2018/2271(INL) | [ParlTrack]

Branislav ŠKRIPEK, Anders VISTISEN, Kristina WINBERG, Marek JUREK

Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)

Ka. whereas on the 14th November 2018 the European Parliament rejected a proposal to establish Humanitarian Visas; considers, therefore, that the legislative process has lawfully concluded;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)

Ka. whereas the update of the EU visa policy, still under negotiation, should allow for improved security and increase the available means to respond to migration challenges, including new tools to return those who do not have a right to stay in the EU territory and to efficiently respond to those countries who are not willing to take their own nationals back;

Amendment 15 #

Branislav ŠKRIPEK, Anders VISTISEN, Kristina WINBERG, Marek JUREK

Motion for a resolution
Recital K b (new)

Kb. whereas an estimated 10% of those applying for international protection are granted it; and with poor return rates in most Member States this equates to high rates of absconding from those refused;

Amendment 16 #

Brice HORTEFEUX

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Re~~quests~~jects that the Commission to submit~~, by 31 March 2019, on the basis of point (a) of Article 77(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),~~ a proposal for a Regulation on establishing a European Humanitarian Visa~~, following the recommendations set out in the Annex hereto;~~.

Amendment 17 #

Branislav ŠKRIPEK, Anders VISTISEN, Kristina WINBERG, Marek JUREK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Re~~quests~~jects that the Commission to submit, by 31 March 2019, on the basis of point (a) of Article 77(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), a proposal for a Regulation on establishing a European Humanitarian Visa, following the recommendations set out in the Annex hereto;

Amendment 18 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Requests the Commission to submit, by 31 March 2019, on the basis of point (a) of Article 77(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), a proposal for a Regulation on establishing a European Humanitarian Visa, followalizes that the introduction of a Humanitarian Visa will not only create an unmanageable administrative burden for consulates and embassies but also preserve fundamental problems regarding secondary movements within the EU, serious deficits ing the ~~recommendations set out in the Annex hereto~~EU return policies and the security problems resulting from it;

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Requests the Commission to submit, by 31 March 2019, on the basis of point (a) of Article 77(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of~~States that with regards to European Court of Justices ruling from March 2017 (Judgment in Case C-638/16 PPU) there is no legal basis for European legislation on long term residence permits under the title Humanitarian Visa but refers to the Ecur~~opean Union (TFEU), a proposal for a Regulation on establishing a Europea~~rent legislation which allows member states to issue short time residence permits with limited territorial validity on Hhumanitarian ~~Visa, following~~grounds and the re~~commendations set out in the Annex hereto~~for does not see a reason to create further means of residence permits;

Amendment 2 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)

– Stresses that a report on the same subject was rejected by the Parliament on 14 November 2018, therefore proceeding with a new vote in such a short time without any further analysis and substantial modification of the text shows a worrying contempt for the basic principles of democracy;

Amendment 20 #

Branislav ŠKRIPEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Considers this procedure dishonouring to parliamentary democracy, as this very report has already been rejected once in a rightfully conducted vote in Chamber on Wednesday 14 November 2018;

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. States that this new and misleading interpretation of Humanitarian Visas can create more problems than it solves: pull factor for third country nationals, mass influx at embassies and consulates that would possibly lead to their closure, increasing number of illegally staying third country nationals in EU member states as there will continue to be negative asylum decisions;

Amendment 22 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Expresses it's serious doubts that this instrument will be able to stop the problems of smugglers, illegal immigration or the attempts to cross the Mediterranean;

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1c. Aims to stop migration as close to its origin as possible by tackling root causes of migration on the one hand and by establishing reception centres in third countries for those who are already on their way on the other hand;

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 d (new)

1d. Expresses its objective that asylum applications should be dealt with already outside the EU in third countries, especially in EU led reception centres in order to prevent people from the dangerous immigration routes such as the Mediterranean;

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Considers that Member States should be able to issue a European humanitarian visa to persons seeking international protection, to allow those persons to enter the territory of the Member State issuing the visa for the sole purpose of makUrges the Commission to examine the feasibility of refugee centres outside of the EU in order to offer the necessary protection ing an ~~application for international protection in that Member State~~efficient and controlled manner;

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Considers that Member States should be able to issue a European humanitarian visa to persons seeking international protection, to allow those persons to enter the territory of the Member State issuing the visa for the sole purpose of making an application for international protection in that Member State; reiterates that, in accordance with the ruling of the European Court of Justice of 7 march 2017 in Case C- 638/16, a regime on European level on humanitarian visas cannot be binding to Member States but rather a framework for those Member State willing to grant humanitarian visas;

Amendment 27 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Considers that Member States should ~~be able~~have the possibility to issue a European humanitarian visa to persons seeking international protection, to allow those persons to enter the territory of the Member State issuing the visa for the sole purpose of making an application for international protection in that Member State;

Amendment 28 #

Branislav ŠKRIPEK, Anders VISTISEN, Kristina WINBERG, Marek JUREK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Considers that European humanitarian visas should be complementary to and not substitute the already existing national entry procedures for humanitarian protection, resettlement procedures and spontaneous applications under international refugee law, and that the decision to issue European humanitarian visas should remain the sole competence of the Member States;

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Considers that part of the financial implications of the requested proposal should be covered by the general budget of the Union as a practical expression of the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, including its financial implications, between the Member States, in accordance with Article 80 TFEU;deleted

Amendment 3 #

Anders VISTISEN, Kristina WINBERG, Branislav ŠKRIPEK, Marek JUREK, Jussi HALLA-AHO

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas despite numerous announcements and requests for safe and legal pathways offering access to European territory for persons seeking international protection there is currently no harmonisation at Union level of protected entry procedures (PEPs) and no legal framework at Union level for humanitarian visas, i.e. visas issued for the purpose of reaching the territory of the Member States in order to seekhumanitarian visas are one of the existing tools that sovereign Member States may decide to use in order to ensure that people in need can legally access international protection; in Europe.

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Considers that ~~part of the financial implications of the requested proposal should be covered by the g~~the Member States that wish to issue humanitarian visas shall be responsible for all of the financial implications that arise from allowing persons to enter~~al budget of the Union as a practical expression of the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, including its financial implications, between the Member States, in acc~~ the territory of the Member State; insists that Member States shall continue to be responsible for such persons when they leave the Member State that issued the humanitarian visa ford an~~ce with Article 80 TFEU~~other Member State;

Amendment 31 #

Branislav ŠKRIPEK, Anders VISTISEN, Kristina WINBERG, Marek JUREK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Instructs its President to forward this resolution and the accompanying recommendations to the Commission and the Council, and to the national parliaments, the Court of Justice, the European External Action Service, the European Asylum Support Office, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation and the European Union Agency for Fundamental RighUrges the Commission to assess the relations with third countries on the basis of the cooperation in EU return policies and to propose efficient approaches to eliminate deficits.

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex I

~~[…]~~deleted

Amendment 33 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 1 – indent 10

– provide for such visa applications to be lodged directly, by electronic means or in writing, at ~~any~~ consulates or embass~~y of the Member States~~ies designated by the Member States for that purpose,

Amendment 34 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 1 – indent 16

– provide that such visa applications be decided on within 1530 calendar days of the date of lodging the application,

Amendment 35 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 1 – indent 27

~~– provide for significant financial support from the Integrated Border Management Fund to be made available to Member States for its implementation,~~deleted

Amendment 36 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 1 – indent 28

– foresee that a Member State that issues such a humanitarian visa has access to the same compensation from the Asylum and Migration Fund as when a Member State receives a refugee through the European Resettlement Framework,deleted

Amendment 4 #