14 Amendments of Monika HOHLMEIER related to 2015/0125(NLE)
Amendment 36 #
Proposal for a decision
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) Whereas at its meetings of 25 and 26 June 2015, the European Council decided, inter alia, that three key dimensions should be advanced in parallel: relocation/ resettlement, return/ readmission/ reintegration and cooperation with countries of origin and transit. Whereas the European Council agreed in particular, in the light of the current emergency situation and the commitment to reinforce solidarity and responsibility, on the temporary and exceptional relocation over two years from Italy and Greece to other Member States of 40 000 persons in clear need of international protection. Whereas Member States should agree on binding quota for the distribution of such persons, reflecting the specific situations of Member States.
Amendment 62 #
Proposal for a decision
Recital 15 a (new)
Recital 15 a (new)
(15a) Whereas the proposal for emergency relocation mechanism is only one part of a holistic European approach to migration, Whereas it is important to stress that all other parts of the European Agenda on Migration should be implemented and enforced, including addressing the root causes of migration, an effective return policy, fighting human smuggling and trafficking and increased cooperation with third countries of origin and transfer.
Amendment 67 #
Proposal for a decision
Recital 17 a (new)
Recital 17 a (new)
(17a) The measures foreseen in this Decision entail a temporary derogation from the provisions related to the required consent of applicants laid down in Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, Article 17(2) of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the Dublin Regulation and Article 5 of the Regulation (EU) No 439/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establishment of the European Asylum Support Office (EASO).
Amendment 72 #
Proposal for a decision
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) The provisional emergency measures are intended to set up a fair and equitable relocation mechanism, reflecting the specific situation of Member States, to relieve the significant asylum pressure from Italy and Greece, in particular by relocating an important number of applicants in clear need of international protection who have arrived in the territory of Italy and Greece following the date on which this Decision becomes applicable. Based on the overall number of third- country nationals who have entered irregularly Italy and Greece in 2014 and the number of those who are in clear need of international protection, a total of 40 000 applicants in clear need of international protection should be relocated from Italy and Greece. This number corresponds to approximately 40% of the total number of third country nationals in clear need of international protection who have entered irregularly in Italy and Greece in 2014. Thus, the relocation measure proposed in this Decision constitutes fair burden sharing between Italy and Greece on the one hand and the other Member States on the other hand. Based on the same overall available figures in 2014 and in the first four months of 2015 in Italy compared to Greece, 60% of these applicants should be relocated from Italy and 40% from Greece. These provisional emergency measures are intended to relieve the significant asylum pressure from Italy and Greece, but are also an important test case with a view to the upcoming legislative proposal on a permanent emergency relocation scheme based on Article 78(2) TFEU.
Amendment 90 #
(26) In addition, in order to decide which specific Member State should be the Member State of relocation, specific account should be given to the preferences and specific qualifications of the applicants concerned which could facilitate their integration into the Member State of relocation, such as their language skills. In the case of particularly vulnerable applicants, consideration should be given to the capacity of the Member State of relocation to provide adequate support to those applicants and family ties beyond the definition of family members in Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, social relations, previous stay in a Member State, previous study and previous work experience with a company or an organisation of a specific Member State. In the case of particularly vulnerable applicants, consideration should be given to the capacity of the Member State of relocation to provide adequate support to those applicants. While applicants do not have a right to choose the Member State of their relocation, their needs, preferences and specific qualification should be taken into account to the extent possible.
Amendment 96 #
Proposal for a decision
Recital 26 a (new)
Recital 26 a (new)
(26a) Secondary movements can be avoided and integration is facilitated when applicants can rely on social relations such as family ties or ties to ethnic and cultural communities, if they speak a language common in the Member State, if they previously have stayed in the Member State or had relations with companies or organizations of that Member State or if they have other qualifications which facilitate their social, economic or cultural inclusion.
Amendment 97 #
Proposal for a decision
Recital 26 b (new)
Recital 26 b (new)
(26b) Based on the lessons-learned from the pilot project on relocation from Malta (EUREMA), expectations and preferences should where possible be taken into consideration.
Amendment 107 #
Proposal for a decision
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Measures should be taken in order to avoid secondary movements of relocated persons from the Member State of relocation to other Member States. In particularTaking the preferences of applicants, including family ties beyond the provisions regarding family in Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, social and cultural ties, as much as possible into account is a straightforward measure for applicants to develop a sense of belonging to the Member State of relocation. Applicants should be provided with all necessary information in a language they understand or are reasonably supposed to understand about their destination and, in case their preference could not be fully taken into account, of the reasons for this. Although desirable, consent of applicants is not required, provided that fundamental rights of the applicant are guaranteed. In addition, applicants should be informed of the consequences of onward movement within the Member States as provided for in Article 4 of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 and of the fact that, if the Member State of relocation grants them international protection, in principle, they are only entitled to the rights attached to international protection in that Member State.
Amendment 112 #
Proposal for a decision
Article 1
Article 1
This Decision establishes provisional emergency measures in the area of international protection for the benefit of Italy and Greece in view of enabling them to cope with an emergency situation characterised by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries in those Member States.
Amendment 123 #
Proposal for a decision
Article 4 – introductory part (new)
Article 4 – introductory part (new)
To relieve the significant asylum pressure from Italy and Greece, but also to act as an important test case with a view to the upcoming legislative proposal on a permanent emergency relocation scheme based on Article 78(2) TFEU, a total of 40.000 applicants shall be relocated from Italy and Greece.
Amendment 133 #
Proposal for a decision
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Italy and Greece shall, at regular intervals during the period of application of this Decision, with the assistance of EASO and other relevant agencies, and, where applicable, of Member States' liaison officers referred to in paragraph 8, identify the individual applicants to be relocated to the other Member States and communicate to the contact points of those Member States and to EASO the number of applicants that can be relocated. Priority shall be given for that purpose to vulnerable applicants within the meaning of Articles 21 and 22 of Directive 2013/33/EU.
Amendment 138 #
Proposal for a decision
Article 5 – paragraph 5
Article 5 – paragraph 5
5. Applicants whose fingerprints are required to be taken pursuant to the obligations set out in Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No 603/2013 may only be proposed for relocatedion if their fingerprints have been taken and transmitted to the Central System of Eurodac, pursuant to that Regulation.
Amendment 150 #
Proposal for a decision
Article 7 – point ca (new)
Article 7 – point ca (new)
(ca) facilitating the relocation by gathering and collecting information on specific qualifications, family ties, social relations, previous stay, study or work or language knowledge of the applicant;
Amendment 165 #
Proposal for a decision
Article 11 a (new)
Article 11 a (new)