59 Amendments of Joëlle MÉLIN related to 2016/0223(COD)
Amendment 28 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) A number of substantive changes are to be made to Council Directive 2011/95/EU of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third- country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection granted31 (recast). To ensure harmonisationupdates to and more convergence in asylum decisions and as regards the content of international protection in order to reduce incentives to move within the European Union and, ensure an equality of treatment of beneficiaries of international protection and avoid a rush of asylum applications, that Directive should be repealed and replaced by a Regulation. _________________ 31 OJ L 337, 20.12.2011, p. 9.
Amendment 29 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) A common policy on asylum, including a Common European Asylum System (CEAS) which is based on the full and inclusive application of the Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, as amended by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967 (Geneva Convention), is a constituent part of the European Union’s objective of establishing progressively an area of freedom, security and justice open to those who, forced by circumstances, legitimately seek protection in the Union. Such a policy should be governed by the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, including its financial implications, between the Member Statesreceiving applicants with a proven and legitimate reason for seeking protection in the Union.
Amendment 31 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The CEAS is based on common standards for asylum procedures, recognition and protection offered at Union level, reception conditions and a system for determining the Member State responsible for asylum seekers. Notwithstanding progress achieved so far in the progressive development of the CEAS, there are still significant disparities between the Member States in the types of procedures used, the recognition rates, the type of protection granted, the level of material reception conditions and benefits given to applicants for and beneficiaries of international protection. These divergences are important drivers of secondary movements and undermine the objective of ensuring that all applicants are equally treated wherever they apply in the Unioncapacity of Member States to manage, with full sovereignty, their legal immigration flows.
Amendment 32 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
Amendment 33 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 b (new)
Recital 3 b (new)
(3b) These divergences, and the failure to control secondary movements, may lead to illegal groupings of asylum seekers at strategic border points, with all the consequences on security, health and social affairs that have been observed in cases such as that of Calais.
Amendment 35 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) For a well-functioning CEAS, including of the Dublin system, substantial progress should be made regarding the convergence of national asylum systems with special regard to differing recognition rates and type of protection status in the Member States. In addition, rules on status review should be strengthened to ensure that protection is only granted to those who need it and for so long as it continues to be needed. Moreover, divergent practices regarding the duration of the residence permits should be avoided, and the rights granted to beneficiaries of international protection should be further clarified and harmonisRules on status review should be strengthened to ensure that protection is only granted to those who need it and for so long as it continues to be needed.
Amendment 37 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) A Regulation is therefore necessary to ensure a more consistent level of harmonisation throughout the Union In this context, the considerable difference between the concept of ‘asylum-seeking refugee’ and ‘migrant’ should be stressed. By definition, a ‘refugee’ is a person requesting temporary protection who is not intending to remain in the host country, but plands to provide a higher degree of legal certainty and trareturn to his or her country of origin once the required conditionsp arency met.
Amendment 39 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The main objective of this Regulation is, on the one hand, to ensure that Member States apply common criteria for the identification of persons genuinely in need of international protection, in order to avoid the abuses that are very frequently seen, and, on the other hand, to ensure that a common set of rights is available for those persons in all Member States.
Amendment 48 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The resources of the Asylum, Migration and Refugee Fund should be used to provide adequate support to Member States’ efforts in implementing the standards set by the Regulation, in particular to those Member States which are faced with specific and disproportionate pressure on their asylum systems, due in particular to their geographical or, demographic, social or economic situation.
Amendment 49 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) The European Union Agency for Asylum should provide adequate support in the application of this Regulation, in particular by providing experts to assist tplays only a supportive role. The Member States authorities to receive, register, and examine applications for international protection, providing updated information regarding third countries, including Country of Origin Information, and other relevant guidelines and tools. When applying this Regulation, Member States' authorities should take into account operational standards, indicative guidelines, and best practices developed by the European Union Agency for Asylum [the Agency]. When assessing applications for international protection, Member States' authorities should take particular account of the information, reports, common analysis and guidance on the situation in countries of origin developed at Union level by the Agency and the European networks on country of origin information in accordance with Articles 8 and 10 of Regulation34. _________________ 34 COM(2016) 271 finalre and remain the sole judges of their reception capacities, as they are most able to determine whether their economic, social and demographic situations enable them to receive applicants with dignity.
Amendment 52 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The notion of family members should take into account the different particular circumstances of dependency and the special attention to be paid to the best interests of the child. It should also reflect the reality of current migratory trends, according to which applicants often arrive to the territory of the Member States after a prolonged period of time in transit. The notion should therefore include families formed outside the country of origin, but before their arrival on the territory of the Member StateMember State’s reception capacity, along with the European notion of ‘family’, as defined by the customs and culture of the host country.
Amendment 53 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The recognition of refugee status is a declaratory act which should only be granted to legitimate applicants.
Amendment 54 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Protection can be provided, where they are willing and able to offer protection, either by the State or by parties or organisations, including international organisations, meeting the conditions set out in this Directive, which control a region or a larger area within the territory of the State. Such protection should be effective and of a non-temporary nature.
Amendment 56 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Where the State or agents of the State are the actors of persecution or serious harm, there should be a presumption that effective protection is notwas available to the applicant. When the applicant is an unaccompanied minor, the availability of appropriate care and custodial arrangements, which are in the best interests of the unaccompanied minor, should form part of the assessment as to whether that protection is effectively available.
Amendment 57 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) In accordance with relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, when assessing applications for international protection, the competent authorities of the Member States should use all methods necessary for the assessment of the applicant's credibility in a manner that respects the individual's rights as guaranteed by the Charter, in particular the right to human dignity and the respect for private and family life. Specifically as regards homosexuality, the individual assessment of the applicant's credibility should not be based on stereotyped notions concerning homosexuals andbut the applicant should not be submitted to detailed questioning or tests as to his or her sexual practices.
Amendment 60 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Committing a political crime is not, at present, in principle a ground justifying exclusion from refugee status. However, in accordance with relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, particularly cruel actions, where the act in question is disproportionate to the alleged political objective, and terrorist acts which are characterised by their violence towards civilian populations, even if committed with a purportedly political objective, should be regarded as non-political crimes and therefore canshould give rise to exclusion from refugee status.
Amendment 63 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) As regards the required proof in relation to the existence of a serious and individual threat to the life or person of an applicant, in accordance with relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union36, determining authorities should not require the applicant to adduce evidence that he is specifically targeted by reason of factors particular to his personal circumstances. However, tThe level of indiscriminate violence required to substantiate the application is lower if the applicant is able to show that he is specifically affected by reason of factors particular to his personal circumstance. Moreover, the existence of a serious and individual threat should exceptionally be established by the determining authorities solely on account of the presence of the applicant on the territory or relevant part of the territory of the country of origin provided the degree of indiscriminate violence characterising the armed conflict taking place reaches such a high level that there are substantial grounds for believing that a civilian, returned to the country or origin or to the relevant part of country of origin, would, solely on account of his presence on the territory of that country or region, face a real risk of being subject to the serious threat. _________________ 36 C-465/07.
Amendment 69 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) When the refugee status or the subsidiary protection status ceases to exist, the application of the decision by which the determining authority of a Member State revokes, ends or does not renew the status should be deferred for a reasonable period of time after adoption, in order to give the third-country national or stateless person concerned the possibility to make arrangements for returning to his or her country of origin or, in certain very specific cases of successful assimilation, to apply for residence on the basis of other grounds than those having justified the granting of international protection, such as family reasons, or reasons related to employment or to education, in accordance with relevant Union and national law.
Amendment 73 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) Beneficiaries of international protection should reside in the Member State which granted them protection. Those beneficiaries who are in possession of a valid travel document and a residence permit issued by a Member State applying the Schengen acquis in full, should be allowed to enter into and move freely within the territory of the Member States applying the Schengen acquis in full, for a period up to 90 days in any 180-day period in accordance with Schengen Borders Code38 and with Article 21 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement39. Beneficiaries of international protection can equally apply to reside in a Member State other than the Member State which granted protection, in accordance with relevant EU rules, notably on the conditions of entry and residence of third- country nationals for the purposes of highly skilled employment40 and national rules, and only with the agreement of the Member States concerned; however, this does not imply any transfer of the international protection and related rights. _________________ 38 Regulation 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders. 39 Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985 between the Governments of the States of the Benelux Economic Union, the Federal Republic of Germany and the French Republic on the gradual abolition of checks at their common borders. 40 COM(2016) 378 final.
Amendment 77 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) In order to discourage secondary movements within the European Union, the Long Term Residence Directive 2003/109/EC should be amended to provide that the 5-year period after which beneficiaries of international protection are eligible for the Long Term Resident status shouldmust be restarted each time the person is found in a Member State, other than the one that granted international protection, without a right to stay or to reside there in accordance with relevant Union or national law. After a beneficiary has committed three infringements, the person’s status as beneficiary of international protection shall be removed.
Amendment 85 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) Competent authorities may restrict the access to employed or self-employed activities as regard posts which involve the exercise of public authority, and responsibility for safeguarding the general interest of the State or other public authorities. In the context of exercising their right equal treatment as regards membership of an organisation representing workers or engaging in a specific occupation, beneficiaries of international protection mayust likewise be excluded from taking part in the management of bodies governed by public law and from holding an office governed by public law.
Amendment 86 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
Amendment 92 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
(50) Equal treatment should be provided for beneficiaries of international protection with nationals of the Member State granting protection as regards social securityBeneficiaries of international protection may not claim social security benefits until they have actively contributed through paying contributions.
Amendment 100 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51
Recital 51
(51) In addition, especially to avoid social hardship, it is appropriate to provide beneficiaries of international protection with social assistance without discrimination. However, aAs regards beneficiaries of subsidiary protection, Member States shouldmust be given some flexibility, to limit such rights to core benefits, which is to be understood as covering at least minimum income support, assistance in the case of illness, or pregnancy, and parental assistance, in so far as those benefits are granted to nationals under national law. In order to facilitate their integration, Member States should be given the possibility to make the access to certain type of social assistances specified in national law, for both refugees and beneficiaries of subsidiary protection, conditional on the effective participation of the beneficiary of international protection in integration measures.
Amendment 102 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
Amendment 108 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 53
Recital 53
(53) In order to facilitate the integration of beneficiaries of international protection into society, beneficiaries of international protection shall have access to integration measures, modalities to be set by the Member States. Member States may make the participation in such integration measures, such as language courses, civic integration courses, vocational training and other employment-related courses compulsory.
Amendment 109 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3
(3) ‘refugee’ means a third-country national who, owing to a well-foundedlegitimate fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership of a particular social group, is outsideleaves the country of nationality voluntarily and temporarily and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of that country, or a stateless person, who, being outside of leaves the country of former habitual residence voluntarily and temporarily for the same reasons as mentioned ,and is unable or, owing to such fear, unwilling to return to it, and to whom Article 12 does not apply;
Amendment 110 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
(4) ‘refugee status’ means the recognition by a Member State of a third- country national or a stateless person as a refugee; this is a temporary status that may be revoked in the event of a change of situation or a failure by the refugee to comply with the provisions of this Regulation;
Amendment 111 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
(6) ‘subsidiary protection status’ means the recognition by a Member State of a third-country national or a stateless person as a person eligible for subsidiary protection; this is a temporary status that may be revoked in the event of a change of situation or a failure by the refugee to comply with the provisions of this Regulation;
Amendment 113 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point a
(a) the spouse of the beneficiary of international protection or his or her unmarried partner in a stable relationship, where the law or practice of the Member State concerned treats unmarried couples in a way comparable to married couples under its law relating to third-country nationals, subject to the notion of ‘family unit’ as defined by the culture and customs of the Member States; in the case of a polygamous household, only one wife and the legitimate children of that relationship may be taken into account; the others shall be subject to the rules on the reception of individuals;
Amendment 114 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point b
(b) the minor children of the couples referred to in point (a) or of the beneficiary of international protection, on condition that they are unmarried and regardless oftaking into account whether they were born in orwedlock or, if necessary, whether it is possible to prove that they were born out of wedlock or adopted as defined under national law;
Amendment 118 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. A well-founded fear of being persecuted or a real risk of suffering serious harm may be based on events which have takentook place sincbefore the applicant left the country of origin.
Amendment 120 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. A well-founded fear of being persecuted or a real risk of suffering serious harm may be based on activities which the applicant has engaged in before and/or since he or she left the country of origin, in particular where it is established that the activities relied upon constitute the expression and continuation of convictions or orientations held in the country of origin.
Amendment 122 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Protection against persecution or serious harm shall be effective and of a non-temporary nature. That protection shall be considered to be provided when the actors referred to in paragraph 1 take reasonable steps to prevent the persecution or suffering of serious harm, among others, by operating an effective legal system for the detection, prosecution and punishment of acts constituting persecution or serious harm, and when the applicant has access to that protection.
Amendment 123 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. The assessment of the availability of internal protection shall be carried out once it has been established by the determining authority that the qualification criteria would otherwise apply. The burden of demonstrating the availability of internal protection shall rest on the determining authority. The applicant shall nomust be required to prove that, before seeking international protection, he or she has exhausted all possibilities to obtain protection in his or her country of origin.
Amendment 124 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Article 8 – paragraph 4
4. When considering the general circumstances prevailing in that part of the country which is the source of the protection as referred to in Article 7, the accessibility, effectiveness and durability of that protection shall be taken into account. When considering personal circumstances of the applicant, health, age, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity and social status shall in particular be taken into account together with an assessment of whether living in the part of the country of origin regarded as safe would not impose undue hardship on the applicantis possible.
Amendment 125 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) legal, administrative, police, and/or judicial measures which are in themselves discriminatory or which are implemented in a discriminatory manner; and with a clear intention to cause harm to the person;
Amendment 126 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) prosecution or punishment which is disproportionate or discriminatory and with a clear intention to cause harm to the person;
Amendment 127 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) denial of judicial redress resulting in a disproportionate or discriminatory punishment and with a clear intention to cause harm to the person;
Amendment 130 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. When assessing if an applicant has a well-founded fear of being persecuted it is immaterial whether the applicant actually possesses the racial, religious, national, social or political characteristic which attracts the persecution, provided that he or she can prove that such a characteristic is attributed to the applicant by the actor of persecution.
Amendment 131 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where points 1(a), (b), (c), (e) and (f) apply, the determining authority shall ascertain that the refugee has taken the steps required to return to his or her country of origin or, in specific cases of successful assimilation, has taken the steps required to remain lawfully in the Member State.
Amendment 132 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Refugee status shall be automatically reviewed every year.
Amendment 138 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(fa) he or she refuses to comply with the obligations associated with his or her status.
Amendment 139 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point f b (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point f b (new)
(fb) he or she is guilty of obstructing the law or of crime, as defined in the legislation of the host State.
Amendment 140 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point f c (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point f c (new)
(fc) he or she refuses to return voluntarily to his or her country of origin when that is officially possible in accordance with Article 11(e) and (f) of this Regulation.
Amendment 141 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. In situations referred to in points (d) to (fc) of paragraph 1, the determining authority may decide not to grant status to a refugee, where such a decision has not yet been taken.
Amendment 142 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. Persons to whom points (d) to (fc) of paragraph 1 or paragraph 2 apply shall be entitled to rights set out in or similar to those set out in Articles 3, 4, 16, 22, 31, 32 and 33 of the Geneva Convention in so far as they are present in the Member State.
Amendment 144 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) Refugee status shall then be automatically reviewed every year.
Amendment 145 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Where paragraph 1 applies, the determining authority shall ascertain that the refugee has taken the steps required to return to his or her country of origin or, in specific cases of successful assimilation, has taken the steps required to remain lawfully in the Member State.
Amendment 154 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall only respect the principle of non-refoulement in accordance with their international obligations where their social, economic and demographic situation enables them to do so, and where they can offer the applicants decent reception conditions.
Amendment 161 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. Family members of a beneficiary of international protection who do not individually qualify for such protection shall be entitled to claim a residence permit in accordance with national procedures and insofar as this is compatible with the personal legal status of the family member. Only proven family members of that family may benefit from this protection, within the limit of the notion of ‘family’ established by the culture and customs of the host country. In the case of a polygamous household, only one wife and the legitimate children of that relationship may be taken into account, with the others being subject to the rules on the reception of individuals.
Amendment 162 #
2. A residence permit issued pursuant to paragraph 1 shall have the duration of the residence permit issued to the beneficiary of international protection and shall be renewable. The period of validity of the residence permit granted to the family member shall in principle notnever extend beyond the date of expiry of the residence permit held by the beneficiary of international protection.
Amendment 163 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. In the event of withdrawal of refugee status from a beneficiary of international protection, the family members who had been entitled to residence permits shall have the permits withdrawn at the same time.
Amendment 169 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) For beneficiaries of refugee status, the residence permit shall have a period of validity of threone years and be renewable thereafter for periods of threone years.
Amendment 172 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) For beneficiaries of subsidiary protection status, the residence permit shall have a period of validity of one year and be renewable thereafter for periods of twoone years.
Amendment 196 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Beneficiaries of international protection shall enjoy equal treatment with nationals of the Member State that has granted protection with regard to social security provided that they have actively contributed to its financing through contributions.
Amendment 203 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Access to certain social assistance specified in national law mayust be made conditional on the effective participation of the beneficiary of international protection in integration measures.
Amendment 220 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2
Article 37 – paragraph 2
Amendment 224 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2
Article 37 – paragraph 2
2. National dispersal practices of beneficiaries of international protection shall be carried out to the extent possible without discrimination of beneficiaries of international protection and shall ensure equal opportunities regarding access to accommodation, and no positive discrimination or preference shall be applied.