11 Amendments of Jeroen LENAERS related to 2016/0133(COD)
Amendment 136 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) In the light of the results of the evaluation undertaken of the implementation of Regulation (EU) 604/2013 , it is appropriate, at this stage, to confirm the principles underlying Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, while making the necessary improvements, in the light of experience, to the effectiveness of the Dublin system and the protection granted to applicants under that system. Based on this evaluation and on consultation with Member States, the European Parliament and other stakeholders, it is also considered appropriate to establish in the Regulation measures required for a fair share of responsibility between Member States for applications for international protection, in particular to ensure thatf and when a disproportionate burden is not placed upon somon one or more Member States.
Amendment 148 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) In order to improve the efficiency of the system, and to prevent that applicants with inadmissible claims or who are likely not to be in need of international protection, or who represent a security risk are transferred among the Member States, it is necessaryessential to ensure that the Member State where an application is first lodged verifies the admissibility of the claim in relation to the first country of asylum and safe third country, examines in accelerated procedures applications made by applicants coming from a safe country of origin designated on the EU list, as well as applicants presenting security concerns.
Amendment 173 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
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. VIn order to encourage applicants to comply and cooperate, 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.
Amendment 231 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
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 todeducted from the number of applications for international protection for the purposes of this calculationwhich a Member State is responsible.
Amendment 258 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
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. In case of non-payment of solidarity contributions, as a measure of last resort, the Commission shall deduct the amount due from European funds to which the Member State in question is entitled. 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.
Amendment 285 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
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 regularly 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. The Commission closely involves the European Parliament with regard to aforementioned reviews.
Amendment 789 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 2
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.
Amendment 801 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3
Article 34 – paragraph 3
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. The number of persons effectively resettled to a Member State shall be deducted from the number of applications for which a Member State is responsible according to the reference key.
Amendment 905 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 3
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 thereafteras soon as possible thereafter, and not later than three months after it was notified, 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.
Amendment 906 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 37 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. In case of non-payment of solidarity contributions, as a measure of last resort, the Commission shall deduct the amount due from European funds to which the Member State in question is entitled
Amendment 913 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 4
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 and 3a(new).