29 Amendments of Rachida DATI related to 2016/0224(COD)
Amendment 230 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) TBefore the determining authority takes a decision, the applicant should be provided withhave an effective opportunity to present all relevant elements at his or her disposal to the determining authority. For this reason, the applicant should, subject to limited exceptions, enjoy the right to be heard through a personal interview on the admissibility or on merits of his or her application, as appropriate. For the right to a personal interview to be effective, the applicant should be assisted by an interpreter and be given the opportunity to provide his or explanations concerning the grounds for his or her application in a comprehensive manner. The applicant should be given sufficient and reasonable time to prepare and consult with his or her legal adviser or counsellor, and he or she may be assisted by the legal adviser or counsellor during the interview. The personal interview should be conducted under conditions which ensure appropriate confidentiality and by adequately trained and competent personnel, including where necessary, personnel from authorities of other Member States or experts deployed by the European Union Agency for Asylum. The personal interview may only be omitted when the determining authority is to take a positive decision on the application or is of the opinion that the applicant is unfit or unable to be interviewed owing to enduring circumstance beyond his or her control. Given that the personal interview is an essential part of the examination of the application, the interview should be recorded and the applicants and their legal advisers should be given access to the recording, as well as to the report or transcript of the interview before the determining authority takes a decision, or in the case of an accelerated examination procedure, at the same time as the decision is made.
Amendment 294 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) To ensure that unaccompanied minors have effective access to the procedure, they should always be appointed a guardian. The guardian should be a person or a representative of an organisation appointed to assist and guide the minor through the procedure with a view to safeguard the best interests of the child as well his or her general well-being. Where necessary, the guardian should exercise legal capacity for the minor. In order to provide effective support to the unaccompanied minors, guardians should not be placed in charge of a disproportionalimited number of unaccompanied minors at the same time. Member States should appoint entities or persons responsible for the support, supervision and monitoring of the guardians in the performance of their tasks. An unaccompanied minor should lodge an application in his or her own name or through the guardian. In order to safeguard the rights and procedural guarantees of an unaccompanied minor, the time-limit for him or her to lodge an application should start to run from when his or her guardian is appointed and they meet. Where the guardian does not lodge the application within the set time limit, the unaccompanied minor should be given an opportunity to lodge the application on his or her name with the assistance of the determining authority. The fact that an unaccompanied minor chooses to lodge an application in his or her own name should not preclude him or her from being assigned a guardian.
Amendment 330 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) The examination of an application should be accelerated and completed within a maximum of two months in those instances where an application is manifestly unfounded because it is an abusive claim, including where an applicant comes from a safe country of origin or an applicant is making an application merely to delay or frustrate the enforcement of a removal decision, or where there are serious national security or public concerns, such as membership of a criminal or terrorist organisation, where the applicant does not apply for international protection in the first Member State of entry or in the Member State of legal residence or where an applicant whose application is under examination and who made an application in another Member State or who is on the territory of another Member State without a residence document is taken back under the Dublin Regulation. In the latter case, the examination of the application should not be accelerated if the applicant is able to provide substantiated justifications for having left to another Member State without authorisation, for having made an application in another Member State or for having otherwise been unavailable to the competent authorities, such as for instance that he or she was not informed adequately and in a timely manner of his or her obligations. Furthermore, an accelerated examination procedure may be applied to unaccompanied minors only within the limited circumstances set out in this Regulation. This accelerated examination should ensure swift return of third country nationals who are declared ineligible for international protection.
Amendment 340 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) The notion of public order may, inter alia, cover a conviction of having committed a serious crime. The notions of national security and public order also covers serious crimes, such association with a criminal organisation, acts of terrorism, and trafficking in human beings.
Amendment 358 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
Recital 45
(45) A key consideration as to whether an application for international protection is well-founded is the safety of the applicant in his or her country of origin. Having regard to the fact that Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX (Qualification Regulation) aims to achieve a high level of convergence on the qualification of third- country nationals and stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, this Regulation establishes common criteria for designating third countries as safe countries of origin and, in view of the need to strengthen the application of the safe country of origin concept as an essential tool to support the swift processing of applications that are likely to be unfounded, this Regulation sets out an EU common list of safe countries of origin. This list will increase the efficiency of the asylum systems of the Member States as regards applications for international protection that are liable to be unfounded, and will remedy certain discrepancies between Member States’ national lists of safe countries of origin.
Amendment 368 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) As regards the designation of safe third countries at Union level, this Regulation provides for having such a designation. Third countries should be designated as safe third countries at Union level by means of an amendment to this Regulation based on the conditions set out in this Regulation and after carrying out a detailed evidence-based assessment involving substantive research and broad consultation with Member States, the EU Agency for Asylum and relevant stakeholders.
Amendment 373 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) The establishment of an EU common list of safe countries of origin and an EU common list for safe third countries should address some of the existing divergences between Member States’ national lists of safe countries. While Member States should retain the right to apply or introduce legislation that allows for the national designation of third countries other than those designated as safe third countries at Union level or appearing on the EU common list as safe countries of origin, the establishment of such common designation or list should ensure that the concept is applied by all Member States in a uniform manner in relation to applicants whose countries of origin are on the common list or who have a connection with a safe third country. This should facilitate convergence in the application of procedures and thereby also deter secondary movements of applicants for international protection. For that reason, the possibility of using national lists or designations should come to an end within a period of five years from entry into force of this Regulation. During that harmonising period, Member States should make sure that the national lists of safe countries of origin and the EU common list are consistent with one another. A country suspended or deleted from the EU common list must not be considered a safe country of origin at national level.
Amendment 377 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48 a (new)
Recital 48 a (new)
(48a) With a view to harmonisation of national lists of safe countries of origin, the Commission shall regularly examine the situation in third states so as to make sure that the common list of safe countries of origin is comprehensive and effective. Where necessary, the Commission should then draw up a proposal to extend the EU common list of safe countries of origin. The Member States must also be able to submit proposals to the Commission with a view to adding third countries to that common list of safe countries of origin. The Commission should then examine these proposals within six months in the light of a set of information sources at its disposal and, where appropriate, make a proposal to extend the common list of safe countries of origin. The Commission must ensure that, for every third country on the EU common list of safe countries of origin, there is an efficient EU return policy with effective readmission agreements that must be complied with fully in order for EU aid to be sent to those countries.
Amendment 381 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) The Commission, assisted by the European Union Agency for Asylum, should regularly review the situation in third countries designated as safe third countries at Union level or that are on the EU common list of safe countries of origin. In case of sudden change for the worse in the situation of such a third country, the Commission should be able to suspend the designation of that third country as safe third country at Union level or the presence of that third country from the EU common list of safe countries of origin for a limited period of time by means of a delegated act in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Moreover, in this case, the Commission should propose an amendment for the third country not to be designated as a safe third country at Union level any longer or to remove that third country from the EU common list of safe country of origin within 3 months of the adoption of the delegated act suspending the third country. If no such amendment has been submitted within that time limit, the delegated act should cease to have effect.
Amendment 394 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) The Commission, with the assistance of the European Union Agency for Asylum, should regularly review the situation in third countries that have been removed from the EU common list of safe countries of origin or safe third countries, including where a Member State notifies the Commission that it considers, based on a substantiated assessment, that, following changes in the situation of that third country, it fulfils again the conditions set out in this Regulation for being designated as safe. In such a case, Member States could only designate that third country as a safe country of origin or a safe third country at the national level as long as the Commission does not raise objections to that designation. Where the Commission considers that these conditions are fulfilled, it mayshould propose an amendment to the designation of safe third countries at Union level or to the EU common list of safe countries of origin so as to add the third country.
Amendment 525 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Each Member State shall provide the determining authorityies with appropriate means, including sufficient competent and trained personnel to carry out its tasks in accordance with this Regulation. For that purpose, each Member State shall regularly assess the needs of the determining authority to ensure that it is always in a position to deal with applications for international protection in an effective manner, particularly when receiving a disproportionate number of simultaneous applications.
Amendment 529 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The following authorities shall have the task of receiving and registering applications for international protection as well as informing applicants as to where and how to lodge an application for international protection:
Amendment 535 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)
(a a) the determining authority
Amendment 540 #
Member States may entrust also other authorities with those tasks. Where the application is received by an authority without the power to register it, that authority shall inform the applicants where and how to apply for international protection.
Amendment 541 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. In each Member State an authority or authorities shall be responsible for: (a) registering applications for international protection; (b) dealing with cases in accordance with Regulation (EU) No xxx/xxxx [Dublin Regulation] (c) granting or refusing permission to enter in the framework of the procedure provided for in Article 41 of this Directive, subject to the conditions as set out therein and on the basis of the reasoned opinion of the determining authority.
Amendment 544 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. The determining authorityies of the Member State responsible may be assisted for the purpose of receiving, registering and examining applications for international protection by:
Amendment 648 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Applicants shall have the rightbe authorised to remain in the Member State responsible, for the sole purpose of the procedure, until the determining authority has taken a decision in accordance with the administrative procedure provided for in Chapter III.
Amendment 655 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Amendment 678 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. In the substantive interview, the applicant shall be given an adequate theopportunity to present the elements needed to substantiate his or her application in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX (Qualification Regulation), and he or she shall provide all the elements at his or her disposal as completely as possible. The applicant shall be given the opportunity to provide an explanation regarding elements which may be missing or any inconsistencies or contradictions in the applicant’s statements.
Amendment 696 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The personal interview may be omitted in the following situationssubstantive interview on the application may be omitted where the determining authority:
Amendment 726 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 6
Article 13 – paragraph 6
6. Where the application is examined in accordance with the accelerated examination procedure, the determining authority may grant access to the report or the transcript of the recording atfrom the same time ast which the decision is made.
Amendment 997 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Amendment 1145 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The determining authority shall assess the admissibility of an application, in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees provided for in Chapter II, and shallmay reject an application as inadmissible where any of the following grounds applies:
Amendment 1233 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the applicant has misled the authorities by presenting false information or false or forged documents or by withholding relevant information or documents with respect to his or her identity, age or nationality that could have had a negative impact on the decision;
Amendment 1236 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the applicant is making an application merelysolely in order to delay or frustrate the enforcement of an earlier or imminent decision resulting in his or her removal from the territory of a Member State;
Amendment 1280 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The determining authority mayshall, in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees provided for in Chapter II, take a decision on an application at the border or in transit zones of the Member State on:
Amendment 1300 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 41 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The border procedure may be applied to unaccompanied minors, in accordance with Articles 8 to 11 of Directive (EU) No XXX/XXX (Reception Conditions Directive) only where:
Amendment 1455 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 48 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Commission shall regularly examine the situation in third countries and the possibility of proposing to add them to the EU common list of safe countries of origin. If appropriate, the Commission shall draw up a proposal to enlarge the common EU list of safe countries of origin after a substantiated assessment of whether countries to be added to the list fulfil the criteria set in Article 47 of this Regulation.
Amendment 1456 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 48 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. The Member States may propose to add third countries to the common list of safe countries of origin to Annex 1 to this Regulation. The Commission shall then examine these proposals within six months in the light of a set of information sources at its disposal and, when appropriate, it shall make a proposal for the amendment of Annex 1 to this Regulation.