Activities of Marie-Christine VERGIAT related to 2017/0245(COD)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2016/399 as regards the rules applicable to the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders PDF (680 KB) DOC (110 KB)
Amendments (30)
Amendment 45 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital -1 (new)
Recital -1 (new)
(-1) The creation of an area in which the free movement of persons across internal borders is ensured is one of the EU’s main achievements. It is based on trust and solidarity between the Member States which have agreed to take part in the joint construction of this area and internal controls, with all the hazards they represent, and internal controls may only be reintroduced as a last resort and in truly exceptional and duly justified circumstances, subject to consultation between the states concerned and under the strict supervision of the Commission.
Amendment 50 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) In an area where persons may move freely, the reintroduction of border control at internal borders should remain an exception and be subject to close monitoring. The reintroduction of internal border control should be decided, in collaboration between the Member States affected, and only as a measure of last resort, for a limited period of time and to the extent that controls are necessary and proportionate to the identverified serious threats to public policy or internal security identified by the requesting Member State. Such controls should be suspended immediately if the grounds invoked by the requesting state prove to be unconvincing or if it becomes apparent that the conditions are not being complied with. Under no circumstances may these grounds be solely to carry out checks on ‘irregular’ migrants.
Amendment 56 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The identified serious threats can be addressed by different measures, depending on their nature and scale. The Member States have at their disposal also police powers, as referred to in Article 23 of Regulation (EU) 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 (Schengen Borders Code)8 , which, subject to some conditions, can be used in the border areas. The Commission Recommendation on proportionate police checks and police cooperation in the Schengen area9 provides guidelines to the Member States to that end. All these measures should also be considered in the light of all the arrangements concerning the Union’s external borders which are being reviewed or adopted. Any failure to do so would be tantamount to acknowledging that the EU has no long- term vision of its border control policy. _________________ 8 OJ L 77, 23.3.2016, p. 1. 9 C(2017) 3349 final, 12.5.2017.
Amendment 60 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) However, experiesince it has shown that certain serious threats to public policy or internal security, such as cross- border terrorist threats or specific cases of secondary movements of irregular migrants within the Union that justified the reintroduction of border controls, may persist well beyond the above periods. It is therefore needed and justified to adjust the time limits applicable tobeen clearly demonstrated that it is rarely necessary to reintroduce internal border controls for more than two months, it should only be possible to extend them beyond two months in exceptional cases and with evidence that such checks are necessary and strictly justified. Only then can it be deemed necessary to exceed the maximum duration for the temporary reintroduction of border control to the current needs, whiles. This should be done in such a manner as to ensuringe that this measure issuch temporary reintroductions are not abused and, remains an exception, to be used onlyal and may only be agreed to as a last resort. To that end, the general deadline applicable under Article 25 of the Schengen Borders Code should be extended to one yearthus remain six months.
Amendment 67 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) Migration and the crossing of external borders by a large number of third-country nationals should not, per se, be considered to be a threat to public order or internal security.
Amendment 68 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 b (new)
Recital 4 b (new)
(4b) In accordance with the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, any derogation from the fundamental principle of free movement of persons must be interpreted in a restrictive manner and the concept of public order presupposes the existence of a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society.
Amendment 72 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) In order to guarantee that this is a measure of last resort and these internal border controls remain an exception, Member States should submit a justification, including, among other elements, a risk assessment concerning theany intended reintroducprolongation of border control or prolongatibeyond two mon thereofs. The risk assessmentjustifications provided should, in particular, assess for how long the identified threat is expected to persist and which sections of the internal borders are affected, demonstrate that the prolongation of border controls is a last resort measure, explain the consequences of the measures already implemented that have proven ineffective and explain how border control would help in addressing the identified threat. In case of internal border control going beyond six months, the risk assessmentThe justifications should also demonstrate retrospectively the efficiency of the reintroduced border control in addressing the identified threat and explain in detail how each neighbouring Member State affected by such prolongation was consulted and involved in determining the least burdensome operational arrangements.
Amendment 76 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) Whenever the reintroduction of internal border controls is proposed for specific planned events of an exceptional nature and duration (such as sporting activities), the duration of such controls should be very precise, circumscribed and linked to the actual duration of the event.
Amendment 78 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The quality of the risk assessment submitted by the Member State will be very important for the assessment of the necessity and proportionality of the intended reintroduction or prolongation of border control. The European Border and Coast Guard Agency and Europol should be involved in that assessment, as should EASO, EU-LISA and the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights.
Amendment 80 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The power of the Commission to issue an opinion under Article 27(4) of the Schengen Borders Code should be modified to reflect the new obligations on the Member States related to the risk assessment, including the cooperation with Member States concerned. When border control at internal borders isCommission should ensure that all the conditions laid down in this Regulation are implemented and that the arrangements put in place are transparent, while carriedying out for more than six months, the Commission should be obliged to issue an opinion. Also the consultation procedure as provided for in Article 27(5) of the Schengen Borders Code should be modified in order to reflect the role of the Agencies (Europeaits own evaluation of any procedure for reintroducing and extending internal border controls, in close cooperation with all the states concerned, in Border and Coast Guard Agency and Europol) and focus onto ensure the practical implementation of different aspects of cooperation between the Member States, including the coordination, where appropriate, of different measures on both sides of the border.
Amendment 86 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In order to make the revised rules better adapted to the challenges related tothat may cause persistent and serious threats to public policy or internal security, a specific possibility should be provided to prolong, on an exceptional basis, internal border controls beyond one yearsix months. Such prolongation should accompany commensurate exceptional national measures also taken within the territory to address the threat, such as a state of emergency. In any case, such a possibility may be subject to particularly close consultation with all the States concerned and should not lead to the further prolongation of temporary internal border controls beyond twoone years.
Amendment 91 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) The necessity and proportionality of reintroducing internal border controls should be balanced against the threat to public order or internal security triggering the need for such reintroduction, as should alternative measures which could be taken at national or Union level, or both, and the impact of such controls on the free movement of persons within the area without internal border control.
Amendment 92 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
Amendment 98 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The possibility to carry out temporary internal border controls in response to a specific threat to public policy or internal security which persists beyond one yearsix months should be subject to a specific procedure.
Amendment 100 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) To that end, the Commission should issue an opinion on the necessity and proportionality of such prolongation, and, where appropriate, on the cooperation with the neighbouring Member Statefter consulting all the Member States affected and in cooperation with them. The European Parliament should immediately be informed of such requests.
Amendment 108 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The Council, taking account of the Commission's reasoned and detailed opinion, may recommend such extraordinary further prolongation and where appropriate determine the conditions for cooperation between the Member States concerned, with a view to ensuring that it is an exceptional measure, in place only for as long as necessary and justified, and consistent with the measures also taken at the national level within the territory to address the same specific threat to public policy or internal security. The Council recommendation should be a prerequisite for any further prolongation beyond the period of one year and hence be of the same nature as the one already provided for in Article 29six months. In the event of disagreement between the Commission and the Council, the matter should immediately be referred to the European Parliament.
Amendment 112 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13a) Measures adopted under Article 29 concerning specific procedures for exceptional circumstances endangering the overall functioning of the area without internal border control should not be able to be applied in combination with measures for the reintroduction or extension of internal border control adopted under other articles of this Regulation.
Amendment 119 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. Where, in the area without internal border control, there is a serious threat to public policy or internal security in a Member State, that Member State may exceptionally reintroduce border control at all or specific parts of its internal borders, as a last resort, for a limited period of up to 30 days, or for the foreseeable duration of the serious threat if its duration exceeds 30 days, but not exceeding sixtwo months. The scope and duration of the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders shall not exceed what is strictly necessary to respond to the serious threat.
Amendment 124 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 Regulation (EU) 2016/399
3. If the serious threat to public policy or internal security in the Member State concerned persists beyond the period provided for in paragraph 1 of this Article, that Member State may prolong border control at its internal borders, taking account ofrdance with the criteria referred to in Article 26 and in accordance with Article 27, on the same grounds as those referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and,or taking into account any new elements, for renewable which prove the persistence of the serious threat, for a periods corresponding to the foreseeable duration of the serious threat, and not exceeding six monthsunder no circumstances exceeding four months. Such an extension is possible only if it the state concerned supplies proof that alternative measures or actions, such as police controls or cross-border police cooperation, are ineffective and have proven incapable of addressing the serious threat, including in the light of legislative developments in the country concerned.
Amendment 130 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
The total period during which border control is reintroduced at internal borders, including any prolongation provided for under paragraph 3 of this Article, shall not exceed one yearsix months.
Amendment 135 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
In the exceptional cases referred to in Article 27a, the total period may be further extended by a maximum length of two yearsix months in accordance with that Article.
Amendment 139 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Article 25 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 144 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 25 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Any reintroduction or prolongation of border controls at internal borders made before ... [the date of entry into force of this Regulation] shall be taken into account for the purpose of calculation of the periods referred to in Articles 27, 27(a) and 28, and the provisions on risk assessment laid down in Articles 27 and 27(a) shall apply.
Amendment 155 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point i
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point i
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a a – subparagraph 1
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a a – subparagraph 1
a justification including, among other elements, a risk assessment assessing how long the identified threat is expected to persist and which sections of the internal borders are affected, demonstrating that the prolongation of border control is a last resort measure and explaining how border control would help address the identified threat. Where border control has already been reintroduced for more than sixtwo months, the risk assessment shall also explain how the previous reintroduction of border control has contributed to remedying the identified threat. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 37 concerning the uniform format of such justifications, including that of the risk assessment.
Amendment 159 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point i a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point i a (new)
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a b (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a b (new)
(ia) In paragraph 1, the following point is inserted: ‘(ab) any measures other than the proposed reintroduction taken or envisaged by the Member State to address the threat detected and the reasons why alternative measures, such as enhanced cross-border police cooperation or police controls, were deemed insufficient;’
Amendment 180 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point iv
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point iv
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Article 27 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 182 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point v
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point v
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 – paragraph 5
Article 27 – paragraph 5
The information referred to in paragraph 1 and any Commission or Member State opinion referred to in paragraph 4 shall be the subject of a consultation led by the Commission. Where appropriate, tThe consultation shall include joint meetings between the Member State planning to reintroduce border control at internal borders, the other Member States, especially those directly affected by such measures and the relevant Agencies. The proportionality of the intended measures, possible alternative measures that could be adopted to ensure the obligation of last resort, the identified threat to public policy or internal security as well as the ways of ensuring implementation of the mutual cooperation between the Member States shall be examined. The Member State planning to reintroduce or prolong border control at internal borders shall take the utmost account of the results of such consultation when carrying out border controlsCommission, with the support of experts from the European Border and Coast Guard, Europol or Member States if necessary, shall be free to check whether the internal border controls are in compliance with this Regulation by means of unannounced visits to those borders. It shall also ensure compliance with the fundamental principles of the Union, in particular fundamental rights and the principle of free movement.
Amendment 191 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 a – paragraph 2
Article 27 a – paragraph 2
2. At the latest sixthree weeks before the expiry of the period referred to in Article 25(4) first sentence, the Member State shall notify the other Member States and the Commission that it seeks a further prolongation in accordance with the specific procedure laid down in this Article. The notification shall contain all the information required in Article 27(1)(a) to (e). Article 27 paragraphs 2 and 3 shall apply.
Amendment 194 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 a – paragraph 3
Article 27 a – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall issue an opinion specifying whether the extension complies with the conditions of this Regulation, in particular as regards the necessity and proportionality of the measure and its effect on the principle of free movement, in particular in the neighbouring countries concerned. The Member States affected may also deliver an opinion.
Amendment 199 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/399
Article 27 a – paragraph 4
Article 27 a – paragraph 4
4. The Council, taking due account of the opinion of the Commission, may recommend and the Member States affected, may recommend as a measure of last resort that the Member State decide to further prolong border control at internal borders for a period of up to six months. That period may be prolonged, no more than three times, for a further pere Council may also recommend the application of alternative measures to internal border controls or the suspensiodn of up to six months. In its recommendation, the Council shall at least indicate the information referred to in Article 27(1) (a) to (e). Where appropriate, it shall determine the conditions for cooperation between the Member States concernedsuch controls. If necessary, the Council may also ask the Commission to monitor the implementation of internal border controls pursuant to Article 27(5)(ii). In the event of disagreement between the Commission and the Council, the matter shall immediately be referred to the European Parliament.