109 Amendments of Charlie WEIMERS related to 2021/0428(COD)
Amendment 110 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) The COVID-19 pandemic has reinforced the need for the Union to be better prepared to respond to crisis situations at the external borders related to situations of diseases with an epidemic potential that are a threat to public health. The COVID-19 pandemic has shown that threats to public health can require uniform rules concerning travel restrictions for travel into the European Union by thirand migratory pressure facing Europe has reinforced the need for Member States to take unilateral action to improve checks and country nationals. The adoption of inconsistent and divergent measures at the external borders to address such threats negatively affects the functioning of the entire Schengen area, reduces predictability for third-country travellers and people-to-people contacts with third countriesols of persons entering or exiting their territory. To prepare the Schengen area for future challenges of a comparable scale related to threats to public health or safety, it is necessary to estnablish a new mechanism which should allow for a timelye Member States to implement adopdition and lifting of coordinated measures at Union level. The new procedure at the external border should be applied in a situation of an infectious disease with epidemic potential as identified by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control or the Commission. This mechanism should complement the procedures proposed to be established in the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on serious cross- border threal border control measures regardless of decisions taken at EU level. A new provision should enable border control measures deemed necessary by Member States to health43 , notably in case of the recognition of a public health emergency, and the revised mandate of the European Centre for Disease Control.44 _________________ 43 COM(2020)727. 44 Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 851/2004 establishing a European Centre for disease prevention and control, COM(2020)726safeguard public order and guarantee security for citizens.
Amendment 114 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The mechanism should provide for the adoption by the Council, upon a proposal by the Commission, of a regulationnew provision should enable border control measures deemed necessary by Member States to safeguard public order and guarantee security for citizens. The provision should enable the adoption by Member States, acting alone or jointly, of measures setting out restrictions on travel, including restrictions on entry and any other necessary measures for travel into the European Union,Member State or Member States concerned and the conditions for lifting them. In view of the politically sensitive nature of such measures which concern the right to enter the territory of Member States, implementing powers should be conferred on the Council to adopt such a regulation, acting on a proposal from the Commissionthe Commission should be limited to a consultative role.
Amendment 121 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) It is also necessary to reinforce the rules and safeguards in Union law in order to allow Member States to act swiftly to counter instances of instrumentalisation of migrants. Such instrumentalisation should be understood as referring to a situation where a third country instigates irregular migratory flows to the Union by, assists, enables, actively encouraginges or facilitating the arrival of third country nationals to thees flows of migrants exnternal borders of the Member States, where such actions indicate an intention to destabilise the Union as a whole or a Member State and where the nature of such actions is liable to put at risk essential State functions, including its territorial integrity, the maintenance of law and order or the safeguard of its national securiting the territory of the Member States of the Union illegally.
Amendment 126 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Instrumentalisation of migrants can refer to situations where irregular travel of third country nationals has been actively encouraged or, facilitated, assisted or enabled by a third country onto its own territory to reach the external border of the Member States but can equally refer to the active encouragement or facilitation of irregular travel of third country nationals already present in that third country. Instrumentalisation of migrants may also entail the imposition of coercive measures, intended to prevent the third country nationals from leaving the border areas of the instrumentalising third country, in a direction other than through a Member State.
Amendment 130 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The Union should mobilise all tools from its toolbox of diplomatic, financial and operational measures to support the Member States confronted with instrumentalisation. Diplomatic efforts by the Union or the Member State concerned, should be given priority as the means of addressing the phenomenon of instrumentalisation, including the facilitation of asylum processing and reception for those granted international protection in third country partner state reception centres. This may be supplemented, where appropriate, by the imposition of restrictive measures by the Union.
Amendment 134 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) At the same time, in addition to these measures, it is equally necessary to further reinforce the current rules in relation to external border controls and border surveillance. To further assist the Member State facing an instrumentalisation of migrants, Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX complements the rules on border control by providing for specific measures in the area of asylum and return, while respecting the fundamental rights the individuals concerned and in particular by ensuring the respect of the right to asylum and providing the necessary assistance by the UN agencies and other relevant organisations.
Amendment 138 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In particular, in a situation of instrumentalisation, it should, where necessary, be possible for the Member State concerned, to limit border traffic to the minimum by closing some border crossing points, while guaranteeing genuine and effective access to international protection procedures. Any such decision should take into account whether the European Council has acknowledged that the Union or one or more of its Member States are facing a situation of instrumentalisation of migrants. Furthermore, any such limitations should take full account of the rights of Union citizens, third country nationals who are beneficiaries of the right of free movement pursuant an international agreement and third- country nationals who are long-term residents under national or Union law or are holders of long-term visas, as well as their respective family members. Such limitations should also be applied in a manner that ensures respect for obligations related to access to international protection, in particular the principle of non-refoulemententirely by closing all border crossing points.
Amendment 146 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Moreover, in the event of instrumentalisation of migrants, the Member State concerned should reinforce border control, including, as appropriate, through additional measures preventing illegal crossings such as erecting physical border barriers and the deployment of additional resources and technical means to prevent unauthorised crossing of the border. Such technical means could include modern technologies including drones and motion sensors, as well as mobile units. The use of such technical means, in particular, any technologies capable of collecting personal data, needs to be based on and exercised in accordance with clearly defined provisions of should be exercised in accordance with national law.
Amendment 149 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The Commissionuncil should be empowered to specify, in delegated acts adopted under this Regulation, appropriate standard best practices for border surveillance, concerning in particular the new technologies that Member States may use, while taking into account the type of borders (land, sea or air), the impact levels attributed to each external border section in accordance with Article 34 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 and other relevant factors, as a specific response to situations of instrumentalisation of migrants.
Amendment 151 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The Commission should be empowered to specify, in delegated acts adopted under this Regulation,uncil could recommend appropriate standards for border surveillance, concerning in particular the new technologies that Member States may use, while taking into account the type of borders (land, sea or air), the impact levels attributed to each external border section in accordance with Article 34 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 and other relevant factors, as a specific response to situations of instrumentalisation of migrants.
Amendment 152 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) In an area without internal border controls, persons should be able to move freely, and in security between Member States. In this regard, it should be clarified that the prohibition of controls at internal borders does not affect the competence of Member StatesThere shall be no prohibition of controls at internal borders and Member States have competence to carry out checks on their territory, including at their internal borders, for purposes other than border control. It should, in particular, be clarified that national competent authorities, including health or law enforcement authorities, remain, in principle, free to carry out checks in the exercise of public powers provided for under national law.
Amendment 159 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) While the prohibition of internal border controls also extends to checks having equivalent effectincrease security and safety of citizens, checks by competent authorities should not be considered equivalent to the exercise of border checks where they do not have border control as an objective, where they are based on general information and experience of the competent authorities regarding possible threats to public security or public policy, including where they aim to combat irregularllegal stay or residence and cross-border crimes linked to irregular migration, where they are devised and executed in a manner clearly distinct from systematic checks on persons at the external borders,llegal migration and where they are conducted at transport hubs, such as ports, train or bus stations and airports or directly on board of passenger transport services, and where they are based on risk analysis.
Amendment 162 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) While the prohibition of internal border controls also extends to checks having equivalent effects, checks by competent authorities should not be considered equivalent to the exercise of border checks where they do not have border control as an objective, where they are based on general information and experience of the competent authorities regarding possible threats to public security or public policy, including where they aim to combat irregularllegal stay or residence and cross-border crimes linked to irregularllegal migration, where they are devised and executed in a manner clearly distinct from systematic checks on persons at the external borders, and where they are conducted at transport hubs, such as ports, train or bus stations and airports or directly on board of passenger transport services, and where they are based on risk analysis.
Amendment 163 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) While irregularllegal entry and migratory flows should not, per se, be considered to bconstitute a threat to public policy orand internal security, they may require additional measures to ensure the functioning of the Schengen areasuch as enhanced controls on the internal border and internal identity checks on foreigners in Member States.
Amendment 170 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) The combatting of illegal residence or stay and of cross-border crime linked to irregularllegal migration such as human trafficking, migrant smuggling and document fraud and other forms of cross- border crime could in particular encompass measures allowing the verification of the identity, nationality and residence status of persons provided that such verifications are non-systematic and carried out on the basis of risk analysis.
Amendment 175 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) The use of modern technologies to monitor traffic flows, notably on motorways and other important roads determined by the Member States, can be instrumental in addressing threats to public policy or internal security. The prohibition of internal border controls should not be understood asre shall be nothing to preventing the lawful exercise of police or other public powers to carry out checks in and beyond the internal border areas. This includes checks that entail the use of monitoring and surveillance technologies which are generally used in the territory or that are based on a risk assessment forserve the purpose of protectenhancing internal security. The use of such technologies for checks should therefore not be considered as equivalent to border controls.
Amendment 179 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The prohibition of border controls at internal bordersre should not be any limit to the carrying out of checks provided for in other instruments of Union law. The rules provided for in this Regulation, should not therefore, affect the applicable rules regarding the carrying out of checks on passenger data against relevant databases in advance of arrivalof documents, identification or other information required to verify a persons identity or right to stay in the territory of a Member State.
Amendment 182 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) It is necessary to ensure that checks carried out by Member States in exercise of national competences remain fully consistent with an area that is free of internal border controls. In accordance with the case law of the Court of Justice, the more extensive the indications are that checks conducted by Member States at their border areas have an equivalent effect to border control, having regard to the objective of such checks, their territorial scope and possible differences compared to checks carried out in the remainder of the territory of the Member State concerned, the greater the need for strict and detailed rules and limitations laying down the conditions for the exercise, by the Member States, of their police powers in a border areaat their border areas have an equivalent effect to border control.
Amendment 186 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Measures need to be taken to address unauthorised movements of illegally staying third country nationals in an area without internal border controls. In order to strengthen the functioning of the Schengen area. In order to strengthen security and safety, Member States should be able to take additional measures to counter irregularllegal movements between Member States, and combat illegal stays. Where national law enforcement authorities of a Member State apprehend illegally staying third country nationals at the internal borders as part of cross- border police operational cooperation it should be possible for those authorities to refuse such persons the right to enter or remain in their territory and to transfer them to the Member State from which they entered. The Member State from where the person came directly should in turn be required to receive the apprehended third country nationals.
Amendment 193 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) The procedure by which a Member State may transfer apprehended illegally staying third country nationals to a Member State from where the person came directly should take place swiftly but be subject to safeguards and carried out in full respect of fundamental rights and the principle of non-discrimination enshrined in Article 21 of the Charter, to prevent racial profiling. It should be possible for the authorities to carry out a verification of relevant information immediately available to the authorities concerning the movements of the persons concerned. Such information may include objective elements that would allow the authorities to conclude that the person had recently travelled from another Member States, such as the possession of documents, including receipts or invoices, evidencing recent travel from another Member State. Third country nationals subject to the transfer procedure should be provided with a reasoned decision in writing. While the decision should be immediately enforceable, the third country national should be afforded an effective remedy to appeal against or seek review of the transfer decision. This remedy should not have suspensive effect.
Amendment 197 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) The transfer procedure provided for under this Regulation should not affect the existing possibility for Member States to return irregular third country nationals illegally having entered their territory in accordance with bilateral agreements or arrangements referred to in Article 6(3) of Directive 2008/115/EC (the “Return Directive”), where such persons are detected outside of the vicinity of internal borders. In order to facilitate the application of such agreements, and to complement the objective of protecting the area without internal borders, the Member States should be afforded the possibility to conclude new agreements or arrangements and update existing ones. The Commission should be notified of any such modifications or updates of new agreements or arrangements. Where a Member State has taken back a third country national under the procedure provided for in this Regulation or on the basis of a bilateral agreement or arrangement, the Member State concerned should be required to issue a return decision in accordance with the Return Directive. In order to ensure consistency between the new procedures provided for in this Regulation and existing rules on the return of third country nationals, a targeted modification of Article 6(3) of the Return Directive is therefore necessary.
Amendment 199 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) In exceptional cases, addressing threats to the Schengen areaUpholding public safety and security may require the adoption, by the Member States, of measures at the internal borders. Member States remain competent to determine the need for the temporary reintroduction or prolongation of border controls. Under the existing rules, the reintroduction of controls at internal borders is provided for in circumstances where a serious threat to internal security or public policy manifests itself in a single Member State for a limited period ofThe reintroduction or prolongation of controls at internal borders is ultimately a decision of the Member States and does not require there to be a threat to internal security or public policy manifested at the time. In particular, terrorism and organised crime, large scale public health emergencies or large scale or high profile international events such as sporting, trade or political events can amount to a serious threats to public policy or internal security which may require additional measures at the internal borders.
Amendment 205 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) Furthermore, a serious threat to public policy or internal security can also result from large scale unauthorised movements of irregularllegal migrants between the Member States where this creates a situation putting a strain on the overall resources and capacities of the responsible national services, where the other means provided for under this Regulation are not sufficient to address these inflows and movements. In this context, Member States should be able to rely on objective and quantified reports on unauthorised movements whenever available, in particular, when produced on a regular basis by the competent Union agencies in line with their respective mandates. It should be possible for a Member State to use the information provided by thenational, regional, local or international agencies to demonstrate the exceptional character of the identified threat caused by unauthorised movement in the risk assessment, in order to justify the reintroduction of internal border controls on this ground, though no such justification shall be required.
Amendment 206 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
Amendment 210 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) TheNo new Schengen area safeguard mechanism should allow the Council to adopt, upon a proposal by the Commission,is required for the Member States to adopt a decision authorising the reintroduction or prolongation of internal border controls, where this is. No justifiedcation by a particular threat, identified on the basis of notifications received from individual Member States, or other available information, in particular a risk assessment, in case of prolongation ofs required for Member States to prolong internal border controls beyond six months. Given the politically sensitive nature of such a decision which regulates the possibility for Member States to reintroduce or prolong internal border control in particular circumstances, implementing powers to adopt a decision should be conferred on the Council, acting on a proposal from the Commissionthe Commission shall refrain from comment on decisions to reintroduce or prolong internal border controls.
Amendment 214 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) In determining whether a reintroduction or prolongation of internal border controls by the Member States is justified, the Council should take into account whether any other measures that could ensure a high level of security within the territory, suchThe Member States shall be responsible for determining whether as reinforced checks in the internal border areas by the competent authorities, are available. In the event that a prolongation of the controls is not considered justified, the Commission should, instead, recommend the use of other measures deemed more appropriate to address the identified threattroduction or prolongation of internal border controls is warranted.
Amendment 217 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) The establishment of theany new Schengen area safeguard mechanismmechanism or provision should not affect the right of Member States to have prior recourse to unilateral measures in accordance with the Regulation, where the situation so requires. However, once adopted, the Union measure should become the single basis for a coordinated response to the threat identifiedtake unilateral measures.
Amendment 219 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) In order to ensure compliance with the principle of proportionality, the decision of the Council should be adopted for a limited period of time of up to six months that may be prolonged subject to regular review upon a proposal from the Commission, as long as the threat is found to persist. The initial decision should include an assessment of the expected impact of the measures adopted, including its adverse side-effects, with a view to determining if controls at internal borders are justified or whether less restrictive measures could be applied in their place in an effective manner. Subsequent decisions should take account of the evolution of the identified threat. Member State sovereignty, the decision of the Council should be adopted for an unlimited period of time. The Member States should immediatelycan notify the Commission and the Member States of the reintroduction of internal border controls in accordance with the decision of the Council.
Amendment 225 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) Reintroduction of internal border controls should also remain possible where serious deficiencies in the management of the external borders persist, putting at risk the overall functioning of the area without internal border control. Periods where the border controls weSovereign states have the right to re introduced by Member States because the urgency of the situation required it or where the Council takes a decision to recommend the reintroduction because a threat affects a significant number of Member States, should not be included in the two years’ period applicable to reintroductions based on serious deficiencies at the external bordersorder controls if they deem such action necessary.
Amendment 228 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) The reintroduction of border controls at internal borders, whether on the basis of unilateral decisions of the Member States or at a Union level, has serious implications for the functioning of the Schengen area. In order to ensure that any decision to reintroduce border controls is only taken where necessary, as a measure of last resort, the decision on temporary reintroduction or prolongation of border controls should be based on common criteria, putting an emphasis on necessity and proportionality. The proportionality principle requires that the reintroduction of internal border controls be subject to safeguards that increase over timeree movement within the Schengen area.
Amendment 235 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) In the first instance, Member States should assess the appropriateness of internal border controls having regard to the nature of the serious threat identified. In this context, the Member States should pay particular attention to and assess the likely impact of internal border controls on the movement of persons within the area without internal border controls and the functioning of the cross-border regions. This assessment should be part of the notification that Member States are required to transmit to the Commission. In case of prolongation of internal border controls for foreseeable events beyond an initial period of six months, the Member State should also assess the appropriateness of alternative measures to pursue the same objectives as internal border controls, such as proportionate checks as carried out in the exercise of police or other public powers or through forms of police cooperation as provided for under Union law, and the possibility to use the transfer procedureMember States should consider the effects of reintroduced internal border controls having regard to the nature of the serious threat identified.
Amendment 239 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) In order to limit harmful consequences resulting fromassess the effect of the reintroduction of internal border controls, any decision to reintroduce internal border controls should be accompanied by mitigating measures if needed. Such measures should include measures to assure a smooth operation of transit of goods and transport personnel and seafarers by the establishment of ‘green lanes’. In addition, and to take account of the need to ensure the movement of persons whose activities may be essential for preserving the supply chain or the provision of essential services, Member States should also apply the existing guidelines on cross-border workers45 . Against this background, the rules for the reintroduction of border controls at internal borders should take account of the guidelines and recommendations adopted throughout the COVID-19 pandemic as a solid safety net for the Single Market, for the purpose of assuring that they are applied by the Member States, where appropriate, as mitigating measures during reintroduced internal border controls. Measures should in particular be identified with a view to ensuring the uninterrupted functioning of the Single Market and safeguarddata collection and analysis which should be shared with the Member States and the Commission. Such assessments should also include measurement of the positive effects ing the interests of cross-border regions and of ‘twin cities’ including for instance authorisations or derogations for the inhabitants offight against cross- border regions. _________________ 45 2020/C 102 I/03crime.
Amendment 244 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) The notification to be provided by the Member States should be decisive when assessing compliance with the criteria and conditions for a temporary reintroduction of internal border controlsMember States can provide when reintroducing internal border controls should outline both expected positive and possible negative effects of the decision. In order to ensure a comparable set of information, the Commission shoulduncil can adopt a template for the notification of reintroduction of border controls at internal borders in anby way of a Council implementing actdecision. Member States should be entitled to classify all or parts of the information provided in the notification, without prejudice to the functioning of appropriate and secure police cooperation channels.
Amendment 250 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) In order to ensure that internal border controls are truly a last resort measure applied only for as long as necessary and in order to allow for assessing the necessity and proportionality of internal border controls to address foreseeable threats, Member States should prepare a risk assessment to be submitted to the Commission when internal border controls are prolonged beyond an initial six months in response to foreseeable threats. The Member States must in particular, explain,eated as a proportional measure to address foreseeable threats, Member States are welcome to share with the Council and Commission an assessment outlining why internal border controls are prolonged or reintroduced as well as the scale and evolution of theany identified serious threat, including how long the identified serious threat is expected to persist and whichthreat and whether all or only some sections of the internal borders may be affected, as well as their coordination measures with the other Member States that are impacted or likely to be impacted by such measures.
Amendment 256 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) The Commission should be entitled tocan request additional information based on the notification received, including on the risk assessment oron cooperation and coordination measures with the Member States affected by the planned prolongation or reintroduction of border control at internal borders. Where the notification does not comply with the minimum requirements, the Commission should discuss the notification with the Member State concerned and request additional information or a resubmission of the notification.
Amendment 259 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) In order to ensure a sufficient degree of transparency of the actionmeasures affecting travel without internal border controls, themovement between Member States the Council should alsobe inform the European Parliament and the Counciled about the main elements concerning the planned reintroduction or prolongation of border controls. In justified cases, Member States may also classify such information. Every year, pursuant to Article 33 of the Schengen Borders Code, the Commission should present to the European Parliament and to the Council a report on the functioning of the area without internal border control (‘State of Schengen report’) which should pay particular attention to thesecondary movements and the general situation as regards the unauthorised movements of third country nationals, building on the available information from the relevant Anational, regional, local or international agencies and data analysis from relevant information systems. It should alsonot assess the necessity and proportionality of the reintroductions of border controls inas the period covered by that Reportse are decisions of sovereign Member States. The State of Schengen report shall also cover the reporting obligations resulting from Article 20 of the Schengen Evaluation Mechanism46 . _________________ 46 Council Regulation (EU) No 1053/2013 of 7 October 2013 establishing an evaluation and monitoring mechanism to verify the application of the Schengen acquis and repealing the Decision of the Executive Committee of 16 September 1998 setting up a Standing Committee on the evaluation and implementation of Schengen, OJ L 295, 6.11.2013, p. 27positive effects on the fight against cross border crime of reintroduced or prolonged border controls.
Amendment 261 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) The mechanism for the temporary reintroduction of border controls at internal borders in urgent situations or to address foreseeable threats should provide for a possibility, for the Commission, to organise consultations between Member States, including at the request of any Member Stateshould be accompanied by consultations between Member States and when appropriate, the Commission. Relevant Union Aagencies shcould be involved in this process in order to share their expertise, where appropriate. Such consultations should look into the modalities of carrying out internal border controls and their time-line, possible mitigating measures as well as the possibilities of applying alternative measures instead. Where the Commission or a Member State has issued an opinion expressing concerns regarding the reintroduction of border controls, such consultations should be mandatory.
Amendment 265 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) The Commission and Member States should retain the possibility to express any concern as regards the necessity and proportionality of a decision of a Member State to reintroduce or prolong internal border controls for reason of urgency or to address a foreseeable threat. In case controls at internal borders are reintroduced and prolonged for foreseeable threats for combined periods exceeding eighteen months, it should be a requirement for the Commission to issue an opinion assessing the necessity and proportionality of such internal border controls. Where a Member State considers that there are exceptional situations justifying the continued need for internal border controls for a period exceeding two years, the Commission should issue a follow-up opinion. Such an opinion is without prejudice to the enforcement measures, including infringement actions, which the Commission may take at any time against any Member State for failure to comply with its obligations under Union law. Where an opinion is issued, the Commission should launch consultations with the Member States concerned.
Amendment 269 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) The Commission and Member States should retain the possibility to express any concern as regards the necessity and proportionality of a decision of a Member State to reintroduce internal border controls for reason of urgency or to address a foreseeable threat. In case controls at internal borders are reintroduced and prolonged for foreseeable threats for combined periods exceeding eighteen36 months, it should be a requirement for the Commission to issue an opinion assessing the necessity and proportionality of such internal border controls. Where a Member State considers that there are exceptional situations justifying the continued need for internal border controls for a period exceeding twosix years, the Commission should issue a follow-up opinion. Such an opinion is without prejudice to the enforcement measures, including infringement actions, which the Commission may take at any time against any Member State for failure to comply with its obligations under Union law. Where an opinion is issued, the Commission should launch consultations with the Member States concerned.
Amendment 273 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
Recital 45
Amendment 279 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) When implementing this Regulation, Member States shall not discriminate against persons on grounds of sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientationbe empowered to make decisions enhancing their security interests and safety of citizens.
Amendment 282 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) The competent authorities shall use their powers to carry out checks within the territory and apply relevant national procedures in full respect of the rules on data protection under Union law. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council or Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council apply to the processing of personal data by competent national authorities for the purposes of this Regulanational rules on data protection, in their respective field of application.
Amendment 284 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) The objective of this Regulation is to strengthen security and safety of citizens by enhancing the functioning of the Schengen area. This objective cannot be achieved by Member States acting alone. Therefore, an amendment of the common rules established at Union level is necessary. Thus, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out i, however, sincere cooperation and coordination that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objecs added value for all partives.
Amendment 285 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, as annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark and any other Member state with an opt-out from the Justice and Home Affairs pillar is not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application. Given that this Regulation builds upon the Schengen acquis, Denmark shall, in accordance with Arand any other Member State with an opt-out from the Justicle 4 of that Protocol,and Home Affairs pillar shall decide within a period of six months after the Council has decided on this Regulation whether it will implement it in its national law.
Amendment 286 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54
Recital 54
Amendment 287 #
(55) This Regulation respects fundamental rights and observesincluding the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Unght of sovereign states to erect border barriers and conduct border controls in line with national legal provisions.
Amendment 294 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Regulation (EU) No 2016/399
Article 2 – point 27
Article 2 – point 27
27. ‘instrumentalisation of migrants’ refers to a situation where a third country instigates irregular migratory flows into the Union, assists, enables, encourages or facilitates flows of migrants entering into the territory of Member States illegally by actively encouraging or facilitating the movement of third country nationals to the external borders, onto or from within its territory and then onwards to those external borders, where such actions are indicative of an intention of a third country to destabilise the Unione or a Member State, where the nature of such actions is liable to put at risk essential State functions, including its territorial integrity, the maintenance of law and order or the safeguard of its national securitymore Member States or the Union;
Amendment 299 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 2016/399
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. In a situation of instrumentalisation of migrants, Member States may limitreduce the number of border crossing points as notified pursuant to paragraph 1 or their opening hours where theto zero if circumstances so require.
Amendment 302 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 2016/399
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 309 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) No 2016/399
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. The border guards shall use stationary or mobile unitsany means required to carry out border surveillance. That surveillance shall be carried out in such a way as to prevent and discourage persons from unauthorised border crossings between border crossing points and from circumventing the checks at border crossing points.
Amendment 322 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) No 2016/399
Article 13 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Those technical means may include modern technologies including drones and motion sensors, as well as mobile units or physical barriers erected to prevent unauthorised border crossings into the Union.
Amendment 327 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) No 2016/399
Article 13 – paragraph 7
Article 13 – paragraph 7
7. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 37 concerning additional measures governing surveillance, including the development of standards for borderMember States retain the right to adopt provisions and implement measures in accordance with applicable national law concerning additional measures governing surveillance, in particular the use of surveillance and monitoring technologies at the external borders, taking into account the type of borders, the impact levels attributed to each external border section in accordance with Article 34 of the Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 and other relevant factors.
Amendment 336 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EU) No 2016/399
Article 21a – paragraph 1
Article 21a – paragraph 1
1. This Article shall apply to situations where the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control or the Commissionrelevant authorities have identifyied the existence inof one or more third countries of an infectious disease with epidemic potential as defined by the relevant instruments of the World Health OrganizationMember States by way of unanimous decision in the Council.
Amendment 340 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EU) No 2016/399
Article 21a– paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 21a– paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
2. The Council, on the basis of a proposal by the Commission, may adopt an implementing regulation, providing for temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States.
Amendment 344 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EU) No 2016/399
Article 21a – paragraph 3
Article 21a – paragraph 3
Amendment 346 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – paragraph 1
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 21a – paragraph 4
Article 21a – paragraph 4
Amendment 368 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 23a – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 23a – paragraph 1 – point d
d) there are clear indications that the third country national has arrived directly from another Member State, on the basis of information immediately available to the apprehending authorities, including statements from the person concerned, identity, travel or other documents found on that person or the results of searches carried out in relevant national and Union databases.
Amendment 371 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 24 – paragraph 1
Article 24 – paragraph 1
Amendment 372 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 25 General framework for the temporary reintroduction or prolongation of border control at internal borders
Amendment 373 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Regulation (EU) No 2016/399
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. Where, in the area without internal border controls, there is a serious threat to public policy or internal security in a Member State, that Member State may exceptionallyMember State retain the right to reintroduce border controls at all or specific parts of its internal and external borders.
Amendment 374 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Regulation (EU) No 2016/399
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
A serious threat to public policy or internal security may be considered to arise from, in particular:
Amendment 381 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Regulation (EU) No 2016/399
Article 25 – paragraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 2
2. Border controls may only be introduced pursuant to Articles 25a and 28 whereif a Member State has establishdetermined that such a measure is necessary and proportionate, taking into account the criteria referred to in Article 26(1), and, in case such controls are prolonged, also the criteria referred to in Article 26(2). Border controls may also be reintroduced in accordance with Article 29, taking into account the criteria referred to in Article 30national legal and constitutional provisions.
Amendment 385 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25 – paragraph 3
Article 25 – paragraph 3
3. Where the same threat continues to persista Member State deems it necessary and proportionate, border controls at internal borders may be prolonged in accordance with Articles 25a, 28 or 29definitely.
Amendment 387 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Regulation (EU) No 2016/399
Article 25a – paragraph 1
Article 25a – paragraph 1
1. Where a serious threat to public policy or, internal security or safety of citizens in a Member State is unforeseeable and requires immediate action, the Member State may, on an exceptional basis, immediately reintroduce border control at internal borders.
Amendment 388 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25a – paragraph 2
Article 25a – paragraph 2
2. The Member State shallis welcome to, at the same time as reintroducing border control under paragraph 1, notify the Commission and the other Member States of the reintroduction of border controls, in accordance with Article 27(1).
Amendment 395 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25a – paragraph 3
Article 25a – paragraph 3
3. For the purposes of paragraph 1, border control at internal borders may be immediately reintroduced for a limited period of up to one month. If the serious threat to public policy or internal security persists beyond that period, the Member State may prolong the border control at internal borders for further periods, leading to a maximum duration not exceeding three monthsn unlimited period of time.
Amendment 396 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25a – paragraph 3
Article 25a – paragraph 3
3. For the purposes of paragraph 1, border control at internal borders may be immediately reintroduced for a limited period of up to one36 months. If the serious threat to public policy or internal security persists beyond that period, the Member State may prolong the border control at internal borders for further periods, leading to a maximum duration not exceeding three monthsix years.
Amendment 398 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25a – paragraph 4
Article 25a – paragraph 4
4. Where a serious threat to public policy or internal security is foreseeable in a Member State, the Member State shallis welcome to notify the Commission and the other Member States and the Commission in accordance with Article 27(1), at the latest four weeks before the planned reintroduction of border controls, or within a shorter period where the circumstances giving rise to the need to reintroduce border controls at internal borders become known less than four weeks before the planned reintroduction of border controls.
Amendment 401 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25a – paragraph 5
Article 25a – paragraph 5
5. For the purposes of paragraph 4, and without prejudice to Article 27a(4), border control at internal borders may be reintroduced for a period of up to six36 months. Where the serious threat to public policy or internal security or safety persists beyond that period, the Member State may prolong the border control at internal borders for renewable periods of up to six months. Any prolongation shallcan be notified to the Commission and the other Member States in accordance with Article 27 and within the time limits referred to in paragraph 4. Subject to Article 27a(5), the maximum duration of border control at internal borders shall not exceed two years.
Amendment 403 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25a – paragraph 5
Article 25a – paragraph 5
5. For the purposes of paragraph 4, and without prejudice to Article 27a(4), border control at internal borders may be reintroduced for a period of up to six months. Where the serious threat to public policy or internal security persists beyond that period, the Member State may prolong the border control at internal borders for renewablen unlimited periods of up to six months. Any prolongation shall be notified to the Commission and the other Member States in accordance with Article 27 and within the time limits referred to in paragraph 4. Subject to Article 27a(5), the maximum duration of border control at internal borders shall not exceed two yearstime.
Amendment 411 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 26 – title
Article 26 – title
Article 26 Criteria for the temporary reintroduction and prolongation of border control at internal borders
Amendment 412 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 26 – paragraph 1
Article 26 – paragraph 1
1. To establish whether theMember States retain the right to determine whether establishing or reintroduction ofing border control at internal borders is necessary and proportionate in accordance with Article 25, a Member State shall in particular. In their assessment they may consider:
Amendment 415 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the appropriateness of the measure of reintroducing border controls at internal border, having regard to the nature of the serioussecurity and safety situation and the nature of any threat identified and in particular, whether the reintroduction of border controls at internal borders is likely to adequately remedy the threat to public policy orand internal or public security;
Amendment 419 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the likelypossible impact of such a measure on:
Amendment 423 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b – indent 2
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b – indent 2
— the functioning of the cross-border regions, taking into account the strong social and economic ties between them, especially in regions where free movement of people's and goods pre-dates the single market and the European Union.
Amendment 442 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27
Article 27
Article 27 Notification of temporary reintroduction of internal border controls and risk assessment
Amendment 443 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 1
Article 27 – paragraph 1
1. Notifications by Member States of the reintroduction or prolongation of internal border controls shallcould contain the following information:
Amendment 447 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(f a) the expected positive effects in the fight against cross border crime
Amendment 448 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 1
Article 27 – paragraph 1
The notification shallcan be provided in accordance with a template to be established by the Commissionuncil by an implementing act anddecision to be made available online. That implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 38(2).”
Amendment 451 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 2
Article 27 – paragraph 2
2. Where border controls have been in place for six36 months in accordance with Article 25a(4), any subsequent notification for the prolongation of such controls shall include a risk assessment. The risk assessment shall present the scale and anticipated evolution of the identified serious threat, in particular how long the identified serious threat is expected to persist and which, or all, sections of the internal borders may be affected, as well as information regarding coordination measures with the other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by such measures.
Amendment 457 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 3
Article 27 – paragraph 3
3. Where the reintroduction of border controls or its prolongation refers to large scale unauthorised movements referred to in Article 25(1) point (b), the risk assessment shall also provide information on the scale and trends of such unauthorised movements, including any information obtained from the relevant EUnational, regional, local or international agencies in line with their respective mandates and data analysis from relevant information systems.
Amendment 459 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
4. The Member State concerned shall upon request by the Commissionuncil, provide any further information, including on the coordination measures with the Member States affected by the planned prolongation of border control at internal borders as well as further information needed to assess the possible use of measures referred to in Article 23 and 23a .
Amendment 461 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 Regulation (EU) 2016/399
5. Member States submitting a notification under paragraphs 1 or 2 may, where necessary and in accordance with national law, decide to classify all or parts of the notified information. Such classification shall not prexclude access to information, throughthe possibility for appropriate and secure police cooperation channels, by withe other Member States affected by the temporary reintroduction of border controls at internal borders.
Amendment 471 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27a – paragraph 3
Article 27a – paragraph 3
3. Following receipt of notifications submitted in relation to a prolongation of border control at the internal border under Article 25a(4) which leads to the continuation of border controls at internal borders for eighteenthirty six months in total, the Commissionuncil shall issue an opinion on necessity and proportionality of such internal border controls.
Amendment 479 #
5. Where a Member State considers that there are exceptional situations justifying the continuedis a need for internal border controls in excess of the maximum period referred to in Article 25(5), it shall notify the Commission in accordance with Article 27(2). The new notification from the Member State shall substantiate the continued threat to public policy or internal security, taking into account the opinion of the Commission given pursuant to paragraph 3. The Commission shall issue a follow up opinion.
Amendment 481 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 28
Article 28
Article 28 Specific mechanism where the serious threat to public policy or internal security puts at risk the overall functioning of the area without internal border controlsSchengen area
Amendment 482 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 Regulation (EU) 2016/399
1. Where the Commission, establishes that the sameA Member State does not have to prove that a serious threat to internal security or, public policy affects a majority of Member States, putting at risk the overall functioning of the area without internal border, it may, make a proposal to the Council to adopt an implementing decision authorising theor safety exists to reintroduction ofe border controls by Member States where the available measures referred to in Articles 23 and 23a are not sufficient to address the threatfor an unlimited period of time.
Amendment 487 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Amendment 488 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 28 – paragraph 2
Article 28 – paragraph 2
2. The decision shall cover a period of up to thirty six months and may be renewed, upon proposal from the Commissionuncil, for further periods of up to six months as long as the threat persists, taking into account the review referred to in paragraph 5years.
Amendment 492 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 28 – paragraph 5
Article 28 – paragraph 5
5. The Commissionuncil shall review the evolution of the identified threat as well as the impact of the measures adopted in accordance with the Council decision referred to in paragraph 1, with a view to assess whether the measures remain justified.
Amendment 498 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13
6. Member States shallare welcome to immediately notify the Commission and the other Member States in the Council of a reintroduction of border controls in accordance with the decision referred to in paragraph 1.
Amendment 501 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 28 – paragraph 7
Article 28 – paragraph 7
7. The Commission may issue a non- binding recommendation indicating other measures as referred to in Articles 23 and 23a that could complement internal border controls or be more suitable toin addressing the identified threat to internal security or public policy as referred to in paragraph 1.
Amendment 503 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point b
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 31 – paragraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 2
2. Where a Member State notifies the Commission and the other Member States of the reintroduction of border controls in accordance with Article 27(1), it shallis welcome to at the same time inform the European Parliament and the Council of the following:
Amendment 515 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point b
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 31 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
Article 31 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
e a) the expected positive effects on the fight against cross border crime
Amendment 519 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point b
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 31 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 31 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
The classification of information shall notcan preclude information from being made available byto the Commission and to the European Parliament if the Member State deems such action to be necessary and proportionate. The transmission and handling of information and documents transmitted to the European Parliament under this Article shall comply with rules concerning the forwarding and handling of classified information which are applicable between the European Parliament and the Commission.
Amendment 520 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. Within four weeks of the lifting of border control at internal borders,hen it deems appropriate Member States which have carried out border controls at internal borders shallare welcome to present a report to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on the reintroduction and, where applicable, the prolongation of border control at internal borders.
Amendment 522 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 33 – paragraph 2
Article 33 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to the first paragraph 1, where border controls are prolonged as referred to in Article 25a(5), the Member State concerned shallis welcome to submit a report at the expiry of twelve months and every twelve months thereafter if border control is exceptionally maintained.
Amendment 526 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 33 – paragraph 3
Article 33 – paragraph 3
Amendment 529 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 33 – paragraph 4
Article 33 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission shalluncil can adopt a uniform format to be used for such reports and make it available online.
Amendment 530 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 33 – paragraph 5
Article 33 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission may issue an opinion on that ex-post assessment of the temporary reintroduction of border control at one or more internal borders or at parts thereof. This opinion shall include an estimate of the effect on cross border crime of reintroduced internal border controls.
Amendment 531 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 33 – paragraph 6
Article 33 – paragraph 6
6. The Commission shall present to the European Parliament and to the Council, at least annually, a report on the functioning of the area without internal border control entitledSchengen area (‘State of Schengen report’). The report shall include a list of all decisions to reintroduce border control at internal borders taken during the relevant year. It shall also include information on the trends within the Schengen area as regards the unauthorisedillegal movements of third country nationals, taking into account available information from the relevant Unionnational, regional, local or international agencies, data analysis from relevant information systems and an assessment of the necessity and proportionalityeffect on cross border crime operations of the reintroductions of border controls in the period covered by that report.
Amendment 535 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point h
h) Member States shallare welcome to notify to the Commission the local administrative areas considered as the cross-border regions and any relevant changes thereto.
Amendment 537 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Amendment 540 #
1. Decisions shallmust not state the grounds for finding that a person has no right to stay. They shall take effect immediately.
Amendment 541 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Annex XII – paragraph 3 – point f
Annex XII – paragraph 3 – point f
f) the Member States, country of origin or third country partner state reception centre to which the third country national was sent back.
Amendment 542 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Annex XII – paragraph 4 – point d
Annex XII – paragraph 4 – point d
d) the Member State(s), countries of origin or transit or third country partner state reception centres to which persons were sent back;
Amendment 543 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Annex XII – paragraph 5
Annex XII – paragraph 5
5. Persons refused entry or the right to stay shall have thea limited right to appeal. Appeals shall only take into consideration and shall be conducted in accordance with national law. A written indication of contact points able to provide information on representatives competent to act on behalf of the third-country national in accordance with national law shall also be given to the third-country national in a language that they understand or are reasonably supposed to understand. Lodging such an appeal shall not have suspensive effect.
Amendment 546 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Directive 2008/115/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. Member States may refrain from issuing a return decision to a third-country national staying illegally on their territory if the third-country national concerned is taken back by another Member State in accordance with the procedure provided for in Article 23a of the Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council* or under bilateral agreements or arrangements with other Member States or third country partner states hosting asylum processing and reception centres.
Amendment 547 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Directive 2008/115/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Member States shallare welcome to without delay notify any existing, amended or new bilateral agreements or arrangements to the Commission.”