[ParlTrack]

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.

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

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 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 covered.

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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.

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Petri SARVAMAA, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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 Regulation.

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, József NAGY, Artis PABRIKS, Kinga GÁL, Pál CSÁKY, Pavel POC, Miroslav POCHE, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Jan KELLER, Monika SMOLKOVÁ, Andrea BOCSKOR, Vladimír MAŇKA

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.

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ, Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ, Artis PABRIKS, Richard SULÍK

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.deleted

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Petri SARVAMAA, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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.deleted

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Petri SARVAMAA, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Petri SARVAMAA, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, József NAGY, Artis PABRIKS, Pál CSÁKY, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pavel POC, Jan KELLER, Monika SMOLKOVÁ, Vladimír MAŇKA, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Miroslav POCHE

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.

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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.

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Mariya GABRIEL, Emil RADEV, Artis PABRIKS

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. That network should promote the exchange of best practices concerning the examination of an asylum application by the competent authorities of Member States under this Regulation and initiate the training of the employees of those authorities.

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Petri SARVAMAA, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Mariya GABRIEL, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – indent 5

- the sibling or siblings of the applicant, where the proof of the relationship is provided;

2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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

2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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

2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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

2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE

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
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Any Member State shall retain the right to send an applicant to a safe third country, subject to the rules and safeguards laid down in Directive 2013/32/EU.

2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Mariya GABRIEL, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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.

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

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:

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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.

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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.

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

József NAGY, Richard SULÍK, Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ, Artis PABRIKS

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

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – title

Information ~~in the automated~~ system

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. The ~~automated~~ system referred to in Article 44(1) shall indicate in real time:

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point c

~~(c) the number of third country nationals resettled by each Member Sta~~delete;d

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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

2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE

József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ, Richard SULÍK, Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ, Artis PABRIKS

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Krišjānis KARIŅŠ, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, József NAGY, Artis PABRIKS, Pál CSÁKY, Kinga GÁL, Pavel POC, Miroslav POCHE, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Andrea BOCSKOR, Vladimír MAŇKA, Monika SMOLKOVÁ, Jan KELLER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1

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.

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ, Richard SULÍK, Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ, Artis PABRIKS

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Krišjānis KARIŅŠ, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

2. The reference key referred to in paragraph 1 shall be based on the following criteria for each Member State~~, according to Eurostat figures~~:

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – point a

(a) the size of the population ~~(50 % weighting)~~;

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) the total GDP ~~(50% weighting)~~;

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Mariya GABRIEL, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)

(ba) number of migrants already living in the Member State;

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – point b b (new)

(bb) integration capacity of the Member State;

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Krišjānis KARIŅŠ, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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).rticle 36 deleted

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ, Richard SULÍK, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ, Artis PABRIKS

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).rticle 36 deleted

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ, Richard SULÍK, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ, Artis PABRIKS

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Krišjānis KARIŅŠ, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, Mariya GABRIEL, József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Mariya GABRIEL, Artis PABRIKS, Emil RADEV

Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – title

~~Financial solidarity~~Opt-out mechanism

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, József NAGY, Artis PABRIKS, Pál CSÁKY, Kinga GÁL, Pavel POC, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Miroslav POCHE, Monika SMOLKOVÁ, Jan KELLER, Vladimír MAŇKA, Andrea BOCSKOR

Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – title

~~Financial s~~Solidarity

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, József NAGY, Artis PABRIKS, Pavel POC, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Miroslav POCHE, Monika SMOLKOVÁ, Jan KELLER, Vladimír MAŇKA, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Kinga GÁL

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Mariya GABRIEL, Artis PABRIKS, Emil RADEV

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Mariya GABRIEL, Emil RADEV, Artis PABRIKS

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Artis PABRIKS, József NAGY, Pál CSÁKY, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Vladimír MAŇKA, Jan KELLER, Monika SMOLKOVÁ, Miroslav POCHE, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Pavel POC

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Artis PABRIKS, József NAGY, Pál CSÁKY, Kinga GÁL, Pavel POC, Andrea BOCSKOR, Vladimír MAŇKA, Jan KELLER, Monika SMOLKOVÁ, Miroslav POCHE, Olga SEHNALOVÁ

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Mariya GABRIEL, Emil RADEV, Artis PABRIKS

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~~opt-out mechanism.

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ, Richard SULÍK, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ, Artis PABRIKS

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Krišjānis KARIŅŠ, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ, Richard SULÍK, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ, Artis PABRIKS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 39

Obligations of the Member State of 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 allocation

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Krišjānis KARIŅŠ, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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 Exchange of relevant information for security verification

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ, Richard SULÍK, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ, Artis PABRIKS

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ, Richard SULÍK, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ, Artis PABRIKS

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

~~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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ, Richard SULÍK, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ, Artis PABRIKS

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Petri SARVAMAA, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 42

~~For the costs to transfer an applicant to the Member State~~Article 42 deleted Costs 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.ransfers

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43

Cessation of corrective allocation 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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

József NAGY, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ, Richard SULÍK, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ, Artis PABRIKS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

József NAGY, Richard SULÍK, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ, Artis PABRIKS

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – title

~~Automated s~~System for registration, and monitoring ~~and the allocation~~ mechanism

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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~~a system shall be established.

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 2

2. The ~~automated~~ system shall consist of the central system and the communication infrastructure between the central system and the national infrastructures.

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

József NAGY, Richard SULÍK, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ, Artis PABRIKS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 45

Access to the automated system 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).rticle 45 deleted

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – title

Access to the ~~automated~~ system

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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~~.

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Artis PABRIKS, József NAGY, Pál CSÁKY, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Vladimír MAŇKA, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Miroslav POCHE, Pavel POC, Monika SMOLKOVÁ, Jan KELLER

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.

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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~~ shall be accessible 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].

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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~~ .

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Mariya GABRIEL, Emil RADEV, Artis PABRIKS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 1 a (new)

That network shall promote the exchange of best practices concerning the examination of an asylum application by the competent authorities of Member States under this Regulation and initiate the training of the employees of those authorities.

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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~~.

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Traian UNGUREANU, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

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). new~~deleted

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

Artis PABRIKS, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Traian UNGUREANU, Kinga GÁL, Andrea BOCSKOR, Pál CSÁKY, Brice HORTEFEUX, Roberts ZĪLE, Jussi HALLA-AHO, Anders VISTISEN, Anna ZÁBORSKÁ

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I

Formula for the reference key pursuant to Article 35 of the Regulation: Population effectMS27 GDP effectMS28 ShareMS = 50% Population effectMS + 50% GDP effectMS _________________ 27For three Member States, participation depends on the exercise of rights as set out in the relevant Protocols and other instruments. 28For three Member States, participation depends on the exercise of rights as set out in the relevant Protocols and other instruments.deleted

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

80 Amendments of Artis PABRIKS related to 2016/0133(COD)

ParlTrack - 2011-2024