicant has absconded or the information provided by the applicant pursuant to Article 4(2) is sufficient for determining the Member State responsible . The interview shall also allow the proper understanding of the information supplied to the applicant in accordance with Article 6.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 2. The personal interview shall take place in a timely manner and, in any event, before any take charge request pursuant to Article 24 is made .deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 (2) A common pPolicy on asylum, including a Common European Asylum System (CEAS), is a cs determined by the nation stituent part of the European Union’s objective of progressively establishing an area of freedom, security and justice open to those who, forced by circumstances, legitimately seek protection in the Unionate, the only entity with a legitimate claim to express the will of the people, who are sovereign in this regard.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 3. The personal interview shall be conducted in a language that the applicant understands or is reasonably supposed to understand and in which he or she is able to communicate. Where necessary, Member States shall have recourse to an interpreter who is able to ensure appropriate communication between the applicant and the person conducting the personal interview.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 4. The personal interview shall take place under conditions which ensure appropriate confidentiality. It shall be conducted by a qualified person under national law.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 5 5. The Member State conducting the personal interview shall make a written summary thereof which shall contain at least the main information supplied by the applicant at the interview. This summary may either take the form of a report or a standard form. The Member State shall ensure that the applicant and/or the legal advisor or other counsellor who is representing the applicant have timely access to the summary.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 [...]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 1. The best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration for Member States with respect to all procedures provided for in this Regulation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 2. 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. This paragraph shall be without prejudice to the relevant provisions in Article 25 of Directive 2013/32/EU.deleted
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.deleted
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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 3. In assessing the best interests of the child, Member States shall closely cooperate with each other and shall, in particular, take due account of the following factors: (a)family reunification possibilities; (b)the minor’s well-being and social development; (c)safety and security considerations, in particular where there is a risk of the minor being a victim of human trafficking; (d)the views of the minor, in accordance with his or her age and maturity.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point a (a) family reunification possibilities;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 (3) The European Council, at its special meeting in Tampere on 15 and 16 October 1999,Each Member State has ag reed to work towardssponsibility to establishing the CEAS, based on the full and inclusive application of the Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, as supplemidentity of applicants for international protection and of persons apprehentded by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967 (‘the Geneva Convention’), thus ensuring that nobody is sent back to persecution, i.e. maintaining the principle of non- refoulement. In this respect, and without the responsibility criteria laid down in this Regulation being affected, Member States, all respecting the principle of non- refoulement, are considered as safe countries for third-country nationalswhen unlawfully crossing an external border of the Union. It has a responsibility to detain illegal immigrants, to consider their applications and, if appropriate, to expel them.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point b (b) the minor’s well-being and social development;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point c (c) safety and security considerations, in particular where there is a risk of the minor being a victim of human trafficking;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point d (d) the views of the minor, in accordance with his or her age and maturity.deleted
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. 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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph nouveau5 new5. For the purpose of applying Article 10, the Member State where the unaccompanied minor lodged an application for international protection shall, as soon as possible, take appropriate action to identify the family members or relatives of the unaccompanied minor on the territory of Member States, whilst protecting the best interests of the child. To that end, that Member State may call for the assistance of international or other relevant organisations, and may facilitate the minor’s access to the tracing services of such organisations. The staff of the competent authorities referred to in Article 47 who deal with requests concerning unaccompanied minors shall have received, and shall continue to receive, appropriate training concerning the specific needs of minors.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph nouveau5 – subparagraph 1 For the purpose of applying Article 10, the Member State where the unaccompanied minor lodged an application for international protection shall, as soon as possible, take appropriate action to identify the family members or relatives of the unaccompanied minor on the territory of Member States, whilst protecting the best interests of the child.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph nouveau5 – subparagraph 2 To that end, that Member State may call for the assistance of international or other relevant organisations, and may facilitate the minor’s access to the tracing services of such organisations.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph nouveau5 – subparagraph 3 The staff of the competent authorities referred to in Article 47 who deal with requests concerning unaccompanied minors shall have received, and shall continue to receive, appropriate training concerning the specific needs of minors.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 6 6. With a view to facilitating the appropriate action to identify the family members or relatives of the unaccompanied minor living in the territory of another Member State pursuant to paragraph 5 of this Article, the Commission shall adopt implementing acts including a standard form for the exchange of relevant information between Member States. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 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. 2.The Member State responsible in accordance with the criteria set out in this Chapter shall be determined on the basis of the situation obtaining when the applicant first lodged his or her application for international protection with a Member State.Article 9 deleted Hierarchy of criteria
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 (4) The Tampere conclusions also stated that the CEAS should include, in the short-term, a clear and workable method for determining the Member State responsible for the examination of an asylum application.deleted
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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 2. The Member State responsible in accordance with the criteria set out in this Chapter shall be determined on the basis of the situation obtaining when the applicant first lodged his or her application for international protection with a Member State.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 [...]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 1. Where the applicant is an unaccompanied minor, only the criteria set out in this article shall apply, in the order in which they are set out in paragraphs 2 to 5.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 2. The Member State responsible shall be that where a family member of the unaccompanied minor is legally present, provided that it is in the best interests of the minor. Where the applicant is a married minor whose spouse is not legally present on the territory of the Member States, the Member State responsible shall be the Member State where the father, mother or other adult responsible for the minor, whether by law or by the practice of that Member State, or sibling is legally present.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 3. Where the applicant has a relative who is legally present in another Member State and where it is established, based on an individual examination, that the relative can take care of him or her, that Member State shall unite the minor with his or her relative and shall be the Member State responsible, provided that it is in the best interests of the minor.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4 4. Where family members or relatives as referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3, stay in more than one Member State, the Member State responsible shall be decided on the basis of what is in the best interests of the unaccompanied minor.deleted
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 protection, unless it is demonstrated that this is not in the best interests of the minor.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6 6. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 57 concerning the identification of family members or relatives of the unaccompanied minor; the criteria for establishing the existence of proven family links; the criteria for assessing the capacity of a relative to take care of the unaccompanied minor, including where family members, siblings or relatives of the unaccompanied minor stay in more than one Member State. In exercising its powers to adopt delegated acts, the Commission shall not exceed the scope of the best interests of the child as provided for under Article 8(3).
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 7 7. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish uniform conditions for the consultation and the exchange of information between Member States. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 (5) Such a method should be based on objective, fair criteria both for the Member States and for the persons concerned. It should, in particular, make it possible to determine rapidly the Member State responsible, so as to guarantee effective access to the procedures for granting international protection and not to compromise the objective of the rapid processing of applications for international protection.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 Family members who are beneficiaries of Where the applicant has a family member, regardless of whether the family was previously formed in the country of origin, who has been allowed to reside as a beneficiary of international protection in a Member State, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection, provided that the persons concerned expressed their desire in writing.Article 11 deleted international protection
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 Where the applicant has a family member, regardless of whether the family was previously formed in the country of origin, who has been allowed to reside as a beneficiary of international protection in a Member State, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection, provided that the persons concerned expressed their desire in writing.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 Family members who are applicants for If the applicant has a family member in a Member State whose application for international protection in that Member State has not yet been the subject of a first decision regarding the substance, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection, provided that the persons concerned expressed their desire in writing.Article 12 deleted international protection
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 If the applicant has a family member in a Member State whose application for international protection in that Member State has not yet been the subject of a first decision regarding the substance, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection, provided that the persons concerned expressed their desire in writing.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 Where several family members submit applications for international protection in the same Member State simultaneously, or on dates close enough for the procedures for determining the Member State responsible to be conducted together, and where the application of the criteria set out in this Regulation would lead to their being separated, the Member State responsible shall be determined on the basis of the following provisions: (a)responsibility for examining the applications for international protection of all the family members and/or minor unmarried siblings shall lie with the Member State which the criteria indicate is responsible for taking charge of the largest number of them; (b)failing this, responsibility shall lie with the Member State which the criteria indicate is responsible for examining the application of the oldest of them.Article 13 deleted Family procedure
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 Where several family members submit applications for international protection in the same Member State simultaneously, or on dates close enough for the procedures for determining the Member State responsible to be conducted together, and where the application of the criteria set out in this Regulation would lead to their being separated, the Member State responsible shall be determined on the basis of the following provisions: (a)responsibility for examining the applications for international protection of all the family members and/or minor unmarried siblings shall lie with the Member State which the criteria indicate is responsible for taking charge of the largest number of them; (b)failing this, responsibility shall lie with the Member State which the criteria indicate is responsible for examining the application of the oldest of them.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) responsibility for examining the applications for international protection of all the family members and/or minor unmarried siblings shall lie with the Member State which the criteria indicate is responsible for taking charge of the largest number of them;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) failing this, responsibility shall lie with the Member State which the criteria indicate is responsible for examining the application of the oldest of them.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 Issue of residence documents or visas 1.Where the applicant is in possession of a valid residence document or a residence document which has expired less than two years before lodging the first application , the Member State which issued the document shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection. 2.Where the applicant is in possession of a valid visa or a visa expired less than six months before lodging the first application , the Member State which issued the visa shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection, unless the visa was issued on behalf of another Member State under a representation arrangement as provided for in Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council 25. In such a case, the represented Member State shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection. 3.Where the applicant is in possession of more than one valid residence document or visa issued by different Member States, the responsibility for examining the application for international protection shall be assumed by the Member States in the following order: (a)the Member State which issued the residence document conferring the right to the longest period of residency or, where the periods of validity are identical, the Member State which issued the residence document having the latest expiry date; (b)the Member State which issued the visa having the latest expiry date where the various visas are of the same type; (c)where visas are of different kinds, the Member State which issued the visa having the longest period of validity or, where the periods of validity are identical, the Member State which issued the visa having the latest expiry date. 4.The fact that the residence document or visa was issued on the basis of a false or assumed identity or on submission of forged, counterfeit or invalid documents shall not prevent responsibility being allocated to the Member State which issued it. However, the Member State issuing the residence document or visa shall not be responsible if it can establish that a fraud was committed after the document or visa had been issued. _________________ 25Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 13 July 2009, establishing a Community Code on Visas (OJ L 243, 15.9.2009, p. 1).Article 14 deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 1. Where the applicant is in possession of a valid residence document or a residence document which has expired less than two years before lodging the first application , the Member State which issued the document shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 (6) The first phase in the creation of a CEAS that should lead, in the longer term, to a common procedure and a uniform status, valid throughout the Union, for those granted international protection, has now been completed. The European Council of 4 November 2004 adopted The Hague Programme which set the objectives to be implemented in the area of freedom, security and justice in the period 2005-2010. In this respect, The Hague Programme invited the European Commission to conclude the evaluation of the first-phase legal instruments and to submit the second-phase instruments and measures to the European Parliament and to the Council with a view to their adoption before 2010.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 2. Where the applicant is in possession of a valid visa or a visa expired less than six months before lodging the first application , the Member State which issued the visa shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection, unless the visa was issued on behalf of another Member State under a representation arrangement as provided for in Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council25 . In such a case, the represented Member State shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection. _________________ 25Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 13 July 2009, establishing a Community Code on Visas (OJ L 243, 15.9.2009, p. 1).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 3. Where the applicant is in possession of more than one valid residence document or visa issued by different Member States, the responsibility for examining the application for international protection shall be assumed by the Member States in the following order: (a)the Member State which issued the residence document conferring the right to the longest period of residency or, where the periods of validity are identical, the Member State which issued the residence document having the latest expiry date; (b)the Member State which issued the visa having the latest expiry date where the various visas are of the same type; (c)where visas are of different kinds, the Member State which issued the visa having the longest period of validity or, where the periods of validity are identical, the Member State which issued the visa having the latest expiry date.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point a (a) the Member State which issued the residence document conferring the right to the longest period of residency or, where the periods of validity are identical, the Member State which issued the residence document having the latest expiry date;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point b (b) the Member State which issued the visa having the latest expiry date where the various visas are of the same type;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point c (c) where visas are of different kinds, the Member State which issued the visa having the longest period of validity or, where the periods of validity are identical, the Member State which issued the visa having the latest expiry date.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4 4. The fact that the residence document or visa was issued on the basis of a false or assumed identity or on submission of forged, counterfeit or invalid documents shall not prevent responsibility being allocated to the Member State which issued it. However, the Member State issuing the residence document or visa shall not be responsible if it can establish that a fraud was committed after the document or visa had been issued.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 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.Article 15 deleted Entry
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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 If a third-country national or a stateless person enters into the territory of a Member State in which the need for him or her to have a vArticle 16 deleted Visa is waived, that Member State shall be responsible for examining his or her application for international protection. entry
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 If a third-country national or a stateless person enters into the territory of a Member State in which the need for him or her to have a visa is waived, that Member State shall be responsible for examining his or her application for international protection.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 (7) In the Stockholm Programme, the European Council reiterated its commitment to the objective of establishing a common area of protection and solidarity in accordance with Article 78 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), for those granted international protection, by 2012 at the latest. Furthermore it emphasised that the Dublin system remains a cornerstone in building the CEAS, as it clearly allocates responsibility among Member States for the examination of applications for international protection. In May 2015 the Commission indicated in its Communication on the European Agenda on Migration that the Dublin Regulation would be evaluated and, if necessary, that a proposal for its revision would be made, in particular to achieve a fairer distribution of asylum seekers in Europe .deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 Application in an international transit Where the application for international protection is made in the international transit area of an airport of a Member State by a third-country national or a stateless person, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application.rticle 17 deleted area of an airport
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 Where the application for international protection is made in the international transit area of an airport of a Member State by a third-country national or a stateless person, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 1.Where, on account of pregnancy, a new- born child, serious illness, severe disability or old age, an applicant is dependent on the assistance of his or her child, sibling or parent legally resident in one of the Member States, or his or her child, sibling or parent legally resident in one of the Member States is dependent on the assistance of the applicant, Member States shall normally keep or bring together the applicant with that child, sibling or parent, provided that family ties existed in the country of origin, that the child, sibling or parent or the applicant is able to take care of the dependent person and that the persons concerned expressed their desire in writing. 2.Where the child, sibling or parent referred to in paragraph 1 is legally resident in a Member State other than the one where the applicant is present, the Member State responsible shall be the one where the child, sibling or parent is legally resident unless the applicant’s health prevents him or her from travelling to that Member State for a significant period of time. In such a case, the Member State responsible shall be the one where the applicant is present. Such Member State shall not be subject to the obligation to bring the child, sibling or parent of the applicant to its territory. 3.The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 57 concerning the elements to be taken into account in order to assess the dependency link, the criteria for establishing the existence of proven family links, the criteria for assessing the capacity of the person concerned to take care of the dependent person and the elements to be taken into account in order to assess the inability to travel for a significant period of time. 4.The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish uniform conditions for the consultation and exchange of information between Member States. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2).Article 18 deleted Dependent persons
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 1. Where, on account of pregnancy, a new-born child, serious illness, severe disability or old age, an applicant is dependent on the assistance of his or her child, sibling or parent legally resident in one of the Member States, or his or her child, sibling or parent legally resident in one of the Member States is dependent on the assistance of the applicant, Member States shall normally keep or bring together the applicant with that child, sibling or parent, provided that family ties existed in the country of origin, that the child, sibling or parent or the applicant is able to take care of the dependent person and that the persons concerned expressed their desire in writing.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 2. Where the child, sibling or parent referred to in paragraph 1 is legally resident in a Member State other than the one where the applicant is present, the Member State responsible shall be the one where the child, sibling or parent is legally resident unless the applicant’s health prevents him or her from travelling to that Member State for a significant period of time. In such a case, the Member State responsible shall be the one where the applicant is present. Such Member State shall not be subject to the obligation to bring the child, sibling or parent of the applicant to its territory.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 3 3. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 57 concerning the elements to be taken into account in order to assess the dependency link, the criteria for establishing the existence of proven family links, the criteria for assessing the capacity of the person concerned to take care of the dependent person and the elements to be taken into account in order to assess the inability to travel for a significant period of time.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 4 4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish uniform conditions for the consultation and exchange of information between Member States. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 1. By way of derogation from Article 3(1) and only as long as no Member State has been determined as responsible , each Member State may decide to examine an application for international protection lodged with it by a third-country national or a stateless person based on family grounds in relation to wider family not covered by Article 2(g) , even if such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in this Regulation. The Member State which decides to examine an application for international protection pursuant to this paragraph shall become the Member State responsible and shall assume the obligations associated with that responsibility. Where applicable, it shall inform the Member State previously responsible, the Member State conducting a procedure for determining the Member State responsible or the Member State which has been requested to take charge of the applicant. The Member State which becomes responsible pursuant to this paragraph shall forthwith indicate it in Eurodac in accordance with Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013] by adding the date when the decision to examine the application was taken. 2. 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 , 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. The request to take charge shall contain all the material in the possession of the requesting Member State to allow the requested Member State to assess the situation. The requested Member State shall carry out any necessary checks to examine the humanitarian grounds cited, and shall reply to the requesting Member State within one month of receipt . A reply refusing the request shall state the reasons on which the refusal is based. Where the requested Member State accepts the request, responsibility for examining the application shall be transferred to it.Article 19 deleted Discretionary clauses
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 1. By way of derogation from Article 3(1) and only as long as no Member State has been determined as responsible , each Member State may decide to examine an application for international protection lodged with it by a third- country national or a stateless person based on family grounds in relation to wider family not covered by Article 2(g) , even if such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in this Regulation. The Member State which decides to examine an application for international protection pursuant to this paragraph shall become the Member State responsible and shall assume the obligations associated with that responsibility. Where applicable, it shall inform the Member State previously responsible, the Member State conducting a procedure for determining the Member State responsible or the Member State which has been requested to take charge of the applicant. The Member State which becomes responsible pursuant to this paragraph shall forthwith indicate it in Eurodac in accordance with Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013] by adding the date when the decision to examine the application was taken.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 By way of derogation from Article 3(1) and only as long as no Member State has been determined as responsible , each Member State may decide to examine an application for international protection lodged with it by a third-country national or a stateless person based on family grounds in relation to wider family not covered by Article 2(g) , even if such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in this Regulation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 (8) nulldeleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 The Member State which decides to examine an application for international protection pursuant to this paragraph shall become the Member State responsible and shall assume the obligations associated with that responsibility. Where applicable, it shall inform the Member State previously responsible, the Member State conducting a procedure for determining the Member State responsible or the Member State which has been requested to take charge of the applicant.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 The Member State which becomes responsible pursuant to this paragraph shall forthwith indicate it in Eurodac in accordance with Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013] by adding the date when the decision to examine the application was taken.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 2. 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 , 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. The request to take charge shall contain all the material in the possession of the requesting Member State to allow the requested Member State to assess the situation. The requested Member State shall carry out any necessary checks to examine the humanitarian grounds cited, and shall reply to the requesting Member State within one month of receipt . A reply refusing the request shall state the reasons on which the refusal is based. Where the requested Member State accepts the request, responsibility for examining the application shall be transferred to it.deleted
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 , 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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 The request to take charge shall contain all the material in the possession of the requesting Member State to allow the requested Member State to assess the situation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 The requested Member State shall carry out any necessary checks to examine the humanitarian grounds cited, and shall reply to the requesting Member State within one month of receipt . A reply refusing the request shall state the reasons on which the refusal is based.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 4 Where the requested Member State accepts the request, responsibility for examining the application shall be transferred to it.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 [...]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 1. The Member State responsible under this Regulation shall be obliged to: (a)take charge, under the conditions laid down in Articles 24, 25 and 30, of an applicant who has lodged an application in a different Member State; (b)take back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 26 and 30, an applicant whose application is under examination and who made an application in another Member State or who is on the territory of another Member State without a residence document; (c)take back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 26 and 30, a third- country national or a stateless person who has withdrawn the application under examination and made an application in another Member State or who is on the territory of another Member State without a residence document; (d)take back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 26 and 30, a third- country national or a stateless person whose application has been rejected and who made an application in another Member State or who is on the territory of another Member State without a residence document; (e)take back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 26 and 30 a beneficiary of international protection, who made an application in another Member State than the Member State responsible which granted that protection status or who is on the territory of another Member State than the Member State responsible which granted that protection without a residence document.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) take charge, under the conditions laid down in Articles 24, 25 and 30, of an applicant who has lodged an application in a different Member State;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 (9) The European Union Agency for Asylum should provide adequate support in the implementation of this Regulation, in particular by establishing the reference key for the distribution of asylum seekers under the corrective allocatioidea of distributing asylum seekers is absurd and inhumane. It is, moreover, anti-democratic, since the Member States must be able to take sovereign mdechanism, and by adapting the figures underlying the reference key annually, as well as the reference key based on Eurostat dataisions determining who may enter and remain on their territory.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) take back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 26 and 30, an applicant whose application is under examination and who made an application in another Member State or who is on the territory of another Member State without a residence document;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) take back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 26 and 30, a third- country national or a stateless person who has withdrawn the application under examination and made an application in another Member State or who is on the territory of another Member State without a residence document;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point d (d) take back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 26 and 30, a third- country national or a stateless person whose application has been rejected and who made an application in another Member State or who is on the territory of another Member State without a residence document;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point e (e) take back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 26 and 30 a beneficiary of international protection, who made an application in another Member State than the Member State responsible which granted that protection status or who is on the territory of another Member State than the Member State responsible which granted that protection without a residence document.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 2. In a situation referred to in point (a) of paragraph 1, the Member State responsible shall examine or complete the examination of the application for international protection.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 3. In a situation referred to in point (b) of paragraph 1, the Member State responsible shall examine or complete the examination of the application for international protection in an accelerated procedure in accordance with Article 31 paragraph 8 of Directive 2013/32/EU.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4 4. In a situation referred to in point (c) of paragraph 1, the Member State responsible shall treat any further representations or a new application by the applicant as subsequent application in accordance with Directive 2013/32/EU.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 5 5. In a situation referred to in point (d) of paragraph 1, the decision taken by the responsible authority of the Member State responsible to reject the application shall no longer be subject to a remedy within the framework of Chapter V of Directive 2013/32/EU.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 6 6. Where a Member State issues a residence document to the applicant, the obligations referred to in paragraph 1 shall be transferred to that Member State.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 7 7. The Member State responsible shall indicate in the electronic file referred to in Article 22(2) the fact that it is the Member State responsible. THIS PARAGRAPH IS MISSING. THANK YOU FOR USING ANOTHER LANGUAGE.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 (10) In the light of the results of the evaluation undertaken of the implementation of Regulation (EU) 604/2013 , it is appropriate, at this stage, to confirm the principles underlying Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, while making the necessary improvements, in the light of experience, to the effectiveness of the Dublin system and the protection granted to applicants under that system. Based on this evaluation and on consultation with Member States, the European Parliament and o2015, the refugee and migration crisis highlighted the challenges faced by some Member States in coping with the floods of migrants. They can only be advised to invest human and material resources in protecting their stakeholborders, and it is also considered appropriate to establish in the Regulation measures required for a fair share of responsibility between Member States for applications for international protection, in particular to ensure that a disproportionate burden is not placed upon some Member Statesimportant that those States which are under the greatest pressure should receive EU funding.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 The Member State responsible shall indicate in the electronic file referred to in Article 22(2) the fact that it is the Member State responsible.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2 THIS PARAGRAPH IS MISSING. THANK YOU FOR USING ANOTHER LANGUAGE.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter 6 – section 1 [...]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 [...]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 1. The process of determining the Member State responsible shall start as soon as an application for international protection is first lodged with a Member State , provided that the Member State of first application is not already the Member State responsible pursuant to Article 3(4) or (5) .deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 2. An application for international protection shall be deemed to have been lodged once a form submitted by the applicant or a report prepared by the authorities has reached the competent authorities of the Member State concerned. Where an application is not made in writing, the time elapsing between the statement of intention and the preparation of a report should be as short as possible.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 3 3. For the purposes of this Regulation, the situation of a minor who is accompanying the applicant and meets the definition of family member shall be indissociable from that of his or her family member and shall be a matter for the Member State responsible for examining the application for international protection of that family member, even if the minor is not individually an applicant, provided that it is in the minor’s best interests. The same treatment shall be applied to children born after the applicant arrives on the territory of the Member States, without the need to initiate a new procedure for taking charge of them.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 4 4. Where an application for international protection is lodged with the competent authorities of a Member State by an applicant who is on the territory of another Member State, the determination of the Member State responsible shall be made by the Member State in whose territory the applicant is present. The latter Member State shall be informed without delay by the Member State which received the application and shall then, for the purposes of this Regulation, be regarded as the Member State with which the application for international protection was lodged. The applicant shall be informed in writing of this change in the determining Member State and of the date on which it took place.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 Where an application for international protection is lodged with the competent authorities of a Member State by an applicant who is on the territory of another Member State, the determination of the Member State responsible shall be made by the Member State in whose territory the applicant is present. The latter Member State shall be informed without delay by the Member State which received the application and shall then, for the purposes of this Regulation, be regarded as the Member State with which the application for international protection was lodged.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 The applicant shall be informed in writing of this change in the determining Member State and of the date on which it took place.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 (11) In order to ensure equal treatment for all applicants and beneficiaries of international protection, and consistency with the current Union asylum acquis, in particular with Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council18 , the scope of this Regulation encompasses applicants for subsidiary protection and persons eligible for subsidiary protection. _________________ 18Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection granted (OJ L 337, 20.12.2011, p. 9).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 5 5. An applicant who is present in another Member State without a residence document or who there lodges an application for international protection after withdrawing his or her first application made in a different Member State during the process of determining the Member State responsible shall be taken back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 26 and 30, by the Member State with which that application for international protection was first lodged.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter 6 – section 2 [...]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 1.The Member State with which an application for international protection is lodged shall enter in the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) within the period referred to in Article 10 (1) of Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) 603/2013] that: (a)such application is lodged; (b)where applicable, links to the applications of family members or relatives travelling together; (c)the reference number referred to in Article 12 (i) of Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013]. 2.Upon entry of the information pursuant to paragraph 1, the automated system referred to in Article 44 shall register each application under a unique application number, create an electronic file for each application and communicate the unique application number to the Member State of application. 3.Member States shall provide the European Union Agency for Asylum with information on the number of third country nationals effectively resettled on a weekly basis. The Agency shall validate this information and enter the data in the automated system. 4.Where a hit in Eurodac indicates that the applicant has previously lodged an application for international protection before having left or having been removed from the territories of the Member States, the Member State with which the new application is lodged shall also indicate which Member State has been the Member State responsible for examining the previous application. 5.The Member State with which the application is lodged shall search the VIS pursuant to Article 21 of Regulation (EC) 767/2008. Where a hit in the VIS indicates that the applicant is in possession of a valid visa or a visa expired less than six months before lodging the first application, the Member State shall indicate the visa application number and the Member State, the authority of which issued or extended the visa and whether the visa has been issued on behalf of another Member State.Article 22 deleted Registration
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 1. The Member State with which an application for international protection is lodged shall enter in the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) within the period referred to in Article 10 (1) of Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) 603/2013] that: (a)such application is lodged; (b)where applicable, links to the applications of family members or relatives travelling together; (c)the reference number referred to in Article 12 (i) of Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013].deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) such application is lodgdeleted;
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) where applicable, links to the applications of family members or relatives travelling together;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) the reference number referred to in Article 12 (i) of Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013].deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 2. Upon entry of the information pursuant to paragraph 1, the automated system referred to in Article 44 shall register each application under a unique application number, create an electronic file for each application and communicate the unique application number to the Member State of application.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 3. Member States shall provide the European Union Agency for Asylum with information on the number of third country nationals effectively resettled on a weekly basis. The Agency shall validate this information and enter the data in the automated system.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 4 4. Where a hit in Eurodac indicates that the applicant has previously lodged an application for international protection before having left or having been removed from the territories of the Member States, the Member State with which the new application is lodged shall also indicate which Member State has been the Member State responsible for examining the previous application.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 (12) In order to ensure that beneficiaries of international protection who entered the territory of another Member State than the Member State responsible without fulfilling the conditions of stay in that other Member State are taken back by the Member State responsible, it is necessary to encompass beneficiaries of international protection in the scope of this Regulation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 5 5. The Member State with which the application is lodged shall search the VIS pursuant to Article 21 of Regulation (EC) 767/2008. Where a hit in the VIS indicates that the applicant is in possession of a valid visa or a visa expired less than six months before lodging the first application, the Member State shall indicate the visa application number and the Member State, the authority of which issued or extended the visa and whether the visa has been issued on behalf of another Member State.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 Information in the automated system 1.The automated system referred to in Article 44(1) shall indicate in real time: (a)the total number of applications lodged in the Union; (b)the actual number of applications lodged in each Member State; (c)the number of third country nationals resettled by each Member State; (d)the actual number of applications to be examined by each Member State as Member State responsible; (e)the share of each Member State pursuant to the reference key referred to in Article 35. 2.In the electronic file referred to in Article 22(2) only the following information shall be recorded: (a)the unique application number referred to in Article 22(2): (b)link to applications referred to in point b of Article 22 (1) and 22(4); (c)the reference number referred to in point d of Article 12(i) of Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013]; (d)the existence of an alert following the security verification pursuant to Article 40; (e)the Member State responsible; (f)in case of the indication of a previous application for international protection by the same applicant pursuant to Article 22(4), the Member State who was responsible for that previous application; (g)in case of the indication of a visa issued to the applicant pursuant to Article 22(5), the Member State which issued or extended the visa or on behalf of which the visa has been issued and the visa application number; (h)where the allocation mechanism under Chapter VII applies, the information referred to in Article 36(4) and point (h) of Article 39. 3.Upon communication by the Member State responsible pursuant to Article 20(7) and Article 22(3) the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) shall count that application and that third country national effectively resettled for the share of that Member State. 4.The electronic files shall be automatically erased after expiry of the period set out in Article 17(1) of Regulation [Proposal for Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013].Article 23 deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 1. The automated system referred to in Article 44(1) shall indicate in real time: (a)the total number of applications lodged in the Union; (b)the actual number of applications lodged in each Member State; (c)the number of third country nationals resettled by each Member State; (d)the actual number of applications to be examined by each Member State as Member State responsible; (e)the share of each Member State pursuant to the reference key referred to in Article 35.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) the total number of applications lodged in the Union;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) the actual number of applications lodged in each Member State;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) the number of third country nationals resettled by each Member Stadelete;d
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point d (d) the actual number of applications to be examined by each Member State as Member State responsible;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point e (e) the share of each Member State pursuant to the reference key referred to in Article 35.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 2. In the electronic file referred to in Article 22(2) only the following information shall be recorded: (a)the unique application number referred to in Article 22(2): (b)link to applications referred to in point b of Article 22 (1) and 22(4); (c)the reference number referred to in point d of Article 12(i) of Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013]; (d)the existence of an alert following the security verification pursuant to Article 40; (e)the Member State responsible; (f)in case of the indication of a previous application for international protection by the same applicant pursuant to Article 22(4), the Member State who was responsible for that previous application; (g)in case of the indication of a visa issued to the applicant pursuant to Article 22(5), the Member State which issued or extended the visa or on behalf of which the visa has been issued and the visa application number; (h)where the allocation mechanism under Chapter VII applies, the information referred to in Article 36(4) and point (h) of Article 39.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point a (a) the unique application number referred to in Article 22(2):deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 (13) Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council19 should apply to the procedure for the determination of the Member State responsible as regulated under this Regulation, subject to the limitations in the application of that Directive. _________________ 19See page 96 of this Official Journal. Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 laying down standards for the reception of applicants for international protection (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 96).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point b (b) link to applications referred to in point b of Article 22 (1) and 22(4);deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point c (c) the reference number referred to in point d of Article 12(i) of Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013];deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point d (d) the existence of an alert following the security verification pursuant to Article 40;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point e (e) the Member State responsible;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point f (f) in case of the indication of a previous application for international protection by the same applicant pursuant to Article 22(4), the Member State who was responsible for that previous application;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point g (g) in case of the indication of a visa issued to the applicant pursuant to Article 22(5), the Member State which issued or extended the visa or on behalf of which the visa has been issued and the visa application number;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point h (h) where the allocation mechanism under Chapter VII applies, the information referred to in Article 36(4) and point (h) of Article 39.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3 3. Upon communication by the Member State responsible pursuant to Article 20(7) and Article 22(3) the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) shall count that application and that third country national effectively resettled for the share of that Member State.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 4 4. The electronic files shall be automatically erased after expiry of the period set out in Article 17(1) of Regulation [Proposal for Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013].deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter 6 – section 3 [...]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14 (14) Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council20 should apply in addition and without prejudice to the provisions concerning the procedural safeguards regulated under this Regulation, subject to the limitations in the application of that Directive. _________________ 20See page 60 of this Official Journal. Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 60).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 1. Where a Member State with which an application for international protection has been lodged considers that another Member State is responsible for examining the application, it shall, as quickly as possible and in any event within one month of the date on which the application was lodged within the meaning of Article 21(2), request that other Member State to take charge of the applicant. Notwithstanding the first subparagraph, in the case of a Eurodac hit with data recorded pursuant to Article 13 of Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013] or of a VIS hit with data recorded pursuant to Article 21(2) of Regulation (EU) 767/2008 , the request shall be sent within two weeks of receiving that hit. Where the request to take charge of an applicant is not made within the periods laid down in the first and second subparagraphs, responsibility for examining the application for international protection shall lie with the Member State in which the application was lodged. 2. In the cases referred to in paragraph 1, the request that charge be taken by another Member State shall be made using a standard form and including proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists mentioned in Article 25(4) and/or relevant elements from the applicant’s statement, enabling the authorities of the requested Member State to check whether it is responsible on the basis of the criteria laid down in this Regulation. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt uniform conditions on the preparation and submission of take charge requests. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2).Article 24 deleted Submitting a take charge request
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 1. Where a Member State with which an application for international protection has been lodged considers that another Member State is responsible for examining the application, it shall, as quickly as possible and in any event within one month of the date on which the application was lodged within the meaning of Article 21(2), request that other Member State to take charge of the applicant. Notwithstanding the first subparagraph, in the case of a Eurodac hit with data recorded pursuant to Article 13 of Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013] or of a VIS hit with data recorded pursuant to Article 21(2) of Regulation (EU) 767/2008 , the request shall be sent within two weeks of receiving that hit. Where the request to take charge of an applicant is not made within the periods laid down in the first and second subparagraphs, responsibility for examining the application for international protection shall lie with the Member State in which the application was lodged.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 Where a Member State with which an application for international protection has been lodged considers that another Member State is responsible for examining the application, it shall, as quickly as possible and in any event within one month of the date on which the application was lodged within the meaning of Article 21(2), request that other Member State to take charge of the applicant.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 Notwithstanding the first subparagraph, in the case of a Eurodac hit with data recorded pursuant to Article 13 of Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013] or of a VIS hit with data recorded pursuant to Article 21(2) of Regulation (EU) 767/2008 , the request shall be sent within two weeks of receiving that hit .deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 Where the request to take charge of an applicant is not made within the periods laid down in the first and second subparagraphs, responsibility for examining the application for international protection shall lie with the Member State in which the application was lodged.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 2. In the cases referred to in paragraph 1, the request that charge be taken by another Member State shall be made using a standard form and including proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists mentioned in Article 25(4) and/or relevant elements from the applicant’s statement, enabling the authorities of the requested Member State to check whether it is responsible on the basis of the criteria laid down in this Regulation. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt uniform conditions on the preparation and submission of take charge requests. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 In the cases referred to in paragraph 1, the request that charge be taken by another Member State shall be made using a standard form and including proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists mentioned in Article 25(4) and/or relevant elements from the applicant’s statement, enabling the authorities of the requested Member State to check whether it is responsible on the basis of the criteria laid down in this Regulation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt uniform conditions on the preparation and submission of take charge requests. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 [...]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1 1. The requested Member State shall make the necessary checks, and shall give a decision on the request to take charge of an applicant within one month of receipt of the request.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 (15) In accordance with the 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the best interests of the child should be a primary consideration of Member States when applying this Regulation. In assessing the best interests of the child, Member States should, in particular, take due account of thChildren, if scientific tests have shown that they are minor’s well-being and social developmdeed childrent, safety and security considerations and the views of the minor in accordance with his or her age and maturity, including his or her background. In addition, specific procedural guarantees for unaccompanied minors should be laid down on account of their particular vulnerabilitymust not be separated from their families. Special detention centres could be set up to cater for families awaiting expulsion.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 2. Notwithstanding the first subparagraph, in the case of a Eurodac hit with data recorded pursuant to Article 13 of Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013] or of a VIS hit with data recorded pursuant to Article 21(2) of Regulation (EU) 767/2008, the requested Member State shall give a decision on the request within two weeks of receipt of the request.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 3. In the procedure for determining the Member State responsible elements of proof and circumstantial evidence shall be usdeleted.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 4 4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish, and review periodically, two lists, indicating the relevant elements of proof and circumstantial evidence in accordance with the criteria set out in points (a) and (b) of this paragraph. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2). (a) Proof: (i) this refers to formal proof which determines responsibility pursuant to this Regulation, as long as it is not refuted by proof to the contrary; (ii) the Member States shall provide the Committee provided for in Article 56 with models of the different types of administrative documents, in accordance with the typology established in the list of formal proofs; (b) Circumstantial evidence: (i) this refers to indicative elements which while being refutable may be sufficient, in certain cases, according to the evidentiary value attributed to them; (ii) their evidentiary value, in relation to the responsibility for examining the application for international protection shall be assessed on a case-by-case basis.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 4 – point a (a) Proof: (i) this refers to formal proof which determines responsibility pursuant to this Regulation, as long as it is not refuted by proof to the contrary; (ii) the Member States shall provide the Committee provided for in Article 56 with models of the different types of administrative documents, in accordance with the typology established in the list of formal proofs;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 4 – point a – point i (i) this refers to formal proof which determines responsibility pursuant to this Regulation, as long as it is not refuted by proof to the contrary;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 4 – point a – point ii (ii) the Member States shall provide the Committee provided for in Article 56 with models of the different types of administrative documents, in accordance with the typology established in the list of formal proofs;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 4 – point b (b) Circumstantial evidence: (i) this refers to indicative elements which while being refutable may be sufficient, in certain cases, according to the evidentiary value attributed to them; (ii) their evidentiary value, in relation to the responsibility for examining the application for international protection shall be assessed on a case-by-case basis.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 4 – point b – point i (i) this refers to indicative elements which while being refutable may be sufficient, in certain cases, according to the evidentiary value attributed to them;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 4 – point b – point ii (ii) their evidentiary value, in relation to the responsibility for examining the application for international protection shall be assessed on a case-by-case basis.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 5 5. The requirement of proof should not exceed what is necessary for the proper application of this Regulation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 (16) In accordance with the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, respect for family life should be a primary consideration of Member States when applying this Regulation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 6 6. If there is no formal proof, the requested Member State shall acknowledge its responsibility if the circumstantial evidence is coherent, verifiable and sufficiently detailed to establish responsibility.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 7 7. Where the requested Member State does not object to the request within the one-month period mentioned in paragraph 1 by a reply which gives substantiated reasons, or where applicable within the two weeks period mentioned in paragraph 2, this shall be tantamount to accepting the request, and entail the obligation to take charge of the person, including the obligation to provide for proper arrangements for arrival.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter 6 – section 4 Procedures for take back notifications Submitting a take back notification 1. In a situation referred to in Article 20(1)(b), (c), (d) or (e) the Member State where the person is present shall make a take back notification at the latest within two weeks after receiving the Eurodac hit, and transfer that person to the Member State responsible. 2. A take back notification shall be made using a standard form and shall include proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists mentioned in Article 25(4) and/or relevant elements from the statements of the person concerned. 3. The Member State responsible shall confirm immediately the receipt of the notification to the Member State which made the notification. 4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt uniform conditions for the preparation and submission of take back notifications. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2). THIS PARAGRAPH IS MISSING. THANK YOU FOR USING ANOTHER LANGUAGE.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 Submitting a take back notification 1. In a situation referred to in Article 20(1)(b), (c), (d) or (e) the Member State where the person is present shall make a take back notification at the latest within two weeks after receiving the Eurodac hit, and transfer that person to the Member State responsible. 2. A take back notification shall be made using a standard form and shall include proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists mentioned in Article 25(4) and/or relevant elements from the statements of the person concerned. 3. The Member State responsible shall confirm immediately the receipt of the notification to the Member State which made the notification. 4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt uniform conditions for the preparation and submission of take back notifications. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2). THIS PARAGRAPH IS MISSING. THANK YOU FOR USING ANOTHER LANGUAGE.Article 26 deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 1. In a situation referred to in Article 20(1)(b), (c), (d) or (e) the Member State where the person is present shall make a take back notification at the latest within two weeks after receiving the Eurodac hit, and transfer that person to the Member State responsible.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2 2. A take back notification shall be made using a standard form and shall include proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists mentioned in Article 25(4) and/or relevant elements from the statements of the person concerned.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 3 3. The Member State responsible shall confirm immediately the receipt of the notification to the Member State which made the notification.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 4 4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt uniform conditions for the preparation and submission of take back notifications. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2). THIS PARAGRAPH IS MISSING. THANK YOU FOR USING ANOTHER LANGUAGE.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt uniform conditions for the preparation and submission of take back notifications. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter 6 – section 5 [...]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 (17) In order to prevent that applicants with inadmissible claims or who are likely not to be in need of international protection, or who represent a security risk are transferred among the Member States, it is necessary to ensure that the Member State where an application is first lodged verifies the admissibility of the claim in relation to the first country of asylum and safe third country, examines in accelerated procedures applications made by applicants coming from a safe country of origin designated on the EU list, as well as applicants presenting security concernsdetains illegal immigrants before sending them back to their country of origin.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 Notification of a transfer decision 1. Where the requested Member State accepts to take charge of an applicant , the requesting Member State shall notify the applicant in writing without delay of the decision to transfer him or her to the Member State responsible and, where applicable, of not examining his or her application for international protection. 2. Where the applicant or another person referred to in Article 20(1) (c), (d) or (e) is to be taken back, the Member State where the person concerned is present shall notify the person concerned in writing without undue delay the decision to transfer him or her to the Member State responsible. 3. If a legal advisor or other counsellor is representing the person concerned, Member States may choose to notify the decision to such legal advisor or counsellor instead of to the person concerned and, where applicable, communicate the decision to the person concerned. 4. The decision referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall contain information on the legal remedies available and on the time limits applicable for seeking such remedies and for carrying out the transfer, and shall, if necessary, contain information on the place where, and the date on which, the person concerned should appear, if that person is travelling to the Member State responsible by his or her own means. Member States shall ensure that information on persons or entities that may provide legal assistance to the person concerned is communicated to the person concerned together with the decision referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 , when that information has not been already communicated. 5. When the person concerned is not assisted or represented by a legal advisor or other counsellor, Member States shall inform him or her of the main elements of the decision, which shall always include information on the legal remedies available and the time limits applicable for seeking such remedies, in a language that the person concerned understands or is reasonably supposed to understand.Article 27 deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 1. Where the requested Member State accepts to take charge of an applicant , the requesting Member State shall notify the applicant in writing without delay of the decision to transfer him or her to the Member State responsible and, where applicable, of not examining his or her application for international protection.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 2. Where the applicant or another person referred to in Article 20(1)(c), (d) or (e) is to be taken back, the Member State where the person concerned is present shall notify the person concerned in writing without undue delay the decision to transfer him or her to the Member State responsible.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 3 3. If a legal advisor or other counsellor is representing the person concerned, Member States may choose to notify the decision to such legal advisor or counsellor instead of to the person concerned and, where applicable, communicate the decision to the person concerned.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 4 4. The decision referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall contain information on the legal remedies available and on the time limits applicable for seeking such remedies and for carrying out the transfer, and shall, if necessary, contain information on the place where, and the date on which, the person concerned should appear, if that person is travelling to the Member State responsible by his or her own means. Member States shall ensure that information on persons or entities that may provide legal assistance to the person concerned is communicated to the person concerned together with the decision referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 , when that information has not been already communicated.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 The decision referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall contain information on the legal remedies available and on the time limits applicable for seeking such remedies and for carrying out the transfer, and shall, if necessary, contain information on the place where, and the date on which, the person concerned should appear, if that person is travelling to the Member State responsible by his or her own means.deleted
Member States shall ensure that information on persons or entities that may provide legal assistance to the person concerned is communicated to the person concerned together with the decision referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, when that information has not been already communicated.ted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 5 5. When the person concerned is not assisted or represented by a legal advisor or other counsellor, Member States shall inform him or her of the main elements of the decision, which shall always include information on the legal remedies available and the time limits applicable for seeking such remedies, in a language that the person concerned understands or is reasonably supposed to understand.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 [...]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 1. The applicant or another person as referred to in Article 20(1)(c), (d) or (e) shall have the right to an effective remedy, in the form of an appeal or a review, in fact and in law, against a transfer decision, before a court or tribunal.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 (19) The definition of a family member in this Regulation should not include the sibling or siblings of the applicant. Reuniting siblings is of particular importance for improving the chances of integration of applicants and hence reducing secondary movements. The scope of the definition of family member should also reflect the reality of current migratory trends, according to which applicants often arrive to the territory of the Member States after a prolonged period of time in transit. The definition should therefore include families formed outside the country of origin, but before their arrival on the territory of the Member State. This limited and targeted enlargement of the scope of the definition is expected to reduce the incentive for some secondary movements of asylum seekers within the EUa further factor which contributes to the non- assimilation of immigrants, who prefer to fall back on their community of origin.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2 2. Member States shall provide for a period of 7 days after the notification of a transfer decision within which the person concerned may exercise his or her right to an effective remedy pursuant to paragraph 1.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3 3. For appeals against, or reviews of, transfer decisions, the court or tribunal shall decide within a period of 15 days on the substance of the appeal or review. No transfer shall take place before this decision on the appeal or review is taken.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 4 4 The scope of the effective remedy laid down in paragraph 1 shall be limited to an assessment of whether Articles 3(2) in relation to the existence of a risk of inhuman or degrading treatment or Articles 10 to 13 and 18 are infringed upon.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 5 5. Where no transfer decision referred to in paragraph 1 is taken, Member States shall provide for an effective remedy before a court or tribunal, where the applicant claims that a family member or, in the case of unaccompanied minors, a relative is legally present in a Member State other than the one which is examining his or her application for international protection, and considers therefore that other Member State as Member State responsible for examining the application.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 6 6 Member States shall ensure that the person concerned has access to legal assistance and, where necessary, to linguistic assistance.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 7 7. Member States shall ensure that legal assistance is granted on request free of charge where the person concerned cannot afford the costs involved. Member States may provide that, as regards fees and other costs, the treatment of applicants shall not be more favourable than the treatment generally accorded to their nationals in matters pertaining to legal assistance. Without arbitrarily restricting access to legal assistance, Member States may provide that free legal assistance and representation not be granted where the appeal or review is considered by the competent authority or a court or tribunal to have no tangible prospect of success. Where a decision not to grant free legal assistance and representation pursuant to this paragraph is taken by an authority other than a court or tribunal, Member States shall provide the right to an effective remedy before a court or tribunal to challenge that decision. In case the decision is challenged, this remedy shall be an integral part of the remedy referred to in paragraph 1. In complying with the requirements set out in this paragraph, Member States shall ensure that legal assistance and representation is not arbitrarily restricted and that the applicant’s effective access to justice is not hindered. Legal assistance shall include at least the preparation of the required procedural documents and representation before a court or tribunal and may be restricted to legal advisors or counsellors specifically designated by national law to provide assistance and representation. Procedures for access to legal assistance shall be laid down in national law.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 Member States shall ensure that legal assistance is granted on request free of charge where the person concerned cannot afford the costs involved. Member States may provide that, as regards fees and other costs, the treatment of applicants shall not be more favourable than the treatment generally accorded to their nationals in matters pertaining to legal assistance.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2 Without arbitrarily restricting access to legal assistance, Member States may provide that free legal assistance and representation not be granted where the appeal or review is considered by the competent authority or a court or tribunal to have no tangible prospect of success.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 3 Where a decision not to grant free legal assistance and representation pursuant to this paragraph is taken by an authority other than a court or tribunal, Member States shall provide the right to an effective remedy before a court or tribunal to challenge that decision. In case the decision is challenged, this remedy shall be an integral part of the remedy referred to in paragraph 1.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 4 In complying with the requirements set out in this paragraph, Member States shall ensure that legal assistance and representation is not arbitrarily restricted and that the applicant’s effective access to justice is not hindered.deleted
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. 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 protection, 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. 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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 5 Legal assistance shall include at least the preparation of the required procedural documents and representation before a court or tribunal and may be restricted to legal advisors or counsellors specifically designated by national law to provide assistance and representation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 6 Procedures for access to legal assistance shall be laid down in national law.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter 6 – section 6 [...]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 [...]deleted
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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2 2. When there is a significant risk of absconding, Member States may detain the person concerned in order to secure transfer procedures in accordance with this Regulation, on the basis of an individual assessment and only in so far as detention is proportional and other less coercive alternative measures cannot be applied effectively.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 3 3. Detention shall be for as short a period as possible and shall be for no longer than the time reasonably necessary to fulfil the required administrative procedures with due diligence until the transfer under this Regulation is carried out. Where a person is detained pursuant to this Article, the period for submitting a take charge request or a take back notification shall not exceed two weeks from the lodging of the application. The Member State carrying out the procedure in accordance with this Regulation shall ask for an urgent reply on a take charge request. Such reply shall be given within one week of receipt of the take charge request. Failure to reply within the one- week period shall be tantamount to accepting the take charge request and shall entail the obligation to take the person in charge, including the obligation to provide for proper arrangements for arrival. Where a person is detained pursuant to this Article, the transfer of that person from the requesting Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within four weeks from the final transfer decision. When the requesting Member State fails to comply with the deadlines for submitting a take charge request or take back notification or where the transfer does not take place within the period of four weeks referred to in the third subparagraph, the person shall no longer be detained. Articles 24, 26 and 30 shall continue to apply accordingly.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 Detention shall be for as short a period as possible and shall be for no longer than the time reasonably necessary to fulfil the required administrative procedures with due diligence until the transfer under this Regulation is carried out.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 Where a person is detained pursuant to this Article, the period for submitting a take charge request or a take back notification shall not exceed two weeks from the lodging of the application. The Member State carrying out the procedure in accordance with this Regulation shall ask for an urgent reply on a take charge request. Such reply shall be given within one week of receipt of the take charge request. Failure to reply within the one- week period shall be tantamount to accepting the take charge request and shall entail the obligation to take the person in charge, including the obligation to provide for proper arrangements for arrival.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 Where a person is detained pursuant to this Article, the transfer of that person from the requesting Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within four weeks from the final transfer decision.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21 (21) Assuming responsibility by a Member State for examining an application lodged with it in cases when such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in this Regulation may undermine the effectiveness and sustainability of the system and should be exceptional. Therefore, a Member State should be able to derogate from the responsibility criteria only on humanitarian grounds, in particular for family reasons, before a Member State responsible has been determined and examine an application for international protection lodged with it or with another Member State, even if such examination is not its responsibility under the binding criteria laid down in this Regulation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 4 When the requesting Member State fails to comply with the deadlines for submitting a take charge request or take back notification or where the transfer does not take place within the period of four weeks referred to in the third subparagraph, the person shall no longer be detained. Articles 24, 26 and 30 shall continue to apply accordingly.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 4 4. As regards the detention conditions and the guarantees applicable to persons detained, in order to secure the transfer procedures to the Member State responsible, Articles 9, 10 and 11 of Directive 2013/33/EU shall apply.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter 6 – section 7 [...]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 1. The determining Member State whose take charge request referred to in Article 20(1)(a) was accepted or who made a take back notification referred to in Article 20(1)(b) to (e) shall take a transfer decision at the latest within one week of acceptance or notification and transfer the applicant or the person concerned to the Member State responsible. The transfer of the applicant or of another person as referred to in Article 20(1)(c), (d) or (e) from the requesting Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out in accordance with the national law of the requesting Member State, after consultation between the Member States concerned, as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within four weeks from the final transfer decision. If transfers to the Member State responsible are carried out by supervised departure or under escort, Member States shall ensure that they are carried out in a humane manner and with full respect for fundamental rights and human dignity. If necessary, the applicant shall be supplied by the requesting Member State with a laissez passer. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish the design of the laissez passer. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2). The Member State responsible shall inform the requesting Member State, as appropriate, of the safe arrival of the person concerned or of the fact that he or she did not appear within the set time limit. 2. If a person has been transferred erroneously or a decision to transfer is overturned on appeal or review after the transfer has been carried out, the Member State which carried out the transfer shall promptly accept that person back. 3. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish uniform conditions for the consultation and exchange of information between Member States, in particular in the event of postponed or delayed transfers, transfers following acceptance by default, transfers of minors or dependent persons, and supervised transfers. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2).Article 30 deleted Modalities and time limits
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 1. The determining Member State whose take charge request referred to in Article 20(1)(a) was accepted or who made a take back notification referred to in Article 20(1) (b) to (e) shall take a transfer decision at the latest within one week of acceptance or notification and transfer the applicant or the person concerned to the Member State responsible. The transfer of the applicant or of another person as referred to in Article 20(1)(c), (d) or (e) from the requesting Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out in accordance with the national law of the requesting Member State, after consultation between the Member States concerned, as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within four weeks from the final transfer decision. If transfers to the Member State responsible are carried out by supervised departure or under escort, Member States shall ensure that they are carried out in a humane manner and with full respect for fundamental rights and human dignity. If necessary, the applicant shall be supplied by the requesting Member State with a laissez passer. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish the design of the laissez passer. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2). The Member State responsible shall inform the requesting Member State, as appropriate, of the safe arrival of the person concerned or of the fact that he or she did not appear within the set time limit.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 The determining Member State whose take charge request referred to in Article 20(1)(a) was accepted or who made a take back notification referred to in Article 20(1)(b) to (e) shall take a transfer decision at the latest within one week of acceptance or notification and transfer the applicant or the person concerned to the Member State responsible.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 The transfer of the applicant or of another person as referred to in Article 20(1)(c), (d) or (e) from the requesting Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out in accordance with the national law of the requesting Member State, after consultation between the Member States concerned, as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within four weeks from the final transfer decision .deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 If transfers to the Member State responsible are carried out by supervised departure or under escort, Member States shall ensure that they are carried out in a humane manner and with full respect for fundamental rights and human dignity.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4 If necessary, the applicant shall be supplied by the requesting Member State with a laissez passer. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish the design of the laissez passer. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 5 The Member State responsible shall inform the requesting Member State, as appropriate, of the safe arrival of the person concerned or of the fact that he or she did not appear within the set time limit.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22 (22) In order to ensure that the aims of this Regulation are achieved and obstacles to its application are prevented, in particular in order to avoid absconding and secondary movements between Member States, it is necessary to establish clear obligations to be complied with by the applicant in the context of the procedure, of which he or she should be duly informed in a timely manner. Violation of those legal obligations should lead to appropriate and proportionate procedural consequences for the applicant and to appropriate and proportionate consequences in terms of his or her reception conditions. In line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the Member State where such an applicant is present should in any case ensure that the immediate material needs of that person are covnational asylum systems operate smoothly, asylum seekers should be kept in detention while their applications are being considered.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 2. If a person has been transferred erroneously or a decision to transfer is overturned on appeal or review after the transfer has been carried out, the Member State which carried out the transfer shall promptly accept that person back.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 3 3. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish uniform conditions for the consultation and exchange of information between Member States, in particular in the event of postponed or delayed transfers, transfers following acceptance by default, transfers of minors or dependent persons, and supervised transfers. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 1. The costs necessary to transfer an applicant or another person as referred to in Article 20(1)(c), (d) or (e) to the Member State responsible shall be met by the transferring Member State. 2. Where the person concerned has to be transferred back to a Member State as a result of an erroneous transfer or of a transfer decision that has been overturned on appeal or review after the transfer has been carried out, the Member State which initially carried out the transfer shall be responsible for the costs of transferring the person concerned back to its territory. 3. Persons to be transferred pursuant to this Regulation shall not be required to meet the costs of suchArticle 31 deleted Costs of transfers.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 1. The costs necessary to transfer an applicant or another person as referred to in Article 20(1)(c), (d) or (e) to the Member State responsible shall be met by the transferring Member State.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2 2. Where the person concerned has to be transferred back to a Member State as a result of an erroneous transfer or of a transfer decision that has been overturned on appeal or review after the transfer has been carried out, the Member State which initially carried out the transfer shall be responsible for the costs of transferring the person concerned back to its territory.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 3 3. Persons to be transferred pursuant to this Regulation shall not be required to meet the costs of such transfers.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 [...]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 1. The Member State carrying out the transfer of an applicant or of another person as referred to in Article 20(1)(c) or (d) shall communicate to the Member State responsible such personal data concerning the person to be transferred as is adequate , relevant and limited to what is necessary for the sole purposes of ensuring that the competent authorities, in accordance with national law in the Member State responsible, are in a position to provide that person with adequate assistance, including the provision of immediate health care required in order to protect his or her vital interests, and to ensure continuity in the protection and rights afforded by this Regulation and by other relevant asylum legal instruments. Those data shall be communicated to the Member State responsible within a reasonable period of time before a transfer is carried out, in order to ensure that its competent authorities in accordance with national law have sufficient time to take the necessary measures.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2 2. The transferring Member State shall, in so far as such information is available to the competent authority in accordance with national law, transmit to the Member State responsible any information that is essential in order to safeguard the rights and immediate special needs of the person to be transferred, and in particular: (a) any immediate measures which the Member State responsible is required to take in order to ensure that the special needs of the person to be transferred are adequately addressed, including any immediate health care that may be required; (b) contact details of family members, relatives or any other family relations in the receiving Member State, where applicable; (c) in the case of minors, information on their education; (d) an assessment of the age of an applicant.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – point a (a) any immediate measures which the Member State responsible is required to take in order to ensure that the special needs of the person to be transferred are adequately addressed, including any immediate health care that may be required;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23 (23) A personal interview with the applicant should be organised in order to facilitate the determination of the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection unless the applicant has absconded or the information provided by the applicant is sufficient for determining the Member State responsible . As soon as the application for international protection is lodged, the applicant should be informed in particular of the application of this Regulation, of the lack of choice as to which Member State will examine his or her asylum application; of his or her obligations under this Regulation and of the consequences of not complying with themdeleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – point b (b) contact details of family members, relatives or any other family relations in the receiving Member State, where applicable;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – point c (c) in the case of minors, information on their education;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – point d (d) an assessment of the age of an applicant.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3 3. The exchange of information under this Article shall only take place between the authorities notified to the Commission in accordance with Article 47 of this Regulation using the ‘DubliNet’ electronic communication network set-up under Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003. The information exchanged shall only be used for the purposes set out in paragraph 1 of this Article and shall not be further processed.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 4 4. With a view to facilitating the exchange of information between Member States, the Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, draw up a standard form for the transfer of the data required pursuant to this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 5 5. The rules laid down in Article 46(8) shall apply to the exchange of information pursuant to this Article.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 [...]deleted
1. For the sole purpose of the provision of medical care or treatment, in particular concerning disabled persons, elderly people, pregnant women, minors and persons who have been subject to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical and sexual violence, the transferring Member State shall, in so far as it is available to the competent authority in accordance with national law, transmit to the Member State responsible information on any special needs of the person to be transferred, which in specific cases may include information on that person’s physical or mental health. That information shall be transferred in a common health certificate with the necessary documents attached. The Member State responsible shall ensure that those special needs are adequately addressed, including in particular any essential medical care that may be required. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, draw up the common health certificate. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 For the sole purpose of the provision of medical care or treatment, in particular concerning disabled persons, elderly people, pregnant women, minors and persons who have been subject to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical and sexual violence, the transferring Member State shall, in so far as it is available to the competent authority in accordance with national law, transmit to the Member State responsible information on any special needs of the person to be transferred, which in specific cases may include information on that person’s physical or mental health. That information shall be transferred in a common health certificate with the necessary documents attached. The Member State responsible shall ensure that those special needs are adequately addressed, including in particular any essential medical care that may be required.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, draw up the common health certificate. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24 (24) 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 is 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 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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2 2. The transferring Member State shall only transmit the information referred to in paragraph 1 to the Member State responsible after having obtained the explicit consent of the applicant and/or of his or her representative or when such transmission is necessary to protect public health and public security, or, if the applicant is physically or legally incapable of giving his or her consent, to protect the vital interests of the applicant or of another person. The lack of consent, including a refusal to consent, shall not constitute an obstacle to the transfer.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 3 3. The processing of personal health data referred to in paragraph 1 shall only be carried out by a health professional who is subject, under national law or rules established by national competent bodies, to the obligation of professional secrecy or by another person subject to an equivalent obligation of professional secrecy.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 4 4. The exchange of information under this Article shall only take place between the health professionals or other persons referred to in paragraph 3. The information exchanged shall only be used for the purposes set out in paragraph 1 and shall not be further processed.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 5 5. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt uniform conditions and practical arrangements for exchanging the information referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 6 6. The rules laid down in Article 46(8) shall apply to the exchange of information pursuant to this Article.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 1. The allocation mechanism referred to in this Chapter shall be applied for the benefit of a Member State, where that Member State is confronted with a disproportionate number of applications for international protection for which it is the Member State responsible under this Regulation. 2. Paragraph 1 applies where the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) indicates that the number of applications for international protection for which a Member State is responsible under the criteria in Chapter III, Articles 3(2) or (3), 18 and 19, in addition to the number of persons effectively resettled, is higher than 150% of the reference number for that Member State as determined by the key referred to in Article 35. 3. The reference number of a Member State shall be determined by applying the key referred to in Article 35 to the total number of applications as well as the total number of resettled persons that have been entered by the respective Member States responsible in the automated system during the preceding 12 months. 4. The automated system shall inform Member States, the Commission and the European Union Agency for Asylum once per week of the Member States' respective shares in applications for which they are the Member State responsible. 5. The automated system shall continuously monitor whether any of the Member States is above the threshold referred to in paragraph 2, and if so, notify the Member States and the Commission of this fact, indicating the number of applications above this threshold. 6. Upon the notification referred to in paragraph 5, the allocation mechanism shall apply.Article 34 deleted General Principle
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 1. The allocation mechanism referred to in this Chapter shall be applied for the benefit of a Member State, where that Member State is confronted with a disproportionate number of applications for international protection for which it is the Member State responsible under this Regulation.deleted
1. The allocation mechanism referred to in this Chapter shall be applied voluntarily for the benefit of a Member State, where that Member State is confronted with a disproportionate number of applications for international protection for which it is the Member State responsible under this Regulation.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2 2. Paragraph 1 applies where the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) indicates that the number of applications for international protection for which a Member State is responsible under the criteria in Chapter III, Articles 3(2) or (3), 18 and 19, in addition to the number of persons effectively resettled, is higher than 150% of the reference number for that Member State as determined by the key referred to in Article 35.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2 2. Paragraph 1 applies where the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) indicates that the number of applications for international protection for which a Member State is responsible under the criteria in Chapter III, Articles 3(2) or (3), 18 and 19, in addition to the number of persons effectively resettled, is higher than 1500% of the reference number for that Member State as determined by the key referred to in Article 35.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25 (25) The Member State which is determined as responsible under this Regulation should remain responsible for examination of each and every application of that applicant, including any subsequent application, 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. Provisions in Regulation (EU) 604/2013 which had provided for the cessation of responsibility in certain circumstances, including when deadlines for the carrying out of transfers had elapsed for a certain period of time, had created an incentive for absconding, and should therefore be removed.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3 3. The reference number of a Member State shall be determined by applying the key referred to in Article 35 to the total number of applications as well as the total number of resettled persons that have been entered by the respective Member States responsible in the automated system during the preceding 12 months.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 4 4. The automated system shall inform Member States, the Commission and the European Union Agency for Asylum once per week of the Member States' respective shares in applications for which they are the Member State responsible.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 5 5. The automated system shall continuously monitor whether any of the Member States is above the threshold referred to in paragraph 2, and if so, notify the Member States and the Commission of this fact, indicating the number of applications above this threshold.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 6 6. Upon the notification referred to in paragraph 5, the allocation mechanism shall apply.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 1. For the purpose of the corrective mechanism, the reference number for each Member State shall be determined by a key. 2. The reference key referred to in paragraph 1 shall be based on the following criteria for each Member State, according to Eurostat figures: (a) the size of the population (50 % weighting); (b) the total GDP (50% weighting); 3. The criteria referred to in paragraph 2 shall be applied by the formula as set out in Annex I. 4. The European Union Agency for Asylum shall establish the reference key and adapt the figures of the criteria for the reference key as well as the reference key referred to in paragraph 2 annually, based on Eurostat figures.Article 35 deleted Reference key
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1 1. For the purpose of the corrective mechanism, the reference number for each Member State shall be determined by a key.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 2. The reference key referred to in paragraph 1 shall be based on the following criteria for each Member State, according to Eurostat figures: a) the size of the population (50 % weighting); b) the total GDP (50% weighting);deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – point a (a) the size of the population (50 % weighting);deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – point a (a) the size of the population (520 % weighting);
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – point b (b) the total GDP (50% weighting);deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26 (26) In order to ensure the speedy determination of responsibility and allocation of applicants for international protection between Member States, the deadlines for making and replying to requests to take charge, for making take back notifications, and for carrying out transfers, as well as for making and deciding on appeals, should be streamlined and shortened to the greatest extent possible.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – point b (b) the total GDP (530% weighting);.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new) (ba) the migration burden already endured by the country (50% weighting).
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 3 3. The criteria referred to in paragraph 2 shall be applied by the formula as set out in Annex I.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 4 4. The European Union Agency for Asylum shall establish the reference key and adapt the figures of the criteria for the reference key as well as the reference key referred to in paragraph 2 annually, based on Eurostat figures.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 Application of the reference key 1. Where the threshold referred to in Article 34(2) is reached, the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) shall apply the reference key referred to in Article 35 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) and notify the Member States thereof. 2. Applicants who lodged their application in the benefitting Member State after notification of allocation referred to in Article 34(5) shall be allocated to the Member States referred to in paragraph 1, and these Member States shall determine the Member State responsible; 3. Applications declared inadmissible or examined in accelerated procedure in accordance with Article 3(3) shall not be subject to allocation. 4. On the basis of the application of the reference key pursuant to paragraph 1, the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) shall indicate the Member State of allocation and communicate this information not later than 72 hours after the registration referred to in Article 22(1) to the benefitting Member State and to the Member State of allocation, and add the Member State of allocation in the electronic file referred to in Article 23(2).Article 36 deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 1. Where the threshold referred to in Article 34(2) is reached, the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) shall apply the reference key referred to in Article 35 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) and notify the Member States thereof.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2 2. Applicants who lodged their application in the benefitting Member State after notification of allocation referred to in Article 34(5) shall be allocated to the Member States referred to in paragraph 1, and these Member States shall determine the Member State responsible.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 3 3. Applications declared inadmissible or examined in accelerated procedure in accordance with Article 3(3) shall not be subject to allocation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 4 4. On the basis of the application of the reference key pursuant to paragraph 1, the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) shall indicate the Member State of allocation and communicate this information not later than 72 hours after the registration referred to in Article 22(1) to the benefitting Member State and to the Member State of allocation, and add the Member State of allocation in the electronic file referred to in Article 23(2).deleted
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
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27 (27) The detention of applicants should be applied in accordance with the underlying principle that a person should not be held in detention for the sole reason that he or she is seeking international protection. Detention should be for as short a period as possible and subject to the principles of necessity and proportionality. In particular, the detention of applicants must be in accordance with Article 31 of the Geneva Convention. The procedures provided for under this Regulation in respect of a detained person should be applied as a matter of priority, within the shortest possible deadlines. As regards the general guarantees governing detention, as well as detention conditions, where appropriate, Member States should apply the provisions of Directive 2013/33/EU also to persons detained on the basis of this Regulationutomatic.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – title Financial sSolidarity
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1 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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1 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 AsylumIn order to ensure financial solidarity between Member States, the Commission shall establish an adjustment mechanism which applies for Member States who infringe their obligations pursuant to the relocation mechanism. To that end, the Commission shall set an amount of compensation per relocated applicant and a number of applicants that the Member State is obliged to accommodate. A fund (the "Dublin Reserve Fund") shall be established and a Member State that has failed to meet its obligations shall pay the compensation into that fund. If an infringing Member State fails to pay, the Commission shall withhold the same amount from the payments due to that Member State from other Union funds.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2 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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2 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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 3 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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 3 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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 4 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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 3 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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 4 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 31.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28 (28) Deficiencies in, or the collapse of, asylum systems, often aggravated or contributed to by particular pressures on them, can jeopardise the smooth functioning of the system put in place under this Regulation, which could lead to a risk of a violation of the rights of applicants as set out in the Union asylum acquis and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, other international human rights and refugee rights.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 4 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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 5 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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 5 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.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 3 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.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 Obligations of the benefitting Member The benefitting Member State shall: (a) take a decision at the latest within one week from the communication referred to in Article 36(4) to transfer the applicant to the Member State of allocation, unless the benefitting Member State can accept within the same time limit responsibility for examining the application pursuant to the criteria set out in Articles 10 to 13 and Article 18; (b) notify without delay the applicant of the decision to transfer him or her to the Member State of allocation; (c) transfer the applicant to the Member State of allocation, at the latest within four weeks from the final transfer decision.Article 38 deleted State
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 1 The benefitting Member State shall:deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph a (a) take a decision at the latest within one week from the communication referred to in Article 36(4) to transfer the applicant to the Member State of allocation, unless the benefitting Member State can accept within the same time limit responsibility for examining the application pursuant to the criteria set out in Articles 10 to 13 and Article 18;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph b (b) notify without delay the applicant of the decision to transfer him or her to the Member State of allocation;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph c (c) transfer the applicant to the Member State of allocation, at the latest within four weeks from the final transfer decision.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 The Member State of allocation shall: (a) confirm to the benefitting Member State the receipt of the allocation communication and indicate the competent authority to which the applicant shall report following his or her transfer; (b) communicate to the benefitting Member State the arrival of the applicant or the fact that he or she did not appear within the set time limit; (c) receive the applicant and carry out the personal interview pursuant to Article 7, where applicable; (d) examine his or her application for international protection as Member State responsible, unless, according to the criteria set out in Articles 10 to 13 and 16 to 18, a different Member State is responsible for examining the application; (e) where, according to the criteria set out in Articles 10 to 13 and 16 to 18 a different Member State is responsible for examining the application, the Member State of allocation shall request that other Member State to take charge of the applicant; (f) where applicable, communicate to the Member State responsible the transfer to that Member State; (g) where applicable, transfer the applicant to the Member State responsible; (h) where applicable, enter in the electronic file referred to in Article 23(2) that it will examine the application for international protection as Member State responsible.Article 39 deleted Obligations of the Member State of allocation
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29 (29) Proper registration of all asylum applications in the EU under a unique application number should help detect multiple applications and prevent irregular secondary movements and asylum shopping. An automated system should be established for the purpose of facilitating the application of this Regulation. It should enable registration of asylum applications lodged in the EU, effective monitoring of the share of applications of each Member State and a correct application of the corrective allocation mechanism.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 The Member State of allocation shall: (a) confirm to the benefitting Member State the receipt of the allocation communication and indicate the competent authority to which the applicant shall report following his or her transfer; (b) communicate to the benefitting Member State the arrival of the applicant or the fact that he or she did not appear within the set time limit; (c) receive the applicant and carry out the personal interview pursuant to Article 7, where applicable; (d) examine his or her application for international protection as Member State responsible, unless, according to the criteria set out in Articles 10 to 13 and 16 to 18, a different Member State is responsible for examining the application; (e) where, according to the criteria set out in Articles 10 to 13 and 16 to 18 a different Member State is responsible for examining the application, the Member State of allocation shall request that other Member State to take charge of the applicant; (f) where applicable, communicate to the Member State responsible the transfer to that Member State; (g) where applicable, transfer the applicant to the Member State responsible; (h) where applicable, enter in the electronic file referred to in Article 23(2) that it will examine the application for international protection as Member State responsible.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) confirm to the benefitting Member State the receipt of the allocation communication and indicate the competent authority to which the applicant shall report following his or her transfer;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) communicate to the benefitting Member State the arrival of the applicant or the fact that he or she did not appear within the set time limit;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) receive the applicant and carry out the personal interview pursuant to Article 7, where applicable;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point d (d) examine his or her application for international protection as Member State responsible, unless, according to the criteria set out in Articles 10 to 13 and 16 to 18, a different Member State is responsible for examining the application;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point e (e) where, according to the criteria set out in Articles 10 to 13 and 16 to 18 a different Member State is responsible for examining the application, the Member State of allocation shall request that other Member State to take charge of the applicant;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point f (f) where applicable, communicate to the Member State responsible the transfer to that Member State;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point g (g) where applicable, transfer the applicant to the Member State responsible;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point h (h) where applicable, enter in the electronic file referred to in Article 23(2) that it will examine the application for international protection as Member State responsible.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 Exchange of relevant information for 1. Where a transfer decision according to point (a) of Article 38 is taken, the benefitting Member State shall transmit, at the same time and for the sole purpose of verifying whether the applicant may for serious reasons be considered a danger to the national security or public order, the fingerprint data of the applicant taken pursuant to Regulation (Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation 603/2013/EU) to the Member State of allocation. 2. Where, following a security verification, information on an applicant reveals that he or she is for serious reasons considered to be a danger to the national security or public order, information on the nature of the alert shall be shared with the law enforcement authorities in the benefitting Member State and shall not be communicated via the electronic communication channels referred to in Article 47(4). The Member State of allocation shall inform the benefitting Member State of the existence of such alert, specifying the law enforcement authorities in the Member State of application that have been fully informed, and record the existence of the alert in the automated system pursuant to point d of Article 23(2), within one week of receipt of the fingerprints. 3. Where the outcome of the security verification confirms that the applicant may for serious reasons be considered a danger to the national security or public order, the benefitting Member State of application shall be the Member State responsible and shall examine the application in accelerated procedure pursuant to Article 31(8) of Directive 2013/32/EU. 4. The information exchanged shall only be used for the purposes set out in paragraph 1 and shall not be further processed.Article 40 deleted security verification
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 (30) The European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice established by Regulation (EU) No 1077/201121 should be responsible for the preparation, development and the operational management of the central system and the communication infrastructure between the central system and the national infrastructures. _________________ 21Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011 of the European Parliament and of the council of 25 October 2011 establishing a European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice (OJ L 286, 1.11.2011, p. 1).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 1. Where a transfer decision according to point (a) of Article 38 is taken, the benefitting Member State shall transmit, at the same time and for the sole purpose of verifying whether the applicant may for serious reasons be considered a danger to the national security or public order, the fingerprint data of the applicant taken pursuant to Regulation (Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation 603/2013/EU) to the Member State of allocation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2 2. Where, following a security verification, information on an applicant reveals that he or she is for serious reasons considered to be a danger to the national security or public order, information on the nature of the alert shall be shared with the law enforcement authorities in the benefitting Member State and shall not be communicated via the electronic communication channels referred to in Article 47(4). The Member State of allocation shall inform the benefitting Member State of the existence of such alert, specifying the law enforcement authorities in the Member State of application that have been fully informed, and record the existence of the alert in the automated system pursuant to point d of Article 23(2), within one week of receipt of the fingerprints.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 Where, following a security verification, information on an applicant reveals that he or she is for serious reasons considered to be a danger to the national security or public order, information on the nature of the alert shall be shared with the law enforcement authorities in the benefitting Member State and shall not be communicated via the electronic communication channels referred to in Article 47(4).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 The Member State of allocation shall inform the benefitting Member State of the existence of such alert, specifying the law enforcement authorities in the Member State of application that have been fully informed, and record the existence of the alert in the automated system pursuant to point d of Article 23(2), within one week of receipt of the fingerprints.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 3 3. Where the outcome of the security verification confirms that the applicant may for serious reasons be considered a danger to the national security or public order, the benefitting Member State of application shall be the Member State responsible and shall examine the application in accelerated procedure pursuant to Article 31(8) of Directive 2013/32/EU.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 4 4. The information exchanged shall only be used for the purposes set out in paragraph 1 and shall not be further processdeleted.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 1. Chapter V and Sections II to VII of Chapter VI shall apply mutatis mutandis. 2. Family members to whom the procedure for allocation applies shall be allocated to the same Member State.Article 41 deleted Procedure for allocation
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1 1. Chapter V and Sections II to VII of Chapter VI shall apply mutatis mutandis.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 2 2. Family members to whom the procedure for allocation applies shall be allocated to the same Member State.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 Costs of allocation transfers For the costs to transfer an applicant to the Member State of allocation, the benefitting Member State shall be refunded by a lump sum of EUR 500 for each person transferred pursuant to Article 38(c). This financial support shall be implemented by applying the procedures laid down in Article 18 of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014.Article 42 deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31 (31) In accordance with Article 80 of the Treaty, Union acts should, whenever necessary, contain appropriate measures to give effect to the principle of solidarity. A corrective allocation mechanism should be established in order to ensure a fair sharing of responsibility between Member States and a swift access of applicants to procedures for granting international protection in situations when a Member State is confronted with a disproportionate number of applications for international protection for which it is responsible under this Regulationthus make for targeted funding by the EU.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1 For the costs to transfer an applicant to the Member State of allocation, the benefitting Member State shall be refunded by a lump sum of EUR 500 for each person transferred pursuant to Article 38(c). This financial support shall be implemented by applying the procedures laid down in Article 18 of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014.deleted
The automated system shall notify the Member States and the Commission as soon as the number of applications in the benefitting Member State for which it is the Member State responsible under this Regulation is below 150 % of its share pursuant to Article 35(1). Upon the notification referred to in paragraph 2, the application of the corrective allocation shall cease for that Member State.Article 43 deleted Cessation of corrective allocation
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 The automated system shall notify the Member States and the Commission as soon as the number of applications in the benefitting Member State for which it is the Member State responsible under this Regulation is below 150 % of its share pursuant to Article 35(1).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 The automated system shall notify the Member States and the Commission as soon as the number of applications in the benefitting Member State for which it is the Member State responsible under this Regulation is below 1580% of its share pursuant to Article 35(1).
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 2 Upon the notification referred to in paragraph 2, the application of the corrective allocation shall cease for that Member State.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 Automated system for registration, monitoring and the allocation mechanism 1. For the purposes of the registration and monitoring the share of applications for international protection pursuant to Article 22 and of the application of the allocation mechanism set out in Chapter VII an automated system shall be established. 2. The automated system shall consist of the central system and the communication infrastructure between the central system and the national infrastructures. 3. The European agency for the operational management of large scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice established by Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011 shall be responsible for the preparation, development and the operational management of the central system and the communication infrastructure between the central system and the national infrastructures. 4. The national infrastructures shall be developed and managed by the Member States.rticle 44 deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1 1. For the purposes of the registration and monitoring the share of applications for international protection pursuant to Article 22 and of the application of the allocation mechanism set out in Chapter VII an automated system shall be established.deleted
2. The automated system shall consist of the central system and the communication infrastructure between the central system and the national infrastructures.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 3 3. The European agency for the operational management of large scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice established by Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011 shall be responsible for the preparation, development and the operational management of the central system and the communication infrastructure between the central system and the national infrastructures.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 4 4. The national infrastructures shall be developed and managed by the Member States.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31 (31) In accordance with Article 80 of the Treaty, Union acts should, whenever necessary, contain appropriate measures to give effect to the principle of solidarity. A voluntary corrective allocation mechanism should be established in order to ensure a fair sharing of responsibility between Member States and a swift access of applicants to procedures for granting international protection in situations when a Member State is confronted with a disproportionate number of applications for international protection for which it is responsible under this Regulation.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 1. The competent asylum authorities of the Member States referred to in Article 47 shall have access to the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) for entering the information referred to in Article 20(7), Article 22(1), (4) and (5), Article 37(1) and point (h) of Article 39. 2. The European Union Agency for Asylum shall have access to the automated system for entering and adapting the reference key pursuant to Article 35(4) and for entering the information referred to in Article 22(3). 3. The information referred to in Article 23(2), Article 36(4) and point h of Article 39 shall be accessible for consultation only by the competent asylum authorities of the Member States referred to in Article 47 for the purposes of this Regulation and of Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013]. 4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt uniform conditions and practical arrangements for entering and consulting the information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure laid down in Article 56(2).Article 45 deleted Access to the automated system
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 1. The competent asylum authorities of the Member States referred to in Article 47 shall have access to the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) for entering the information referred to in Article 20(7), Article 22(1), (4) and (5), Article 37(1) and point (h) of Article 39.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 2 2. The European Union Agency for Asylum shall have access to the automated system for entering and adapting the reference key pursuant to Article 35(4) and for entering the information referred to in Article 22(3).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 3 3. The information referred to in Article 23(2), Article 36(4) and point h of Article 39 shall be accessible for consultation only by the competent asylum authorities of the Member States referred to in Article 47 for the purposes of this Regulation and of Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013].deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 4 4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt uniform conditions and practical arrangements for entering and consulting the information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure laid down in Article 56(2).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 [...]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1 1. Each Member State shall communicate to any Member State that so requests such personal data concerning the applicant as is adequate , relevant and limited to what is necessary for: (a) determining the Member State responsible; (b) examining the application for international protection; (c) implementing any obligation arising under this Regulation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) determining the Member State responsible;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) examining the application for international protection;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) implementing any obligation arising under this Regulation.deleted
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. 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.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 2. The information referred to in paragraph 1 may only cover: (a) personal details of the applicant, and, where appropriate, his or her family members, relatives or any other family relations (full name and where appropriate, former name; nicknames or pseudonyms; nationality, present and former; date and place of birth); (b) identity and travel papers (references, validity, date of issue, issuing authority, place of issue, etc.); (c) other information necessary for establishing the identity of the applicant, including fingerprints taken of the applicant by the Member State, in particular for the purposes of Article 40 in accordance with Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013]; (d) places of residence and routes travelled; (e) residence documents or visas issued by a Member State; (f) the place where the application was lodged; (g) the date on which any previous application for international protection was lodged, the date on which the present application was lodged, the stage reached in the proceedings and the decision taken, if any.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point a (a) personal details of the applicant, and, where appropriate, his or her family members, relatives or any other family relations (full name and where appropriate, former name; nicknames or pseudonyms; nationality, present and former; date and place of birth);deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point b (b) identity and travel papers (references, validity, date of issue, issuing authority, place of issue, etc.);deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point c (c) other information necessary for establishing the identity of the applicant, including fingerprints taken of the applicant by the Member State, in particular for the purposes of Article 40 in accordance with Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013];deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point d (d) places of residence and routes travelldeleted;
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point e (e) residence documents or visas issued by a Member State;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point f (f) the place where the application was lodged;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point g (g) the date on which any previous application for international protection was lodged, the date on which the present application was lodged, the stage reached in the proceedings and the decision taken, if any.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 3 3. Furthermore, provided it is necessary for the examination of the application for international protection, the Member State responsible may request another Member State to let it know on what grounds the applicant bases his or her application and, where applicable, the grounds for any decisions taken concerning the applicant. The other Member State may refuse to respond to the request submitted to it, if the communication of such information is likely to harm its essential interests or the protection of the liberties and fundamental rights of the person concerned or of others. In any event, communication of the information requested shall be subject to the written approval of the applicant for international protection, obtained by the requesting Member State. In that case, the applicant must know for what specific information he or she is giving his or her approval.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 4 4. Any request for information shall only be sent in the context of an individual application for international protection. It shall set out the grounds on which it is based and, where its purpose is to check whether there is a criterion that is likely to entail the responsibility of the requested Member State, shall state on what evidence, including relevant information from reliable sources on the ways and means by which applicants enter the territories of the Member States, or on what specific and verifiable part of the applicant’s statements it is based. It is understood that such relevant information from reliable sources is not in itself sufficient to determine the responsibility and the competence of a Member State under this Regulation, but it may contribute to the evaluation of other indications relating to an individual applicant.deleted
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 1500% of the figure identified in the reference key. 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.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 5 5. The requested Member State shall be obliged to reply within two weeks. Any delays in the reply shall be duly justified. Non-compliance with the two week time limit shall not relieve the requested Member State of the obligation to reply. If the research carried out by the requested Member State which did not respect the maximum time limit withholds information which shows that it is responsible, the time limits provided for in Article 24 for submitting a request to take charge shall be extended by a period of time which shall be equivalent to the delay in the reply by the requested Member State.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 6 6. The exchange of information shall be effected at the request of a Member State and may only take place between authorities whose designation by each Member State has been communicated to the Commission in accordance with Article 47(1).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 7 7. The information exchanged may only be used for the purposes set out in paragraph 1. In each Member State such information may, depending on its type and the powers of the recipient authority, only be communicated to the authorities and courts and tribunals entrusted with: (a) determining the Member State responsible; (b) examining the application for international protection; (c) implementing any obligation arising under this Regulation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 7 – point a (a) determining the Member State responsible;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 7 – point b (b) examining the application for international protection;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 7 – point c (c) implementing any obligation arising under this Regulation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 8 8. In each Member State concerned, a record shall be kept, in the individual file for the person concerned and/or in a register, of the transmission and receipt of information exchanged.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 Competent authorities and resources 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 . 2. The Commission shall publish a 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. 3. The authorities referred to in paragraph 1 shall receive the necessary training with respect to the application of this Regulation. 4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish secure electronic transmission channels between the authorities referred to in paragraph 1 and between those authorities and the European Union Agency for Asylum for transmitting information, fingerprint data taken in accordance with Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation 603/2013/EU], requests, notifications, replies and all written correspondence and for ensuring that senders automatically receive an electronic proof of delivery. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2).Article 47 deleted
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 .deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 2 2. The Commission shall publish a 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.deleted
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. 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.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 3 3. The authorities referred to in paragraph 1 shall receive the necessary training with respect to the application of this Regulation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 4 4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish secure electronic transmission channels between the authorities referred to in paragraph 1 and between those authorities and the European Union Agency for Asylum for transmitting information, fingerprint data taken in accordance with Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation 603/2013/EU], requests, notifications, replies and all written correspondence and for ensuring that senders automatically receive an electronic proof of delivery. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 Administrative arrangements 1. Member States may, on a bilateral basis, establish administrative arrangements between themselves concerning the practical details of the implementation of this Regulation, in order to facilitate its application and increase its effectiveness. Such arrangements may relate to: (a) exchanges of liaison officers; (b) simplification of the procedures and shortening of the time limits relating to transmission and the examination of requests to take charge of or take back applicants. 2. Member States may also maintain the administrative arrangements concluded under Regulation (EU) No 604/2013. To the extent that such arrangements are not compatible with this Regulation, the Member States concerned shall amend the arrangements in such a way as to eliminate any incompatibilities observrticle 48 deleted.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1 1. Member States may, on a bilateral basis, establish administrative arrangements between themselves concerning the practical details of the implementation of this Regulation, in order to facilitate its application and increase its effectiveness. Such arrangements may relate to: (a) exchanges of liaison officers; (b) simplification of the procedures and shortening of the time limits relating to transmission and the examination of requests to take charge of or take back applicants.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) exchanges of liaison officers;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) simplification of the procedures and shortening of the time limits relating to transmission and the examination of requests to take charge of or take back applicants.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 2 2. Member States may also maintain the administrative arrangements concluded under Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 and Regulation (EU) No 604/2013. To the extent that such arrangements are not compatible with this Regulation, the Member States concerned shall amend the arrangements in such a way as to eliminate any incompatibilities observed.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 The European Union Agency for Asylum shall set up and facilitate the activities of a network of the competent authorities referred to in Article 47 (1), with a view to enhancing practical cooperation and information sharing on all matters rArticle 49 delaeted to the application of this Regulation, including the development of practical tools and guidance.Network of Dublin units
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 1 The European Union Agency for Asylum shall set up and facilitate the activities of a network of the competent authorities referred to in Article 47(1), with a view to enhancing practical cooperation and information sharing on all matters related to the application of this Regulation, including the development of practical tools and guidance.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 2 newdeleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33 (33) When the allocation mechanism applies, the applicants who lodged their applications in the benefitting Member State should be allocated to Member States which are below their share of applications on the basis of the reference key as applied to those Member States. Appropriate rules should be provided for in cases where an applicant may for serious reasons be considered a danger to national security or public order, especially rules as regards the exchange of information between competent asylum authorities of Member States. After the transfer, the Member State of allocation should determine the Member State responsible, and should become responsible for examining the application, unless the overriding responsible criteria, related in particular to the presence of family members, determine that a different Member State should be responsible.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 Data security and data protection 1. Member States shall implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure the security of personal data processed under this Regulation and in particular to prevent unlawful or unauthorised access or disclosure, alteration or loss of personal data processed. 2. The competent supervisory authority or authorities of each Member State shall monitor the lawfulness of the processing of personal data by the authorities referred to in Article 47 of the Member State in question, including of the transmission to and from the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) and to the authorities competent for carrying out checks referred to in Article 40. 3. The processing of personal data by the European Union Agency for Asylum shall be subject to the monitoring of the European Data Protection Supervisor in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and the provisions on data protection laid down in [Proposal for a Regulation on the European Union Agency for Asylum and repealing Regulation (EU) No 439/2010].Article 50 deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure the security of personal data processed under this Regulation and in particular to prevent unlawful or unauthorised access or disclosure, alteration or loss of personal data processed.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 2 2. The competent supervisory authority or authorities of each Member State shall monitor the lawfulness of the processing of personal data by the authorities referred to in Article 47 of the Member State in question, including of the transmission to and from the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) and to the authorities competent for carrying out checks referred to in Article 40.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 3 3. The processing of personal data by the European Union Agency for Asylum shall be subject to the monitoring of the European Data Protection Supervisor in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and the provisions on data protection laid down in [Proposal for a Regulation on the European Union Agency for Asylum and repealing Regulation (EU) No 439/2010].deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 Member States shall ensure that the authorities referred to in Article 47 are bound by the confidentiality rules provided for in national law, in relation to any information they obtain in the course of their work.Article 51 deleted Confidentiality
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that the authorities referred to in Article 47 are bound by the confidentiality rules provided for in national law, in relation to any information they obtain in the course of their work.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 Member States shall lay down the rules on penalties, including administrative and/or criminal penalties in accordance with national law, applicable to infringements of this Regulation and shall take all measures necessary to ensure that they are implemented. The penalties provided for must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.Article 52 deleted Penalties
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 1 Member States shall lay down the rules on penalties, including administrative and/or criminal penalties in accordance with national law, applicable to infringements of this Regulation and shall take all measures necessary to ensure that they are implemented. The penalties provided for must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 Where an application has been lodged after [the first day following the entry into force of this Regulation] , the events that are likely to entail the responsibility of a Member State under this Regulation shall be taken into consideration, even if they precede that date. By way of derogation from Article 34(2), during the first three months after entry into force of this Regulation, the corrective allocation mechanism shall not be triggered. By way of derogation from Article 34(3), after the expiry of the three month period following the entry into force of this Regulation and until the expiry of one year following the entry into force of this Regulation, the reference period shall be the period which has elapsed since the entry into force of this Regulation.Article 53 deleted Transitional measures
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 1 Where an application has been lodged after [the first day following the entry into force of this Regulation] , the events that are likely to entail the responsibility of a Member State under this Regulation shall be taken into consideration, even if they precede that date.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34 (34) Under the allocation mechanism, the costs of transfer of an applicant to the Member State of allocation should be reimbursed from the EU budget.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 2 By way of derogation from Article 34(2), during the first three months after entry into force of this Regulation, the corrective allocation mechanism shall not be triggered. By way of derogation from Article 34(3), after the expiry of the three month period following the entry into force of this Regulation and until the expiry of one year following the entry into force of this Regulation, the reference period shall be the period which has elapsed since the entry into force of this Regulation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 Any period of time prescribed in this Regulation shall be calculated as follows: (a) where a period expressed in days, weeks or months is to be calculated from the moment at which an event occurs or an action takes place, the day during which that event occurs or that action takes place shall not be counted as falling within the period in question; (b) a period expressed in weeks or months shall end with the expiry of whichever day in the last week or month is the same day of the week or falls on the same date as the day during which the event or action from which the period is to be calculated occurred or took place. If, in a period expressed in months, the day on which it should expire does not occur in the last month, the period shall end with the expiry of the last day of that month; (c) time limits shall include Saturdays, Sundays and official holidays in any of the Member States concerned.Article 54 deleted Calculation of time limits
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 Any period of time prescribed in this Regulation shall be calculated as follows: (a) where a period expressed in days, weeks or months is to be calculated from the moment at which an event occurs or an action takes place, the day during which that event occurs or that action takes place shall not be counted as falling within the period in question; (b) a period expressed in weeks or months shall end with the expiry of whichever day in the last week or month is the same day of the week or falls on the same date as the day during which the event or action from which the period is to be calculated occurred or took place. If, in a period expressed in months, the day on which it should expire does not occur in the last month, the period shall end with the expiry of the last day of that month; (c) time limits shall include Saturdays, Sundays and official holidays in any of the Member States concerned.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) where a period expressed in days, weeks or months is to be calculated from the moment at which an event occurs or an action takes place, the day during which that event occurs or that action takes place shall not be counted as falling within the period in question;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) a period expressed in weeks or months shall end with the expiry of whichever day in the last week or month is the same day of the week or falls on the same date as the day during which the event or action from which the period is to be calculated occurred or took place. If, in a period expressed in months, the day on which it should expire does not occur in the last month, the period shall end with the expiry of the last day of that month;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) time limits shall include Saturdays, Sundays and official holidays in any of the Member States concerndeleted.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 As far as the French Republic is concerned, this Regulation shall apply only to its European territory.rticle 55 deleted Territorial scope
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 1 As far as the French Republic is concerned, this Regulation shall apply only to its European territory.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 1. The Commission shall be assisted by a committee. That committee shall be a committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. 2. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply. Where the committee delivers no opinion, the Commission shall not adopt the draft implementing act and the third subparagraph of Article 5(4) of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply.Article 56 deleted Comitology
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 1 1. The Commission shall be assisted by a committee. That committee shall be a committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34 (34) Under the allocation mechanism, the costs of transfer of an applicant to the Member State of allocation should be reimbursed from the EU budget as an EUR 500 lump sum per person transferred.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 2 2. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply. Where the committee delivers no opinion, the Commission shall not adopt the draft implementing act and the third subparagraph of Article 5(4) of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 Where the committee delivers no opinion, the Commission shall not adopt the draft implementing act and the third subparagraph of Article 5(4) of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 1. The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the conditions laid down in this Article. 2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 10(6) and 18(3) shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of 5 years from the date of entry into force of this Regulation. The Commission shall produce a report on the delegation of power within nine months of the five-year period coming to an end. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period. 3. The delegation of power referred to in Articles 10(6) and 18(3) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force. 4. Before adopting a delegated act, the Commission shall consult experts designated by each Member State in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016. 5. As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council. 6 A delegated act adopted pursuant to Articles 10(6) and 18(3) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of two months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and to the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.Article 57 deleted Exercise of the delegation
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 1 1. The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the conditions laid down in this Article.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 2 2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 10(6) and 18(3) shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of 5 years from the date of entry into force of this Regulation. The Commission shall produce a report on the delegation of power within nine months of the five-year period coming to an end. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 3 3. The delegation of power referred to in Articles 10(6) and 18(3) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 4 4. Before adopting a delegated act, the Commission shall consult experts designated by each Member State in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 5 5. As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 6 6 A delegated act adopted pursuant to Articles 10(6) and 18(3) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of two months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and to the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
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
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 Review, monitoring and evaluation By [18 months after entry into force] and from then on annually, the Commission shall review the functioning of the corrective allocation mechanism set out in Chapter VII of this Regulation and in particular the thresholds set out in Article 34(2) and Article 43 thereof. By [three years after entry into force] , the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the application of this Regulation and, where appropriate, shall propose the necessary amendments. Member States shall forward to the Commission all information appropriate for the preparation of that report, at the latest six months before that time limit expires. After having submitted that report, the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the application of this Regulation at the same time as it submits reports on the implementation of the Eurodac system provided for by Article 42 of Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013].Article 58 deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 1 By [18 months after entry into force] and from then on annually, the Commission shall review the functioning of the corrective allocation mechanism set out in Chapter VII of this Regulation and in particular the thresholds set out in Article 34(2) and Article 43 thereof.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 1 By [182 months after entry into force] and from then on annuallyevery six months, the Commission shall review the functioning of the corrective allocation mechanism set out in Chapter VII of this Regulation and in particular the thresholds set out in Article 34(2) and Article 43 thereof.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 2 By [three years after entry into force], the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the application of this Regulation and, where appropriate, shall propose the necessary amendments. Member States shall forward to the Commission all information appropriate for the preparation of that report, at the latest six months before that time limit expires.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 2 By [three year18 months after entry into force], the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the application of this Regulation and, where appropriate, shall propose the necessary amendments. Member States shall forward to the Commission all information appropriate for the preparation of that report, at the latest six months before that time limit expires.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 3 After having submitted that report, the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the application of this Regulation at the same time as it submits reports on the implementation of the Eurodac system provided for by Article 42 of Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013].deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 In accordance with Article 4(4) of Regulation (EC) No 862/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council26, Member States shall communicate to the Commission (Eurostat), statistics concerning the application of this Regulation and of Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003. 2. The European Union Agency for Asylum shall publish at quarterly intervals the information transmitted pursuant to Article 34(4). _________________ 26Regulation (EU) No 862/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 on Community statistics on migration and international protection (OJ L 199, 31.7.2007, p. 23).Article 59 deleted Statistics
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 1 In accordance with Article 4(4) of Regulation (EC) No 862/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council26 , Member States shall communicate to the Commission (Eurostat), statistics concerning the application of this Regulation and of Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003. _________________ 26Regulation (EU) No 862/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 on Community statistics on migration and international protection (OJ L 199, 31.7.2007, p. 23).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 2 2. The European Union Agency for Asylum shall publish at quarterly intervals the information transmitted pursuant to Article 34(4).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 The European Union Agency for Asylum shall publish at quarterly intervals the information transmitted pursuant to Article 34(4).deleted
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.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 newdeleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 is repealed for the Member States bound by this Regulation as concerns their obligations in their relations between themselves. References to the repealed Regulation shall be construed as references to this Regulation and shall be read in accordance with the correlation table in Annex II.Article 60 deleted Repeal
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 1 Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 is repealed for the Member States bound by this Regulation as concerns their obligations in their relations between themselves.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 2 References to the repealed Regulation shall be construed as references to this Regulation and shall be read in accordance with the correlation table in Annex II.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 Entry into force and applicability This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. It shall apply to applications for international protection lodged as from [ the first day following its entry into force ] . The Member State responsible for the examination of an application for international protection submitted before that date shall be determined in accordance with the criteria set out in Regulation 604/2013272829. THIS PARAGRAPH IS MISSING. THANK YOU FOR USING ANOTHER LANGUAGE.30 This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in the Member States in accordance with the Treaties. _________________ 27 THIS FOOTNOTE IS MISSING. THANK YOU FOR USING ANOTHER LANGUAGE. 28 THIS FOOTNOTE IS MISSING. THANK YOU FOR USING ANOTHER LANGUAGE. 29 THIS FOOTNOTE IS MISSING. THANK YOU FOR USING ANOTHER LANGUAGE. 30 THIS FOOTNOTE IS MISSING. THANK YOU FOR USING ANOTHER LANGUAGE.Article 61 deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 1 This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 2 It shall apply to applications for international protection lodged as from [ the first day following its entry into force ] . The Member State responsible for the examination of an application for international protection submitted before that date shall be determined in accordance with the criteria set out in Regulation 604/201327 28 29. _________________ 27 THIS FOOTNOTE IS MISSING. THANK YOU FOR USING ANOTHER LANGUAGE. 28 THIS FOOTNOTE IS MISSING. THANK YOU FOR USING ANOTHER LANGUAGE. 29 THIS FOOTNOTE IS MISSING. THANK YOU FOR USING ANOTHER LANGUAGE.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 4 This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in the Member States in accordance with the Treaties.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I Formula for the reference key pursuant to Article 35 of the Regulation: Population effectMS31 GDP effectMS32 ShareMS = 50% Population effectMS + 50% GDP effectMS _________________ 31For three Member States, participation depends on the exercise of rights as set out in the relevant Protocols and other instruments. 32For three Member States, participation depends on the exercise of rights as set out in the relevant Protocols and other instruments.deleted
Formula for the reference key pursuant to Article 35 of the Regulation:deleted
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 informatThe return of third-country nationals who do not have the right to stay in the Union ins 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 principal aim of the comprehensive efforts being made to address migration and, in particular, to reduce and deter irregular migration. It is vital to increase the effectiveness of the Union system for the return of illegally staying third-countribution of EUR 250,000 per applicant not accepted to the Member State that was determined as responsible for examiny nationals in order to maintain public trust ing those applications. The Commission should lay down the practical modalities for the implementation of the solidarity contribution mechanisme Union migration and asylum system, and these efforts should go hand in han 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 mechanismd with the efforts to safeguard those in need of protection.
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – paragraph 1 Population effectMS31 _________________ 31For three Member States, participation depends on the exercise of rights as set out in the relevant Protocols and other instruments.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – paragraph 2 GDP effectMS32 _________________ 32For three Member States, participation depends on the exercise of rights as set out in the relevant Protocols and other instruments.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – subheading 2 ShareMS = 50% Population effectMS + 50% GDP effectMSdeleted
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II [...]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – subheading 1 CORRELATION TABLEdeleted
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.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36 (36) In accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 1560/200322 , transfers to the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection may be carried out on a voluntary basis, by supervised departure or under escort. Member States should promote voluntary transfers by providing adequate information to the applicant and should ensure that supervised or escorted transfers are undertaken in a humane manner, in full compliance with fundamental rights and respect for human dignity, as well as the best interests of the child and taking utmost account of developments in the relevant case law, in particular as regards transfers on humanitarian grounds. _________________ 22 OJ L 222, 5.9.2003, p. 3.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36 (36) In accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 1560/200322 , transfers to the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection may be carried out on a voluntary basis, by supervised departure or under escort. Member States should promote voluntary transfers by providing adequate information to the applicant and should ensure that supervised or escorted transfers are undertaken in a humane manner, in full compliance with fundamental rights and respect for human dignity, as well as the best interests of the child and taking utmost account of developments in the relevant case law, in particular as rThe return of third-country nationals who do not have the right to stay in the Union is the principal aim of the comprehensive efforts being made to address migration and, in particular, to reduce and deter irregular migration. It is vital to increase the effectiveness of the Union system for the return of illegally staying third-country nationals in order to maintain public trust in the Union migration and asylum system, and these efforts should go hand in hand with the efforts to safeguards transfers on humanitarian grounds. _________________ 22hose in need of protection. OJ L 222, 5.9.2003, p. 3.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37 (37) The progressive creation of an area without internal frontiers in which free movement of persons is guaranteed in accordance with the TFEU and the establishment of Union policies regarding the conditions of entry and stay of third- country nationals, including common efforts towards the management of external borders, makes it necessary to strike a balance between responsibility criteria in a spirit of solidarityhas proved to be dangerous for peoples, given that today it represents a formidable aid in carrying out acts of terrorism.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38 (38) The [General Data Protection Regulation (EU) .../2016] applies to the processing of personal data by the Member States under this Regulation from the date set out in that Regulation; until this date Directive 95/46/EC applies. Member States should implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure and be able to demonstrate that processing is performed in accordance with that Regulation and the provisions specifying its requirements in this Regulation. In particular those measures should ensure the security of personal data processed under this Regulation and in particular to prevent unlawful or unauthorised access or disclosure, alteration or loss of personal data processed. The competent supervisory authority or authorities of each Member State should monitor the lawfulness of the processing of personal data by the authorities concerned, including of the transmission to and from the automated system and to the authorities competent for carrying out security checks.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38 (38) The [General Data Protection Regulation (EU) .../2016] applies to the processing of personal data by the Member States under this Regulation from the date set out in that Regulation; until this date Directive 95/46/EC applies. Member States should implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure and be able to demonstrate that processing is performed in accordance with that Regulation and the provisions specifying its requirements in this Regulation. In particular those measures should ensure the security of personal data processed under this Regulation and in particular to prevent unlawful or unauthorised access or disclosure, alteration or loss of personal data processed. The competent supervisory authority or authorities of each Member State should monitor the lawfulness of the processing of personal data by the authorities concerned, including of the transmission to and from the automated system and to the authorities competent for carrying out security checksreturn of third-country nationals who do not have the right to stay in the Union is the principal aim of the comprehensive efforts being made to address migration and, in particular, to reduce and deter irregular migration. It is vital to increase the effectiveness of the Union system for the return of illegally staying third-country nationals in order to maintain public trust in the Union migration and asylum system, and these efforts should go hand in hand with the efforts to safeguard those in need of protection.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39 (39) The processing of personal data by the European Union Agency for Asylum should be subject to the monitoring of the European Data Protection Supervisor in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and the provisions on data protection laid down in [Proposal for a Regulation on the European Union Agency for Asylum and repealing Regulation (EU) No 439/2010].deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39 (39) The processing of personal data by the European Union Agency for Asylum should be subject to the monitoring of the European Data Protection Supervisor in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and the provisions on data protection laid down in [Proposal for a Regulation on the European Union Agency for Asylum and repealing Regulation (EU) No 439/2010]return of third-country nationals who do not have the right to stay in the Union is the principal aim of the comprehensive efforts being made to address migration and, in particular, to reduce and deter irregular migration. It is vital to increase the effectiveness of the Union system for the return of illegally staying third-country nationals in order to maintain public trust in the Union migration and asylum system, and these efforts should go hand in hand with the efforts to safeguard those in need of protection.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40 (40) The application of this Regulation can be facilitated, and its effectiveness increased, by bilateral arrangements between Member States for improving communication between competent departments, reducing time limits for procedures or simplifying the processing of requests to take charge or take back, or establishing procedures for the performance of transfers.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40 (40) The application of this Regulation can be facilitated, and its effectiveness increased, byInstead of a pointless Regulation, bilateral arrangements between Member States for improving communication between competent departments, reducing time limits for procedures or simplifying the processing of requests to take charge or take back, or establishing procedures for the performance of transfers should be encouraged.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41 (41) Continuity between the system for determining the Member State responsible established by Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 and the system established by this Regulation should be ensured. Similarly, consistency should be ensured between this Regulation and Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council] .deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42 (42) A network of competent Member State authorities should be set up and facilitated by the European Union Agency for Asylum to enhance practical cooperation and information sharing on all matters related to the application of this Regulation, including the development of practical tools and guidance.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43 (43) The operation of the Eurodac system, as established by Regulation [Proposal for a Regulation recasting Regulation (EU) No 603/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council], should facilitate the application of this Regulation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44 (44) The operation of the Visa Information System, as established by Regulation (EC) No 767/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council23 , and in particular the implementation of Articles 21 and 22 thereof, should facilitate the application of this Regulation. _________________ 23 Regulation (EC) No 767/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 July 2008 concerning the Visa Information System (VIS) and the exchange of data between Member States on short-stay visas (OJ L 218, 13.8.2008, p. 60).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45 (45) With respect to the treatment of persons falling within the scope of this Regulation, Member States are bound by their obligations under instruments of international law, including the relevant case-law of the European Court of Human Rights.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46 (46) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by the Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers24 . _________________ 24 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by the Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47 (47) The examination procedure should be used for the adoption of a common leaflet on Dublin/Eurodac, as well as a specific leaflet for unaccompanied minors; of a standard form for the exchange of relevant information on unaccompanied minors; of uniform conditions for the consultation and exchange of information on minors and dependent persons; of uniform conditions on the preparation and submission of take charge requests and take back notifications ; of two lists of relevant elements of proof and circumstantial evidence, and the periodical revision thereof; of a laissez passer; of uniform conditions for the consultation and exchange of information regarding transfers; of a standard form for the exchange of data before a transfer; of a common health certificate; of uniform conditions and practical arrangements for the exchange of information on a person’s health data before a transfer, and of secure electronic transmission channels for the transmission of requests.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48 (48) In order to provide for supplementary rules, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of the identification of family members or relatives of an unaccompanied minor; the criteria for establishing the existence of proven family links; the criteria for assessing the capacity of a relative to take care of an unaccompanied minor, including where family members, siblings or relatives of the unaccompanied minor stay in more than one Member State; the elements for assessing a dependency link; the criteria for assessing the capacity of a person to take care of a dependent person and the elements to be taken into account in order to assess the inability to travel for a significant period of time. In exercising its powers to adopt delegated acts, the Commission shall not exceed the scope of the best interests of the child as provided for under Article 8 of this Regulation. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016 . In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. .deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49 (49) In the application of this Regulation, including the preparation of delegated acts, the Commission should consult experts from, among others, all relevant national authorities.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50 (50) Detailed rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 have been laid down by Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003. Certain provisions of Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003 as amended by Regulation 118/2014 should be incorporated into this Regulation, either for reasons of clarity or because they can serve a general objective. In particular, it is important, both for the Member States and the applicants concerned, that there should be a general mechanism for finding a solution in cases where Member States differ over the application of a provision of this Regulation. It is therefore justified to incorporate the mechanism provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003 for the settling of disputes on the humanitarian clause into this Regulation and to extend its scope to the entirety of this Regulation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51 (51) The effective monitoring of the application of this Regulation requires that it be evaluated at regular intervals.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52 (52) In order to assess whether the corrective allocation mechanism in this Regulation is meeting the objective of ensuring a fair sharing of responsibility between Member States and of relieving disproportionate pressure on certain Member States, the Commission should review the functioning of the corrective allocation mechanism and in particular verify that the threshold for the triggering and cessation of the corrective allocation effectively ensures a fair sharing of responsibility between the Member States and a swift access of applicants to procedures for granting international protection in situations when a Member State is confronted with a disproportionate number of applications for international protection for which it is responsible under this Regulation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 53 (53) This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles which are acknowledged, in particular, in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In particular, this Regulation seeks to ensure full observance of the right to asylum guaranteed by Article 18 of the Charter as well as the rights recognised under Articles 1, 4, 7, 24 and 47 thereof. This Regulation should therefore be applied accordingly.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54 (54) Since the objective of this Regulation, namely the establishment of criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale and effects of this Regulation, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55 (55) [In accordance with Article 3 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, those Member States have notified their wish to take part in the adoption and application of this Regulation] ORdeleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55 – paragraph 1 [In accordance with Article 3 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, those Member States have notified their wish to take part in the adoption and application of this Regulation]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55 – paragraph 2 ORdeleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56 (56) [In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, those Member States are not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and are not bound by it or subject to its application.] ORdeleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56 – paragraph 1 [In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, those Member States are not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and are not bound by it or subject to its application.]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56 – paragraph 2 ORdeleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 53 (53) [In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, the United Kingdom is not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54 (54) In accordance with Article 3 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Ireland has notified (, by letter of ...,) its wish to take part in the adoption and application of this Regulation.] ORdeleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54 – paragraph 1 In accordance with Article 3 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Ireland has notified (, by letter of ...,) its wish to take part in the adoption and application of this Regulation.]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54 – paragraph 2 ORdeleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 53 (53) In accordance with Article 3 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the United Kingdom has notified (, by letter of ...,) its wish to take part in the adoption and application of this Regulation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54 (54) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, Ireland is not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application.]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57 (57) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application,deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 This Regulation lays down the criteria and mechanisms for determining the single Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (‘the Member State responsible’).Article 1 deleted Subject matter
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 This Regulation lays down the criteria and mechanisms for determining the single Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (‘the Member State responsible’).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 [...]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 [...]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) ‘third-country national’ means any person who is not a citizen of the Union within the meaning of Article 20(1) TFEU and who is not national of a State which participates in this Regulation by virtue of an agreement with the Union;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) ‘application for international protection’ means an application for international protection as defined in Article 2(h) of Directive 2011/95/EU;deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) ‘applicant’ means a third-country national or a stateless person who has made an application for international protection in respect of which a final decision has not yet been taken;deleted
2017/03/28
AFET
164 amendments...
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 (17) In order to prevent that applicants with inadmissible claims or who are likely not to be in need of international protection, or who represent a security risk are transferred among the Member States, it is necessary to ensure that the Member where an application is first lodged verifies the admissibility of the claim in relation to the first country of asylum and safe third country, examines in accelerated procedures applications made by applicants coming from a safe country of origin designated on the EU list, as well as applicants presenting security concerns.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 5 5. The Member State conducting the personal interview shall make a written summary thereof which shall contain at least the main information supplied by the applicant at the interview. This summary may eithershould take the form of a report or an identical standard form to be used by all Member States. The Member State shall ensure that the applicant and/or the legal advisor or other counsellor who is representing the applicant have timely access to the summary.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 1. The best interests of the child shall be assessed on a systematic basis and shall be a primary consideration for Member States with respect to all procedures provided for in this Regulation.
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.
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.
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. Upon arrival, a well-trained guardian shall be appointed immediately.
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.
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.
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 the child's best interest.
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.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point a (a) the preservation of family life, including family reunification possibilities;
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 (17) In order to prevent that applicants with inadmissible claims or who are likely not to be in need of international protection, or who represent a security risk are transferred among the Member States, it is necessary to ensure that the Member where an application is first lodged verifies the admissibility of the claim in relation to the first country of asylum and safe third country, examines in accelerated procedures applications made by applicants coming from a safe country of origin designated on the EU list, as well as applicants presenting security concerns.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point b (b) the minor’'s well-being and social development, taking into particular consideration the minor's ethnic, religious, cultural and linguistic background and having regard, in addition, to the need for stability and continuity in care and custodial arrangements and access to health and education services;
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point c (c) safety and security considerations, in particular where there is a risk of the minor being a victim of any form of violence and exploitation, including human trafficking;
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point δ (d) the views of the minor, in accordance with his or her age and maturity.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. The concept of first country of asylum referred to in article 3(3)(a) of this Regulation may only be applied to accompanied minors when it is in their best interests and where the authorities of Member States have first received from the authorities of the third country in question the assurance that the accompanied minor shall immediately benefit from one of the forms of protection referred to in paragraph 1, article 44, of Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX (Procedures Regulation). The accelerated examination procedure referred to in article 3(3)(b) and 5(1) of this Regulation shall not be applied to minors, whether unaccompanied or not.
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 prioritised procedure pursuant to Article 31(7) of 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.
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.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph new5 – subparagraph 1 All applications for international protection and requests for family reunification of unaccompanied minors shall be treated with priority. For the purpose of applying Article 10, the Member State where the unaccompanied minor lodged an application for international protection shall, as soon as possible, take appropriate action to identify the family members or relatives of the unaccompanied minor on the territory of Member States, whilst protecting the best interests of the child.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph νέο5 – subparagraph 1 For the purpose of applying Article 10, the Member State where the unaccompanied minor lodged an application for international protectionEuropean Union organisation for asylum shall, as soon as possible, take appropriate action to identify the family members or relatives of the unaccompanied minor on the territory of Member States, whilst protecting the best interests of the child.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph νέο5 – subparagraph 2 To that end, that Member State may call for the assistance of international or other relevant organisations, and may facilitate the minor’s access to the tracing services of such organisations.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph new5 – subparagraph 3 The staff of the competent authorities referred to in Article 47 who deal with requests concerning unaccompanied minors shall have received, and shall continue to receive, appropriate training concerning the specific needs of minors. This includes modules on risk assessment to target care and protection depending on the individual needs of the child, with a specific focus on early identification of victims of trafficking and abuse, and training on good practices to prevent disappearance.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 (17) In order to prevent that applicants with inadmissible claims or who are not likely not to be in need of international protection, or who represent a security risk are transferred among the Member States, it is necessary to ensure that the Member where anthe application is first lodged individually verifies the admissibility of the claim in relation to the first country of asylum and safe third country, examines in accelerated procedures applications made by applicants coming from a safe country of origin designated on the EU list, as well as applicants presenting security concerns.
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.
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.
2. The Member State responsible shall be that where a family member of the unaccompanied minor is legally present, provided that it is in the best interests of the minor. Where the applicant is a married minor whose spouse is not legally present on the territory of the Member States, the Member State responsible shall be the Member State where the father, mother or other adult responsible for the minor, whether by law or by the practice of that Member State, or sibling is legally present.(Does not affect the English version.)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4 4. Where family members or relatives as referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3, stay in more than one Member State, the Member State responsible shall be decided on the basis of the rules of corrective allocation and what is in the best interests of the unaccompanied minor.
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 protection,is present unless it is demonstrated that this is not in the best interests of the minor.
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.
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 firstis present and has lodged his or heran asylum application for international protection, unless it is demonstrat, provided that this is not in the best interests of the minor.
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 firstis present and has lodged his or her application for international protection, unless it is demonstrated that this is not in the best interests of the minor.
Where the applicant has a family member, regardless of whether the family was previously formed in the country of origin, who has been allowed to reside as a beneficiary of international protection in a Member State, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection, provided that the persons concerned expressed their desire in writing of their own free will.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) responsibility for examining the applications for international protection of all the family members and/or minor unmarried siblings shall lie with the Member State which the criteria indicate is responsible for taking charge of the largest number of them;
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 a (new) (17a) The concepts of safe countries and safe countries of origin should not prevent the identification of those seeking international protection, the individual examination of asylum applications and appropriate safeguards in respect of non- refoulement.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 2. Where the applicant is in possession of a valid visa or a visa expired less than six months before lodging the first application , the Member State which issued the visa shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection, unless the visa was issued on behalf of another Member State under a representation arrangement as provided for in Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council25 . In such a case, the represented Member State shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection. _________________ 25 Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 13 July 2009, establishing a Community Code on Visas (OJ L 243, 15.9.2009, p. 1).
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4 4. The fact that the residence document or visa was issued on the basis of a false or assumed identity or on submission of forged, counterfeit or invalid documents shall not prevent responsibility being allocated to the Member State which issued it. However, the Member State issuing the residence document or visa shall not be responsible if it can establish that a fraud was committed after the document or visa had been issued. In this case, the State against which the fraud was committed may return the holder of invalid documents, provided that his or her life and physical integrity will not be endangered.
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.
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.
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.
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. It shall continue to bear this responsibility for a period of six months after the date of illegal entry.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new) 2. When a Member State cannot or can no longer be held responsible in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article and where it is established, on the basis of proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists mentioned in Article 25(4), that the applicant — who has entered the territories of the Member States irregularly or whose circumstances of entry cannot be established — has been living for a continuous period of at least five months in a Member State before lodging the application for international protection, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection. If the applicant has been living for periods of time of at least five months in several Member States, the Member State where he or she has been living most recently shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 By way of derogation from Article 3(1) and only as long as no Member State has been determined as responsible , each Member State may decide to examine an application for international protection lodged with it by a third-country national or a stateless person based on family grounds in relation to wider family not covered by Article 2(g) , even if such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in this Regulation.
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.
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 of 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.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 (19) The definition of a family member in this Regulation should include the minor sibling or siblings of the applicant. Reuniting siblings is of particular importance for improving the chances of integration of applicants and hence reducing secondary movements. The scope of the definition of family member should also reflect the reality of current migratory trends, according to which applicants often arrive to the territory of the Member States after a prolonged period of time in transit. The definition should therefore include families formed outside the country of origin, but before their arrival on the territory of the Member State. This limited and targeted enlargement of the scope of the definition is expected to reduce the incentive for some secondary movements of asylum seekers within the EU.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 The Member State in which an application for international protection is madelodged 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, or the Member State responsible, request another Member State to take charge of an applicant in order to bring together any family relations on humanitarian grounds based in particular on family or cultural considerations, 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.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 a (new) Article 20 a Cessation of responsibilities 1. Where a Member State issues a residence document to the applicant, the obligations specified in Article 20(1) shall be transferred to that Member State. 2. The obligations specified in Article 20(1) shall cease if the Member State responsible can establish, upon request to take charge or take back an applicant or another person as referred to in Article 20(1)(c) or (d), that the person concerned has left the territory of the Member State for at least three months, unless the person concerned is in possession of a valid residence document issued by the Member State responsible. An application lodged after the period of absence referred to in the first subparagraph of this Article shall be regarded as a new application giving rise to a new procedure for determining the Member State responsible. 3. The obligations specified in Article 20(1)(c) and (d) shall cease if the Member State responsible can establish, when requested to take back an applicant or another person as referred to in Article 20(1)(c) or (d), that the person concerned has left the territory of the Member State to comply with a return decision or removal order issued following the withdrawal or rejection of the application. An application lodged after an effective removal has taken place shall be regarded as a new application giving rise to a new procedure for determining the Member State responsible.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 1. The process of determining the Member State responsible shall start as soon as an application for international protection is first lodged with a Member State, provided that the Member State of first application is not already the Member State responsible pursuant to Article 3(4) or (5).
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 5 5. An applicant who is present in another Member State without a residence document or who there lodges an application for international protection after withdrawing his or her first application made in a different Member State during the process of determining the Member State responsible shall be taken back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 26 and 30, by the Member State with which that application for international protection was first lodged. That obligation shall cease if the Member State requested to complete the process of determining the Member State responsible can establish that the applicant has in the meantime left the territory of the Member State for a period of at least three months or has obtained a residence document from another Member State. An application lodged after the period of absence referred to in the second subparagraph shall be regarded as a new application giving rise to a new procedure for determining the Member State responsible.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 [...]deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph new4 new4. The scope of the effective remedy laid down in paragraph 1 shall be limited to an assessment of whether Articles 3(2) in relation to the existence of a risk of inhuman or degrading treatment or Articles 10 to 13 and 18 are infringed upon.deleted
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.
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.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2 2. When there is a significant risk of absconding, Member States may detain the person concerned in order to secure transfer procedures in accordance with this Regulation, on the basis of an individual assessment and only in so far as detention is proportional and other less coercive alternative measures cannot be applied effectively. When the person concerned is a minor, he or she shall not be detained.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Minors, whether accompanied or unaccompanied, shall not be detained. In accordance with the principle of family unity, parents or legal or customary primary caregivers shall not be detained. Minors and families with minor children shall be accommodated together in non- custodial, community-based placements while their immigration status is being resolved.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 (19) The definition of a family member in this Regulation should include the sibling or siblings of the applicant. Reuniting siblings is of particular importance for improving the chances of integration of applicants and hence reducing secondary movements. The scope of the definition of family member should also reflect the reality of current migratory trends, according to which applicants often arrive to the territory of the Member States after a prolonged period of time in transit. The definition should therefore include families formed outside the country of origin, but before their arrival on the territory of the Member State, allowing for reunification with a married or unmarried partner and considering the specificities of de facto families and relationships. This limited and targeted enlargement of the scope of the definition is expected to reduce the incentive for some secondary movements of asylum seekers within the EU.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 1. The automatic, mandatory and permanent allocation mechanism referred to in this Chapter shall be applied for the benefit of a Member State, where that Member State is confronted with a disproportionate number of applications for international protection for which it is the Member State responsible under this Regulation.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. During this time, take charge or take back requests shall be suspended.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2 2. Paragraph 1 applies where the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) indicates that the number of applications for international protection for which a Member State is responsible under the criteria in Chapter III, Articles 3(2) or (3), 18 and 19, in addition to the number of persons effectively resettled, is higher than 15075% of the reference number for that Member State as determined by the key referred to in Article 35.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2 2. Paragraph 1 applies where the automated system referred to in Article 44(1) indicates that the number of applications for international protection for which a Member State is responsible under the criteria in Chapter III, Articles 3(2) or (3), 18 and 19, in addition to the number of persons effectively resettled, is higher than 15075% of the reference number for that Member State as determined by the key referred to in Article 35.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 6 6. Upon the notification referred to in paragraph 5, the allocation mechanism shall apply and all take charge or take back requests for that Member State shall be suspended.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new) (b a) the unemployment rate;
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 3 3. Applications declared inadmissible or examined in accelerated procedure in accordance with Article 3(3) shall not be subject to allocation.deleted
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
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
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
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 (19) The definition of a family member in this Regulation should include the sibling or siblings of the applicant. Reuniting siblings is of particular importance for improving the chances of integration of applicants and hence reducing secondary movements. The scope of the definition of family member should also reflect the reality of current migratory trends, according to which applicants often arrive to the territory of the Member States after a prolonged period of time in transit where the sibling or siblings is or are proven to be under the legal age of maturity. Reuniting siblings is of particular importance in order to increase the chances of integration of applicants and hence reduce secondary movements. The definition should therefore include families formed outside the country of origin, but before their arrival on the territory of the Member State. This limited and targeted enlargement of the scope of the definition is expected to reduce the incentive for some secondary movements of asylum seekers within the EU.
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
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
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 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 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 alloca2. deleted 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. Obligations of the benefitting Member State The benefitting Member State shall:.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 Article 44(1) shall in that case apply the number of applications for which they are the Member States responsible below their share pursuant to Article 35(1), with the benefitting Member State. The automated count each application which would have otherwise been allocated to the Member pursuant to Article 36(4) for the share of 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. Obligations of the benefitting Member State The benefitting2. deleted The automated system referred to in reference key during this twelve-month period to those Member States with a exception of the Member State which entered the information, as well as the system referred to in Article 44(1) shall State which entered the information that Member State shall:.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 Costs of allocation transfers For the costs to transfer an applicant to the Member State of allocation, the benefitting Member State shall be refunded by a lump sum of EUR 500 for each person transferred pursuant to Article 38(c). This financial support shall be implemented by applying the procedures laid down in Article 18 of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014.Article 42 deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 The automated system shall notify the Member States and the Commission as soon as the number of applications in the benefitting Member State for which it is the Member State responsible under this Regulation is below 15075 % of its share pursuant to Article 35(1).
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 The automated system shall notify the Member States and the Commission as soon as the number of applications in the benefitting Member State for which it is the Member State responsible under this Regulation is below 15075 % of its share pursuant to Article 35(1).
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.
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.
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. 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 protection, 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. 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.deleted
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 lodgedis present his or her application for international protection, 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 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.
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.
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, if this is in their best interests. In order to discourage secondary movements and unnecessary transfers of unaccompanied minors, which are not in their best interests, in the absence of a family member or a relative legally present in the territory of a Member State, the Member State responsible should be that wheree one in which the unaccompanied minor firstis present and has lodged his or heran asylum application for international protection, unless it is demonstrat, provided that this would not beis in the best interests of the child. Before transferring an unaccompanied minor to another Member State, the transferring Member State should make sure that thatminor. Where a transfer is in the best interests of an unaccompanied minor the receiving 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 case of non-compliance, proportional procedural consequences should follow. 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.
(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. 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 firstis present and has lodged his or her application for international protection, 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. 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.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21 (21) Assuming responsibility by a Member State for examining an application lodged with it in cases when such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in this Regulation may undermine the effectiveness and sustainability of the system and should be exceptional. Therefore, a Member State should be able to derogate from the responsibility criteria only on humanitarian grounds, in particular for family reasons, before a Member State responsible has been determined and examine an application for international protection lodged with it or with another Member State, even if such examination is not its responsibility under the binding criteria laid down in this Regulation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21 (21) Assuming responsibility by a Member State for examining an application lodged with it in cases when such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in this Regulation may undermine the effectiveness and sustainability of the system and should be exceptional. Therefore, a Member State should be able to derogate from the responsibility criteria only on humanitarian grounds, in particular for family reasons, before a Member State responsible has been determined and examine an application for international protection lodged with it or with another Member State, even if such examination is not its responsibility under the binding criteria laid down in this Regulation.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22 (22) In order to ensure that the aims of this Regulation are achieved and obstacles to its application are prevented, in particular in order to avoid absconding and secondary movements between Member States, it is necessary to establish clear obligations to be complied with by the applicant in the context of the procedure, of which he or she should be duly informed in a timely manner. Violation ofFailure to comply with those legal obligations should lead to appropriate and proportionate procedural consequences for the applicant and to must not prejudice the right of the applicant to a fair and equitable process or entail unnecessary, inappropriate and disproportionate consequences in terms of his or her reception conditions. In line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the Member State where such an applicant is present should in any case ensure that the immediate materialbasic needs of that person are covered.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23 (23) A personal interview with the applicant should be organised in order to facilitate the determination of the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection unless the applicant has absconded or the information provided by the applicant is sufficient for determining the Member State responsible . As soon as the application for international protection is lodged, the applicant should be informed in particular of the application of this Regulation, of the lack of choice as to which Member State will examine his or her asylum application; of his or her obligations under this Regulation and of the consequences of not complying with them and of the possibility, during the interview, of providing information regarding the presence of family members, relatives or any other family relations in the Member States, in order to facilitate the procedure for determining the Member State responsible.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24 (24) 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 is 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 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.
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.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24 (24) All persons subject to this regulation should have the right to an effective remedy, in the form of an appeal or review, in fact and in law. 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 and the relevant case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union as well as of the European Court of Human Rights is 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 or returned. The scope of the effective remedy should be limited to, in particular, concern 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.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24 (24) 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, provided that such a transfer is in the interests of the child. In order to ensure that international law is 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 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.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25 (25) The Member State which is determined as responsible under this Regulation shcould remainbe held responsible for examination of each and every application of that applicant, including any subsequent application, 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. Provisions in Regulation (EU) 604/2013 which had provided for the cessation of responsibility in certain circumstances, including when deadlines for the carrying out of transfers had elapsed for a certain period of time, hadmay have created an incentive for absconding, and should thereforeome of them could be removed.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26 (26) In order to ensure the speedy determination of responsibility and allocation of applicants for international protection between Member States, the deadlines for making and replying to requests to take charge, for making take back notifications, and for carrying out transfers, as well as for making and deciding on appeals, should be streamlined and shortened to the greatest extent possible, while respecting the rights of vulnerable persons, in particular the rights of the child and the fundamental principle of the best interests of the child and the principle of family reunification.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26 (26) In order to ensure the speedy determination of responsibility and allocation of applicants for international protection between Member States, the deadlines for making and replying to requests to take charge, for making take back notifications, and for carrying out transfers, as well as for making and deciding on appeals, should be streamlined and shortened to the greatest extent possible while respecting the fundamental rights of applicants.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28 (28) Deficiencies in, or the collapse of, asylum systems, especially in the Member States of first arrival; often aggravated or contributed to by particular pressures on them, can jeopardise the smooth functioning of the system put in place under this Regulation, which could leading to a risk of a violation of the rights of applicants as set out in the Union asylum acquis and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, other international human rights and refugee rights.
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.
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, but also taking into account a wish of preference of the applicant especially if motivated by familiar reunification 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. 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 category of unaccompanied minors should require particular attention and a distinct key should be determined for them with the same calculation formula.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32 (32) A key based on the size of the population, the economy and of the economyunemployment 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 15075% of the figure identified in the reference key. 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. As soon as this mechanism has been activated, all take back requests should be suspended.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32 (32) A key based on the size of the population and of, the economy and unemployment 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 15075% of the figure identified in the reference key. 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. As soon as this mechanism is triggered, take back requests should be suspended.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32 (32) A key based on the size of the population and of the economy of the Member States, and on the unemployment rate and the degree of stability in neighbouring third countries, 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. 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.
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 1500 % of the figure identified in the reference key. 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.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33 (33) When the allocation mechanism applies, the applicants who lodged their applications in the benefitting Member State of entry should be allocated to Member States which are below their share of applications on the basis of the reference key as applied to those Member States. Appropriate rules should be provided for in cases where an applicant may for serious reasons be considered a danger to national security or public order, especially rules as regards the exchange of information between competent asylum authorities of Member States. After the transfer, the Member State of allocation should determine the Member State responsible, and should become responsible for examining the application, unless the overriding responsible criteria, related in particular to the presence of family members, determine that a different Member State should be responsiblIn the above case, the applicant should not be granted asylum and should be sent back so as not to transfer the problem to another Member State.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34 (34) Under the allocation mechanism, the costs of transfer of an applicant to the Member State of allocation should be reimbursed from the EU budget.deleted
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
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
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
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
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.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35 (35) A Member State of allocation mayFull compliance of Member States with their obligations for the application of the corrective allocation mechanism should be mandatory. Where a Member State of allocation decides 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 mechanismSuch mechanism should be monitored by the European Commission and, in cases of non compliance, corrective measures should be taken immediately.
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, fully justified, 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. After the elapse of the above period, the Member State of allocation is obliged to accept the asylum seekers on its territory. 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.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42 (42) A network of competent Member State authorities should be set up and facilitated by the European Union Agency for Asylum to enhance practical cooperation and information sharing on all matters related to the application of this Regulation, including the development of practical tools and guidance. This network should be able to collaborate with the authorities of transit countries and countries of origin as well as with international organisations, in particular the United Nations Agencies and non- governmental organisations.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new) (9a) In order to prevent applicants whose applications are inadmissible, or who are unlikely to require international protection, from undertaking a potentially dangerous journey from their country of origin to a Member State, the European Union Agency for Asylum, in cooperation with the Commission and the Member States, should ensure that potential migrants are informed about the legal entry routes into the Union and the risks of illegal migration.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52 (52) In order to assess whether the corrective allocation mechanism in this Regulation is meeting the objective of ensuring a fair sharing of responsibility between Member States and of relieving disproportionate pressure on certain Member States, the Commission should review the functioning of the corrective allocation mechanism and in particular verify that the threshold for the triggering and cessation of the corrective allocation effectively ensures a fair sharing of responsibility between the Member States and a swift access of applicants to procedures for granting international protection in situations when a Member State is confronted with a disproportionate number of applications for international protection for which it is responsible under this Regulation. In this regard, the Commission should publish at regular intervals the number of applications for international protection received in each Member State, including the positive response rate, the origin of the applicants and the processing time for each application.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52 (52) In order to assess whether the corrective allocation mechanism in this Regulation is meeting the objective of ensuring a fair sharing of responsibility between Member States and of relieving disproportionate pressure on certain Member States, the Commission should, at the request of a Member State, review the functioning of the corrective allocation mechanism and in particular verify that the threshold for the triggering and cessation of the corrective allocation effectively ensures a fair sharing of responsibility between the Member States and a swift access of applicants to procedures for granting international protection in situations when a Member State is confronted with a disproportionate number of applications for international protection for which it is responsible under this Regulation.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – introductory part (g) ‘'family members’' means, insofar as the family already existed before the applicant arrived on the territory of the Member States , the following members of the applicant’'s family who are present on the territory of the Member States:
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point ζ – introductory part (g) ‘family members’ means, insofar as the family already existed before the applicant arrived on the territory of the Member States ,- which must have been established previously - the following members of the applicant’s family who are present on the territory of the Member States:
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – indent 1 – the spouse of the applicant or beneficiary of international protection or his or her unmarried partner in a stable relationship, where the law or practice of the country of origin or of the Member State concerned treats unmarried couples in a way comparable to married couples under its law relating to third-country nationals,
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – indent 2 – the minor children of couples referred to in the first indent or of the applicant, on condition that they are unmarried andr beneficiary, regardless of whether they were born in or out of wedlock or adopted as defined under national law, and the children for whom they bear legal or customary primary responsibility, on condition that they are unmarried or, when they are married, that it is in their best interests, taking due account of their views, to form a family with their parents or legal or customary primary caregiver,
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – indent 3 – when the applicant is a minor and unmarried, the father, mother or another adult responsible for the applicant, whether by law or by the practice of the Member State where the adult isthe father, mother, or another adult responsible for the applicant whether by law or practice of the country of origin or of the Member State where the adult is present, on condition that the applicant is a minor and unmarried or, when he or she is a married minor, that it is in his or her best interests, taking due account of his or her views, to form a family with his or her parent or parents or legal or customary primary caregiver. Minor siblings accompanying the father, mother or legal or customary primary caregiver are also considered as family members on condition that they are unmarried or, when they are married, that it is in their best interest, taking due account of their views, to form a family with their paresent or parents or legal or customary primary caregiver,
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – indent 4 – when the beneficiary of international protectionthe father, mother, or another adult responsible for the applicant whether by law or practice of the country of origin or of the Member State where the beneficiary is present, on condition that the applicant is a minor and unmarried or, twhe father, mother or another adult responsible forn he or she is a married minor, that it is in his or her best interests, taking due account of his or her views, to form a family with hims or her whether by law or by the practice of the Member State whereparent or parents or legal or customary primary caregiver. Minor siblings accompanying the father, mother or legal or customary primary caregiver are also considered as family members on condition that they are unmarried or, when they are married, that it is in their beneficiary isst interest, taking due account of their views, to form a family with their paresent,nt or parents or legal or customary primary caregiver;
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – indent 5 – the sibling or siblings of the applicant or beneficiary of international protection;
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – indent 5 – the sibling or siblings of the applicant under the legal age of majority;
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 (10) In the light of the results of the evaluation undertaken of the implementation of Regulation (EU) 604/2013 , it is appropriate, at this stage, to confirm the principles underlying Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, while making the necessary improvements, in the light of experience, to the effectiveness of the Dublin system and the protection granted to applicants under that system. Based on this evaluation and on consultation with Member States, the European Parliament and other stakeholders, it is also considered appropriate to establish in the Regulation measures required for a fair share of responsibility between Member States for applications for international protection, in particular to ensure that a disproportionate burden is not placed upon some Member States of first arrival, such as Italy, that are clearly struggling to cope with the migrant flow.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point ζ – indent 5 – the minor sibling or siblings of the applicant;
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;
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;
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall examine any application for international protection by a third-country national or a stateless person who applies on the territory of any one of them, including at the border or in the transit zones. Member States shall instruct their diplomatic representations in third countries to consider applications for international protection in order to avoid excessive pressure on the asylum systems of frontline Member States. The application shall be examined by a single Member State, which shall be the one which the criteria set out in Chapter III indicate is responsible.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 Where it is impossible to transfer an applicant to the Member State primarily designated as responsible because it carries already a disproportioned share of responsibility or because there are substantial grounds for believing that there are systemic flaws in the asylum procedure and in the reception conditions for applicants in that Member State, resulting in a risk of inhuman or degrading treatment within the meaning of Article 4 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the determining Member State shall continue to examine the criteria set out in Chapter III in order to establish whether another Member State can be designated as responsible.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 3. Before applying the criteria for determining a Member State responsible in accordance with Chapters III and IV, the first Member State in which the application for international protection was lodged shall: (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; and (b)examine the application in accelerated procedure pursuant to Article 31(8) of Directive 2013/32/EU when the following grounds apply: (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]; or (ii)the applicant may, for serious reasons, be considered a danger to the national security or public order of the Member State, or the applicant has been forcibly expelled for serious reasons of public security or public order under national law.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 3. Before applying the criteria for determining a Member State responsible in accordance with Chapters III and IV, the first Member State in which the application for international protection was lodged shall: (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; and (b)examine the application in accelerated procedure pursuant to Article 31(8) of Directive 2013/32/EU when the following grounds apply: (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]; or (ii) the applicant may, for serious reasons, be considered a danger to the national security or public order of the Member State, or the applicant has been forcibly expelled for serious reasons of public security or public order under national law.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 3. Before applying the criteria for determining a Member State responsible in accordance with Chapters III and IV, the first Member State in which the application for international protection was lodged shall: (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; and (b) examine the application in accelerated procedure pursuant to Article 31(8) of Directive 2013/32/EU when the following grounds apply: (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]; or (ii) the applicant may, for serious reasons, be considered a danger to the national security or public order of the Member State, or the applicant has been forcibly expelled for serious reasons of public security or public order under national law.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 3. Before applying the criteria for determining a Member State responsible in accordance with Chapters III and IV, the first Member State in which the application for international protection was lodged shall: (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; and (b) examine the application in accelerated procedure pursuant to Article 31(8) of Directive 2013/32/EU when the following grounds apply: (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]; or (ii) the applicant may, for serious reasons, be considered a danger to the national security or public order of the Member State, or the applicant has been forcibly expelled for serious reasons of public security or public order under national law.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – introductory part 3. Before applying the criteria for determining a Member State responsible in accordance with Chapters III and IV, the first Member State in which the application for international protection was lodged, or in the case of an unaccompanied minor the Member State in which the minor is present after having lodged an asylum application if he or she has lodged asylum applications in more than one Member State, shall:
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 (10) In the light of the results of the evaluation undertaken of the implementation of Regulation (EU) 604/2013 , it is appropriate, at this stage, to confirm the principles underlying Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, while making the necessary improvements, in the light of experience, to the effectiveness of the Dublin system and the protection granted to applicantsreinforcing the conventions for crisis management and migrant flow set out under thate Dublin system. Based on this evaluation and on consultation with Member States, the European Parliament and other stakeholders, it is also considered appropriate to establish in the Regulation measures required for a fair share of responsibility between Member States for applications for international protection, in particular to ensure that a disproportionate burden is not placed upon some Member States.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – introductory part 3. Before applyAny Member State shall retaing the criteria for determining a Member State responsible in accordance with Chapters III and IV, the first Member State in which the application for international protection was lodged shall:ght to send an applicant to a safe third country, subject to the rules and safeguards laid down in Directive 2013/32/EU.
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
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; and
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
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4 4. Where the Member State considers an application inadmissible or examines an application in accelerated procedure pursuant to paragraph 3, that Member State shall be considered the Member State responsible.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4 4. Where the Member State considers an application inadmissible or examines an application in accelerated procedure pursuant to paragraph 3, that Member State shall be considered the Member State responsible.deleted
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.deleted
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.
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 whetherunless the applicant has left or was removed from the territories of the Member States for one year or more.
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.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 a (new) (10a) The migration flow management difficulties encountered at reception and sorting centres ('hotspots') in the Member States of first arrival demonstrate the need for a more cooperative and concrete approach.
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.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point b (b) be present andremain available to the competent authorities in the Member State of application, respectively in the Member State to which he or she is transferred.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 1. If an applicant does not comply with the obligation set out in Article 4(1), the Member State responsible in accordance with this Regulation shall examine the application in an accelerated procedure, in accordance with Article 31(8) of Directive 2013/32/EU.deleted
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.deleted
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.deleted
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 Stathas been relocated shall be the one responsible for bearing the consequences of non-compliance.
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.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 2. The Member State in which the applicant is obliged to be presentrequired to remain available to the competent authorities shall continue the procedures for determining the Member State responsible even when the applicant leaves the territory of that Member State without authorisrelevant justification or is otherwise not available for the competent authorities of that Member State.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 3. The applicant shall not be entitled to the reception conditions set out in Articles 14 to 19 of Directive 2013/33/EU, with the exception of emergency health care, during the procedures under this Regulation in any Member State other than the one in which he or she is required to be present.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 3. The applicant shall not be entitled to the reception conditions set out in Articles 14 to 19 of Directive 2013/33/EU, with the exception of emergency health care, during the procedures under this Regulation in any Member State other than the one in which he or she is required to be present. Paragraph 3 shall not be applied to minors and families with minor children.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 (12) In order to ensure that beneficiaries of international protection who entered the territory of another Member State than the Member State responsible without fulfilling the conditions of stay in that other Member State are taken back by the Member State responsible, it is necessary to encompass beneficiaries of international protection in the scope of this Regulation.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 4. The competent authorities shall take into account elements and information relevant for determining the Member State responsible only insofar as these were submitted within the deadline set out in Article 4(2).
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;
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;
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) of the objectives of this Regulation and the consequences of making another application in a different Member State as well as the consequences of leaving the Member State where he or she is obliged to be present during the phases in which the Member State responsible under this Regulation is being determined and the application for international protection is being examined , in particular that the applicant shall not be entitled to the reception conditions set out in Articles 14 to 19 of Directive 2013/33/EU in any Member State other than the one where he or she is required to be present, with the exception of emergency health care ;
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) of the objectives of this Regulation and the consequences of making another application in a different Member State as well as the consequences of leaving the Member State where he or she is obliged to be presentrequired to remain available to the competent authorities during the phases in which the Member State responsible under this Regulation is being determined and the application for international protection is being examined , in particular that the applicant shall not be entitled to the reception conditions set out in Articles 14 to 19 of Directive 2013/33/EU in any Member State other than the one where he or she is required to be present, with the exception of emergency health care ;
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d (d) of the personal interview pursuant to Article 7 and the obligationpossibility of submitting and substantiating information regarding the presence of family members, relatives or any other family relations in the Member States, including the means by which the applicant can submit such information;
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 Where necessary for the proper understanding of the applicant, the information shall also be supplied orally, for example in connection with the personal interview as referred to in Article 7. Whenever the applicant is a minor, he or she shall be informed in a child- friendly manner.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 3. The personal interview shall be conducted in a language that the applicant understands or is reasonably supposed to understand and in which he or she is able to communicate, and, when necessary, in a child-friendly manner. Where necessary, Member States shall have recourse to an interpreter who is able to ensure appropriate communication between the applicant and the person conducting the personal interview.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Where requested by the applicant, the determining authority shall ensure, in so far as possible, that the interviewers and interpreters are of the same sex as the applicant and that the determining authority does not have reasons to believe that such a request is based on grounds which are not related to difficulties on the part of the applicant to present the grounds of his or her application in a comprehensive manner.
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. The person conducting the interview shall be able to take account of the personal and general circumstances surrounding the application, including the applicant's cultural origin, age, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity and vulnerability. Personnel interviewing applicants shall also have acquired a general knowledge of problems which could adversely affect the applicant's ability to be interviewed, such as indications that the person may have been tortured in the past.
2017/04/04
LIBE
413 amendments...
Proposal for a regulation
– The European Parliament rejects [the Commission proposal].
Proposal for a regulation
– The European Parliament rejects the Commission proposal.
Proposal for a regulation
– The European Parliament rejects the Commission proposal.
Draft legislative resolution
Citation 5 — having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 19 October 20161 , _________________ 1deleted OJ C 34, 2.2.2017, p. 144.
Draft legislative resolution
Citation 6 — having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 8 December 20162 , _________________ 2Not yet published in the Official Journal.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 1 Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 67(2) and 78(2)(e) thereof,
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 2 a (new) Having regard to the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights, and in particular Article 18 thereof;
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new) (1a) It should be reiterated that the much-celebrated European solidarity, articulated through the mechanism of asylum based on the Dublin rules and the corrective measures put in place in recent years (the relocation measures are an excellent example), has been a huge failure. If the Member States decide for legitimate reasons not to implement or honour fully and effectively a plan for sharing out the responsibilities and burdens associated with asylum, we must bravely acknowledge that the EU’s migration policy has failed. As a result, migration policy should no longer be set in Brussels and should therefore return to being under the exclusive jurisdiction of the individual Member States.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 (2) An effective common policy on asylum, including a Common European Asylum System (CEAS), iscan be a constituent part of the European Union’s objective of progressively establishing an area of freedom, security and justice open to those who, forced by circumstances, legitimately seek protection seek asylum in the Union.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 (3) The European Council, at its special meeting in Tampere on 15 and 16 October 1999, agreed to work towards establishing the CEAS, based on the full and inclusive application of the Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, as supplemented by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967 (‘the Geneva Convention’), thus ensuring that nobody is sent back to persecution, i.e. maintaining the principle of non- refoulement. In this respect, and without the responsibility criteria laid down in this Regulation being affected, Member States, all respecting the principle of non- refoulement, are considered as safe countries for third-country nationals.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 (3) The European Council, at its special meeting in Tampere on 15 and 16 October 1999, agreed to work towards establishing the CEAS, based on the full and inclusive application of the Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, as supplemented by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967 (‘the Geneva Convention’), thus ensuring that nobody is sent back to persecution, i.e. maintaining the principle of non- refoulement. In this respect, and without the responsibility criteria laid down in this Regulation being affected, Member States, all respecting the principle of non- refoulement, are considered as safe countries for third-country nationals.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 (5) Such a method should be based on objective, fair criteria both for the Member States and for the persons concerned. It should, in particular, make it possible to determine rapidly the Member State responsible, on behalf of the European Union, so as to guarantee effective access to the procedures for granting international protection and not to compromise the objective of the rapid processing of applications for international protection.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 (5) Such a method should be based on the principle of solidarity and objective, fair criteria both for the Member States and for the persons concerned. It should, in particular, make it possible to determine rapidly the Member State responsible, so as to guarantee effective access to the procedures for granting international protection and not to compromise the objective of the rapid processing of applications for international protection.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 (6) The first phase in the creation of a CEAS that should lead, in the longer term, to a common procedure and a uniform status, valid throughout the Union, for those granted international protection, has now been completed. The European Council of 4 November 2004 adopted The Hague Programme which set the objectives to be implemented in the area of freedom, security and justice in the period 2005-2010. In this respect, The Hague Programme invited the European Commission to conclude the evaluation of the first-phase legal instruments and to submit the second-phase instruments and measures to the European Parliament and to the Council with a view to their adoption before 2010.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new) (7a) Solidarity initiatives between Member States must be voluntary and take into account the added value of all types of contributions which Member States may make to the joint efforts of the EU to manage migration.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 (9) The European Union Agency for Asylum should provide adequate support in the implementation of this Regulation, in particular by establishing the reference key for the distribution of asylum seekers under the corrective allocation mechanism, and by adapting the figures underlying the reference key annually, as well as the reference key based on Eurostat data.deleted
(9) The European Union Agency for Asylum (the "Asylum Agency") should provide adequate support in the implementation of this Regulation, in particular by establishing the reference key for the distribution of asylum seekers under the corrective allocation mechanism, and by adapting the figures underlying the reference key annually, as well as the reference key based on Eurostat data. The Asylum Agency should also develop information material in cooperation with the relevant authorities of the Member States. The Asylum Agency should assist and coordinate the transfer of applicants for, or beneficiaries of, international protection under this Regulation.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 (9) The European Union Agency for Asylum should provide adequate support in the implementation of this Regulation, in particular by establishing the reference key for the distribution of asylum seekers under the corrective allocation mechanism, and by adapting the figures underlying the reference key annually, as well as the reference key based on Eurostat data. The Agency should also develop information material, in cooperation with the relevant authorities of the Member States. The Agency should gradually become responsible for the transfer of applicants for, or beneficiaries of, international protection under this Regulation.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 (9) The European Union Agency for Asylum should provide adequate support in the implementation of this Regulation, in particular by establishing the reference key for the distribution of asylum seekers under the corrective allocation mechanism, and by adapting the figures underlying the reference key annually, as well as the reference key based on Eurostat data. The Agency should also develop information material, in close cooperation with the relevant authorities of the Member States. The Agency should be responsible for the transfer of applicants for, or beneficiaries of, international protection, under this Regulation.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 (9) The European Union Agency for Asylum should provide adequate support in the implementation of this Regulation, in particular by establishing the reference key for the distribution of asylum seekers under the corrective allocation mechanism, and by adapting the figures underlying the reference key annuallyevery six months, as well as the reference key based on Eurostat data. The European Agency for Asylum should handle the transfers of applicants requesting international protection from one Member State to another in all the cases provided for by this Regulation.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 (9) The European Union Agency for Asylum should provide adequate support in the implementation of this Regulation, in particular by establishing the reference key for the distribution of asylum seekers under the corrective allocation mechanism, and by adapting the figures underlying the reference key annually, as well as the reference key based on Eurostat data.
Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Petri SARVAMAA, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, Mariya GABRIEL, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 (9) The European Union Agency for Asylum should provide adequate support in the implementation of this Regulation, in particular by establishing the reference key for the distribution of asylum seekers under the corrective allocation mechanism, and by adapting the figures underlying the reference key annually, as well as the reference key based on Eurostat data.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 (9) The European Union Agency for Asylum should provide adequate support in the implementation of this Regulation, in particular by establishing the reference key for the distribution of asylum seekers under the voluntary corrective allocation mechanism, and by adapting the figures underlying the reference key annually, as well as the reference key based on Eurostat data. The European Union Agency for Asylum should also develop information material, in close cooperation with the relevant authorities of the Member States.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 (9) The European Union Agency for Asylum should provide adequate support in the implementation of this Regulation, in particular by establishing the reference key for the distribution of asylum seekers under the corrective allocation mechanism, and by adapting the figures underlying the reference key annually, as well as the reference key based on Eurostat data. The European Union Agency for Asylum should provide up-to-date information about third countries, particularly countries of origin of asylum seekers.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 (9) The European Union Agency for Asylum should provide adequate support in the implementation of this Regulation, in particular by establish. Nevertheless, member states should maintaing the reference key for the distribuight to examine applications of asylum seekers under the corrective allocation mechanism, and by adapting the figures underlying the reference key annually, as well as the reference key based on Eurostat dataindividuals seeking international protection in their respective territories. The Asylum Agency should assist member states with eventual re- examinations through the provision of information material, which would be developed in close cooperation with the relevant authorities of the Member States.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 (10) In the light of the results of the evaluation undertaken of the implementation of Regulation (EU) 604/2013 , it is appropriatenecessary, at this stage, to confirm the principles underlying Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, while making the necessary improvements, in the light of experience, to the effectiveness of the Dublin system and the protection granted to applicants under that system. Based on this evaluation and on consultation with Member States, the European Parliament and other stakeholders, it is also considered appropriate to establish in the Regulation measures required for adesign a new system in full respect of Article 78(1) TFEU based on a genuine link approach and fair share of responsibility and solidarity between Member States for applications for international protection, in particular to ensure that a disproportionate burden is not placed upon some Member States.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 (10) In the light of the results of the evaluation undertaken of the implementation of Regulation (EU) 604/2013 , it is appropriate, at this stage, to confirm the principles underlying Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, while making the necessary improvements, in the light of experience, to the effectiveness of the Dublin system and the protection granted to applicants under that system. Based on this evaluation and on consultation with Member States, the European Parliament and other stakeholders, it is also considered appropriate to establish in the Regulation measures required for a fair share of responsibility between Member States for applications for international protection, in particular to ensure thatf and when a disproportionate burden is not placed upon somon one or more Member States.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 (11) In order to ensure equal treatment for all applicants and beneficiaries of international protection, and consistency with the current Union asylum acquis, in particular with Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council18 , the scope of this Regulation encompasses applicants for subsidiary protection and persons eligible for subsidiary protection. _________________ 18 Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection granted (OJ L 337, 20.12.2011, p. 9).deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 (15) In accordance with the 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the best interests of the child should be athe primary consideration of Member States when applying this Regulation. In assessing the best interests of the child, Member States should, in particular, take due account of the minor’s well-being and social development, safety and security considerations and the views of the minor in accordance with his or her age and maturity, including his or her background. In addition, specific procedural guarantees for unaccompanied minors should be laid down on account of their particular vulnerability.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 (16) In accordance with the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, respect for family life should be a primary consideration of Member States when applying this Regulation, where a Member State does not recognise a particular long-standing stable partnership or marriage under its national law, it should be possible for the applicants to move to another Member State that does recognise such a relationship or partnership under its law.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 (16) In accordance with the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, respect for family lifeprivate and family life, as well as for the principle of non-discrimination, should be a primary consideration of Member States when applying this Regulation.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 (17) In order to prevent that applicants with inadmissible claims or who are likely not to be in need of international protection, or who represent a security risk are transferred among the Member States, it is necessary to ensure that the Member where an application is first lodged verifies the admissibility of the claim in relation to the first country of asylum and safe third country, examines in accelerated procedures applications made by applicants coming from a safe country of origin designated on the EU list, as well as applicants presenting security concerns.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 (17) In order to prevent that applicants with inadmissible claims or who are likely not to be in need of international protection, or who represent a security risk are transferred among the Member States, it is necessary to ensure that the Member where an application is first lodged verifies the admissibility of the claim in relation to the first country of asylum and safe third country, examines in accelerated procedures applications made by applicants coming from a safe country of origin designated on the EU list, as well as applicants presenting security concerns.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 (17) In order to prevent that applicants with inadmissible claims or who are likely not to be in need of international protection, or who represent a security risk are transferred among the Member States, it is necessary to ensure that the Member where an application is first lodged verifies the admissibility of the claim in relation to the first country of asylum and safe third country, examines in accelerated procedures applications made by applicants coming from a safe country of origin designated on the EU list, as well as applicants presenting security concerns.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 (17) In order to prevent that applicants with inadmissible claims or who are likely not to be in need of international protection, or who represent a security risk are transferred among the Member States, it is necessary to ensure that the Member where an application is first lodged verifies the admissibility of the claim in relation to the first country of asylum and safe third country, examines in accelerated procedures applications made by applicants coming from a safe country of origin designated on the EU list, as well as applicants presenting security concerns.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 (17) In order to prevent that applicants with inadmissible claims or who are likely not to be in need of international protection, or who represent a security risk are transferred among the Member States, it is necessary to ensure that the Member where an application is first lodged verifies the admissibility of the claim in relation to the first country of asylum and safe third country, examines in accelerated procedures applications made by applicants coming from a safe country of origin designated on the EU list, as well as applicants presenting security concerns.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 (17) In order to prevent that applicants with inadmissible claims or who are likely not to be in need of international protection, or who represent a security risk are transferred among the Member States, it is necessary to ensure that the Member State where an application is first lodged verifies the admissibility of the claim in relation to the first country of asylum and safe third country, examines in accelerated procedures applications made by applicants coming from a safe country of origin designated on the EU list, as well asexamines in accelerated procedures applications made by applicants presenting security concerns.
Laura FERRARA, Ignazio CORRAO, Fabio Massimo CASTALDO, Laura AGEA, Isabella ADINOLFI, Tiziana BEGHIN, David BORRELLI, Dario TAMBURRANO, Piernicola PEDICINI, Marco VALLI, Marco ZULLO, Daniela AIUTO, Rosa D'AMATO, Eleonora EVI
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 (17) In order to prevent that applicants with inadmissible claims or who are likely not to be in need of international protection, or who represent a security risk are transferred among the Member States, it is necessary to ensure that the Member where an application is first lodged verifies the admissibility of the claim in relation to the first country of asylum and safe third country, examines in accelerated procedures applications made by applicants coming from a safe country of origin designated on the EU list, as well as applicantexamines in accelerated procedures applications made by applications presenting security concerns.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 (17) In order to improve the efficiency of the system, and to prevent that applicants with inadmissible claims or who are likely not to be in need of international protection, or who represent a security risk are transferred among the Member States, it is necessaryessential to ensure that the Member State where an application is first lodged verifies the admissibility of the claim in relation to the first country of asylum and safe third country, examines in accelerated procedures applications made by applicants coming from a safe country of origin designated on the EU list, as well as applicants presenting security concerns.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 (17) In order to prevent that applicants with inadmissible claims or who are likely not to be in need of international protection, or who represent a security risk are transferred among the Member States, it is necessary to ensure that the Member State where an application is first lodged verifies the admissibility of the claim in relation to the first country of asylum and safe third country, examines in accelerated procedures applications made by applicants coming from a safe country of origin designated on the EU list, as well as applicants presenting security concerns.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 (17) In order to prevent that applicants with inadmissible claims, or who are likely not to be in need of international protection, or who represent a security risk arefrom being transferred among the Member States, it is necessary to ensure that the Member State where an application is first lodged verifies the admissibility of the claim in relation to the first country of asylum and safe third country, examines in accelerated procedures applications made by applicants coming from a safe country of origin designated on the EU list, as well as applicants presenting security concerns.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 (18) The processing together of the applications for international protection of the members of one family by a single Member State makes it possible to ensure that the applications are examined thoroughly, the decisions taken in respect of them are consistent and the members of one family are not separated. The processing together of the applications of a family is without prejudice to the right of an applicant to lodge an application individually.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 (19) The definition of a family member in this Regulation should include the sibling or siblings of the applicant. Reuniting siblings is of particular importance for improving the chances of integration of applicants and hence reducing secondary movements. The scope of the definition of family member should also reflect the reality of current migratory trends, according to which applicants often arrive to the territory of the Member States after a prolonged period of time in transit. The definition should therefore include families formed outside the country of origin, but before their arrival on the territory of the Member State. This limited and targeted enlargement of the scope of the definition is expected to reduce the incentive for some secondary movements of asylum seekers within the EU.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 (19) The definition of a family member in this Regulation should include the sibling or siblings of the applicant. Reuniting siblings is of particular importance for improving the chances of integration of applicants and hence reducing secondary movements. The scope of the definition of family member should also reflect the reality of current migratory trends, according to which applicants often arrive to the territory of the Member States after a prolonged period of time in transit. The definition should therefore include families formed outside the country of origin, but before their arrival on the territory of the Member State. This limited and targeted enlargement of the scope of the definition is expected to reduce the incentive for some secondary movements of asylum seekers within the EU.deleted
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 (19) The definition of a family member in this Regulation should include the sibling or siblings of the applicant. Reuniting siblings, the grandparents of the applicant or beneficiary of international protection and the grandchildren of the applicant. Reuniting siblings the grandparents of the applicant or beneficiary of international protection and the grandchildren of the applicant is of particular importance for improving the chances of integration of applicants and hence reducing secondary movements. The scope of the definition of family member should also reflect the reality of current migratory trends, according to which applicants often arrive to the territory of the Member States after a prolonged period of time in transit. The definition should therefore include families formed outside the country of origin, but before their arrival on the territory of the Member State. This limited and targeted enlargement of the scope of the definition is expected to reduce the incentive for some secondary movements of asylum seekers within the EU.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 (19) The definition of a family member in this Regulation should include the sibling or siblings, grandparents and uncles or aunts of the applicant. Reuniting siblings, grandparents and uncles or aunts is of particular importance for improving the chances of integration of applicants and hence reducing secondary movements. The scope of the definition of family member should also reflect the reality of current migratory trends, according to which applicants often arrive to the territory of the Member States after a prolonged period of time in transit. The definition should therefore include families formed outside the country of origin, but before their arrival on the territory of the Member State. This limited and targeted enlargement of the scope of the definition is expected to reduce the incentive for some secondary movements of asylum seekers within the EU.
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 presence of family members should become a binding responsibility criterion. In particular, 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. 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 protection, unlessis present, provided that, following a multidisciplinary assessment of the child's best interests, 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 thatobtain individualised guarantees from that Member State that it 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 representativesguardian tasked with safeguarding respect for all the rights to which they are entitled. Any decision on responsibility or to transfer an unaccompanied minor should be preceded by an multidisciplinary assessment of his/her best interests by staff with the necessary qualifications and expertise and the participation of his or her guardian and legal advisor or counsellor.
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. 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 protection, 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. 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. If for any reason the age of the applicant is not clearly over 18 years of age the member state have the full right to medically investigate the applicant to establish the age of the applicant.
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. 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 heran application for international protection, unless it is demonstrat and is present, provided 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 thatobtain individualised guarantees from that Member State that it 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 representativesguardian tasked with safeguarding respect for all the rights to which they are entitled. 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. Any decision on responsibility in accordance with this Regulation concerning an unaccompanied minor should be preceded by a multidisciplinary assessment of his or her best interests which shall involve, at a minimum, his or her guardian and legal advisor or counsellor.
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, if this is in their best interests. In order to discourage secondary movements and unnecessary transfers of unaccompanied minors, which are not in their best interests, in the absence of a family member or a relative legally present in the territory of a Member State, the Member State responsible should be that wherein which the unaccompanied minor first has lodged his or her application for international protection, unless it is demonstrated that this would not beis present, provided that this is in the best interests of the childminor. 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 representativesguardian tasked with safeguarding respect for all the rights to which they are entitled. Any decision to transfer an unaccompanied minor should be preceded by an multidisciplinary assessment of his/her best interests by staff with the necessary qualifications and expertise, which shall involve his or her guardian and legal advisor or counsellor.
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. 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 ththe absence of a family member or a relative, unaccompanied minors should not, as general rule, be transferred among Member States. Their application should be therefore examined by the Member State where the unaccompanied minor first has lodged his or her application for international protection,is present after having lodged an application, if provisions at Article 19 are not applicable and unless it is demonstrated that this would not be |
Renew)
EPP),
BARTOLO Pietro (
S&D),
CARÊME Damien (
Verts/ALE),
TARDINO Annalisa (
ID),
PROCACCINI Nicola (
ECR),
ERNST Cornelia (
GUE/NGL)
PPE
ALDE
NI
ENF
EFDD