2018/0329(COD) Return Directive
Lead committee dossier:
Progress: Awaiting committee decision
| Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead | LIBE | ||
| Former Responsible Committee | LIBE | ||
| Former Responsible Committee | LIBE |
STRIK Tineke ( Verts/ALE)
|
|
| Committee Opinion | AFET | ||
| Committee Opinion | DEVE | ||
| Former Committee Opinion | AFET | ||
| Former Committee Opinion | AFET | ||
| Former Committee Opinion | DEVE | ||
| Former Committee Opinion | DEVE | ||
| Committee Recast Technique Opinion | JURI | ||
| Fromer Committee Recast Technique Opinion | JURI | ||
| Fromer Committee Recast Technique Opinion | JURI |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
TFEU 079-p2
Legal Basis:
TFEU 079-p2Events
2019/10/21
EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading
2019/09/04
EP - STRIK Tineke (Verts/ALE) appointed as rapporteur in LIBE
2019/01/23
ESC - Economic and Social Committee: opinion, report
Documents
2019/01/09
CZ_SENATE - Contribution
Documents
2018/11/30
ES_CONGRESS - Contribution
Documents
2018/11/05
FR_SENATE - Contribution
Documents
2018/10/22
EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading
2018/10/12
CSL - Debate in Council
Documents
2018/10/12
CSL - Council Meeting
2018/09/12
EC - Legislative proposal published
Details
PURPOSE: to improve the efficiency of common procedures applicable in Member States for the return of illegally staying third-country nationals.
PROPOSED ACT: Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council.
ROLE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: the European Parliament decides in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure on an equal footing with council.
BACKGROUND: the effective return of third-country nationals who do not have a right to stay in the EU is an essential component of the European Agenda on Migration. At EU level, return policy is regulated by Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (the Return Directive). Since the entry into force of the Return Directive in 2010, migratory pressure on Member States and the Union as a whole has increased.
Two main challenges may be identified:
national practices implementing the EU framework vary between Member States and are not as effective as they should be. Among other things, inconsistent definitions and interpretations of the risk of absconding and of the use of detention result in the absconding of irregular migrants and in secondary movements. Lack of cooperation on the part of the third-country nationals leads also to obstructing return procedures; the efficiency of the EU's return policy depends also on the cooperation of countries of origin . Several legally non-binding arrangements for return and readmission have been put in place. All Member States should make full use of the arrangements to increase returns to the countries concerned.
The Commission adopted a Recommendation in 2017, setting out a series of measures to be taken up by the Member States to make returns more effective, including by making full use of the flexibility provided by the Return Directive. Despite these efforts, there has been little progress in increasing the effectiveness of returns. On the contrary, a decrease in the return rate throughout the EU was observed from 45.8% in 2016 to merely 36.6% in 2017 .
This proposal is part of a package of measures proposed by the Commission as a follow up to the European Council of 28 June 2018 which underlined the necessity to significantly step up the effective return of irregular migrants , and welcomed the intention of the Commission to make legislative proposals for a more effective and coherent European return policy.
CONTENT: the proposal to recast Directive 2008/115/EC aims to address the key shortcomings and obstacles encountered by Member States when carrying out returns, notably to reduce the length of return procedures, secure a better link between asylum and return procedures and ensure a more effective use of measures to prevent absconding. The proposed amendments do not affect the rights of the migrants and ensures full respect of fundamental rights, in particular the principle of non-refoulement.
Specifically, the proposal for recast:
establishes a new border procedure for the rapid return of applicants for international protections whose application was rejected following an asylum border procedure. The proposal provides for specific, simplified rules applicable to third-country nationals who were subject to asylum border procedures: (i) issuance of a decision through a simplified form, (ii) no period for voluntary return granted as a rule (except if the third-country national holds a valid travel document and cooperates with the national authorities), (iii) shorter time-limit for lodging an appeal, and specific ground for detention. This border procedure for return will follow up the asylum border procedure; sets out a common, non-exhaustive, list of objective criteria to determine the existence of a risk of absconding as part of an overall assessment of the specific circumstances of the individual case; introduces an explicit obligation for third-country nationals to cooperate with national authorities at all stages of the return procedures, in particular for establishing and verifying their identity in view of obtaining a valid travel document and ensuring the successful enforcement of a return decision; clarifies the need to issue a return decision immediately after a decision rejecting or terminating the legal stay is taken; adapts the rules for granting a period for voluntary departure , which should not be longer than 30 days. However, the proposal deletes the obligation to grant a minimum of seven days when determining the duration of the period for voluntary departure; introduces the possibility for Member States to impose an entry ban without issuing a return decision on an illegally staying third-country national who is detected for the first time while leaving the Union in certain cases and taking into account the principle of proportionality; establishes the obligation to have national return management systems providing timely information on the identity and legal situation of the third-country nationals that are relevant for monitoring and following upon individual cases. These are to be linked to a central system established by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency in accordance with the new Regulation that is part of this package; sets an obligation for Member States to establish voluntary return programmes that may also include reintegration support; provides for a specific time-limit (five days) for lodging appeals against return decisions issued in cases where the return decision is the consequence of a decision rejecting an application for international protection that became final. If the risk of a breach of the principle of non-refoulement has not been already assessed by a judicial authority in asylum procedures, an automatic suspensive effect of the appeal against a return decision must be granted. A decision on temporary suspension shall be made quickly, within 48 hours as a rule; sets out clear time-limits for detention : while the maximum period for detention of 6 months and the possibility of extension in specific circumstances are not modified, the proposal requires that national legislation provide for not less than 3 months as an initial minimum period of detention , in order to more appropriately reflect the period of time needed to successfully carry out return and readmission procedures with third countries. In addition, Member States may now also detain returnees when they pose a threat to public order or national security.
Documents
Documents
- Economic and Social Committee: opinion, report: CES4780/2018
- Contribution: COM(2018)0634
- Contribution: COM(2018)0634
- Contribution: COM(2018)0634
- Debate in Council: 3641
- Legislative proposal published: COM(2018)0634
- Legislative proposal published: EUR-Lex
- Economic and Social Committee: opinion, report: CES4780/2018
- Contribution: COM(2018)0634
- Contribution: COM(2018)0634
- Contribution: COM(2018)0634
| Amendments | Dossier |
| 1169 |
2018/0329(COD)
2019/02/11
LIBE
534 amendments...
Amendment 122 #
Proposal for a directive Title 1 Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning i
Amendment 123 #
Proposal for a directive Title 1 Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning i
Amendment 124 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) A
Amendment 125 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) An effective and fair return policy is an essential part of the Union's approach to better manage immigration in all aspects, as reflected in the European Agenda on Migration of May 201511 . __________________ 11 COM(2015) 285 final.
Amendment 126 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 Amendment 127 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 (3) On 28 June 2018, in its conclusions, the European Council underlined the necessity to significantly step up the effective return of i
Amendment 128 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 a (new) (3a) On 19 December 2018, the United Nations General Assembly endorsed the UN Global Compact on Migration. States committed in this text to ensure that any detention in the context of international migration follows due process, is non- arbitrary, based on law, necessity, proportionality and individual assessments, is carried out by authorized officials, and for the shortest possible period of time, irrespective of whether detention occurs at the moment of entry, in transit, or proceedings of return, and regardless of the type of place where the detention occurs. They also committed to prioritize non-custodial alternatives to detention that are in line with international law, and to take a human rights-based approach to any detention of migrants, using detention as a measure of last resort only.
Amendment 129 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) That European return policy should be based on common standards, for persons to be returned in a humane manner and with full respect for their fundamental rights and dignity, as well as international law, including refugee protection and human rights obligations. Clear, transparent and fair rules need to be established to provide for an effective European return policy
Amendment 130 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) That European return policy should
Amendment 131 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) That European return policy should be based on common standards, for persons to be returned in a humane manner and with full respect for their fundamental rights and dignity, as well as international law, including the UN Convention of the rights of the Child, refugee protection and other human rights obligations. Clear, transparent and fair rules need to be established to provide for an effective return policy which serves as a deterrent to irregular migration and ensures coherence with and contributes to the integrity of the Common European Asylum System and the legal migration system.
Amendment 132 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4)
Amendment 133 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) That European return policy should be based on common standards, for persons to be returned in a humane manner and with full respect for their fundamental rights and dignity, as well as international law, including refugee protection and human rights obligations. Clear, transparent and fair rules need to be established to provide for an effective return policy which serves as a deterrent to irregular migration and human trafficking and ensures coherence with and contributes to the integrity of the Common European Asylum System and
Amendment 134 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) That European return policy should be based on common standards, for persons to be returned in a humane manner and with full respect for their fundamental rights and dignity, as well as international law, including refugee protection and human rights obligations. Clear, transparent and fair rules need to be established to provide for an effective return policy which serves as a
Amendment 135 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 (6) Member States should ensure that
Amendment 136 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 (6) Member States should ensure that the ending of i
Amendment 137 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 Amendment 138 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 Amendment 139 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 Amendment 140 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7) The link between the decision on ending of the legal stay of a third-country national and the issuing of a return decision should be reinforced in order to reduce the risk of absconding and the likelihood of unauthorised secondary movements, in particular when the third-country national poses a risk to public policy, public security or national security, and when he/she has been convicted for a criminal offence, even with a non- definitive sentence. It is necessary to ensure that a return decision is issued immediately after the decision
Amendment 141 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7) The link between the decision on ending of the legal stay of a third-country national and the issuing of a return decision should be reinforced in order to reduce the risk of absconding and the likelihood of unauthorised secondary movements. It is necessary to ensure that a return decision is issued immediately after the decision rejecting or terminating the legal stay, or ideally in the same act or decision
Amendment 142 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7) The link between the decision on ending of the legal stay of a third-country national and the issuing of a return decision should be reinforced in order to reduce the risk of absconding and the likelihood of unauthorised secondary movements. It is necessary to ensure that a return decision is issued immediately after the decision rejecting or terminating the legal stay, or ideally in the same act or decision. That requirement should in particular apply to cases where an application for international protection is rejected
Amendment 143 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) The need for Union and bilateral readmission agreements with third countries to facilitate the return process is underlined. International cooperation with countries of origin at all stages of the
Amendment 144 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8)
Amendment 145 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) The need for Union and bilateral readmission agreements with third countries to facilitate the return process is underlined. International cooperation with countries of origin at all stages of the return process is a prerequisite to achieving sustainable and effective return.
Amendment 146 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) It is recognised that it is
Amendment 147 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) It is recognised that it is legitimate for Member States to return illegally staying third-country nationals, provided that fair and efficient asylum systems are in place which fully respect the principle of non-refoulement, international law and Union law.
Amendment 148 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) It is recognised that it is legitimate for Member States to return i
Amendment 149 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 10 (10) In accordance with Council Directive 2005/85/EC12 , a third-country national who has applied for asylum in a Member State should not be regarded as staying i
Amendment 150 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 10 (10) In accordance with Council Directive 2005/85/EC12 , a third-country national who has applied for asylum in a Member State should not be regarded as staying i
Amendment 151 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 Amendment 152 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 (11) To ensure clearer and more effective rules for
Amendment 153 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 (11) To ensure clearer and more effective rules for granting a period for voluntary departure and detaining a third- country national, determining whether there is or there is not a risk of absconding should be
Amendment 154 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 (11) To ensure clearer and more effective rules for
Amendment 155 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 (11) To ensure clearer and more effective rules for granting a period for voluntary departure and detaining a third- country national, determining whether there is or there is not a risk of absconding should be based on Union-wide objective criteria.
Amendment 156 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 (11) To ensure clearer and more effective rules for granting a period for voluntary departure and detaining a third- country national, determining whether there is or there is not a risk of absconding should be based on Union-wide objective criteria. Moreover this Directive should set out specific criteria which establish a well- founded ground for a rebuttable presumption that a risk of absconding exists.
Amendment 157 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 12 Amendment 158 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 12 (12) To reinforce the effectiveness of the return procedure, clear responsibilities
Amendment 159 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 12 (12) To reinforce the effectiveness of the return procedure, clear responsibilities for third-country nationals should be established, and in particular the obligation to cooperate with the authorities at all stages of the return procedure, including by providing the information and elements that are necessary in order to assess their individual situation or remaining present and available at all stages of the return procedure.. At the same time, it is necessary to ensure that third-country nationals are informed of the consequences of not complying with those obligations, in relation to the determination of the risk of absconding, the granting of a period for voluntary departure and the possibility to impose detention, and in relation to the access to programmes providing logistical, financial and other material or in-kind assistance. Member States should ensure that the consequences of non-complying are not excessive or disproportionate. The obligation to cooperate should not affect children.
Amendment 160 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 12 (12) To reinforce the effectiveness of the return procedure, clear responsibilities for third-country nationals should be established, and in particular the obligation to cooperate with the authorities at all stages of the return procedure, including by providing the information and elements that are necessary in order to assess their individual situation. At the same time, it is necessary to ensure that third-country nationals are informed of the consequences of not complying with those obligations, in relation to the determination of the risk of absconding, the granting of a period for voluntary departure and the possibility to impose detention and an entry ban, and to the access to programmes providing logistical, financial and other material or in-kind assistance. The length of the entry ban should normally be no less than five years.
Amendment 161 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 12 (12) To reinforce the effectiveness of the return procedure, clear responsibilities for third-country nationals should be
Amendment 162 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 12 (12)
Amendment 163 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 12 (12) To reinforce the effectiveness of the return procedure, clear responsibilities for third-country nationals should be established, and in particular the obligation to cooperate with the authorities at all stages of the return procedure
Amendment 164 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) Where there are no reasons to believe that the granting of a period for voluntary departure would undermine the purpose of a return procedure, voluntary return should be preferred over forced return and an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to thirty days, depending in particular on the prospect of return, should be granted.
Amendment 165 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13)
Amendment 166 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) Where there are no reasons to believe that the granting of a period for voluntary departure would undermine the purpose of a return procedure, voluntary return should be preferred over forced return and an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to thirty days, depending in particular on the prospect of return, should be granted. A period for voluntary departure should not be granted where it has been assessed that third- country nationals pose a risk
Amendment 167 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) Where there are no reasons to believe that the granting of a period for voluntary departure would undermine the purpose of a return procedure, voluntary return should be preferred over forced return and an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to thirty days, depending in particular on the prospect of return, should be granted. A period for voluntary departure should not be granted where it has been assessed that third- country nationals pose a risk of absconding, have had a previous application for legal stay dismissed as fraudulent or manifestly unfounded,
Amendment 168 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) Where there are no reasons to believe that the granting of a period for voluntary departure would undermine the purpose of a return procedure, voluntary return should be preferred over forced return and an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to t
Amendment 169 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13)
Amendment 170 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) Where there are no reasons to believe that the granting of a period for voluntary departure would undermine the purpose of a return procedure, voluntary return should be preferred over forced return and an appropriate period for voluntary departure of
Amendment 171 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 14 (14) In order to promote voluntary return, Member States should have operational programmes providing for case management, enhanced return assistance and counselling, which
Amendment 172 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 14 (14) In order to promote voluntary return, Member States should have operational programmes providing for enhanced return assistance and counselling, which
Amendment 173 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 14 a (new) (14a) In accordance with Directive 2009/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Member States should ensure that there are effective mechanisms through which third-country nationals can lodge complaints against their employers. In accordance with Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, Member States should ensure that all victims of crime receive appropriate information, support and protection and are able to participate in criminal proceedings. To this end, adequate mechanisms ensuring portable justice and access to redress mechanisms should be established as part of the national programmes on return and should ensure access to justice for issues relating to violations of Directive 2009/52/EC or Directive 2012/29/EU throughout the return procedure, including measures to ensure access to justice after return to a third country.
Amendment 174 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 15 a (new) (15a) Member States should ensure that a vulnerability assessment is carried out for persons facing return procedures. Factors increasing the risk of vulnerability may include, among others: individual factors such as age, sex and gender, status in society, beliefs and attitudes, emotional, psychological and cognitive characteristics and physical and mental well-being; household and family factors; community factors; structural factors or situational factors.
Amendment 175 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 15 a (new) (15a) Member States should ensure that persons facing return procedures do not intentionally and fraudulently exploit factors that might be considered as potentially increasing their vulnerability.
Amendment 176 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 Amendment 177 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) The deadline for lodging an appeal against decisions related to return should provide enough time to ensure access to an effective remedy
Amendment 178 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) The deadline for lodging an appeal against decisions related to return should provide enough time to ensure access to an effective remedy, while taking into account that long deadlines can have a detrimental effect on return procedures.
Amendment 179 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16)
Amendment 180 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) The deadline for lodging an appeal against decisions related to return should provide enough time to ensure access to an effective remedy, while taking into account that long deadlines can have a detrimental effect on return procedures. To avoid possible misuse of rights and procedures, a maximum period not exceeding five days should be granted to appeal against a return decision
Amendment 181 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) The deadline for lodging an appeal against decisions related to return should provide enough time to ensure access to an effective remedy, while taking into account that long deadlines
Amendment 182 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 Amendment 183 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 Amendment 184 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 Amendment 185 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 (
Amendment 186 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 (17) The appeal against a return decision that is based on a decision rejecting an application for international protection
Amendment 187 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 (17) The appeal against a return decision that is based on a decision rejecting an application for international protection which was already subject to an effective judicial remedy should take place before
Amendment 188 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 Amendment 189 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 Amendment 190 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 (18)
Amendment 191 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 (18) An appeal against a return decision should have
Amendment 192 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 (18) An appeal against a return decision should have an automatic suspensive effect only in cases where there is a risk of breach of the principle of non-refoulement or where there is clear evidence for exceptional personal circumstances such as severe impairments to health.
Amendment 193 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 (18) An appeal against a return decision should always have an automatic suspensive effect
Amendment 194 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 Amendment 195 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 Amendment 196 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 Amendment 197 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 (19) In cases where the principle of non- refoulement is not at stake, appeals against a return decision should not have a
Amendment 198 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 (19)
Amendment 199 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 (19)
Amendment 200 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 20 Amendment 201 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 20 Amendment 202 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 20 Amendment 203 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 20 (20) To improve the effectiveness of return procedures and avoid unnecessary delays, without negatively affecting the rights of the third-country nationals concerned, the
Amendment 204 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 20 (20) To improve the effectiveness of return procedures and avoid unnecessary delays, without negatively affecting the rights of the third-country nationals concerned, the enforcement of the return decision should not be automatically suspended in cases where the assessment of the risk to breach the principle of non- refoulement already took place
Amendment 205 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 21 (21) The necessary legal aid should be made available
Amendment 206 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 21 (21) The necessary legal aid should be made available
Amendment 207 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 21 (21) The necessary legal aid should be made available
Amendment 208 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 21 (21)
Amendment 209 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 22 (22) The situation of third-country
Amendment 210 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 22 (22) The situation of third-country nationals who are staying i
Amendment 211 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 23 (23) The use of coercive measures should be
Amendment 212 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 24 Amendment 213 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 25 Amendment 214 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 25 Amendment 215 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 25 (25)
Amendment 216 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 25 (25) When an illegally staying third- country national is detected during exit checks at the external borders,
Amendment 217 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 27 (27) The use of detention for the purpose of removal should be a measure of last resort and subject to the principle of proportionality with regard to the means used and objectives pursued. Detention is justified only to prepare the return or carry out the removal process and if the application of less coercive measures would not be sufficient. Member States should develop alternatives to detention, such as community-based facilities for families with children and ensure that unaccompanied minors are not detained.
Amendment 218 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 27 (27) The use of detention for the purpose of removal should be subject to the risk a third-country national poses to security or public order and always be subject to the principle of proportionality with regard to the means used and the objectives pursued
Amendment 219 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 27 (27) The use of detention for the purpose of removal should be limited, always used at last resort and subject to the principle of proportionality with regard to the means used and objectives pursued. Detention is justified only to prepare the return or carry out the removal process and if the application of less coercive measures would not be sufficient.
Amendment 220 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 27 (27)
Amendment 221 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 28 (28)
Amendment 222 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 28 (28) Detention should always be imposed
Amendment 223 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 28 (28) Detention should be imposed, following an individual assessment of each case, where there is a risk of absconding, where the third-country national avoids or hampers the preparation of return or the removal process, or when the third country national concerned poses a risk to public policy, public security or national security, especially if belonging to terrorist or serious crime networks. This should also apply to minors between the age of 16 and 18, who have repeatedly committed criminal offences, thereby proving their unwillingness to abide by the law.
Amendment 224 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 28 (28) Detention should be imposed, following an individual assessment of each case, where there is a risk of absconding, where the third-country national avoids or hampers the preparation of return or the removal process,
Amendment 225 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 28 (28) Detention should be imposed, following an individual assessment of each case, where the
Amendment 226 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 28 (28) Detention
Amendment 227 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 28 (28) Detention should be imposed, following an individual assessment of each case, where there is a risk of absconding,
Amendment 228 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 29 (29) Given that
Amendment 229 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 29 (29)
Amendment 230 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 29 (29)
Amendment 231 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 29 (29) Given that maximum detention
Amendment 232 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 29 (29) Given that maximum detention periods in some Member States are not sufficient to ensure the implementation of return, a maximum period of detention between t
Amendment 233 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 29 (29) Given that maximum detention periods in some Member States are not sufficient to ensure the implementation of return, an initial maximum period of detention
Amendment 234 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 30 Amendment 235 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 30 Amendment 236 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 30 (30)
Amendment 237 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 30 (30) This Directive should not preclude Member States from laying down effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties and criminal penalties, including imprisonment, in relation to the infringements of immigration rule
Amendment 238 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 30 (30) This Directive
Amendment 239 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 31 (31) Third-country nationals
Amendment 240 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 31 a (new) Amendment 241 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 31 b (new) (31b) An independent and qualified guardian with the necessary expertise and training to ensure that the best interests of the child are fully taken into consideration should be appointed to assist unaccompanied and separated children. To that end, the guardian should be involved in the procedure to find a durable solution for the child in his or her best interests.
Amendment 242 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 32 Amendment 243 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 32 Amendment 244 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 32 Amendment 245 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 32 Amendment 246 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 32 (32) Without prejudice to the possibility for Member States not to apply this Directive with regard to the cases referred to in Article 2(2)(a),
Amendment 247 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 33 Amendment 248 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 33 Amendment 249 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 33 Amendment 250 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 33 (33) To ensure effective return in the
Amendment 251 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 33 (33) To ensure effective return in the context of the border procedure, a period for voluntary departure should not be granted. However, a period for voluntary departure
Amendment 252 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 34 Amendment 253 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 34 Amendment 254 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 34 Amendment 255 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 34 Amendment 256 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 34 (34) For a rapid treatment of the case, a maximum time limit is to be granted to appeal once against a return decision following a
Amendment 257 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 35 Amendment 258 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 35 Amendment 259 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 35 Amendment 260 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 35 Amendment 261 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 35 Amendment 262 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 35 (35) An appeal against a return decision taken in the context of the border procedure should
Amendment 263 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 36 Amendment 264 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 36 Amendment 265 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 36 Amendment 266 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 36 (36) It is necessary and proportionate to ensure that a third country national who was already detained during the examination of his or her application for international protection as part of the asylum border procedure
Amendment 267 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 36 (36) It is necessary and proportionate to ensure that a third country national who was already detained during the examination of his or her application for international protection as part of the asylum border procedure may be kept in detention in order to prepare the return and/or carry out the removal process, once his or her application has been rejected. To avoid that a third country national is automatically released from detention and allowed entry into the territory of the Member State despite having been denied a right to stay, a limited period of time is needed in order to try to enforce the return decision issued at the border. The third- country national concerned may be detained in the context of the border procedure for a maximum period of
Amendment 268 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 37 Amendment 269 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 38 Amendment 270 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 38 (38) Establishing return management systems in Member States contributes to the efficiency of the return process. Each national system should provide timely information on the identity and legal situation of the third country national that are relevant for monitoring and following up on individual cases. To operate efficiently and in order to significantly reduce the administrative burden, such national return systems should be linked to the Schengen Information System to facilitate and speed up the entering of return-related information,
Amendment 271 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 38 (38) Establishing return management systems in Member States contributes to the efficiency of the return process. Each national system should provide timely information on the identity and legal situation of the third country national that are relevant for monitoring and following up on individual cases. To operate efficiently
Amendment 272 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 38 a (new) (38a) When, following a best interest assessment, it is established that return would be in a minor’s best interest, Member States should ensure that specific safeguards are in place for separated or unaccompanied children returning to a third country. Where family has been traced, Member States should ensure that child-protection actors assess, through appropriate case-management, whether family reunification is in the child’s best interest, whether the family is willing and able to receive the child and provide suitable immediate care, and take into account both the child’s and the family’s views on reunification. Family tracing should only be done by qualified actors and following a best interest’s assessment to ensure restoring contact would not be contrary to a child’s best interest. Where tracing is unsuccessful or where family reunification is found not to be in the child’s best interest, return should not occur.
Amendment 273 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 38 a (new) (38a) Union data protection legislation is applicable to any processing of personal data in the return management systems of the Member States, including the communication of this data to the central system operated by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency. Return management systems should respect the principles of lawfulness, fairness and transparency; purpose limitation; data minimisation; accuracy; storage limitation; integrity and confidentiality; and accountability of the data controller. The national return management systems should not contain any information obtained during the personal interview carried out on the basis of Article 15 of Directive 2013/32/EU (Asylum Procedures Directive).
Amendment 274 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 40 (40) The Union provides financial and operational support in order to achieve an effective and fundamental rights compliant implementation of this Directive. Member States should make best use of the available Union financial instruments, programmes and projects in the field of return, in particular under Regulation (EU) …/… [Regulation establishing the Asylum and Migration Fund]
Amendment 275 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 40 (40) The Union provides financial and operational support in order to achieve an effective implementation of this Directive. Member States should make best use of the available Union financial instruments, programmes and projects in the field of return, in particular under Regulation (EU) …/… [Regulation establishing the Asylum and Migration Fund], as well as of the operational assistance by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency according to Regulation (EU) …/… [EBCG Regulation]. Such support should be used in particular for establishing return management systems and programmes for providing logistical, financial and other material or in-kind assistance to support the return – and where
Amendment 276 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 40 (40) The Union provides financial and operational support in order to achieve an effective implementation of this Directive. Member States should make best use of the available Union financial instruments, programmes and projects in the field of return, in particular under Regulation (EU) …/… [Regulation establishing the Asylum and Migration Fund], as well as of the operational assistance by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency according to Regulation (EU) …/… [EBCG Regulation]. Such support should be used in particular for establishing return management systems and programmes for providing logistical, financial and other material or in-kind assistance to support the return
Amendment 277 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 40 a (new) (40a) In order to supplement non- essential elements of this Directive, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of establishing the specific modalities for the operation of the central system established in accordance with Article 50 of Regulation (EU) …/… [EBCG Regulation] and the communication between the national systems and the central systems. Those modalities should include clearly identifying the purposes of the processing via this centralised system and of the categories of personal data to be processed for each of these purposes. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts.
Amendment 278 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 41 (41) Since the objective of this Directive, namely to establish
Amendment 279 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 44 (44) Application of this Directive is without prejudice to the obligations resulting from the Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, as amended by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967, from the 1954 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons and from the 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
Amendment 280 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 45 (45) This Directive respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights.
Amendment 281 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 46 Amendment 282 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 46 (46) The purpose of an effective implementation of the return of third- country nationals who do not fulfil or no longer fulfil the conditions for entry, stay or residence in the Member States, in accordance with this Directive, is an essential component of the comprehensive efforts to tackle irregular migration and represents an important reason of substantial public interest. A systematic exploration of possibilities for cooperation with third countries as recipients of returnees is therefore necessary. Even a temporary willingness of a third country, be it the country of origin or other third country, to accept returnees from the Union should be the Member States´ priority as a means to achieving the objective of improved return rates.
Amendment 283 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 46 (46) The purpose of an effective and dignified implementation of the return of third-
Amendment 284 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 46 (46) The purpose of an effective implementation of the return of third- country nationals who do not fulfil or no longer fulfil the conditions for entry, stay or residence in the Member States, in accordance with this Directive, is an essential component of the comprehensive efforts to tackle i
Amendment 285 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 47 (47) Member States' return authorities need to process personal data to ensure the proper implementation of return procedures and the successful enforcement of return decisions. The third countries of return are often not the subject of adequacy decisions adopted by the Commission under Article 45 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council18 ,
Amendment 286 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 47 (47) Member States' return authorities need to process personal data to ensure the
Amendment 287 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 54 Amendment 288 #
Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 This Directive sets out
Amendment 289 #
Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 This Directive sets out common standards and procedures to be applied in Member States for returning i
Amendment 290 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 1. This Directive applies to third- country nationals staying i
Amendment 291 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a Amendment 292 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point b (b) are subject to return as a criminal law sanction or as a consequence of a criminal law sanction as a result of a serious crime, according to national law, or who are the subject of extradition procedures
Amendment 293 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 2. ‘i
Amendment 294 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – introductory part 3. ‘return’ means the process of a third-country national going back — whether in voluntary compliance with an obligation to return, or enforced — to
Amendment 295 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a Amendment 296 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b Amendment 297 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b Amendment 298 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b (b) a country of transit in accordance with Union or bilateral readmission agreements
Amendment 299 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c Amendment 300 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c (c) an
Amendment 301 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4 4. ‘return decision’ means an administrative or judicial decision or act, stating or declaring the stay of a third- country national to be i
Amendment 302 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 7.
Amendment 303 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 7. ‘risk of absconding’ means the proven existence of reasons in an individual case which are based on specific and objective criteria strictly defined by law to believe that a third-
Amendment 304 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 8 a (new) 8a. ‘voluntary return’ means compliance with the obligation to return at any stage of the return procedure, as a consequence of an informed decision, taken freely by the person concerned in the absence of any physical, psychological, or material pressure to return voluntarily or to enrol in an Assisted Voluntary Return and Reintegration programme;
Amendment 305 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9 9. ‘persons in a vulnerable
Amendment 306 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9 9. ‘vulnerable persons’ means minors, unaccompanied minors, disabled people, elderly people, pregnant women, single parents with minor children, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex persons, persons belonging to religious minorities, non-believers, and persons who have been subjected to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual and gender-based violence.
Amendment 307 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9 9. ‘vulnerable persons’ means minors, unaccompanied minors, disabled people, elderly people, pregnant women, single parents with minor children and persons who have been subjected to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violence and exploitation.
Amendment 308 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new) 9a. 'principle of non-refoulement' means the prohibition of expulsion or return according to Article 33 of the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees.
Amendment 309 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 4 Amendment 310 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point a (a) ensure that their treatment and level of protection are no less favourable than as set out in Article 10(4) and (5) (limitations on use of coercive measures), Article
Amendment 311 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point b (b) respect the principle of non- refoulement
Amendment 312 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part When adopting a return decision and implementing this Directive, Member States shall take due account of:
Amendment 313 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) the best interests of the child as the primary consideration in all decisions concerning minors;
Amendment 314 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) the best interests of the child in all cases where children are affected;
Amendment 315 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new) (ca) the special needs of disabled people, elderly people, pregnant women, victims of trafficking in human beings, persons with serious illnesses, persons with mental disorders and persons who have been subjected to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violence, such as victims of female genital mutilation.
Amendment 316 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 Amendment 317 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 Article 6 Article 6 Risk of absconding Risk of absconding 1. The objective criteria referred to in point 7 of Article 3 shall include at least the following criteria:
Amendment 318 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph -1 (new) -1. The existence of a risk of absconding shall be determined on the basis of an overall assessment of the specific circumstances and the future behaviour that can be reasonably expected in the individual case, taking into account the following objective criteria:
Amendment 319 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 Amendment 320 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. The
Amendment 321 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. The objective criteria referred to in point 7 of Article 3 shall include at least one of the following criteria:
Amendment 322 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. The objective criteria referred to in point 7 of Article 3 shall
Amendment 323 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. The objective criteria referred to in point 7 of Article 3
Amendment 324 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1.
Amendment 325 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a Amendment 326 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a Amendment 327 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a Amendment 328 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a Amendment 329 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b Amendment 330 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b Amendment 331 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b Amendment 332 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b Amendment 333 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c Amendment 334 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c Amendment 335 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c Amendment 336 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c Amendment 337 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d Amendment 338 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d Amendment 339 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d Amendment 340 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d Amendment 341 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e Amendment 342 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e Amendment 343 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e (e) unauthorised movement to the territory of another Member State or of a third country, or attempts to do so;
Amendment 344 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g Amendment 345 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h Amendment 346 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i Amendment 347 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i (i) non-compliance with the requirement of Article 8(2) to go
Amendment 348 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point j Amendment 349 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point j Amendment 350 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point j Amendment 351 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k (k) existence of conviction for a criminal offence, even with a non- definitive sentence, including for a serious criminal offence in another Member State;
Amendment 352 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k (k) existence of conviction for a
Amendment 353 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point l Amendment 354 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point m Amendment 355 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point m (m) using false or forged identity documents, destroying or otherwise disposing of existing documents, or refusing to provide fingerprints as required by Union or national law, or having provided false verbal information;
Amendment 356 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point m (m)
Amendment 357 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point n Amendment 358 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point n (n) opposing violently or fraudulently the return procedures, including by deliberately providing false information in an oral or written form or deliberately concealing essential information about the case prior to the return;
Amendment 359 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point o Amendment 360 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point p Amendment 361 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point p Amendment 362 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point p a (new) (pa) risk to public policy, public security or national security.
Amendment 363 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 Amendment 364 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 The existence of a risk of absconding shall be determined on the basis of an overall individual assessment of the specific circumstances of the
Amendment 365 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 366 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 367 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 368 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 369 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 However, Member States shall establish that a risk of absconding is presumed in an individual case, unless proven otherwise, when one of the objective criteria referred to in points (f), (g), (h), (j), (m), (n), (o) and (p) of paragraph 1 is fulfilled.
Amendment 370 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 However, Member States shall establish that a risk of absconding is presumed in an individual case, unless proven otherwise, when one of the objective criteria referred to in points (k), (l), (m), (n), (o) and (p) of paragraph 1 is fulfilled.
Amendment 371 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 However, Member States shall establish that a risk of absconding is presumed in an individual case, unless proven otherwise, when one of the objective criteria referred to in points (m), (n), (o), (p) and (p a) of paragraph 1 is fulfilled.
Amendment 372 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 However, Member States shall establish that a risk of absconding is presumed in an individual case, unless proven otherwise, when one of the objective criteria referred to in p
Amendment 373 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – title Amendment 376 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. Member States shall i
Amendment 377 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. Member States shall
Amendment 378 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. Member States shall
Amendment 379 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a Amendment 380 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a (a)
Amendment 381 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a (a)
Amendment 382 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b Amendment 383 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b Amendment 384 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b Amendment 385 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b Amendment 386 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c Amendment 387 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) the duty to remain
Amendment 388 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c (c)
Amendment 389 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new) (ca) knowledge of consequences of not complying with an obligation to return following a return decision;
Amendment 390 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new) (cb) knowledge of the time-frame of the procedure, including any time limits which the competent authorities are required to respect, including the time limits for detention;
Amendment 391 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d Amendment 392 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d Amendment 393 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d Amendment 394 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d (d) the duty to lodge to the competent
Amendment 395 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new) (da) a clear overview of the rights and obligations during the procedure, including the right to an effective remedy to appeal against or seek review of decisions related to return or detention as referred to in Articles 15 and 18 and the right to free legal assistance and interpretation;
Amendment 396 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new) Amendment 397 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 2 Amendment 398 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 2 Amendment 399 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 400 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 2 2. The elements referred to in point (a) of paragraph 1 shall include the third- country nationals’ statements and documentation in their possession regarding
Amendment 401 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 3 Amendment 402 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 3 3. Member States shall inform the third-country nationals
Amendment 403 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 3 3. Member States shall inform the third-country nationals
Amendment 404 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. All the information referred to in paragraph 1 shall be provided in good time to enable the third-country national to exercise the rights guaranteed under this Directive. The information shall be provided both orally and in writing. In the case of minors, information shall be provided in a child-friendly manner by staff appropriately trained also in Union and international human rights law, as well as Union and international refugee law, and with the involvement of the family members or of the guardian.
Amendment 405 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Member States shall ensure that the consequences of non-complying are proportionate and not excessive and that they are not imposed on children.
Amendment 406 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Member States shall make available generalised information sheets explaining the main elements of the return procedure, imparted both orally and in writing.
Amendment 407 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 3 c (new) 3c. Member States shall make available to the third-country national the assistance of a case-worker to assist him or her during the procedure in line with Article 14.
Amendment 408 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 3 d (new) 3d. Member States shall provide third- country nationals in the process of return with the opportunity to communicate with the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) and with the contact details of organisations providing legal advice or counselling. Legal advice and counselling shall be provided systematically and in all stages of the procedure, included as legal remedies are concerned.
Amendment 409 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 3 e (new) 3e. Member States shall provide third- country nationals in the process of return, access to health care and all other social services they need.
Amendment 410 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 a (new) Article 7 a The right to be heard Before the adoption of a return decision, the right to be heard shall be granted to the third country national, in particular to consider: a) the regular or irregular stay of the third-country national; b) all circumstances affecting the obligation to issue a return decision under article 8 paragraph 2, 3, 4, 5; c) personal and family situation; d) the willingness to voluntary departure pursuant the article 9; e) any other relevant detail in order to avoid the violation of fundamental rights, in particular the principle of non- refoulement, the right to respect for family life, as well as the best interest of the child.
Amendment 412 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall, before issu
Amendment 413 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall issue a return decision to any third-country national staying i
Amendment 414 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 Amendment 415 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 2. Third-country nationals staying i
Amendment 416 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new) In the event of non-compliance by the third-country national concerned with this requirement, paragraph 1 shall apply and the Member State that issued the return decision shall start a consultation in accordance with Article 10 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1860. When the Member State that issued the residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay notifies to the Member State that issued the return decision that it is maintaining that permit or authorisation, or when it does not take a decision within the period set by letter (e) of Article 10 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1860, that Member State shall be obliged to admit the third-country national into its territory.
Amendment 417 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 3 3. Member States may refrain from issuing a return decision to a third-country national staying i
Amendment 418 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 4 4. Member States
Amendment 419 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 4 4. Member States may at any moment decide to grant an autonomous residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay for compassionate, humanitarian or other reasons to a third- country national staying i
Amendment 420 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 5 5. If a third-country national staying illegally on the territory of a Member State is the subject of a pending procedure for renewing his or her residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay, that Member State shall consider refraining from issuing a return decision, until the pending procedure is finished, without prejudice to paragraph 6.
Amendment 421 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 5 5. If a third-country national staying i
Amendment 422 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 Amendment 423 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 Amendment 424 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 Member States shall issue a return decision immediately after or together with the adoption of a decision ending a legal stay of a third-
Amendment 425 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 Member States
Amendment 426 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 Member States shall issue a return decision immediately after the adoption of a decision ending a legal stay of a third- country national, including a decision not granting a third-country national refugee status or subsidiary protection status in accordance with Regulation (EU) …/… [Qualification Regulation] in order to guarantee smooth procedures, which are also in the best interest of the returnees.
Amendment 427 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 Member States shall issue a return decision immediately after the adoption of a decision ending a legal either illegal stay of a third-
Amendment 428 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2 This Directive shall not prevent Member States from adopting a return decision together with a decision ending a legal stay of a third-country national, a decision on a removal and/or entry ban in a single administrative or judicial decision or act as provided for in their national legislation, without prejudice to the procedural safeguards available under Chapter III and under other relevant provisions of Union and national law.
Amendment 429 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2 This Directive shall not
Amendment 430 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 431 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 432 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 A return decision shall provide for an
Amendment 433 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 A return decision shall provide for an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to thirty days, without prejudice to the exceptions referred to in paragraphs 2 and 4.
Amendment 434 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 Amendment 435 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 A return decision shall provide for an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to thirty days, without prejudice to the exception referred to in paragraphs 2 and 4. Member States may provide in their national legislation that such a period shall be granted only following an application by the third-country national concerned. In such a case, Member States shall inform the third-country nationals concerned of the possibility of submitting such an application and clearly inform about the procedure.
Amendment 436 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 A return decision shall provide for an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to thirty days, without prejudice to the exception referred to in paragraphs 2 and 4. Member States may provide in their national legislation that such an appropriate period shall be granted only following an application by the third- country national concerned. In such a case, Member States shall inform the third- country nationals concerned of the possibility of submitting such an application.
Amendment 437 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 A return decision shall provide for an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to t
Amendment 438 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 A return decision shall provide for an appropriate period for voluntary departure of
Amendment 439 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 A return decision shall provide for an appropriate period for voluntary departure
Amendment 440 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 441 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 442 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 443 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Member States shall provide the necessary information on the possibility for third-country nationals to return voluntarily if they have been found to be irregularly staying on national territory or while irregularly crossing an internal or external border or if they have arrived on the territory of a Member State following rescue operations at sea. That information shall cover programmes offering logistical or financial assistance and other types of material assistance, including support for reintegration in countries of origin, the time-frames for the procedure, the related obligations, and the consequences of non-compliance.
Amendment 444 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 2 2. Member States shall, where necessary, extend the period for voluntary departure by an appropriate period, taking into account the specific circumstances of the individual case, such as the length of stay, the existence of children attending school
Amendment 445 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 3 3. Certain obligations aimed at avoiding the risk of absconding, such as
Amendment 446 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 3 3. Certain obligations aimed at avoiding the risk of absconding, such as regular reporting to the authorities, deposit of an adequate financial guarantee that is sustainable for the third-country national, submission of documents or the obligation to stay at a certain place may be imposed for the duration of the period for voluntary departure.
Amendment 447 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 Amendment 448 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part 4. Member States
Amendment 449 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part 4. Member States shall not grant a
Amendment 450 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part 4. Member States shall not grant a period for voluntary departure in the following cases:
Amendment 451 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part 4. Member States
Amendment 452 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point a (a)
Amendment 453 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point a (a) where there is a risk of absconding including secondary movement, determined in accordance with Article 6 ;
Amendment 454 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point b (b) where
Amendment 455 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point b (b) where an application for legal stay has been d
Amendment 456 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point b (b) where an application for legal stay has been dismissed as
Amendment 457 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point c Amendment 458 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point c (c) where the third-country national concerned poses a risk to public policy, public security or national security or has been convicted of an offence which is punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least three years.
Amendment 459 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point c (c) where the third-country national concerned poses a risk to public policy
Amendment 460 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point c – subparagraph 1 (new) This should particularly apply to third- country nationals who have committed offences in several Member States or offences related to terrorism or serious crime.
Amendment 461 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point c a (new) (ca) where the examination of an application for international protection was rejected in the cases referred to in Article 39(1c), (1d) or (1f) of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation] or where the application for international protection was rejected after an accelerated examination procedure in the cases referred to in Article 40(1b), (1c) or (1d) of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation].
Amendment 462 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point c a (new) Amendment 463 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point c b (new) (cb) Where the third-country nationals has been convicted for benefit fraud by using multiple identities.
Amendment 464 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. A period of voluntary departure may be granted by authorities, after an individual assessment, in cases where the third country national is in detention pending a return decision.
Amendment 465 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Member States may decide not to grant a period for voluntary departure where the third-country national concerned poses a genuine and present risk to public security or national security.
Amendment 466 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. The fact that a period for voluntary departure has not been granted shall not preclude voluntary return of the person concerned.
Amendment 467 #
Proposal for a directive Article 10 – paragraph 1 Amendment 468 #
Proposal for a directive Article 10 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall take all necessary measures to enforce the return decision if no period for voluntary departure has been granted in accordance with Article 9(4) or if the obligation to return has not been complied with within the period for voluntary departure granted in accordance with Article 9. Priority shall be given to those third country nationals having been convicted for severe and repeated criminal offences, in particular terrorism. Those measures shall include all measures necessary to confirm the identity of illegally staying third-country nationals who do not hold a valid travel document and to obtain such a document.
Amendment 469 #
Proposal for a directive Article 10 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall take all necessary measures to enforce the return decision if no period for voluntary departure has been granted in accordance with Article 9(4) or if the obligation to return has not been complied with within the period for voluntary departure granted in accordance with Article 9. Those measures shall include all measures necessary to confirm the identity of i
Amendment 470 #
Proposal for a directive Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new) Amendment 471 #
Proposal for a directive Article 10 – paragraph 2 2. If a Member State has granted a period for voluntary departure in accordance with Article 9, the return decision may be enforced only after the period has expired, unless a risk as referred to in Article 9(4a) arises during that period.
Amendment 472 #
Proposal for a directive Article 10 – paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 473 #
Proposal for a directive Article 10 – paragraph 5 Amendment 474 #
Proposal for a directive Article 10 – paragraph 6 6. Member States shall
Amendment 475 #
Proposal for a directive Article 10 – paragraph 6 a (new) Amendment 476 #
Proposal for a directive Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new) (aa) completion of schooling for children;
Amendment 477 #
Proposal for a directive Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point b (b) technical reasons, such as
Amendment 478 #
Proposal for a directive Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new) (ba) the third-country national’s participation in ongoing criminal or administrative proceedings as victims, suspects or witnesses, in particular in relation to Directive2009/52/EC, Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, and Directive 2012/29/EU.
Amendment 479 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – title Return and removal of
Amendment 480 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – title Return and removal of
Amendment 481 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 482 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 1 1. Before deciding to issue a return decision in respect of an unaccompanied minor, Member States shall carry out a best interests assessment, taking into account the specific circumstances of the child, to identify durable solutions for the child. If a return decision is issued based on a best interests assessment, assistance by appropriate bodies
Amendment 483 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 1 1. Before deciding to issue a return decision in respect of an unaccompanied minor, assistance by appropriate bodies other than the authorities enforcing return shall be granted
Amendment 484 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 1 1. Before deciding to issue a return decision in respect of a
Amendment 485 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 2 2. Before removing an unaccompanied minor from the territory of a Member State, the authorities of that Member State shall be satisfied that he or she will be returned to a member of his or her family, a nominated guardian or adequate reception facilities in the State of return. Authorities shall ensure that there is a handover from child protection authorities of the Member States to child protection authorities of the State of return.
Amendment 486 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 2 2. Before re
Amendment 487 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Member States shall provide minors and families with documentation indicating that they are in an ongoing return procedure and that both of them, including legal or customary primary caregivers, shall not be subject to detention.
Amendment 488 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Unaccompanied minors shall be assisted and represented by a qualified guardian throughout the whole return procedure.
Amendment 489 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Member States shall ensure that an independent and qualified guardian with the necessary expertise and training who could ensure that the best interests of the child are taken into consideration is appointed to assist unaccompanied and separated children. To that end, the guardian shall be involved in the procedure to ensure that returns solely occur for the child if it is in his or her best interest.
Amendment 490 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 2 c (new) 2c. Return and reintegration assistance shall be granted to all minors and their families.
Amendment 491 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 1
Amendment 492 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part Return decisions
Amendment 493 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 In other cases return decisions may be accompanied by an entry ban based on an individual assessment of the case. In cases involving children and in cases of voluntary departure, return decisions shall not be accompanied by an entry ban.
Amendment 494 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 In the other cases, return decisions may be accompanied by an entry ban.
Amendment 495 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new) In cases involving children, return decisions shall not be accompanied by an entry ban, after a proved and valid age determination process, based on the national practices and laws of the responsible Member State.
Amendment 496 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 2 Amendment 497 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 2 Amendment 498 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 2 2. Without prejudice to paragraph 3, Member States shall impose an entry ban of a nationally authorised maximum length in cases referred to in paragraph 1 or if a risk referred to in Article 9(4) has arisen during the period for voluntary departure or an obligation to cooperate referred to in Article 7 has not been complied with or the person represents a threat to public policy, public security or national security. Member States may impose an entry ban, which does not accompany a return decision, to a third- country national who has been illegally staying in the territory of the Member States and whose
Amendment 499 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 2 2. Member States
Amendment 500 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 2 2. Member States may impose an entry or stay ban, which does not accompany a return decision, to a third- country national who has been illegally staying in the territory of the Member States and whose illegal stay is detected in connection with border checks carried out at exit in accordance with Article 8 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, where justified on the basis of the specific circumstances of the individual case and taking into account the principle of proportionality.
Amendment 501 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 2 2. Member States may impose an entry ban, which does not accompany a return decision, to a third-country national who has been illegally staying in the territory of the Member States and whose illegal stay is
Amendment 502 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Member States may impose an entry ban, which does not accompany a return decision, to a third-country national who has been illegally staying in the territory of the Member States and whose illegal stay is detected in connection with border checks carried out at exit in accordance with Article 8 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, where justified on the basis of the specific circumstances of the individual case and taking into account the principle of proportionality.
Amendment 503 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 3 3. The length of the entry ban shall be determined with due regard to all relevant circumstances of the individual case and shall not in principle exceed
Amendment 504 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 3 3. The length of the entry ban shall be determined with due regard to all relevant circumstances of the individual case and shall not in principle exceed five years. It may however exceed five years if the third- country national represents a genuine and serious threat to public policy, public security or national security.
Amendment 505 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 3 3. The length of the entry ban shall be determined with due regard to all relevant circumstances of the individual case and shall not in principle exceed
Amendment 506 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 Victims of trafficking in human beings who have been granted a residence permit pursuant to Council Directive 2004/81/EC28 shall not be subject of an entry ban without prejudice to paragraph 1, first subparagraph, point (b), and provided that the third-country national concerned does not represent a threat to public policy,
Amendment 507 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – title Amendment 508 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 1 1. Each Member State shall
Amendment 509 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 1 1. Each Member State shall set up, operate, maintain and further develop a national return management system, which shall process all the necessary information for implementing this Directive, in particular as regards the management of individual cases as well as of any return- related procedure, as well as including post-return monitoring and support to ensure sustainable returns.
Amendment 510 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 1 1. Each Member State shall set up, operate, maintain and further develop a national return management system, which shall process
Amendment 511 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Member States shall ensure that individual assessments are carried out to provide tailored support to each migrant throughout the return process in a gender and age sensitive manner, and in compliance with international law.
Amendment 512 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 1 b (new) 1b. Legal counselling shall be provided in a language that can be understood by the third-country national. It shall take place in conditions that allow migrants to ask questions and express their views freely, including their concerns.
Amendment 513 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 1 c (new) 1c. At all stages of the procedure, it shall be possible for the third-country national concerned to avail himself or herself of existing procedures to determine and apply for residence status, including international protection procedures, any other form of protection procedures provided by national law and other procedures that provide status.
Amendment 514 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 2 Amendment 515 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 2 Amendment 516 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 2 2. The national system shall be set up in a way which ensures technical compatibility allowing for communication with the central system established in accordance with Article 50 of Regulation (EU) …/…
Amendment 517 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 Member States shall establish programmes for providing logistical, financial and other material or in-kind assistance, in accordance with national legislation, for the purpose of supporting the return of i
Amendment 518 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 519 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 Such assistance
Amendment 520 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 521 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 Such assistance
Amendment 522 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 Such assistance
Amendment 523 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new) National programmes shall include a continuum of care for the third-country national throughout all stages of the return and reintegration process. This shall include the provision of adequate information on conditions in countries of return prior to departure, provided by independent or UN bodies in understandable language, appropriate transfer of care for persons in vulnerable situations and custodial arrangements for unaccompanied and separated children and their parents. National programmes shall include mechanisms for the appropriate transfer of legal assistance and access to justice and redress mechanisms, access to relevant national administrative and criminal proceedings, in particular, in accordance with Directives 2009/52/EC, 2011/36/EU and 2012/29/EU, throughout the return procedure, including measures to ensure that readmission agreements include access to justice after return to a third country.
Amendment 524 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 525 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 526 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 527 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 528 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 The granting of such assistance, including its kind and extent, shall be subject to the compliance with the obligation to return within the period for voluntary departure, if granted, the gravity of the reasons for not granting a period for voluntary departure and the cooperation of the third- country national concerned with the competent authorities of the Member States as provided for in Article 7 of this Directive.
Amendment 529 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 The granting of such assistance, including its kind and extent, shall be subject to the cooperation of the third-country national concerned with the competent authorities of the Member States as provided for in Article 7 of this Directive. Assistance granted under this paragraph shall only be granted once.
Amendment 530 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 The granting of such assistance, including its kind and extent, shall be in any case subject to the cooperation of the third- country national concerned with the competent authorities of the Member States as provided for in Article 7 of this Directive.
Amendment 531 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 a (new) The assistance referred to in this paragraph shall as a rule not be granted to third-country nationals who already benefitted from reintegration assistance provided by a Member State once.
Amendment 532 #
Proposal for a directive Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 Amendment 533 #
Proposal for a directive Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 534 #
Proposal for a directive Article 15 – paragraph 2 2. Member States shall provide
Amendment 535 #
Proposal for a directive Article 15 – paragraph 2 2. Member States shall provide
Amendment 536 #
Proposal for a directive Article 15 – paragraph 3 Amendment 537 #
Proposal for a directive Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 Amendment 538 #
Proposal for a directive Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 Amendment 539 #
Proposal for a directive Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 540 #
Proposal for a directive Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 541 #
Proposal for a directive Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 542 #
Proposal for a directive Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 543 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 Amendment 544 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 The third-country national concerned shall be afforded an effective remedy to appeal against or seek review of decisions related to return, as referred to in Article 15(1), before a competent judicial
Amendment 545 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 The third-country national concerned shall be afforded an effective remedy to appeal against or seek review of decisions related to return, as referred to in Article 15(1), before a competent judicial or administrative authority.
Amendment 546 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 547 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 548 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 549 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 The third-country national concerned shall only be granted the right to appeal before a single level of jurisdiction against the return decision
Amendment 550 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 The third-country national concerned shall be granted the right to appeal before a
Amendment 551 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 2 2. The
Amendment 552 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 Amendment 553 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 The enforcement of the return decision shall be automatically suspended during the period for bringing the appeal
Amendment 554 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 The enforcement of the return decision shall be automatically suspended during the period for bringing
Amendment 555 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 The enforcement of the return decision shall be automatically suspended during the period for bringing the appeal at first
Amendment 556 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 The enforcement of the return decision shall be automatically suspended during the period for bringing the appeal at first instance and, where that appeal has been lodged within the set period, during the examination of
Amendment 557 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 The enforcement of the return decision shall be automatically suspended during the period for bringing
Amendment 558 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 559 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 560 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 561 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 562 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 563 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 564 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 565 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 566 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 – introductory part Where no relevant new elements or findings have arisen or have been presented by the third-country national concerned which significantly modify the specific circumstances of the individual case, the
Amendment 567 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 – point b a (new) (ba) the return decision is the consequence of the decision on ending the legal stay that is aggravated by at least one of the following circumstances: - risk of absconding; - application for legal stay dismissed as fraudulent or manifestly unfounded; - the third-country national poses a risk to public policy, public security or national security.
Amendment 568 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 Member States shall establish reasonable time limits and other necessary rules to
Amendment 569 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 Member States shall establish reasonable and sufficient time limits and other necessary rules to ensure the exercise of the right to an effective remedy pursuant to this Article.
Amendment 570 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 4 Member States shall establish
Amendment 571 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 572 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 573 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 Member States shall grant a period not exceeding five days to lodge an appeal against a return decision when such a decision is the consequence of a
Amendment 574 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 Member States shall grant a period
Amendment 575 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 5 5. The third-country national concerned shall have the possibility to obtain legal advice, representation and
Amendment 576 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 6 6. Member States shall ensure that
Amendment 577 #
Proposal for a directive Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. The first paragraph shall also apply to third-country nationals who are staying irregularly and in respect of whom it is not or it has not been possible to implement a return decision.
Amendment 578 #
Proposal for a directive Article 17 – paragraph 2 2. Member States shall provide the persons referred to in paragraph 1 and 1a with a written confirmation in accordance with national legislation that the period for voluntary departure has been extended in accordance with Article 9(2) or that the return decision will temporarily not be enforced or it has not been possible to implement a return decision.
Amendment 580 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part Amendment 581 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part Unless other sufficient but less coercive measures can be applied effectively in a specific case, Member States may only keep in detention a third-country national who is the subject of return procedures in order to prepare the return and/or carry out the removal process, in particular when:
Amendment 582 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part Unless other sufficient but less coercive measures can be applied effectively in a specific case, Member States may only keep in detention a third-country national who is the subject of return procedures in order to prepare the return and/or carry out the removal process
Amendment 583 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part Unless other sufficient but less coercive measures can be applied effectively in a specific case, Member States
Amendment 584 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a Amendment 585 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b Amendment 586 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c Amendment 587 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c Amendment 588 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c (c) the third-country national concerned poses a risk to public policy, public security or national security or has been convicted of an offence which is punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least three years.
Amendment 589 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c (c) the third-country national concerned poses a risk to public policy, public security or national security in which case the person concerned shall, without exception, be detained until his or her removal.
Amendment 590 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c (c) the third-country national concerned poses a genuine and present risk to public policy, public security or national security.
Amendment 591 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 All grounds for detention shall be laid down in national law. Detention shall be obligatory at least when one of the conditions in points (a), (b) or (c) of this paragraph applies. The third-country national concerned shall be detained immediately after the issuance of the return decision as a precautionary measure in preparation for the return.
Amendment 592 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 In other cases Member States may keep in detention a third-country national who is the subject of return procedures in order to prepare the return and/or carry out the removal process. All grounds for detention shall be laid down in national law.
Amendment 593 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 – point b (b) or grant the third-country national concerned the right to take proceedings by means of which the lawfulness of detention shall be subject to a speedy judicial review to be decided on as speedily as possible after the launch of the relevant proceedings. In such a case Member States shall immediately inform the third-country national concerned about the possibility of taking such proceedings, and provide to this purpose for legal and linguistic assistance, free of charge.
Amendment 594 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 3 3. If a Member State decides to apply detention, in every case, detention shall be reviewed at reasonable and regular intervals of time either on application by the third-country national concerned or ex officio.
Amendment 595 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 5 5. Detention shall be maintained for as long a period as the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 are fulfilled and it is necessary to ensure successful removal. Each Member State shall set a maximum initial period of detention of not less than
Amendment 596 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 597 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 5 5. Detention shall be maintained for as long a period as the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 are fulfilled and it is necessary to ensure successful removal. Each Member State shall set a
Amendment 598 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 5 5. Detention shall be maintained for as long a period as the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 are fulfilled and it is necessary to ensure successful removal. Each Member State shall set a
Amendment 599 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 6 Amendment 600 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 6 – introductory part 6. Member States may not extend the period referred to in paragraph 5 except for a limited period not exceeding a further
Amendment 601 #
Proposal for a directive Article 18 – paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Member States may re-detain a third country national despite reaching the limit of the period referred to in paragraphs 5 and 6 if, after the release from detention facilities, there are circumstances present that allow the enforcement of the return decision issued to the same third country national.
Amendment 602 #
Proposal for a directive Article 19 – paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 603 #
Proposal for a directive Article 19 – paragraph 2 2. Third-country nationals in detention
Amendment 604 #
Proposal for a directive Article 19 – paragraph 3 3. Particular attention shall be paid to the situation of persons in a vulnerable
Amendment 605 #
Proposal for a directive Article 19 – paragraph 4 4. Relevant and competent national, international and non-governmental organisations and bodies, as well as journalists and members of national and European Parliaments shall have the possibility to visit detention facilities, as
Amendment 606 #
Proposal for a directive Article 19 – paragraph 5 5. Third-country nationals kept in detention shall be systematically provided with information which explains the rules applied in the facility and sets out their rights and obligations, in a language they understand. Such information shall include information on their entitlement under national law to contact the organisations and bodies, as well as journalists and members of national and European Parliaments referred to in paragraph 4.
Amendment 607 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 Amendment 608 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – title Amendment 610 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 611 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 1 1. Unaccompanied minors and families with minors shall
Amendment 612 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 1 1. Unaccompanied minors and families with minors shall
Amendment 613 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 614 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 2 Amendment 615 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 616 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 617 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 618 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 3 Amendment 619 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 3 Amendment 620 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 3 Amendment 621 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 3 3. Minors in detention shall have the possibility to engage in leisure activities, including play and recreational activities appropriate to their age, and shall have, depending on the length of their stay, access to education and psychosocial support.
Amendment 622 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 3 3. Minors
Amendment 623 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 4 Amendment 624 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 4 Amendment 625 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 4 4. Unaccompanied minors shall, as
Amendment 626 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 627 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 5 Amendment 628 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 5 Amendment 629 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 5 5. The best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration in
Amendment 630 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 5 5. The best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration in the context of the
Amendment 631 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 a (new) Article 20 a Unaccompanied minors shall not be detained. Families with children shall be placed in alternative facilities, such as non-custodial community-based facilities. Minors shall not be separated from their parents during the procedure, unless it is in their best interest.
Amendment 632 #
Proposal for a directive Article 21 Amendment 637 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 1 1. Member States
Amendment 638 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall establish return procedures applicable to i
Amendment 639 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 Article 22 Article 22 Border procedure Border procedure 1. Member States shall establish return procedures app
Amendment 640 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 3 3.
Amendment 641 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 5 5. Member States shall grant a period not exceeding 48 hours to lodge an appeal once against the return decisions based on a
Amendment 642 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part The enforcement of a return decision during the period for bringing the appeal at first instance and, where that appeal has been lodged within the period established, during the examination of
Amendment 643 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point a Amendment 644 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point b Amendment 645 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2 Where a further appeal against a first
Amendment 646 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 647 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 In order to prepare the return or carry out the removal process, or both, Member States
Amendment 648 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 649 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2 Detention shall be for as short a period as possible, which shall in no case exceed
Amendment 650 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 651 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 – paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. In order to prevent secondary movements of illegally staying third- country nationals, Member States shall have the right to introduce return procedures at the border, for cases in which illegally staying third-country nationals were involved into border controls and took part in unauthorised movement, or did not comply with orders given by law enforcement offices or where illegally staying third-country nationals are under ongoing criminal investigations or proceedings.
Amendment 652 #
Proposal for a directive Article 23 – paragraph 1 The Commission shall report every three years to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Directive in the Member States and, if appropriate, propose amendments. Such report shall be accompanied by a full Commission impact assessment of the transposition and implementation of this Directive.
Amendment 653 #
Proposal for a directive Article 23 a (new) Article 23a Exercise of the delegation 1. The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the conditions laid down in this Article. 2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 14(2) shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of 5 years from the … [date of entry into force of the basic legislative act or any other date set by the co-legislators]. 3. The delegation of power referred to in Article 14(2) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force. 4. Before adopting a delegated act, the Commission shall consult experts designated by each Member State in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016. 5. As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council. 6. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 14(2) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or by the Council within a period of [two months] of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
Amendment 654 #
Proposal for a directive Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Articles
source: 634.774
2020/09/28
LIBE
635 amendments...
Amendment 120 #
Draft legislative resolution Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 121 #
Proposal for a directive Title 1 Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning i
Amendment 122 #
Proposal for a directive Title 1 Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning i
Amendment 123 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2)
Amendment 124 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) A
Amendment 125 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) An effective and fair return policy is an essential part of the Union's approach to better manage migration in all aspects in a more balanced way, as reflected in the European Agenda on Migration of May 201511
Amendment 126 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) An effective
Amendment 127 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 Amendment 128 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 (3)
Amendment 129 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 (3) On 28 June 2018, in its conclusions, the European Council underlined the necessity to significantly step up the effective return of irregular migrants, and welcomed the intention of the Commission to make legislative proposals for a more effective and coherent European return policy. These conclusions were adopted in a context where the effective return rate was only 36.6% in 2017, which is wholly inadequate.
Amendment 130 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 Amendment 131 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 a (new) (3a) On 19 December 2018, the United Nations General Assembly endorsed the UN Global Compact on Migration. States committed in this text to ensure that any detention in the context of international migration follows due process, is non- arbitrary, based on law, necessity, proportionality and individual assessments, is carried out by authorised officials, and for the shortest possible period of time, irrespective whether detention occurs at the moment of entry, in transit, or proceedings of return, and regardless of the type of place where the detention occurs. They also committed to prioritize non-custodial alternatives to detention that are in line with international law, and to take a human rights-based approach to any detention of migrants, using detention as a measure of last resort only.
Amendment 132 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 a (new) (3a) The implementation of joint awareness-raising campaigns in third countries on the risks inherent in irregular migration and on the Union’s return policy should be strengthened.
Amendment 133 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) That European return policy should be based on common standards, for persons to be returned in a humane manner and with full respect for their fundamental rights and dignity , as well as international law, including refugee protection and human rights obligations. Clear, transparent and fair rules need to be established to provide for an effective return policy which serves as a deterrent to
Amendment 134 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) That European return policy should be based on common standards, for persons to be returned in a humane manner and with full respect for their fundamental rights and dignity , as well as international law, including refugee protection and human rights obligations. Clear, transparent and fair rules need to be established to provide for an effective European return policy
Amendment 135 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) That European return policy should be based on common standards
Amendment 136 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) That European return policy should be based on common standards, for persons to be returned in a humane manner irrespective of their status and with full respect for their fundamental rights and dignity , as well as international law, including refugee protection and human rights obligations. Clear, transparent, non- discriminatory and fair rules need to be established to provide for an effective
Amendment 137 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4)
Amendment 138 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) That European return policy should be based on common standards, for persons
Amendment 139 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) That European return policy should be based on common standards, for persons to be returned in a humane manner and with full respect for their fundamental rights and dignity , as well as international law, including refugee protection and human rights obligations. Clear, transparent and fair rules need to be established to provide for an effective return policy which serves as a deterrent to i
Amendment 140 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5) This Directive should establish a horizontal set of rules, applicable to all third-country nationals who do not or who no longer fulfil the conditions for entry, stay or residence in a Member State. These horizontal rules should not impede sovereign Member States from imposing stricter rules on third country citizens as befits each Member State’s particular social and economic situation.
Amendment 141 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 (6) Member States should ensure that the ending of illegal stay of third-country nationals is carried out through a fair
Amendment 142 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 (6) Member States should ensure that
Amendment 143 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 (6) Member States should ensure that the ending of illegal stay of third-country nationals is carried out through a fair, humane and transparent procedure, with more effective return procedures. According to general principles of EU law, decisions taken under this Directive should be adopted on a case-by-case basis and based on objective criteria, implying that consideration should go beyond the mere fact of an illegal stay. When using standard forms for decisions related to return, namely return decisions and, if issued, entry-ban decisions and decisions on removal, Member States should respect that principle and fully comply with all applicable provisions of this Directive.
Amendment 144 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 (6) Member States should ensure that the ending of i
Amendment 145 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 Amendment 146 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 Amendment 147 #
(7) The link between the decision on ending of the legal stay of a third-country national and the issuing of a return decision should be reinforced in order to reduce the risk of absconding and the likelihood of unauthorised secondary movements. It is necessary to ensure that a return decision is issued immediately after the decision rejecting or terminating the legal stay, or ideally in the same act or decision. That requirement should in particular apply to cases where an application for international protection is rejected
Amendment 148 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7) The link between the decision on ending of the legal stay of a third-country national
Amendment 149 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7) The link between the decision on ending of the legal stay of a third-country national and the issuing of a return decision should be reinforced in order to reduce the risk of absconding and the likelihood of unauthorised secondary movements. It is necessary to ensure that a return decision is issued immediately after the decision rejecting or terminating the legal stay, or ideally in the same act or decision. That requirement should in particular apply to cases where an application for international protection is rejected
Amendment 150 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7) The link between the decision on ending
Amendment 151 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7)
Amendment 152 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 Amendment 153 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) The need for Union
Amendment 154 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) The need for Union and bilateral readmission agreements with third countries to facilitate the return process is underlined. International cooperation with countries of origin at all stages of the return process is a prerequisite to achieving sustainable return. Third countries that refuse to readmit their own nationals should bear the financial consequences of that decision.
Amendment 155 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) The need for Union and bilateral readmission agreements with third countries to facilitate the return process is underlined. International cooperation with countries of origin at all stages of the return process is a prerequisite to achieving a sustainable, safe return which ensures the protection of persons.
Amendment 156 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 a (new) (8a) In the event of a lack of cooperation by certain third countries regarding readmission of their nationals who have been apprehended in irregular situations and failure by those third countries to cooperate effectively in the return process, some of the provisions of the Visa Code should, on the basis of objective criteria, be applied in a restrictive and temporary manner to enhance a given third country’s cooperation on readmission.
Amendment 157 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) It is recognised that it is legitimate for Member States to return illegally staying third-country nationals, provided that fair and efficient asylum systems are in place which fully respect the principle of non-refoulement. In the interests of fairness and efficiency, asylum systems should be limited to applications by nationals of (allegedly) unsafe countries.
Amendment 158 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) It is recognised that it is
Amendment 159 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) It is recognised that it is legitimate for Member States to return illegally staying third-country nationals, provided that
Amendment 160 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) It is recognised that it is legitimate for Member States to return i
Amendment 161 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 10 (10) In accordance with Council Directive 2005/85/EC12 , a third-country national who has applied for asylum in a Member State should not be regarded as staying i
Amendment 162 #
(10) In accordance with Council Directive 2005/85/EC
Amendment 163 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 10 (10) In accordance with Council Directive 2005/85/EC12 , a third-country national who has applied for asylum in a Member State should not be regarded as staying i
Amendment 164 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 (11) To ensure clearer
Amendment 165 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 (11) To ensure clearer and more effective rules for granting a period for voluntary departure and detaining a third- country national, determining whether there is or there is not a risk of absconding should be based on a non-exhaustive list of Union-wide objective criteria. Moreover this Directive should set out specific criteria which establish a ground for a rebuttable presumption that a risk of absconding exists. Third-country nationals should be obliged to provide all the elements in their possession that are necessary in order to assess the risk of absconding.
Amendment 166 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 (11) To ensure clearer and more effective rules for
Amendment 167 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 (11) To ensure
Amendment 168 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 (11) To ensure clearer and more
Amendment 169 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 (11) To ensure clearer and more effective rules for granting a period for voluntary departure and detaining a third- country national, determining whether there is or there is not a risk of absconding should be based
Amendment 170 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 a (new) (11a) Unless the Member States decide not to apply this Directive, pursuant to Article 2(2)(b), when determining the risk of absconding the relevant national authorities may take into consideration an infringement of the criminal law of Member States, including the rules on migration. Such authorities may also take into account the existence of an ongoing criminal investigation or prosecution that has not yet led to a conviction, where provided by national law.
Amendment 171 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 12 Amendment 172 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 12 (12) To reinforce the effectiveness of the return procedure, clear responsibilities for third-country nationals should be established, and in particular the obligation to cooperate with the authorities at all stages of the return procedure, including by providing the information and elements that are necessary in order to assess their individual situation. The determination of their real age, through bone or dental tests, is vital in order to verify the truth of their statements on this subject, making it possible to assess their good faith, and to protect genuine unaccompanied minors by distinguishing between them and those making false claims. At the same time, it is necessary to ensure that third-country nationals are informed of the consequences of not complying with those obligations, in relation to the determination of the risk of absconding, the granting of a period for voluntary departure and the possibility to impose detention, and to the access to programmes providing logistical, financial and other material or in-kind assistance.
Amendment 173 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 12 (12) To reinforce the effectiveness of the return procedure, clear responsibilities for third-country nationals should be established, and in particular the obligation to cooperate in good faith with the authorities at all stages of the return procedure, including by providing all the information and all elements in their possession that are necessary in order to assess their individual situation. At the same time, it is necessary to ensure that third-country nationals are informed of the consequences of not complying with those obligations, in relation to the determination of the risk of absconding, the granting of a period for voluntary departure and the possibility to impose detention and penalties where provided for by national law, and to the access to programmes providing logistical, financial and other material or in-kind assistance.
Amendment 174 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 12 (12) To reinforce the effectiveness of the return procedure in accordance with EU standards, clear responsibilities for third- country nationals should be established, and in particular the obligation to cooperate with the authorities at all stages of the return procedure, including by providing the information and elements that are necessary in order to assess their
Amendment 175 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 12 (12)
Amendment 176 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13)
Amendment 177 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13)
Amendment 178 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) Where there are no reasons to believe that the granting of a period for voluntary departure would undermine the purpose of a return procedure, voluntary return should be preferred over forced return and an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to thirty days, depending in particular on the prospect of return, should be granted. A period for voluntary departure should not be granted where it has been assessed that third- country nationals pose a risk of absconding, have had a previous application for legal stay dismissed as fraudulent or manifestly unfounded, or they pose a risk to public policy, public security or national security. An extension of the period for voluntary departure should be provided for when considered necessary because of the specific circumstances of an individual case and in the case of children, the best interests of the child should be the primary consideration in an extension decision.
Amendment 179 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) Where there are no reasons to believe that the granting of a period for voluntary departure would undermine the purpose of a return procedure, voluntary return should be preferred over forced return and an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to thirty days, depending in particular on the prospect of return, should be granted.
Amendment 180 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) Where there are no reasons to believe that the granting of a period for voluntary departure would undermine the purpose of a return procedure, voluntary return should be preferred over forced return and an appropriate period for voluntary departure of
Amendment 181 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) Where there are no reasons to believe that the granting of a period for voluntary departure would undermine the purpose of a return procedure, voluntary return should be preferred over forced return and an appropriate period for voluntary departure of
Amendment 182 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) Where there are no reasons to believe that the granting of a period for voluntary departure would undermine the purpose of a return procedure, voluntary return should be preferred over forced return and an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to thirty days, depending in particular on the prospect of return, should be granted. A period for voluntary departure
Amendment 183 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) Where there are no reasons to believe that the granting of a period for voluntary departure would undermine the purpose of a return procedure, voluntary
Amendment 184 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13)
Amendment 185 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 14 Amendment 186 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 14 (14) In order to promote voluntary depar
Amendment 187 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 14 (14) In order to promote voluntary return, Member States should have operational programmes providing for case management, enhanced return assistance and counselling, which
Amendment 188 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 14 (14) In order to promote voluntary return, Member States should have operational programmes providing for enhanced return assistance and counselling, which
Amendment 189 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 14 (14) In order to promote voluntary return, Member States should have operational programmes providing for enhanced return assistance and counselling, which
Amendment 190 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 14 (14) In order to promote voluntary return, Member States
Amendment 191 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 14 a (new) (14a) In accordance with Directive 2009/52/EC, Member States should ensure that there are effective mechanisms through which third-country nationals can lodge complaints against their employers. In accordance with Directive 2012/29/EU, Member States should ensure that all victims of crime receive appropriate information, support and protection and are able to participate in criminal proceedings. To this end, adequate mechanisms ensuring portable justice and access to redress mechanisms should be established as part of the national programmes on return and should ensure access to justice for issues relating to violations of Directive 2009/52/EC or Directive 2012/29/EU throughout the return procedure, including measures to ensure access to justice after return to a third country.
Amendment 192 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 14 a (new) Amendment 193 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 15 Amendment 194 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 15 a (new) Amendment 195 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 15 a (new) (15a) Member States should ensure that persons facing return procedures do not intentionally and fraudulently exploit factors that might be considered as potentially increasing their vulnerability
Amendment 196 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) The deadline for lodging an appeal against decisions related to return should provide enough time to ensure access to an
Amendment 197 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) The deadline for lodging an appeal against decisions related to return should provide enough time to ensure access to an effective remedy
Amendment 198 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) The deadline for lodging an appeal against decisions related to return should provide enough time to ensure access to an effective remedy, while taking into account that long deadlines can have a detrimental effect on return procedures.
Amendment 199 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) The deadline for lodging an appeal
Amendment 200 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) The deadline for lodging an appeal against decisions related to return should provide enough time to ensure access to an effective remedy, while taking into account that long deadlines can have a detrimental effect on return procedures. To avoid possible misuse of rights and procedures, a maximum period not exceeding five days should be granted to appeal against a return decision.
Amendment 201 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) The deadline for lodging an appeal against decisions related to return should provide enough time to ensure access to an effective remedy, while taking into account that long deadlines can have a detrimental effect on return procedures, and the appeal procedure should be notified to third- country nationals within the deadline for lodging an appeal. To avoid possible misuse of rights and procedures, a maximum period not exceeding five days should be granted to appeal against a return decision. This provision should only apply following a decision rejecting an application for international protection which became final, including after a possible judicial review.
Amendment 202 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) The deadline for lodging a
Amendment 203 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) The deadline for lodging an appeal against decisions related to return should provide enough time to ensure access to an effective remedy, while taking into account that long deadlines can have a detrimental effect on return procedures. To avoid possible misuse of rights and procedures, a maximum period
Amendment 204 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) The deadline for lodging an appeal against decisions related to return should provide enough time to ensure access to an effective remedy, while taking into account that long deadlines can have a detrimental effect on return procedures. To avoid possible misuse of rights and procedures, a maximum period not exceeding
Amendment 205 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 Amendment 206 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 Amendment 207 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 (17) The appeal against a return decision that is based on a decision rejecting an application for international protection which was already subject to an effective judicial remedy should
Amendment 208 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 (17) The appeal against a return decision that is based on a decision rejecting an application for international protection which was already subject to an effective judicial remedy
Amendment 209 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 (17) T
Amendment 210 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 (17)
Amendment 211 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 a (new) (17a) Member States shall have the option to keep administrative review proceedings prior to an appeal before a court or tribunal, provided that the administrative review does not affect the effectiveness of the return procedure.
Amendment 212 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 b (new) (17b) A body that carries out a judicial function should be categorised as a court or tribunal if it has been established by law, is permanent, independent and impartial, and has an inter partes procedure, if its jurisdiction is compulsory, if it applies the rule of law, and if it offers the requisite procedural guarantees.
Amendment 213 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 Amendment 214 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 (18)
Amendment 215 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 (18) An appeal against a return decision should have an automatic suspensive effect only in cases where there is a risk of breach of the principle of non-refoulement. An appeal against a return decision is only admissible if the appellant has voluntarily entered secure detention pending the outcome of the appeal.
Amendment 216 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 (18) An appeal against a return decision should always have an automatic suspensive effect
Amendment 217 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 (18) An appeal against a return decision sh
Amendment 218 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 (18) An appeal against a return decision should not have an automatic suspensive effect
Amendment 219 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 (19)
Amendment 220 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 (19) In cases where the principle of non- refoulement is not at stake, appeals against a return decision should not have an automatic suspensive effect.
Amendment 221 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 (19)
Amendment 222 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 (19)
Amendment 223 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 (19) In cases
Amendment 224 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 (19) In cases where
Amendment 225 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 (19)
Amendment 226 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 a (new) (19a) National application of the rules on the provisions of this Directive related to appeals and suspensive effect should comply with the right to an effective remedy as provided for in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Amendment 227 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 20 Amendment 228 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 20 Amendment 229 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 20 (20) To improve the effectiveness of return procedures and avoid unnecessary delays, without negatively affecting the rights of the third-country nationals concerned, the enforcement of the return decision should not be automatically suspended in cases where the assessment of the risk to breach the principle of non- refoulement already took place
Amendment 230 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 20 (20) To improve the effectiveness of return procedures and avoid unnecessary delays, without negatively affecting the rights of the third-country nationals concerned, the enforcement of the return decision should not be automatically suspended in cases where the assessment of the risk to breach the principle of non- refoulement already took place and judicial remedy was effectively exercised as part of the asylum procedure carried out prior to the issuing of the related return decision against which the appeal is lodged
Amendment 231 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 20 (20) To improve the effectiveness of return procedures and avoid unnecessary delays, without negatively affecting the rights of the third-country nationals concerned, the enforcement of the return decision should not be automatically suspended in cases where the
Amendment 232 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 20 (20) To improve the effectiveness of return procedures and avoid unnecessary delays, without negatively affecting the rights of the third-country nationals concerned, the enforcement of the return decision should not be automatically suspended in cases where the full assessment of the risk to breach the principle of non-
Amendment 233 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 21 (21) The necessary legal aid should be made available
Amendment 234 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 21 (21) The necessary legal aid should be made available, upon express request, to those who lack sufficient resources. National legislation should establish a list of instances where legal aid is to be considered necessary.
Amendment 235 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 21 (21) The necessary legal aid should be
Amendment 236 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 21 (21)
Amendment 237 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 22 (22) Th
Amendment 238 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 22 (22) The situation of third-country nationals who are staying i
Amendment 239 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 22 (22) The situation of third-country nationals who are staying i
Amendment 240 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 23 (23) The use of coercive measures
Amendment 241 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 24 Amendment 242 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 24 (24) The effects of national return measures should be given a European dimension by establishing an entry ban prohibiting entry into and stay on the territory of all the Member States. The length of the entry ban should be determined with due regard to all relevant circumstances of an individual case
Amendment 243 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 24 (24) The effects of national return measures should be given a European dimension by establishing an entry ban prohibiting entry into and stay on the territory of all the Member States. The length of the entry ban should be determined with due regard to all relevant circumstances of an individual case and should not normally exceed
Amendment 244 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 25 Amendment 245 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 25 Amendment 246 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 25 (25)
Amendment 247 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 25 (25) When an illegally staying third- country national is detected during exit checks at the external borders, it
Amendment 248 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 25 (25) When an illegally staying third- country national is detected during exit checks at the external borders, it may be appropriate to impose an entry ban in order to prevent future re-entry and therefore to reduce the risks of illegal immigration. When justified,
Amendment 249 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 25 (25) When an illegally staying third- country national is detected during exit checks at the external borders,
Amendment 250 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 27 (27) The use of detention for the purpose of removal should be considered a measure of last resort and subject to the principle of proportionality with regard to the means used and objectives pursued. Preference should be given to alternatives to detention. The detention of unaccompanied minors or families with minors should never be possible. Detention is justified only to prepare the return or carry out the removal process and if the application of less coercive measures would not be sufficient.
Amendment 251 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 27 (27) The use of detention for the purpose of removal should be subject to the
Amendment 252 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 27 (27) The use of detention for the purpose of removal should be limited, always used at last resort and subject to the principle of proportionality with regard to the means used and objectives pursued. Detention is justified only to prepare the return or carry out the removal process and if the application of less coercive measures would not be sufficient.
Amendment 253 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 27 (27)
Amendment 254 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 28 (28)
Amendment 255 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 28 (28) Detention should be imposed, following an individual assessment of each case, where there is a risk of absconding, where the third-country national avoids or hampers the preparation of return or the removal process, or when the third country national concerned poses a risk to public policy, public security or national security. Children, both when unaccompanied or separated and with their families, shall not be detained and Member States shall provide appropriate alternatives to detention in line with the New York Declaration for Refugee sand Migrant of 19 September 2016.
Amendment 256 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 28 (28) Detention should be imposed,
Amendment 257 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 28 (28) Detention
Amendment 258 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 28 (28) Detention should be imposed, following an individual assessment of each case, where there is a risk of absconding,
Amendment 259 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 28 (28) Detention should be imposed, following an individual assessment of each case, where there is a risk of absconding
Amendment 260 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 28 (28) Detention should always be imposed,
Amendment 261 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 28 (28) Detention should be imposed
Amendment 262 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 28 (28) Detention should be
Amendment 263 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 28 a (new) (28a) With a view to combating the trafficking and fraudulent acknowledgement of children, where the national law provides for minors to be detained, the best interests of the child cannot, in themselves, provide grounds for not placing children in detention, whether this relates to the children themselves, their families or their relatives.
Amendment 264 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 29 (29) Given that
Amendment 265 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 29 (29)
Amendment 266 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 29 (29) Given that maximum detention periods in some Member States are not sufficient to ensure the implementation of return, a maximum period of detention between three and six months, which may be prolonged, should be established in order to provide for sufficient time to complete the return procedures successfully
Amendment 267 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 29 (29) Given that maximum detention periods in some Member States are not sufficient to ensure the implementation of return, a maximum period of detention between three and six months, which may be prolonged once only for a maximum of a further six months, should be established in order to provide for sufficient time to complete the return procedures successfully, without prejudice to the established safeguards ensuring that detention is only applied when necessary and proportionate and for as long as removal arrangements are in progress.
Amendment 268 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 29 (29)
Amendment 269 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 29 (29) Given that maximum detention periods in some Member States are not sufficient to ensure the implementation of return, a maximum period of detention between three and
Amendment 270 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 29 (29) Given that maximum detention periods in some Member States are not sufficient to ensure the implementation of return, a maximum period of detention between three and
Amendment 271 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 29 a (new) (29a) Where the order to detain a third- country national has been issued in an administrative procedure, the court or tribunal responsible for assessing the lawfulness of that decision may take into account all relevant facts, evidence and observations that may be submitted by the parties concerned.
Amendment 272 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 30 Amendment 273 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 30 Amendment 274 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 30 Amendment 275 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 30 (30) This Directive
Amendment 276 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 30 (30) This Directive
Amendment 277 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 31 (31) Third-country nationals
Amendment 278 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 31 (31) Third-country nationals in detention should be treated in an equally humane and dignified manner in all the EU Member States with respect for their fundamental rights and in compliance with international and national law. Without prejudice to the initial apprehension by law-enforcement authorities, regulated by national legislation, detention should, as a rule, take place in specialised detention facilities.
Amendment 279 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 31 a (new) (31a) Children's rights apply to both cases involving unaccompanied and separated children and children within families. In the case of families, Member States should respect and protect the rights of each child within the family and his or her right to private and family life, and should also take into full account the safety of the child within the family. Appropriate care and accommodation arrangements that enable children and families to live together in communities should be implemented. Children should not be separated from their parents. In keeping with the principles of family unity and the bests interests of the child, families should be kept together unless the child's safety is at risk. Forced return of children should never occur. Children and families should be provided with documentation indicating that they are in an ongoing procedure and not subject to detention. Children and parents should be ensured access to education, health care and other services.
Amendment 280 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 31 a (new) (31a) In view of the fact that third- country nationals detained for the purpose of removal are not detained as persons suspected of criminal activities or convicted of criminal offences, they should not be accommodated together with ordinary prisoners. It is also possible to ensure this separation by accommodating these third-country nationals in sections of penal institutions that are set aside and used solely for that purpose.
Amendment 281 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 31 a (new) (31a) Member States' obligation to respect and protect the rights of children and families may also include the option to reunite children and their parents or vice versa in third countries outside the European Union
Amendment 282 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 31 b (new) (31b) An independent and qualifies guardian with the necessary expertise and training to ensure the best interests of the child are fully taken into consideration should be appointed to assist unaccompanied and separated children. To that end, the guardian should be involved in the procedure to find a durable solution for the child in his or her best interests.
Amendment 283 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 32 Amendment 284 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 32 Amendment 285 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 32 Amendment 286 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 32 Amendment 287 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 32 (32) Without prejudice to the possibility for Member States not to apply this Directive with regard to the cases referred to in Article 2(2)(a), if a border procedure is applied in accordance with Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation], a specific border procedure should follow for the return of illegally staying third-country nationals whose application for international protection under that asylum border procedure has been rejected in order to ensure direct complementarity between the asylum and return border procedures and prevent gaps between the procedures. In such cases, it is necessary to establish specific rules that ensure the coherence and synergy between the two procedures and preserve the integrity and effectiveness of the whole process. Member States should be able to rely on appropriate Union funding to carry out the necessary activities for the border procedure.
Amendment 288 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 33 Amendment 289 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 33 Amendment 290 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 33 Amendment 291 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 33 (33)
Amendment 292 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 33 (33)
Amendment 293 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 33 (33) To ensure effective return in the context of the border procedure, this procedure should not result in a period for voluntary departure
Amendment 294 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 33 (33) To ensure effective return in the context of the border procedure, a period for voluntary departure should not be granted. However, a period for voluntary departure
Amendment 295 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 34 Amendment 296 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 34 Amendment 297 #
Amendment 298 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 34 Amendment 299 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 34 (34) For a rapid and effective treatment of the case, a maximum time limit is to be granted to
Amendment 300 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 34 (34) For a rapid treatment of the case, a maximum time limit is to be granted to appeal against a return decision
Amendment 301 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 35 Amendment 302 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 35 Amendment 303 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 35 Amendment 304 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 35 Amendment 305 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 35 Amendment 306 #
Amendment 307 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 35 (35) An appeal against a return decision taken in the context of the border procedure should not have an automatic suspensive effect
Amendment 308 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 36 Amendment 309 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 36 Amendment 310 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 36 Amendment 311 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 36 Amendment 312 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 37 Amendment 313 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 37 a (new) (37a) Mutual recognition of return decisions may help to ensure a more effective implementation of returns. Member States should make use of all available means of cooperation and exchanges of information for this purpose. The Commission should assess the EU’s returns legislation with a view to achieving a more uniform and consistent implementation of return decisions, and reducing the administrative burden on the national authorities, notably through mutual recognition of return decisions; it should also consider submitting a legislative proposal in that respect.
Amendment 314 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 38 Amendment 315 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 38 (38) Establishing return management systems in Member States contributes to the efficiency of the return process. Each national system should provide timely information on the identity and legal situation of the third country national that are relevant for monitoring and following up on individual cases. To operate efficiently and in order to significantly reduce the administrative burden, such national return systems should be linked to the Schengen Information System, to Eurodac and to all the databases used to identify third country nationals, to facilitate and speed up the entering of return-related information, as well as to the central system established by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency in accordance with Regulation (EU) …/…
Amendment 316 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 38 (38) Establishing return management systems in Member States contributes to the efficiency of the return process. Each national system should provide timely information on the identity and legal situation of the third country national that are relevant for monitoring and following up on individual cases. To operate efficiently and in order to significantly reduce the administrative burden, such national return systems should be linked to the Schengen Information System to facilitate and speed up the entering of return-related information, as well as to the central system established by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency in accordance with Regulation (EU) …/… [EBCG Regulation] as well as other relevant central information systems.
Amendment 317 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 38 (38) Establishing return management
Amendment 318 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 38 a (new) (38a) When, following a best interest assessment, it is established that return would be in a child's best interest, Member States should ensure that specific safeguards are in place for separated or unaccompanied children returning to a third country. Where family has been traced, Member States should ensure that child-protection actors, through appropriate case management, whether family reunification is in the child's best interest, whether the family is willing and able to receive the child and provide suitable immediate care, and take into account both the child's and the family's views on reunification. Family tracing should only be done by qualified actors and following a best interest's assessment to ensure restoring contact would not be contrary to a child's best interest. Where tracing is unsuccessful or where family reunification is not found not to be in the child's best interest, return should not occur.
Amendment 319 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 38 a (new) (38a) EU data protection legislation is applicable to any processing of personal data in the return management systems of the Member states, including the communication of this data to the central system operated by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency. Return management systems should respect the principles of lawfulness, fairness and transparency; purpose limitation; data minimisation; accuracy; storage limitation; integrity and confidentiality; and accountability of the data controller. The national return management systems should not contain any information obtained during the personal interview carried out on the basis of Article 15 of Directive 2013/32/EU (Asylum Procedures Directive).
Amendment 320 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 39 (39) Cooperation between the sovereign Member States, cooperation between the institutions involved at all levels in the return process and the exchange and promotion of best practices, including by taking into account and regularly updating the Return Handbook to reflect legal and policy developments, should accompany the implementation of this Directive
Amendment 321 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 40 (40) The Union provides financial and operational support in order to achieve an effective and fundamental rights compliant implementation of this Directive. Member States should make best use of the available Union financial instruments, programmes and projects in the field of return, in particular under Regulation (EU) …/… [Regulation establishing the Asylum and Migration Fund]
Amendment 322 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 40 (40) The Union provides financial and operational support in order to achieve an effective implementation of this Directive. Member States should make best use of the available Union financial instruments, programmes and projects in the field of return, in particular under Regulation (EU) …/… [Regulation establishing the Asylum and Migration Fund], as well as of the operational assistance by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency according to Regulation (EU) …/… [EBCG Regulation]. Such support should be used in particular for establishing return management systems and programmes for providing logistical, financial and other material or in-kind assistance to support the return
Amendment 323 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 40 (40) The Union provides financial and operational support in order to achieve an effective implementation of this Directive. Member States should make best use of the available Union financial instruments, programmes and projects in the field of return, in particular under Regulation (EU) …/… [Regulation establishing the Asylum and Migration Fund], as well as of the operational assistance by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency according to Regulation (EU) …/… [EBCG Regulation]. Such support should be used in particular for establishing return management systems and programmes for providing logistical, financial and other material or in-kind assistance to support the sustainable return
Amendment 324 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 40 (40) The Union provides financial and operational support in order to achieve an effective implementation of this Directive. Member States should make best use of the available Union financial instruments, programmes and projects in the field of
Amendment 325 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 41 (41) Since the objective of this Directive, namely to establish
Amendment 326 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 42 Amendment 327 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 43 (43) In line with the 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, the ‘best interests of the child’ should be a primary consideration of
Amendment 328 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 44 (44) Application of this Directive is without prejudice to the obligations resulting from the Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, as amended by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967, from the 1954 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons and from the 1989 United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child and the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
Amendment 329 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 44 (44) Application of this Directive is without prejudice to the obligations resulting from the Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951
Amendment 330 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 45 (45) This Directive respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights.
Amendment 331 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 46 Amendment 332 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 46 (46) The purpose of an effective implementation of the return of third- country nationals who do not fulfil or no longer fulfil the conditions for entry, stay or residence in the Member States, in accordance with this Directive, is an essential component of the comprehensive efforts to tackle irregular migration and represents an important
Amendment 333 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 46 (46) The purpose of an effective and dignified implementation of the return of third-
Amendment 334 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 46 (46) The purpose of an effective implementation of the return of third- country nationals who do not fulfil or no longer fulfil the conditions for entry, stay or residence in the Member States, in accordance with this Directive, is an essential component of the comprehensive efforts to tackle irregular migration, based on the principle of deterrence, and represents an important reason of substantial public interest.
Amendment 335 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 46 (46) The purpose of an effective implementation of the return of third- country nationals who do not fulfil or no longer fulfil the conditions for entry, stay or residence in the Member States, in accordance with this Directive, is an essential component of
Amendment 336 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 47 (47) Member States' return authorities need to process personal data to ensure the proper implementation of return procedures and the successful enforcement of return decisions. The third countries of return are often not the subject of adequacy decisions adopted by the Commission under Article 45 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council18 ,
Amendment 337 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 47 (47) Member States' return authorities need to process personal data to ensure the proper implementation of return procedures and the successful enforcement of return decisions. The third countries of return are often not the subject of adequacy decisions adopted by the Commission under Article 45 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council18 , or under Article 36 of Directive (EU) 2016/68019
Amendment 338 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 47 (47) Member States' return authorities
Amendment 339 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 47 (47) Member States' return authorities need to process personal data to ensure the proper implementation of return procedures and the successful enforcement of return decisions. The third countries of return are often not the subject of adequacy decisions adopted by the Commission under Article 45 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council18, or under Article 36 of
Amendment 340 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 54 Amendment 341 #
Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 This Directive sets out
Amendment 342 #
Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 This Directive sets out common standards and procedures to be applied in Member States for returning i
Amendment 343 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 1. This Directive applies to third- country nationals staying i
Amendment 344 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a Amendment 345 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a Amendment 346 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a Amendment 347 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point b (b) are subject to return as a criminal law sanction or as a consequence of a criminal law sanction as a result of a serious crime, according to national law, or who are the subject of extradition procedures., providing the rights of the returnee, including the rights to fair trial have been guaranteed;
Amendment 348 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Member States may decide not to apply this Directive to third-country nationals in case of mass influx of migrants into their respected territory.
Amendment 349 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 2. ‘i
Amendment 350 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – introductory part 3. ‘return’ means the process of a third-country national going back — whether in voluntary compliance with an obligation to return, or enforced — to
Amendment 351 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a Amendment 352 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b Amendment 353 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b Amendment 354 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b (b) a country of transit in accordance with Union or bilateral readmission agreements or other applicable arrangements, or
Amendment 355 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b (b) a country of transit in accordance with Union
Amendment 356 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c Amendment 357 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c (c) an
Amendment 358 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c (c) another third country, to which the third-country national concerned
Amendment 359 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c (c) another third country, to which the third-country national concerned
Amendment 360 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c a (new) (ca) a third country where the third- country national has a right to enter and reside;
Amendment 361 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c a (new) (ca) another third country in which he or she will be accepted;
Amendment 362 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c b (new) (cb) as a last resort, if the return to a third country referred to in points (a) to (d) cannot be enforced due to lack of cooperation in the return process by either the third country or the third- country national, any third country with which there is an EU or bilateral agreement on the basis of which the third- country national is accepted, and is allowed to remain, where international human rights standards according to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights are respected, and provided that no international, European or national rules prevent the return. When the return is carried out to a third country, which has a common border with a Member State, the prior agreement of that Member State is required before starting negotiations on any such bilateral agreement.
Amendment 363 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4 4. ‘return decision’ means an administrative or judicial decision or act, stating or declaring the stay of a third- country national to be i
Amendment 364 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 6 6. ‘entry ban’ means an administrative or judicial decision or act prohibiting entry into and stay on the territory of the Member States for a specified period
Amendment 365 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 7. ‘risk of absconding’ means the proven existence of specific reasons in an individual case which are based on objective
Amendment 366 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 7. ‘risk of absconding’ means the proven existence of reasons in an individual case which are based on specific and objective criteria strictly defined by law to believe that a third-
Amendment 367 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 7. ‘risk of absconding’ means the existence of reasons in an individual case which are based on objective criteria defined by
Amendment 368 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 7. ‘risk of absconding’ means the existence of
Amendment 369 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 7. ‘risk of absconding’ means the existence of reasons in an individual case which are based on objective criteria
Amendment 370 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 8 8. ‘voluntary departure’ means compliance with the obligation to return
Amendment 371 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9 9. ‘persons in a vulnerable
Amendment 372 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9 9. ‘vulnerable persons’ means minors, unaccompanied minors, disabled people, elderly people, pregnant women, single parents with minor children, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex persons, persons belonging to religious minorities, non-believers, and persons who have been subjected to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual and gender based violence.
Amendment 373 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new) 9a. 10. ‘other authorisation offering a right to stay’ means any document issued by a Member State to a third-country national authorising them to stay on its territory, which is not a residence permit within the meaning of Article 2(16) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 or a long-stay visa within the meaning of Article 2(14) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1860 (SIS Regulation on returns), except for the document referred to in Article 6 of Directive 2013/33/EU.
Amendment 374 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. This Directive shall be without prejudice to
Amendment 375 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 Amendment 376 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 3 3. This Directive shall be without prejudice to the right of the Member States to adopt or maintain provisions that are more favourable or more stringent to persons to whom it applies provided that such provisions are
Amendment 377 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 4 Amendment 378 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point a (a) ensure that their treatment and level of protection are no less favourable than as set out in Article 10(4) and (5) (limitations on use of coercive measures), Article
Amendment 379 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point a (a) ensure that their treatment and level of protection are no less favourable than as set out in Article 10(4) and (5) (limitations on use of coercive measures), Article 11(2)(a) (postponement of removal), Article 12 (consideration of best interest of the child and return to caregiver or adequate reception facilities), Article 17(1)(b) and (d) (emergency health care and taking into account needs of vulnerable persons), and Articles 19 and 20 (detention conditions) and
Amendment 380 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point b Amendment 381 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point b (b) respect the principle of non- refoulement
Amendment 382 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – title 5
Amendment 383 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) the best interests of the child as the primary consideration in all decisions concerning minors;
Amendment 384 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new) (ca) the special needs of persons with disabilities, elderly persons, pregnant women, victims of trafficking in human beings, persons with serious illnesses, persons with mental disorders and persons who have been subject to torture, rape, or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violence, such as victims of female genital mutilation.
Amendment 385 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new) (c a) the rights of their own population
Amendment 386 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 Amendment 387 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 Amendment 388 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph -1 (new) -1. The existence of a risk of absconding shall be determined on the basis of an overall assessment of the specific circumstances and the future behaviour that can be reasonably expected in the individual case, taking into account the following objective criteria
Amendment 389 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 Amendment 390 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. The
Amendment 391 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. The objective criteria referred to in point 7 of Article 3 shall include
Amendment 392 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. The objective criteria referred to in point 7 of Article 3 shall
Amendment 393 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. The objective criteria referred to in point 7 of Article 3
Amendment 394 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. The objective criteria referred to in point 7 of Article 3
Amendment 395 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a Amendment 396 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a Amendment 397 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a Amendment 398 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b Amendment 399 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b Amendment 400 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c Amendment 401 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c Amendment 402 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c Amendment 403 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d Amendment 404 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d Amendment 405 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d Amendment 406 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d (d) illegal entry into the territory of the Member States or apprehension or interception relating to the irregular crossing by land, sea or air of the external border of a Member State;
Amendment 407 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e Amendment 408 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e (e) unauthorised movement to the territory of another Member State, including movement after transit through a third country or attempts to do so;
Amendment 409 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f (f) explicit expression of intent of non- compliance with all return-related measures applied by virtue of this Directive or actions clearly demonstrating an intent not to comply with all of these measures;
Amendment 410 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g Amendment 411 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g (g) being subject of a return decision issued by another Member State
Amendment 412 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i Amendment 413 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i (i) non-compliance with the requirement of Article 8(2) to go
Amendment 414 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point j Amendment 415 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point j Amendment 416 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k (k) existence of conviction for a criminal offence, including for a serious criminal offence in another Member State, where the sentence has not been fully served;
Amendment 417 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k (k) existence of conviction for a
Amendment 418 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k (k) existence of a prior conviction for a criminal offence, including
Amendment 419 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point l Amendment 420 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point m Amendment 421 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point m (m) using false or forged identity or travel documents,
Amendment 422 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point m (m)
Amendment 423 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point n Amendment 424 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point o Amendment 425 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point p Amendment 426 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point p Amendment 427 #
(p) not complying with a
Amendment 428 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point p a (new) (pa) risk to public order, public security or national security.
Amendment 429 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Member States may lay down additional objective criteria in their national legislation.
Amendment 430 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 Amendment 431 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 The existence of a risk of absconding shall be determined on the basis of an overall assessment of the specific circumstances of the individual case, taking into account the objective criteria referred to in paragraphs 1 and 1a.
Amendment 432 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 433 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6.º – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 434 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 However, Member States shall establish that a risk of absconding is presumed in an individual case, unless proven otherwise, when one of the objective criteria referred to in points (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), (k), (l), (m), (n), (o), (p) and (
Amendment 435 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 436 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 However, Member States shall establish that a risk of absconding is presumed in an individual case, unless proven otherwise, when one of the objective criteria referred to in points (k) (m), (n), (o) and (p) of paragraph 1 is fulfilled.
Amendment 437 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 However, Member States shall establish that a risk of absconding is presumed in an individual case, unless proven otherwise, when one of the objective criteria referred to in points (m), (n)
Amendment 438 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – title 7 Obligation to cooperate on the part of third-country nationals
Amendment 440 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – title Amendment 442 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. Member States shall impose on third-country nationals the obligation to cooperate with the competent authorities of the Member States at all stages of the return procedures, unless the third-country national can substantiate that they will leave without assistance. That obligation shall include the following in particular:
Amendment 443 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. Member States shall impose on third-country nationals the obligation to cooperate with the competent authorities of the Member States at all stages of the return procedures, unless the third-country national can substantiate that they will leave without assistance. That obligation shall include the following in particular:
Amendment 444 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. Member States shall i
Amendment 445 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. Member States shall
Amendment 446 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. Member States shall
Amendment 447 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a Amendment 448 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) the duty to provide all the elements that are necessary for establishing or verifying identity, including age through bone or dental tests;
Amendment 449 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) the duty to provide all the elements that are necessary for establishing or verifying identity and to prove, upon request, the efforts made;
Amendment 450 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a (a)
Amendment 451 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a (a)
Amendment 452 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b |