AM_Com_LegReport - europarl.europa.eu · Web viewThe word "illegal" is not considered as relevant...

European Parliament2014-2019

Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

2018/0329(COD)

11.2.2019

AMENDMENTS378 - 654Draft reportJudith Sargentini(PE632.950v01-00)

on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council Common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals (recast)

Proposal for a directive(COM(2018)634 – C8-0407/2018 – 2018/0329(COD))

AM\1176638EN.docx PE634.774v01-00

EN United in diversity EN

AM_Com_LegReport

PE634.774v01-00 2/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Amendment 378Sophia in 't Veld, Angelika MlinarProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission Amendment

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. That obligation shall include the following in particular:

1. Member States shall take measures that facilitate that the competent authorities and the third country national mutually cooperate and provide information.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment acknowledges the importance of mutual provision of information and cooperation during the return procedure. It is thus more balanced than the Commission proposal, which only put duties on the third country national. Mutual information provision and cooperation is crucial for trust building in the return process, making it more efficient and effective, as well as being able to take into account the specific circumstances of the third country national.

Amendment 379Sophia in 't Veld, Angelika MlinarProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 1 – point a


(a) the duty to provide all the elements that are necessary for establishing or verifying identity;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 380Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar KösterProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 1 – point a

AM\1176638EN.docx 3/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN



(a) Third country nationals cooperate to provide all the elements that are necessary for establishing or verifying identity;

Or. enAmendment 381Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 1 – point a



(a) an overview and explanation of the different stages of the return procedure;

Or. en

Amendment 382Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 1 – point b


(b) the duty to provide information on the third countries transited;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 383Sophia in 't Veld, Angelika MlinarProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 1 – point b



deleted

Or. en

PE634.774v01-00 4/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Amendment 384Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar KösterProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 1 – point b



deleted

Or. en

Amendment 385Laura Ferrara, Ignazio Corrao, Fabio Massimo CastaldoProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 1 – point b



deleted

Or. it

Amendment 386Sophia in 't Veld, Angelika MlinarProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 1 – point c


(c) the duty to remain present and available throughout the procedures;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 387Giancarlo Scottà, Harald Vilimsky, Nicolas Bay, Gilles Lebreton, Auke ZijlstraProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 1 – point c


(c) the duty to remain present and (c) the duty to remain on call and

AM\1176638EN.docx 5/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

available throughout the procedures; available throughout the procedures;

Or. en

Justification

For sake of legal clarity.

Amendment 388Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar KösterProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 1 – point c


(c) the duty to remain present and available throughout the procedures;

(c) Third country nationals remain available throughout the procedures;

Or. en

Amendment 389Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)


(ca) knowledge of consequences of not complying with an obligation to return following a return decision;

Or. en

Amendment 390Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 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

PE634.774v01-00 6/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

required to respect, including the time limits for detention;

Or. en

Amendment 391Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar KösterProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 1 – point d


(d) the duty to lodge to the competent authorities of third countries a request for obtaining a valid travel document.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 392Sophia in 't Veld, Angelika MlinarProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 1 – point d



deleted

Or. en

Amendment 393Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 1 – point d



deleted

Or. en

AM\1176638EN.docx 7/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Justification

The duty to request a travel document from the authorities of the country of origin, if implemented against persons who sought asylum and whose application is not yet decided in the final instance, creates a risk of violating the right to asylum and the principle of non-refoulement. Moreover, obtaining a travel document from the authorities of the country of origin may prove difficult.

Amendment 394Jussi Halla-ahoProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 1 – point d



(d) the duty to lodge to the competent authorities of third countries a request for obtaining a valid travel document and a written request to be admitted to the country of return.

Or. en

Justification

As some third countries refuse to take back forced returns thus obstructing the return of their own citizens, the TCNs concerned should be persuaded to return voluntarily, if necessary by declaring in writing their willingness to return.

Amendment 395Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 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;

Or. en

PE634.774v01-00 8/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Amendment 396Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)


(db) knowledge of the outcome of decisions related to return or detention as referred to in Articles 15 and 18, the reasons for that decision, and the elements taken into consideration for the purposes of the decision as well as the deadlines and manner in which such a decision may be challenged.

Or. en

Amendment 397Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 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 the identity, nationality or nationalities, age, country or countries and place or places of previous residence, travel routes and travel documentation.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 398Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar KösterProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 2


2. The elements referred to in point (a) of paragraph 1 shall include the third-

deleted

AM\1176638EN.docx 9/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

country nationals’ statements and documentation in their possession regarding the identity, nationality or nationalities, age, country or countries and place or places of previous residence, travel routes and travel documentation.

Or. en

Amendment 399Sophia in 't Veld, Angelika MlinarProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 2



2. (1) The third-country national shall, to the best of his/her knowledge and capabilities, inform the competent authorities on the elements necessary to establish or verify his/her identity, including, where available, documentation regarding nationality or nationalities, age, country or countries and place or places of previous residence, travel routes and travel documentation. The third-country national shall also remain present and available throughout the procedure.

Or. en

Amendment 400Laura Ferrara, Ignazio Corrao, Fabio Massimo CastaldoProposal for a directiveArticle 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 identity, nationality or nationalities, age, and the country or countries and place or places of previous residence.

PE634.774v01-00 10/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Or. it



3. Member States shall inform the third-country nationals about the consequences of not complying with the obligation referred to in paragraph 1.

deleted

Or. en




3. Member States shall inform the third-country nationals in writing in a concise, transparent, intelligible and easily accessible form, using clear and plain language on the basis of a standard template which shall be developed by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, and in a language that the applicant understands. Where necessary, this information shall, in addition, be supplied orally and in a visual form through videos or pictograms, and shall take into account the individual circumstances, especially for vulnerable persons. This information shall include, at least, a clear overview of the return procedure, the rights and obligations during the procedure, the consequences of not complying with an obligation to return following a return decision, and the contacts of non-governmental and international organisations that can provide advice, and the options for sustainable returns, such as support and

AM\1176638EN.docx 11/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

reintegration measures.

Or. en

Amendment 403Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, Carlos Coelho, Roberta MetsolaProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 3



3. Member States shall inform the third-country nationals in a clear manner about the return procedure and consequences of not complying with the obligation referred to in paragraph 1.

Or. en

Amendment 404Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

Amendment 405Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, Carlos Coelho, Tokia Saïfi, Caterina Chinnici, Nathalie Griesbeck, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Julie Ward

PE634.774v01-00 12/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Proposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

Amendment 406Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

Amendment 407Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

Amendment 408Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 7 – paragraph 3 d (new)

AM\1176638EN.docx 13/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN


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.

Or. en

Amendment 409Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

Amendment 410Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 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

PE634.774v01-00 14/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

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.

Or. en

Justification

The amendment aims to introduce the right to be heard to the third country national subject to return decision, as recognized by CJEU in the case C-249/13, Boudjlida and -82/16, K.A. e a.

Amendment 411Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar KösterProposal for a directiveChapter 2 – title


TERMINATION OF ILLEGAL STAY TERMINATION OF IRREGULAR STAY

Or. en

Justification

The word "illegal" is not considered as relevant in the context of migration. It will be replaced in the whole text by "irregular". International bodies including the United Nations General Assembly and International Organization for Migration have all recommended to use instead the terms “irregular” or “undocumented”.

Amendment 412Barbara Spinelli

AM\1176638EN.docx 15/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Proposal for a directiveArticle 8 – paragraph 1


1. Member States shall issue a return decision to any third-country national staying illegally on their territory, without prejudice to the exceptions referred to in paragraphs 2 to 5.

1. Member States shall, before issuing a return decision to any third-country national staying irregularly on their territory, without prejudice to the exceptions referred to in paragraphs 2 to 5, always check if the status of the person could be regularised based on his or her existing ties to the Member State.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendments tabled to recital 4.

Amendment 413Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar KösterProposal for a directiveArticle 8 – paragraph 1


1. Member States shall issue a return decision to any third-country national staying illegally on their territory, without prejudice to the exceptions referred to in paragraphs 2 to 5.

1. Member States shall issue a return decision to any third-country national staying irregularly on their territory, without prejudice to the exceptions referred to in paragraphs 2 to 5.

Or. en

Justification

Horizontal amendment inextricably linked to other admissible amendments. The word "illegal" is not considered as relevant in the context of migration. It will be replaced in the whole text by the term "irregular". International bodies including the United Nations General Assembly and International Organization for Migration have all recommended to use instead the terms “irregular” or “undocumented”.

PE634.774v01-00 16/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN



2. Third-country nationals staying illegally on the territory of a Member State and holding a valid residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay issued by another Member State shall be required to go to the territory of that other Member State immediately. In the event of non-compliance by the third-country national concerned with this requirement, or where the third-country national’s immediate departure is required for reasons of public policy or national security, paragraph 1 shall apply.

deleted

Or. en

Justification




2. Third-country nationals staying illegally on the territory of a Member State and holding a valid residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay issued by another Member State shall be required to go to the territory of that other Member State immediately. In the event of non-compliance by the third-country national concerned with this requirement, or where the third-country national’s immediate departure is required for reasons

2. Third-country nationals staying irregularly on the territory of a Member State and holding a valid residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay issued by another Member State shall be required to go to the territory of that other Member State immediately. In the event of non-compliance by the third-country national concerned with this requirement, or where the third-country national’s immediate departure is required

AM\1176638EN.docx 17/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

of public policy or national security, paragraph 1 shall apply.

for reasons of public policy or national security, paragraph 1 shall apply.

Or. en

Justification

Horizontal amendment inextricably linked to other admissible amendments. The word “illegal” is not considered as relevant in the context of migration. It will be replaced in the whole text by the term "irregular". International bodies including the United Nations General Assembly and International Organization for Migration have all recommended to use instead the terms “irregular” or “undocumented”.

Amendment 416Jeroen LenaersProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

Justification

As Rapporteur on Regulation (EU) 2018/1860, I advise to make a direct reference in this Directive to the obligations under Article 10 of that Regulation. As the Regulation only establishes rules regarding the consultation between Member States, the Directive should

PE634.774v01-00 18/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

establish the rule for the Member State to admit the third country national to its territory, which is the logical consequence of the procedure started under Regulation (EU) 2018/1860 in the cases where the valid residence permit or other authorisation were not withdrawn.



3. Member States may refrain from issuing a return decision to a third-country national staying illegally on their territory if the third-country national concerned is taken back by another Member State under bilateral agreements or arrangements existing on 13 January 2009. In such a case the Member State which has taken back the third-country national concerned shall apply paragraph 1.

3. Member States may refrain from issuing a return decision to a third-country national staying irregularly on their territory if the third-country national concerned is taken back by another Member State under bilateral agreements or arrangements existing on 13 January 2009. In such a case the Member State which has taken back the third-country national concerned shall apply paragraph 1.

Or. en

Justification




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 illegally on their

4. Member States shall always examine whether the person could be granted an autonomous residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay for compassionate, humanitarian, rights-based or other reasons to a third-country

AM\1176638EN.docx 19/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

territory. In that event no return decision shall be issued. Where a return decision has already been issued, it shall be withdrawn or suspended for the duration of validity of the residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay.

national staying irregularly on their territory. In that event no return decision shall be issued. Where a return decision has already been issued, it shall be withdrawn or suspended for the duration of validity of the residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay.

Or. en

Justification




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 illegally on their territory. In that event no return decision shall be issued. Where a return decision has already been issued, it shall be withdrawn or suspended for the duration of validity of the residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay.

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 irregularly on their territory. In that event no return decision shall be issued. Where a return decision has already been issued, it shall be withdrawn or suspended for the duration of validity of the residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay.

Or. en

Justification


PE634.774v01-00 20/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Amendment 420Jussi Halla-ahoProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

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.

Or. en



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.

5. If a third-country national staying irregularly 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.

Or. en

Justification


AM\1176638EN.docx 21/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Amendment 422Sophia in 't Veld, Angelika MlinarProposal for a directiveArticle 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].

deleted

Or. en

Justification

The asylum and return procedures should be properly distinguished. Also, such immediate issuing of a return decision would frustrate possible efforts to lodge an appeal, or invoke other grounds to stay, and the right to remain on the territory during such appeals.

Amendment 423Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1



deleted

Or. en

Amendment 424Jussi Halla-ahoProposal for a directiveArticle 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1

PE634.774v01-00 22/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN



Member States shall issue a return decision immediately after or together with 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]. A decision ending a legal stay of a third-country national and/or a return decision and/or a decision on a removal and/or entry ban may be adopted in a single administrative or judicial decision or act.

Or. en

Justification

To allow for more efficient administrative processing of returns, restore in the article the possibility to end the legal stay and adopt the return decision in a single administrative or judicial decision or act. In accordance with the case law (CJEU “Gnandi v Belgium” ruling), Member States are entitled to adopt a return decision as soon as an application for international protection is rejected.

Amendment 425Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar KösterProposal for a directiveArticle 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1



Member States may issue a return decision immediately after the adoption of a decision ending a legal stay of a third-country national.

Or. en

AM\1176638EN.docx 23/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Amendment 426Monika Hohlmeier, Kārlis Šadurskis, Heinz K. Becker, Rachida DatiProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

Amendment 427Giancarlo Scottà, Harald Vilimsky, Nicolas Bay, Gilles LebretonProposal for a directiveArticle 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-country national, including a decision not granting a third-country national refugee status or subsidiary protection status in accordance with Regulation (EU) …/… [Qualification Regulation].

Or. en



This Directive shall not prevent Member This Directive shall not prevent Member

PE634.774v01-00 24/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

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.

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.

Or. en



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.

This Directive shall not affect, under any circumstances, the rights enshrined in Article 47 of the Charter of fundamental right of the European Union by reducing the levels of and accessibility to effective judicial remedies compared to those available, under national law, to their own citizens.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendments tabled to Article 16 relating to remedies available to third-country nationals as part of this Directive.



The first and second subparagraphs are without prejudice to the safeguards under Chapter III and under other relevant

deleted

AM\1176638EN.docx 25/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

provisions of Union and national law.

Or. en



The first and second subparagraphs are without prejudice to the safeguards under Chapter III and under other relevant provisions of Union and national law.

deleted

Or. en

Justification

As the first subparagraph is deleted, this paragraph is merged in paragraph 6. To prevent the risk of violations of rights enshrined in Articles 7, 18, 19 and 47 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights when implementing the Return Directive, like the Rapporteur, the Shadow Rapporteur proposes to strengthen the safeguards in proposed Article 8(6) and in line with recommendations provided by the EU Fundamental Rights Agency in its Opinion on this recast.



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.

A return decision shall provide for an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to six months, without prejudice to the exception referred to in paragraphs 2 and 4.

PE634.774v01-00 26/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Or. en

Amendment 433Laura Ferrara, Ignazio Corrao, Fabio Massimo CastaldoProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

The minimum duration of such a period may not be less than 15 days.

Or. it

Amendment 434Jeroen LenaersProposal for a directiveArticle 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1



Member States shall on a case by case basis provide for the appropriate period for voluntary departure for a return decision of maximum 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.

AM\1176638EN.docx 27/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Or. en

Justification

Member States should be allowed to assess on a case by case basis the appropriate amount of days for each return decision. The text was not clear enough on this point. Furthermore, a maximum of 30 days is crucial in order to ensure effective return.

Amendment 435Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, Carlos Coelho, Roberta MetsolaProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

Amendment 436József Nagy, Anna Záborská, Andrea BocskorProposal for a directiveArticle 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

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,

PE634.774v01-00 28/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

the third-country nationals concerned of the possibility of submitting such an application.

Member States shall inform the third-country nationals concerned of the possibility of submitting such an application.

Or. en

Justification

There is a need to adapt the rules for granting a period for voluntary departure. Such period should not be longer than 30 days, as already foreseen in the Return Directive currently in force.




A return decision shall provide for an appropriate period for voluntary departure of up to ten 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.

Or. en

Amendment 438Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar KösterProposal for a directiveArticle 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1


A return decision shall provide for an appropriate period for voluntary departure

A return decision shall provide for an appropriate period for voluntary departure

AM\1176638EN.docx 29/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

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.

of 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.

Or. en




A return decision shall provide for an appropriate period for voluntary departure of 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.

Or. en

Justification

As voluntary departure is the most (cost) efficient option, as underlined by various reports and by the EP impact assessment, this should always be given the full opportunity and priority, rather than limiting it. Making 30 days the standard applicable time frame will allow for clarity and will give actual opportunity for voluntary departure to materialise, as this is often a lengthy process of decision-making and arranging practicalities.


PE634.774v01-00 30/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Proposal for a directiveArticle 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2


The time period provided for in the first subparagraph shall not exclude the possibility for the third-country nationals concerned to leave earlier.

deleted

Or. en



The length of the period for voluntary departure shall be determined with due regard to the specific circumstances of the individual case, taking into account in particular the prospect of return.

deleted

Or. en



The length of the period for voluntary departure shall be determined with due regard to the specific circumstances of the individual case, taking into account in particular the prospect of return.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 443Laura Ferrara, Ignazio Corrao, Fabio Massimo CastaldoProposal for a directiveArticle 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)

AM\1176638EN.docx 31/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN


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.

Or. it



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 and the existence of other family and social links.

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, the existence of other family and social links, illness and hospitalization.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to the amendment tabled to recital 4. It is essential that Member States take into account also other serious and specific circumstances of individual cases such as people in need of medical care or hospitalised.

PE634.774v01-00 32/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN



3. Certain obligations aimed at avoiding the risk of absconding, such as regular reporting to the authorities, deposit of an adequate financial guarantee, submission of documents or the obligation to stay at a certain place may be imposed for the duration of the period for voluntary departure.

3. Certain obligations aimed at avoiding the risk of absconding, such as regular reporting to the authorities or the submission of documents, may be imposed for the duration of the period for voluntary departure.

Or. it

Justification

This amendment is necessary because it is inextricably linked to other admissible amendments, namely those tabled on Article 6.



3. Certain obligations aimed at avoiding the risk of absconding, such as regular reporting to the authorities, deposit of an adequate financial guarantee, submission of documents or the obligation to stay at a certain place may be imposed for the duration of the period for voluntary departure.

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.

Or. en

Justification

Obligations referred to in this Article must be proportionate, affordable and sustainable for the third country national and proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued by this Directive.

AM\1176638EN.docx 33/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN



4. Member States shall not grant a period for voluntary departure in following cases:

deleted

(a) where there is a risk of absconding determined in accordance with Article 6 ;

(b) where an application for legal stay has been dismissed as manifestly unfounded or fraudulent;

(c) where the third-country national concerned poses a risk to public policy, public security or national security.

Or. en

Amendment 448Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar KösterProposal for a directiveArticle 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part



4. Member States may grant a period for voluntary departure of no less than seven days and exceptionally refrain from granting a period of voluntary departure in following cases :

Or. en

Amendment 449Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, Carlos Coelho, Roberta MetsolaProposal for a directiveArticle 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part


4. Member States shall not grant a 4. Member States shall not grant a

PE634.774v01-00 34/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

period for voluntary departure in following cases:

period for voluntary departure, after an individual assessment, in following cases:

Or. en

Amendment 450József Nagy, Anna ZáborskáProposal for a directiveArticle 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part



4. Member States shall not grant a period for voluntary departure in the following cases:

Or. en

Justification

There is a need to adapt the rules for granting a period for voluntary departure. Such period should not be longer than 30 days, as already foreseen in the Return Directive currently in force. However, this article does not make it mandatory anymore, when determining the duration of the period for voluntary departure, to grant a minimum of seven days. This allows Member States to decide on a shorter period. The article also establishes a number of cases in which it becomes mandatory not to grant a period for voluntary departure.

Amendment 451Sophia in 't Veld, Angelika MlinarProposal for a directiveArticle 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part



4. Member States may grant a shorter period for voluntary departure in following cases:

Or. en

Amendment 452Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar Köster

AM\1176638EN.docx 35/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Proposal for a directiveArticle 9 – paragraph 4 – point a



(a) in case of explicit expression of non-compliance with return-related measures applied by virtue of the Directive or non-compliance with a measure aiming at preventing the risk of absconding.

Or. en

Amendment 453József Nagy, Anna ZáborskáProposal for a directiveArticle 9 – paragraph 4 – point a



(a) where there is a risk of absconding including secondary movement, determined in accordance with Article 6 ;

Or. en

Justification

There is a need to adapt the rules for granting a period for voluntary departure. Such period should not be longer than 30 days, as already foreseen in the Return Directive currently in force. However, this Article does not make it mandatory anymore, when determining the duration of the period for voluntary departure, to grant a minimum of seven days. This allows Member States to decide on a shorter period. The article also establishes a number of cases in which it becomes mandatory not to grant a period for voluntary departure.

Amendment 454Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar KösterProposal for a directiveArticle 9 – paragraph 4 – point b


(b) where an application for legal stay has been dismissed as manifestly

(b) where the third-country national concerned poses a genuine and present

PE634.774v01-00 36/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

unfounded or fraudulent; risk to public policy, public security or national security.

Or. en

Amendment 455József Nagy, Anna Záborská, Andrea BocskorProposal for a directiveArticle 9 – paragraph 4 – point b



(b) where an application for legal stay has been denied as manifestly unfounded or fraudulent;

Or. en

Justification

There is a need to adapt the rules for granting a period for voluntary departure. Such period should not be longer than 30 days, as already foreseen in the Return Directive currently in force. However, this article does not make it mandatory anymore, when determining the duration of the period for voluntary departure, to grant a minimum of seven days. This allows Member States to decide on a shorter period. The Article also establishes a number of cases in which it becomes mandatory not to grant a period for voluntary departure.

Amendment 456Sophia in 't Veld, Angelika MlinarProposal for a directiveArticle 9 – paragraph 4 – point b



(b) where an application for legal stay has been dismissed as fraudulent;

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to the amendment tabled to Article 9(4) regarding the short periods for voluntary departure.

AM\1176638EN.docx 37/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Amendment 457Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar KösterProposal for a directiveArticle 9 – paragraph 4 – point c



deleted

Or. en

Amendment 458Jeroen LenaersProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

Justification

The addition of this sentence clarifies that also a criminal act that amounts to a maximum term of imprisonment of at least three years for the purposes of this Directive should not go without consequences for the return decision that applies to that person. Same applies to other parts of this Directive where this sentence is used.

Amendment 459József Nagy, Anna Záborská, Andrea BocskorProposal for a directiveArticle 9 – paragraph 4 – point c


(c) where the third-country national concerned poses a risk to public policy,

(c) where the third-country national concerned poses a risk to public policy and

PE634.774v01-00 38/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

public security or national security. public security or national security.

Or. en

Justification

There is a need to adapt the rules for granting a period for voluntary departure. Such period should not be longer than 30 days, as already foreseen in the Return Directive currently in force. However, this article does not make it mandatory anymore, when determining the duration of the period for voluntary departure, to grant a minimum of seven days. This allows Member States to decide on a shorter period. The article also establishes a number of cases in which it becomes mandatory not to grant a period for voluntary departure.

Amendment 460Monika Hohlmeier, Kārlis Šadurskis, Heinz K. Becker, Rachida DatiProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

Amendment 461Jeroen LenaersProposal for a directiveArticle 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].

AM\1176638EN.docx 39/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Or. en

Justification

As the Return Directive is partly connected to the Asylum Procedure Regulation (APR), the Return Directive should be aligned with the Parliament position on the APR. We therefore add the necessary links in this directive to Article 39 of the APR on implicit withdrawal of applications and to Article 40 of the APR on the accelerated examination procedure.

Amendment 462Giancarlo Scottà, Harald Vilimsky, Nicolas Bay, Gilles Lebreton, Auke ZijlstraProposal for a directiveArticle 9 – paragraph 4 – point c a (new)


(ca) where a conviction for a criminal offence exists, even with a non-definitive sentence, including for a serious criminal offence in another Member State;

Or. en

Amendment 463Monika Hohlmeier, Kārlis Šadurskis, Heinz K. Becker, Rachida DatiProposal for a directiveArticle 9 – paragraph 4 – point c b (new)


(cb) Where the third-country nationals has been convicted for benefit fraud by using multiple identities.

Or. en

Amendment 464Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, Carlos CoelhoProposal for a directiveArticle 9 – paragraph 4 a (new)


4a. A period of voluntary departure may be granted by authorities, after an individual assessment, in cases where the

PE634.774v01-00 40/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

third country national is in detention pending a return decision.

Or. en



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.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendments tabled to paragraph 4 of Article 9, proposing the possibility to shorten a period for voluntary departure in specific cases, rather than the obligation not to grant a period for voluntary departure as this would undermine the primacy of voluntary return. The existence of a genuine and present risk to public security or national security needs to be assessed on a case-by-case basis in the return procedure.

Amendment 466Jussi Halla-ahoProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

AM\1176638EN.docx 41/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Justification

As forced returns are harder and sometimes impossible to implement, it should be stated that the lack of granting a period for voluntary departure should not per se preclude voluntary return.



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 illegally staying third-country nationals who do not hold a valid travel document and to obtain such a document.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 468Monika Hohlmeier, Kārlis Šadurskis, Heinz K. Becker, Rachida DatiProposal for a directiveArticle 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 illegally staying third-country nationals

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

PE634.774v01-00 42/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

who do not hold a valid travel document and to obtain such a document.

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.

Or. en



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 illegally staying third-country nationals who do not hold a valid travel document and to obtain such a document.

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 irregularly staying third-country nationals who do not hold a valid travel document and to obtain such a document.

Or. en

Justification

Horizontal amendment. The word "illegal" is not considered as relevant in the context of migration. It will be replaced in the whole text by the term "irregular". International bodies including the United Nations General Assembly and International Organization for Migration have all recommended to use instead the terms “irregular” or “undocumented”.


AM\1176638EN.docx 43/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN


1a. Without prejudice to the other cases provided by Union and international law for which a removal of a third-country national is not allowed, and in addition to the cases falling within the scope of subsidiary protection, a return decision and the removal of a third country national to a third country or territory affected by restrictive measures taken by the European Union pursuant to Article 215 TFEU or to Title V of Chapter 2 TEU, as well as by restrictive measures adopted by the United Nations Security Council acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations shall be forbidden – without exception.

Or. en



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(4) arises during that period.

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.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendments tabled to paragraph 4a of Article 9, relating to the possibility for Member States to not having a period for voluntary departure.


PE634.774v01-00 44/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN



4. Where Member States use — as a last resort — coercive measures to carry out the removal of a third-country national who resists removal, such measures shall be proportionate and shall not exceed reasonable force. They shall be implemented as provided for in national legislation in accordance with fundamental rights and with due respect for the dignity and physical integrity of the third-country national concerned.

4. Member States shall never use coercive measures to carry out the removal of a third-country national. Member states shall always abide by fundamental rights and with due respect for the dignity and physical integrity of the third-country national concerned.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendment tabled to recital 40.



5. In carrying out removals by air, Member States shall take into account the Common Guidelines on security provisions for joint removals by air annexed to Decision 2004/573/EC.

deleted

Or. en

Justification



AM\1176638EN.docx 45/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN


6. Member States shall provide for an effective forced-return monitoring system.

6. Member States shall establish independent bodies with the aim of monitoring returns. Member States shall ensure that all return operations are duly monitored by independent return monitors, adequately trained on Union and international fundamental rights and refugee law.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to the amendment tabled to recital 4. The Shadow Rapporteur considers that the independent monitoring bodies of the Member States should be one of the pillars of the Union's return policy. The strengthening of their activity should be a red line for the European Parliament in the recast of this Directive.



6a. The independent return monitors, shall carry out inspections, also without prior notice, to the detention facilities and any other national facilities where third-country nationals are being detained or are being hosted pending removal.

During the inspection, the independent return monitors shall have the possibility to:

- have access to all areas of the detention facilities;

- interview the third-country national detained or hosted there;

- ask any question to the staff working in the detention facilities;

- demand and receive copies of documents.

PE634.774v01-00 46/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Each independent national body shall report to the European Parliament and/or to the national parliament of the relevant Member State where the body is based, regarding infringements of the provisions of this Directive, as well as in the case of violation of fundamental rights by the Member State in the application of Directive.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to the amendment tabled to recital 4. The Shadow Rapporteur considers that the independent monitoring bodies of the Member States should be one of the pillars of the Union's return policy. The strengthening of their activity should be a red line for the European Parliament in the recast of this Directive.

Amendment 476Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, Carlos Coelho, Tokia Saïfi, Caterina Chinnici, Nathalie Griesbeck, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Julie Ward, Roberta MetsolaProposal for a directiveArticle 11 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)


(aa) completion of schooling for children;

Or. en

Justification

The amendment is inextricably linked to the proposed amendment on Recital 4 and the obligation of Member States to respect the UN Convention of the right of the Child. In order to fulfil Article 5(1)(a) on the best interests of the child, Member States should be able to postpone the removal to allow the completion of schooling for children.

Amendment 477Laura Ferrara, Ignazio Corrao, Fabio Massimo CastaldoProposal for a directiveArticle 11 – paragraph 2 – point b

AM\1176638EN.docx 47/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN


(b) technical reasons, such as lack of transport capacity, or failure of the removal due to lack of identification.

(b) technical reasons, such as the lack of bilateral readmission agreements or of transport capacity, or failure of the removal due to lack of identification.

Or. it

Justification

This amendment is necessary to stress that the recast of the Return Directive alone would not improve the returnsʼ rate if it is not followed by readmission agreements with third countries. This is needed to ensure consistency with the Commissionʼs action plans on return of both 2015 and 2017 that mentioned the need to increase the number of the readmission agreements with third countries to boost returns.

Amendment 478Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendments tabled to Article 14 and recital 15a (new) relating to return management and establishing an obligation for Member States to set up national programmes to improve the operationalisation of all stages of the return procedure. Like the rapporteur, the shadow rapporteur considers that Member States should provide for appropriate mechanisms to ensure access to justice and redress mechanisms and should consider postponing removal in order to allow victims, suspects of witnesses to participate in criminal proceedings.

PE634.774v01-00 48/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Amendment 479Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Caterina Chinnici, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar KösterProposal for a directiveArticle 12 – title


Return and removal of unaccompanied minors

Return and removal of minors

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to the amendments tabled to the title and paragraph 1 of Article 20.

Amendment 480Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 12 – title


Return and removal of unaccompanied minors

Return and removal of minors

Or. en

Justification




1. Before deciding to issue a return decision in respect of an unaccompanied minor, assistance by appropriate bodies other than the authorities enforcing return

1. As soon as possible after the minor’s identification and in any case before deciding to issue a return decision in respect of the minor, Member States shall

AM\1176638EN.docx 49/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

shall be granted with due consideration being given to the best interests of the child.

carry out a best interests assessment, to identify whether return is in the child’s best interest whether he or she is within a family or is an unaccompanied or separated child. In cases where return is identified as serving the child’s best interests, specific and appropriate implementation measures shall be put in place. Assistance by appropriate bodies other than the authorities enforcing return, included trained care givers as well as legal and linguistic assistance shall be granted with due consideration being given to the best interests of the child.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendments tabled to recitals 28 and 40.

Amendment 482Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, Carlos Coelho, Tokia Saïfi, Nathalie Griesbeck, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Julie Ward, Roberta Metsola, Caterina ChinniciProposal for a directiveArticle 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 with due consideration being given to the best interests of the child.

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 other than the authorities enforcing return shall be granted with due consideration being given to the best interests of the child.

Or. en

PE634.774v01-00 50/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Justification

The amendment is inextricably linked to the proposed amendment on Recital 4 and the obligation of Member States to respect the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. The amendment specifies what are the Member States' obligations when deciding on returns concerning children. It is necessary to clarify the procedure to fulfil Article 5(1)(a).

Amendment 483Sophia in 't Veld, Angelika Mlinar, Nathalie GriesbeckProposal for a directiveArticle 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 with due consideration being given to the best interests of the child.

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 and the best interests of the child shall be the primary consideration assessed by a guardian who is appointed to assist the unaccompanied minor.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to the amendment made to Article 14 on return management in which particular attention should be given to vulnerable groups, in particular to children. This amendment strengthens safeguards for the rights of children and is in line with the EP position in other files, such as in CEAS.



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 with due consideration

1. Before deciding to issue a return decision in respect of a minor, assistance by appropriate bodies other than the authorities enforcing return shall be granted with due consideration being given

AM\1176638EN.docx 51/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

being given to the best interests of the child.

to the best interests of the child.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to the amendments tabled to the title and paragraph 1 of Article 20.

Amendment 485Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, Carlos Coelho, Tokia Saïfi, Caterina Chinnici, Nathalie Griesbeck, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Julie Ward, Roberta MetsolaProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

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.

Or. en

Justification



PE634.774v01-00 52/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN


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.

2. Before returning an unaccompanied or separated 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 and provide for appropriate transfer of care and custodial arrangements that are adequate and appropriate for the individual minor, his/her parents and his/her customary primary caregiver.

Or. en

Justification




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.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendments tabled to recitals 28 and 40. Detention of minors is never in their best interests, including when family units are available. A ban on detention of children should therefore be imposed to protect minors. The application of the concept of ‘best interests of the child’ moreover entails that parents or legal or customary primary caregivers should never be detained either. See e.g. ECtHR- Abdullahi Elmi and Aweys Abubakar v. Malta, Application No. 25794/13 and 28151/13, 22

AM\1176638EN.docx 53/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

February 2017.

Amendment 488Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, Carlos Coelho, Tokia Saïfi, Caterina Chinnici, Nathalie Griesbeck, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Julie Ward, Roberta MetsolaProposal for a directiveArticle 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)


2a. Unaccompanied minors shall be assisted and represented by a qualified guardian throughout the whole return procedure.

Or. en

Justification

The amendment is inextricably linked to the proposed amendment on Recital 4 and the obligation of Member States to respect the UN Convention of the right of the Child. The amendment specifies what are the Member States' obligations when deciding on returns concerning children. It is necessary to clarify the procedure to fulfil Article 5(1)(a).



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.

Or. en

PE634.774v01-00 54/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendments tabled to recital 28 on detention of third-country nationals pending return and to recital 40 relating to necessary support to achieve an effective implementation of this Directive. In order to ensure that the best interests of the child are always the primary consideration, a guardian for separated and unaccompanied children should be appointed. This amendment is based on the FRA Handbook on Guardianship for children deprived of parental care, p. 26 et seq.



2c. Return and reintegration assistance shall be granted to all minors and their families.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendments tabled to recital 28 on detention of third-country nationals pending return and to recital 40 relating to necessary support to achieve an effective implementation of this Directive.

Amendment 491Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 13


13 Article 13 deleted

Entry ban

1.

Return decisions shall be accompanied by an entry ban:

(a) if no period for voluntary departure has been granted, or

(b) if the obligation to return has not been complied with.

AM\1176638EN.docx 55/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

In other cases return decisions may be accompanied by an entry ban.

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 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.

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 serious threat to public policy, public security or national security.

4. Member States shall consider withdrawing or suspending an entry ban where a third-country national who is the subject of an entry ban issued in accordance with paragraph 1, second subparagraph, can demonstrate that he or she has left the territory of a Member State in full compliance with a return decision.

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, public security or national security.

Member States may refrain from issuing, withdraw or suspend an entry ban in individual cases for humanitarian reasons.

Member States may withdraw or suspend

PE634.774v01-00 56/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

an entry ban in individual cases or certain categories of cases for other reasons.

5. Where a Member State is considering issuing a residence permit or other authorisation offering a right to stay to a third-country national who is the subject of an entry ban issued by another Member State, it shall first consult the Member State having issued the entry ban in accordance with Article 27 of Regulation (EU) 2018/XXX29 .

6. Paragraphs 1 to 5 shall apply without prejudice to the right to international protection, as defined in point (a) of Article 2 of Directive 2011/95/EU, in the Member States.

__________________28 Council Directive 2004/81/EC of 29 April 2004 on the residence permit issued to third-country nationals who are victims of trafficking in human beings or who have been the subject of an action to facilitate illegal immigration, who cooperate with the competent authorities (OJ L 261, 6.8.2004, p. 19).29 Regulation (EU) 2018/… of the European Parliament and of the Council of […] on the establishment, operation and use of the Schengen Information System (SIS) in the field of border checks, and amending the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement, and amending and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 [adoption pending].

Or. en

Justification

The Shadow Rapporteur believes that imposing entry bans on third-country nationals is counterproductive and incompatible with the objective of the proposal of enhancing the dignified and fundamental rights-compliant implementation of the return policy.

Amendment 492Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef

AM\1176638EN.docx 57/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar KösterProposal for a directiveArticle 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part


Return decisions shall be accompanied by an entry ban:

Return decisions may be accompanied by an entry ban:

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendments tabled to Article 9(1), first subparagraph and Article 9(4)(c).

Amendment 493Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, Tokia Saïfi, Caterina Chinnici, Nathalie Griesbeck, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Julie WardProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

Justification


Amendment 494József Nagy, Anna Záborská, Andrea BocskorProposal for a directiveArticle 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

PE634.774v01-00 58/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN



In the other cases, return decisions may be accompanied by an entry ban.

Or. en

Justification

This Article introduces the possibility for Member States to impose an entry ban without issuing a return decision following a case-by-case assessment and taking into account the principle of proportionality.

Amendment 495József Nagy, Anna Záborská, Andrea BocskorProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is necessary for pressing reasons of internal consistency of the text. Although the proposal of the Commission did not touch upon the issue of children’s age assessment during return procedures and in detention centres, it is a missing piece of the current legislation. Children are the most vulnerable, therefore their rights should be implemented with our utmost care.



2. Member States may impose an deleted

AM\1176638EN.docx 59/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

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.

Or. en

Justification

Such entry bans upon exit will discourage certain third country nationals to leave the territory of a Member States.




deleted

Or. en

Amendment 498Jussi Halla-aho

PE634.774v01-00 60/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN




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 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.

Or. en

Amendment 499Emil RadevProposal for a directiveArticle 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 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

2. Member States shall 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

AM\1176638EN.docx 61/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

principle of proportionality. principle of proportionality, an entry ban may be imposed by the competent authority without issuing a return decision in order to avoid postponing the departure of the third-country national concerned.

Or. en

Amendment 500Giancarlo Scottà, Harald Vilimsky, Nicolas Bay, Gilles Lebreton, Auke ZijlstraProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

Amendment 501József Nagy, Anna Záborská, Andrea BocskorProposal for a directiveArticle 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 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

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 recognised in connection with border checks carried out at exit in accordance with Article 8 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, where justified on the basis

PE634.774v01-00 62/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

of the specific circumstances of the individual case and taking into account the principle of proportionality.

of the specific circumstances of the individual case and taking into account the principle of proportionality.

Or. en

Justification

When an illegally staying third-country national is detected for the first time while leaving the Union, in certain circumstances it may be appropriate to impose an entry ban in order to prevent future re-entry and reduce the risks of illegal immigration. At the same time, this should not delay his or her departure, given that the person is already about to leave the territory of the Member States.

Amendment 502József Nagy, Anna Záborská, Andrea BocskorProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

Justification

When an illegally staying third-country national is detected for the first time while leaving the Union, in certain circumstances it may be appropriate to impose an entry ban in order to prevent future re-entry and reduce the risks of illegal immigration. At the same time, this should not delay his or her departure, given that the person is already about to leave the territory of the Member States.

Amendment 503Jeroen Lenaers

AM\1176638EN.docx 63/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN




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 ten years. It may however exceed ten years if the third-country national represents a serious threat 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.

Or. en

Justification

The addition of this sentence clarifies that also a criminal act that amounts to a maximum term of imprisonment of at least three years for the purposes of this Directive should not go without consequences for the length of the entry ban for that person. Same applies to other parts of this Directive where this sentence is used.




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.

Or. en

PE634.774v01-00 64/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendments tabled to Article 9(1), first subparagraph and Article 9(4)(c).

Amendment 505Nadine MoranoProposal for a directiveArticle 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 ten years. It may however exceed ten years if the third-country national represents a serious threat to public policy, public security or national security.

Or. fr

Justification

It is necessary to strengthen the deterrent effect of the ban, given the unprecedented level of illegal immigration into Europe.



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, public security or national security.

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, public security or national security or has been convicted of an offence which is punishable by a maximum term of

AM\1176638EN.docx 65/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

imprisonment of at least three years.

__________________ __________________28 Council Directive 2004/81/EC of 29 April 2004 on the residence permit issued to third-country nationals who are victims of trafficking in human beings or who have been the subject of an action to facilitate illegal immigration, who cooperate with the competent authorities (OJ L 261, 6.8.2004, p. 19).

28 Council Directive 2004/81/EC of 29 April 2004 on the residence permit issued to third-country nationals who are victims of trafficking in human beings or who have been the subject of an action to facilitate illegal immigration, who cooperate with the competent authorities (OJ L 261, 6.8.2004, p. 19).

Or. en

Justification

The addition of this sentence clarifies that also a criminal act that amounts to a maximum term of imprisonment of at least three years for the purposes of this Directive should not go without consequences for the length of the entry ban for that person. Same applies to other parts of this Directive where this sentence is used.



Return Management Monitoring of return procedures and reintegration in the country of return

Or. en



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

1. Each Member State shall monitor return procedures and reintegration in the country of return.

PE634.774v01-00 66/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

of any return-related procedure.

Or. en



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.

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.

Or. en



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.

1. Each Member State shall set up, operate, maintain and further develop a national return management system, which shall process the necessary information for implementing this Directive, in particular as regards the management of individual cases as well as of any return-related procedure, including reintegration in the country of return.

Or. en

AM\1176638EN.docx 67/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN



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.

Or. en



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.

Or. en



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

PE634.774v01-00 68/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

procedures provided by national law and other procedures that provide status.

Or. en



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) …/… [EBCG Regulation].

deleted

Or. en




deleted

Or. en

Justification

The EBCG has access to the SIS where Member States have to create alerts for any return decision. Thus, creating a new database is redundant.

AM\1176638EN.docx 69/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN




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) …/…[EBCG Regulation]. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article23a to establish the specific modalities for the operation of this central system and the communication between the national systems and the central system, including 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.

Or. en

Justification

The current Commission proposal is quite unclear, more clarity is needed, along the lines of the opinion of the EDPS. See as well the technical amendments on the use of delegated acts introduced in Recital 40a and Article 23a.



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 illegally staying third-country nationals

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 irregularly staying third-country nationals

PE634.774v01-00 70/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

who are nationals of third countries listed in Annex I to Council Regulation 539/200130 .

who are nationals of third countries listed in Annex I to Council Regulation 539/200130 .

__________________ __________________30 Council Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 of 15 March 2001 listing the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are exempt from that requirement (OJ L 81, 21.3.2001, p. 1).

30 Council Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 of 15 March 2001 listing the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are exempt from that requirement (OJ L 81, 21.3.2001, p. 1).

Or. en

Justification

Horizontal amendment. The word “illegal” is not considered as relevant in the context of migration. It will be replaced in the whole text by the term "irregular". International bodies including the United Nations General Assembly and International Organization for Migration have all recommended to use instead the terms “irregular” or “undocumented”.



Such assistance may include support for reintegration in the third country of return.

Where such assistance includes support for reintegration in the third country of return, the Member State concerned shall fund it by drawing on the [Asylum and Migration Fund].

Or. en




Such assistance shall include support for reintegration in the third country of return to ensure sustainable returns, especially taking into account the specific

AM\1176638EN.docx 71/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

circumstances of each third country national, and giving full attention to the cases of vulnerable persons.

Or. en




The assistance offered shall only be used to facilitate return procedures until successful repatriation of the person concerned. The third country national shall be required to pay back the assistance received, whenever possible.

Or. en




Such assistance shall include support for reintegration in the third country of return.

Or. en




Such assistance shall include support for reintegration in the third country of return.

PE634.774v01-00 72/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Or. en

Amendment 523Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en



The granting of such assistance, including its kind and extent, shall be subject to the cooperation of the third-

deleted

AM\1176638EN.docx 73/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

country national concerned with the competent authorities of the Member States as provided for in Article 7 of this Directive.

Or. en



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.

deleted

Or. en

Justification

This deletion is in line with the amendment on Article 7.




deleted

Or. en

PE634.774v01-00 74/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Amendment 527Laura Ferrara, Ignazio Corrao, Fabio Massimo CastaldoProposal for a directiveArticle 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3



deleted

Or. it




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.

Or. en

Justification

The Member States should prioritise the return assistance provided in accordance with the prospect of return of the TCN as manifested in their cooperation and compliance with the rules.

Amendment 529Jeroen Lenaers

AM\1176638EN.docx 75/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN




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.

Or. en




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.

Or. en

Amendment 531Heinz K. Becker, Kārlis Šadurskis, Monika Hohlmeier, Rachida DatiProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

PE634.774v01-00 76/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN



Return decisions and, if issued, entry-ban decisions and decisions on removal shall be issued in writing and give reasons in fact and in law as well as information about available legal remedies.

Member States shall provide a written and oral translation of the main elements of decisions related to return, as referred to in paragraph 1, including information on the available legal remedies in a language that the third-country national understands.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to the amendment tabled to recital 4. Access to timely, unbiased and reliable information allows migrants to make an informed decision and fosters preparedness for return and ownership of the return process, thereby enhancing prospects for sustainable reintegration. Such information should be provided to third-country nationals in a language they understand and in relation to the different stages of the return procedure.



The information on reasons in fact may be limited where national law allows for the right to information to be restricted, in particular in order to safeguard national security, defence, public security and for the prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of criminal offences.

deleted

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to the amendment tabled to recital 4. Access to timely, unbiased and reliable information allows migrants to make an informed

AM\1176638EN.docx 77/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

decision and fosters preparedness for return and ownership of the return process, thereby enhancing prospects for sustainable reintegration. Such information should be provided to third-country nationals in a language they understand and in relation to the different stages of the return procedure.



2. Member States shall provide, upon request, a written or oral translation of the main elements of decisions related to return, as referred to in paragraph 1, including information on the available legal remedies in a language the third-country national understands or may reasonably be presumed to understand.

2. Member States shall provide a written or oral translation of the main elements of decisions related to return, as referred to in paragraph 1, including information on the available legal remedies in a language the third-country national understands.

Or. en

Justification

Access to understandable information is crucial for third country nationals especially to prepare their return. This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendments tabled to Article 7(1), introductory part and Article 7(2).



2. Member States shall provide, upon request, a written or oral translation of the main elements of decisions related to return, as referred to in paragraph 1, including information on the available legal remedies in a language the third-country national understands or may reasonably be presumed to understand.

2. Member States shall provide a written and oral translation of the main elements of decisions related to return, as referred to in paragraph 1, including information on the available legal remedies in a language the third-country national understands.

PE634.774v01-00 78/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Or. en

Justification

In order to ensure coherence in the proposal, elements concerning provision of information have been moved from Article 15 to Article 7. Access to timely, unbiased and reliable information allows migrants to make an informed decision and fosters preparedness for return and ownership of the return process, thereby enhancing prospects for sustainable reintegration. Such information should be provided to third-country nationals in a language they understand and in relation to the different stages of the return procedure.



3. Member States may decide not to apply paragraph 2 to third country nationals who have illegally entered the territory of a Member State and who have not subsequently obtained an authorisation or a right to stay in that Member State.

deleted

In such cases decisions related to return, as referred to in paragraph 1, shall be given by means of a standard form as set out under national legislation.

Member States shall make available generalised information sheets explaining the main elements of the standard form in at least five of those languages which are most frequently used or understood by illegal migrants entering the Member State concerned.

Or. en

Justification

All migrants should have access to the information regarding their return and the related procedures. Access to understandable information is crucial for third country nationals especially to prepare their return. This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to

AM\1176638EN.docx 79/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

amendments tabled to Article 7(1), introductory part and Article 7(2).



Member States may decide not to apply paragraph 2 to third country nationals who have illegally entered the territory of a Member State and who have not subsequently obtained an authorisation or a right to stay in that Member State.

deleted

Or. en

Justification

All migrants should have access to the information regarding their return and the related procedures. This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendments tabled to Article 7(1), introductory part and Article 7(2).



Member States may decide not to apply paragraph 2 to third country nationals who have illegally entered the territory of a Member State and who have not subsequently obtained an authorisation or a right to stay in that Member State.

deleted

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to the amendment tabled to recital 4. In order to ensure coherence in the proposal, elements concerning provision of information have

PE634.774v01-00 80/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

been moved from Article 15 to Article 7. Access to timely, unbiased and reliable information allows migrants to make an informed decision and fosters preparedness for return and ownership of the return process, thereby enhancing prospects for sustainable reintegration. Such information should be provided to third-country nationals in a language they understand and in relation to the different stages of the return procedure.




deleted

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to the amendment tabled to recital 4. Access to timely, unbiased and reliable information allows migrants to make an informed decision and fosters preparedness for return and ownership of the return process, thereby enhancing prospects for sustainable reintegration. Such information should be provided to third-country nationals in a language they understand and in relation to the different stages of the return procedure.




deleted

Or. en

AM\1176638EN.docx 81/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Justification





deleted

Or. en

Justification





deleted

Or. en

PE634.774v01-00 82/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Justification

Access to timely, unbiased and reliable information allows migrants to make an informed decision and fosters preparedness for return and ownership of the return process, thereby enhancing prospects for sustainable reintegration. Such information should be provided to third-country nationals in a language they understand and in relation to the different stages of the return procedure.



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 authority.

deleted

Or. en




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 or a competent impartial body.

Or. en

Justification

In order to avoid congesting courts with appeals, administrative authorities/bodies should be accepted to examine the appeals.

AM\1176638EN.docx 83/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Amendment 545Emil RadevProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en



The third-country national concerned shall be granted the right to appeal before a single level of jurisdiction against the return decision where that decision is based on a decision rejecting an application for international protection taken in accordance with Regulation EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation] that was subject to an effective judicial review in accordance with Article 53 of that Regulation.

deleted

Or. en

Justification

The shadow rapporteur considers that it is not the aim of this recast to modify the organisation of the jurisdictions in the member states and to have different rules for asylum seekers whom claim has been rejected and irregular migrants

PE634.774v01-00 84/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN




deleted

Or. en

Justification

Only allowing for a single level of jurisdiction prevents Member States from providing more judicial avenues.




deleted

Or. en

AM\1176638EN.docx 85/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN




The third-country national concerned shall only be granted the right to appeal before a single level of jurisdiction against the return decision.

Or. en

Justification

Appeals to all decisions rejecting or terminating legal stay should be limited explicitly to a first instance decision to avoid repeated appeals just to postpone removal.

Amendment 550Emil RadevProposal for a directiveArticle 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2



The third-country national concerned shall be granted the right to appeal before at least one level of jurisdiction against the return decision where that decision is based on a decision rejecting an application for international protection taken in accordance with Regulation EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation] that was subject to an effective judicial review in accordance with Article 53 of that Regulation.

Or. en

PE634.774v01-00 86/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN



2. The judicial authority mentioned in paragraph 1 shall have the power to review decisions related to return, as referred to in Article 15(1), including the possibility of temporarily suspending their enforcement.

2. The authority or body mentioned in paragraph 1 shall have the power to review decisions related to return, as referred to in Article 15(1), including the possibility of suspending their enforcement due to the risk of a breach of the principle of non-refoulement.

Or. en

Justification

Administrative authorities/bodies should be accepted to examine the appeals. The suspensive effect of an appeal should be limited to cases where there is a risk of refoulement.

Amendment 552Nadine MoranoProposal for a directiveArticle 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 the appeal, where there is a risk to breach the principle of non-refoulement. Should a further appeal against a first or subsequent appeal decision be lodged, and in all other cases, the enforcement of the return decision shall not be suspended unless a court or tribunal decides otherwise taking into due account the specific circumstances of the individual case upon the applicant’s request or acting ex officio.

deleted

Or. fr

AM\1176638EN.docx 87/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Justification

Whether or not there is a suspensive effect must be left to the discretion of the Member States.




The enforcement of the return decision shall be automatically suspended during the period for bringing the appeal, during the examination of the appeal and until the decision on the appeal has been notified to the applicant.

Or. en



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 the appeal, where there is a risk to breach the principle of non-refoulement. Should a further appeal

The enforcement of the return decision shall be automatically suspended during the period for bringing an appeal against that decision during the examination of the appeal and until the decision on appeal has been notified to the third country national. An appeal against a return decision shall have an automatic

PE634.774v01-00 88/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

against a first or subsequent appeal decision be lodged, and in all other cases, the enforcement of the return decision shall not be suspended unless a court or tribunal decides otherwise taking into due account the specific circumstances of the individual case upon the applicant’s request or acting ex officio.

suspensive effect.

Or. en

Justification

The suspensive effect of an appeal against a return decision is crucial, as otherwise there could be an irreversible situation with grave fundamental rights consequences.




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 the appeal, where there is a risk to breach the principle of non-refoulement. Should a further appeal against a first or subsequent appeal decision be lodged, and in all other cases, the enforcement of the return decision shall not be suspended.

Or. en


AM\1176638EN.docx 89/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN



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 whether there is a risk to breach the principle of non-refoulement and when such a risk exists, pending the outcome of the appeal. Should a further appeal against a first appeal decision be lodged, and in all other cases, the enforcement of the return decision shall not be suspended.

Or. en

Justification

The amendment limits the suspensive effect of an appeal against a return decision to cases where there is a risk of refoulement as that is the only compelling reason for the appellant to stay throughout the appeal procedure.



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 the appeal, where there is a risk to breach the principle of non-refoulement. Should a further appeal against a first or subsequent appeal decision be lodged, and in all other cases, the enforcement of the return decision shall not be suspended unless a court or

The enforcement of the return decision shall be automatically suspended during the period for bringing an appeal against such decision, during the examination of the appeal and until the decision on the appeal has been notified to the applicant, including where there is a risk to breach the principle of non-refoulement. An appeal against a return decision shall have an automatic suspensive effect, this shall include instances where there are pending cases before a criminal court, in order to

PE634.774v01-00 90/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

tribunal decides otherwise taking into due account the specific circumstances of the individual case upon the applicant’s request or acting ex officio.

ensure access to justice for both victims and suspects.

Or. en



Member States shall ensure that a decision on the request for temporary suspension of the enforcement of a return decision is taken within 48 hours from the lodging of such a request by the third-country national concerned. In individual cases involving complex issues of fact or law, the time-limits set out in this paragraph may be extended, as appropriate, by the competent judicial authority.

deleted

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is linked to the previous amendment regarding the suspensive effect, which should always be granted.



Member States shall ensure that a decision on the request for temporary suspension of the enforcement of a return decision is taken within 48 hours from the lodging of such a request by the third-country national concerned. In individual

deleted

AM\1176638EN.docx 91/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

cases involving complex issues of fact or law, the time-limits set out in this paragraph may be extended, as appropriate, by the competent judicial authority.

Or. en



Member States shall ensure that a decision on the request for temporary suspension of the enforcement of a return decision is taken within 48 hours from the lodging of such a request by the third-country national concerned. In individual cases involving complex issues of fact or law, the time-limits set out in this paragraph may be extended, as appropriate, by the competent judicial authority.

deleted

Or. en



Member States shall ensure that a decision on the request for temporary suspension of the enforcement of a return decision is taken within 48 hours from the lodging of such a request by the third-country national concerned. In individual cases involving complex issues of fact or law, the time-limits set out in this paragraph may be extended, as

deleted

PE634.774v01-00 92/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

appropriate, by the competent judicial authority.

Or. en

Justification

The remedy has always a suspensive effect. Thus, it's not necessary to have a decision on the suspension.



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 first and the second subparagraphs of this paragraph shall not apply where:

deleted

(a) the reason for temporary suspension referred thereto was assessed in the context of a procedure carried out in application of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation] and was subject to an effective judicial review in accordance with Article 53 of that Regulation;

(b) the return decision is the consequence of the decision on ending the legal stay that has been taken following such procedures.

Or. en

Amendment 563Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar Köster

AM\1176638EN.docx 93/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN




deleted



Or. en

Justification

This deletion is the consequence of the amendment on article 16, paragraph 3, subparagraph 1. The remedy has an automatic suspensive effect.



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 first and the second subparagraphs of this paragraph shall not

deleted

PE634.774v01-00 94/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

apply where:



Or. en




deleted



Or. en

AM\1176638EN.docx 95/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Amendment 566Nadine MoranoProposal for a directiveArticle 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 provisions of this paragraph shall not apply where:

Or. fr

Amendment 567Giancarlo Scottà, Harald Vilimsky, Nicolas Bay, Gilles Lebreton, Auke ZijlstraProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en



Member States shall establish reasonable Member States shall establish reasonable

PE634.774v01-00 96/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

time limits and other necessary rules to ensure the exercise of the right to an effective remedy pursuant to this Article.

time limits and other necessary rules to ensure the exercise of the right to an effective remedy pursuant to this Article. Member States shall allow third country nationals to rely on changes in circumstances occurred after the adoption of the return decision which may have a significant bearing on the assessment of their situation only once.

Or. en

Justification

In the context of decisions rejecting an application for international protection, a court decision is never truly final as changes in circumstances can always take place. It is therefore necessary to establish when a decision is enforceable rather than when it is final. The number of appeals against return decisions due to the change in circumstances is therefore explicitly limited to one.



Member States shall establish reasonable time limits and other necessary rules to ensure the exercise of the right to an effective remedy pursuant to this Article.

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.

Or. en



Member States shall establish reasonable time limits and other necessary rules to ensure the exercise of the right to an effective remedy pursuant to this Article.

Member States shall establish applicable time limits and other necessary rules to ensure the exercise of the right to an effective remedy pursuant to this Article.

AM\1176638EN.docx 97/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

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 final decision rejecting an application for international protection taken in accordance with Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation].


Or. en

Justification

The effectiveness and speed of return procedures need to be complemented with adequate safeguards. Having a deadline of five days is considered to be a strong safeguard.




deleted

Or. en

Justification

The proposed period by the Commission is too short to guarantee the full exercise of the right to lodge an appeal.


PE634.774v01-00 98/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN



deleted

Or. en




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 decision rejecting an application for international protection taken in accordance with Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation]. The authority or body mentioned in paragraph 1 shall examine the appeal within two weeks from when the appeal is lodged.

Or. en

Justification

The appeal process should be expedited by setting a deadline (two weeks) for the appeal decision.


AM\1176638EN.docx 99/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN



Member States shall grant a period of at least fifteen days to lodge an appeal against a return decision when such a decision is the consequence of a final decision rejecting an application for international protection taken in accordance with Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation].

Or. en

Justification

In the case Diouf, the CJEU considered fifteen days has sufficient to prepare and bring a remedy. Member states should have the possibility to grant more favourable provisions.



5. The third-country national concerned shall have the possibility to obtain legal advice, representation and, where necessary, linguistic assistance.

5. The third-country national concerned shall have the possibility to obtain legal advice, representation and linguistic assistance.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is inextricably linked to our amendments to recital 40.



6. Member States shall ensure that the necessary legal assistance and/or

6. Member States shall ensure that legal assistance and/or representation is

PE634.774v01-00 100/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

representation is granted on request free of charge in accordance with relevant national legislation or rules regarding legal aid, and may provide that such free legal assistance and/or representation is subject to conditions as set out in Article15(3) to (6) of Directive 2005/85/EC.

granted on request free of charge in accordance with relevant national legislation or rules regarding legal aid. Member States shall inform the third-country nationals about the possibility to forward such request.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendments tabled to recital 40 relating to measures needed in order to ensure the effective implementation of this Directive and to Article 7 providing for the third country nationals’ right to be informed during return procedures.



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.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to the amendment tabled to recital 4. The safeguards referred to in Article 17 should apply also to the third-country nationals who are staying irregularly and in respect of whom it is not, or has not been, possible to implement a return decision. This amendment aims to codify the obligation of Member State to provide the third-country national with written confirmation of his situation, as recognized by CJEU in the case C-146/14 PPU, Mahdi.


AM\1176638EN.docx 101/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN


2. Member States shall provide the persons referred to in paragraph 1 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.

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.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is inextricably linked amendment to our amendment to Article 17.1(a).



18 [...] deleted

Or. en

Amendment 580Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 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 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:

Member States shall never apply coercive measures.

Or. en

PE634.774v01-00 102/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Justification

This amendment is needed as inextricably linked to other amendments tabled to this Article 18 on detention and to recitals 27 and 28.

Amendment 581Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar KösterProposal for a directiveArticle 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:

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to the amendment to point c of paragraph 1.

Amendment 582Sophia in 't Veld, Angelika MlinarProposal for a directiveArticle 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 when:

Or. en

AM\1176638EN.docx 103/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Justification

This amendment is needed as inextricably linked to other amendments tabled to this Article. The Commission proposal deleted the word "only". Rather, it would be important to have an exhaustive list of grounds for detention, to ensure that detention is only used as a matter of last resort and in well specified cases.

Amendment 583Jeroen LenaersProposal for a directiveArticle 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part



Unless other sufficient but less coercive measures can be applied effectively in a specific case, Member States shall 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 when:

Or. en

Justification

The article is not correctly aligned with recital 28 on this point where it is explicitly stated that the person under these conditions should be kept in detention.

Amendment 584Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a


(a) there is a risk of absconding determined in accordance with Article 6;

deleted

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is coherent with the deletion of Article 6.

PE634.774v01-00 104/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Amendment 585Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b


(b) the third-country national concerned avoids or hampers the preparation of return or the removal process; or

deleted

Or. en

Justification

In line with amendment proposed to Article 18(1).

Amendment 586Sophia in 't Veld, Angelika MlinarProposal for a directiveArticle 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c


(c) the third-country national concerned poses a risk to public policy, public security or national security.

deleted

Or. en

Justification

This newly proposed ground by the Commission is not specific enough and such cases should be dealt with under existing criminal law or administrative law.

Amendment 587Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c


(c) the third-country national concerned poses a risk to public policy,

deleted

AM\1176638EN.docx 105/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

public security or national security.

Or. en

Amendment 588Jeroen LenaersProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

Justification

The addition of this sentence clarifies that also a criminal act that amounts to a maximum term of imprisonment of at least three years for the purposes of this Directive should be a ground for detention of that person. Same applies to other parts of this Directive where this sentence is used.

Amendment 589Jussi Halla-ahoProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

Amendment 590Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef

PE634.774v01-00 106/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar KösterProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en



All grounds for detention shall be laid down in national law.

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.

Or. en



All grounds for detention shall be laid down in national law.

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

AM\1176638EN.docx 107/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

down in national law.

Or. en

Justification

Logical consequence of my amendment on the first paragraph of this Article, in order to clarify when detention should be done and when this may be done.

Amendment 593Barbara SpinelliProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

(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.

Or. en

Justification




3. In every case, detention shall be reviewed at reasonable intervals of time either on application by the third-country national concerned or ex officio. In the

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

PE634.774v01-00 108/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

case of prolonged detention periods, reviews shall be subject to the supervision of a judicial authority.

the third-country national concerned or ex officio. Reviews shall be subject to the supervision of a judicial authority.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to other amendments tabled to this Article and to recitals 27 and 28.



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 period of detention of not less than three months and not more than six months.

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 12 months and not more than 24 months, without prejudice to paragraph 1 point c of this Article.

Or. en




5. If a Member State chooses to apply detention, the Member State shall set a limited period of detention, which shall not exceed two weeks.

Or. en

AM\1176638EN.docx 109/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN




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 limited period of detention of maximum two months.

Or. en

Justification

According to NGOs and international organizations, it's absolutely not proven that the longer the detention is, the higher the level rates are.




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 limited period of detention which may not exceed three months.

Or. en

Justification

The proposed amendment of the Commission would set a mandatory high detention maximum period. As various sources, including the EP impact assessment, have shown, more detention is not the answer to the current challenge of return and readmission the Union is facing.

PE634.774v01-00 110/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN



6. Member States may not extend the period referred to in paragraph 5 except for a limited period not exceeding a further twelve months in accordance with national law in cases where regardless of all their reasonable efforts the removal operation is likely to last longer owing to:

deleted

(a) a lack of cooperation by the third-country national concerned, or

(b) delays in obtaining the necessary documentation from third countries.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to other amendments tabled to this Article and to recitals 27 and 28.

Amendment 600Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar KösterProposal for a directiveArticle 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 twelve months in accordance with national law in cases where regardless of all their reasonable efforts the removal operation is likely to last longer owing to:

6. Member States may not extend the period referred to in paragraph 5 except for a limited period not exceeding a further four months in accordance with national law in cases where regardless of all their reasonable efforts the removal operation is likely to last longer owing to:

Or. en

AM\1176638EN.docx 111/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to the amendment tabled to paragraph 5.

Amendment 601Emil RadevProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is necessary because it is inextricably linked to other admissible amendments, namely Commission changes in Article 18 (5).



1. Detention shall take place as a rule in specialised detention facilities. Where a Member State cannot provide accommodation in a specialised detention facility and is obliged to resort to prison accommodation, the third-country nationals in detention shall be kept separated from ordinary prisoners.

1. If a Member State chooses to apply detention as a last resort, detention shall take place as a rule in specialised, open detention facilities. The specialised detention facilities shall offer dignified conditions of detention respecting the fundamental rights of the third-country nationals detained. Staff employed in the specialised detention facilities shall be properly trained and qualified. Third country nationals shall never be detained

PE634.774v01-00 112/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

in prison accommodation.

Or. en

Justification

The proposed amendment is inextricably linked to recital 27 and aims to ensure that detention of third-country national shall take place only in specialised detention facilities and in dignified conditions of detention, managed by Staff employed properly trained and qualified. For this reason the shadow rapporteur stresses that the first subparagraph of article 19.1 providing the detention of third-country national to prison accommodation should be deleted.



2. Third-country nationals in detention shall be allowed — on request — to establish in due time contact with legal representatives, family members and competent consular authorities.

2. Third-country nationals in detention shall be allowed — on request — to establish since the first day of detention contact with legal representatives, family members and competent consular authorities.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is inextricably linked to our amendments in recital 4.



3. Particular attention shall be paid to the situation of vulnerable persons. Emergency health care and essential treatment of illness shall be provided.

3. Particular attention shall be paid to the situation of persons in a vulnerable situation. Health care and treatment of illness shall be promptly provided.

Or. en

AM\1176638EN.docx 113/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Justification

This amendment is needed as inextricably linked to amendments tabled to recital 38 and Article 14.



4. Relevant and competent national, international and non-governmental organisations and bodies shall have the possibility to visit detention facilities, as referred to in paragraph 1, to the extent that they are being used for detaining third-country nationals in accordance with this Chapter. Such visits may be subject to authorisation.

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 referred to in paragraph 1, to the extent that they are being used for detaining third-country nationals in accordance with this Chapter. Unannounced visits shall be made possible.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is inextricably linked to amendments proposed to Article 10.



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. Such information shall include information on their entitlement under national law to contact the organisations and bodies referred to in paragraph 4.

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

PE634.774v01-00 114/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Parliaments referred to in paragraph 4.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is inextricably linked to amendments proposed to Article 10.

Amendment 607Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, Tokia Saïfi, Caterina Chinnici, Nathalie Griesbeck, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Julie WardProposal for a directiveArticle 20


Article 20 deleted

Detention of minors and families

1. Unaccompanied minors and families with minors shall only be detained as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time.

2. Families detained pending removal shall be provided with separate accommodation guaranteeing adequate privacy.

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.

4. Unaccompanied minors shall as far as possible be provided with accommodation in institutions provided with personnel and facilities which take into account the needs of persons of their age.

5. The best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration in the context of the detention of minors pending removal.

Or. en

AM\1176638EN.docx 115/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Justification




20 Detention of minors and families Prohibition of detention of minors and families

Or. en

Justification


Amendment 609Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar KösterProposal for a directiveArticle 20 – title


20 Detention of minors and families Minors and families

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed for reason of consistency with Article 12 of the Commission proposal, which puts the best interests of the child first.


PE634.774v01-00 116/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN




1. Minors and families with minors shall not be detained.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendments tabled to recitals 28 and 40 and Article 18.




1. Unaccompanied minors and families with minors shall not be detained.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendments tabled to recital 28. Detention of children should be abolished, as it runs inherently counter to the best interest of the child.


AM\1176638EN.docx 117/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN



1. Unaccompanied minors and families with minors shall never be detained.

Or. en

Justification

The detention of minors is never in their best interests. Member states have the possibility to find alternatives measures such as open centres to ensure the return of unaccompanied minors, and minors with their families, after the assessment of their best interests. This amendment is needed for reason of consistency with Article 12 of the Commission proposal, which puts the best interests of the child first.




1. For unaccompanied minors and families with minors alternatives to detention shall be provided for the shortest appropriate period of time.

Or. it

Justification

This amendment is necessary for pressing reasons relating to ensuring consistency in the Parliament position in other asylum legislative files where it is stated that minors cannot be detained.



2. Families detained pending deleted

PE634.774v01-00 118/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

removal shall be provided with separate accommodation guaranteeing adequate privacy.

Or. it

Justification





2. Pending removal, unaccompanied and separated minors and children with their families shall be provided with adequate alternatives to detention. Minors shall not be separated from their parents or from their legal or customary primary caregivers during the procedure, through the detention or removal of a parent or a caregiver. Families shall be kept together, unless the child’s safety would be at risk. This includes implementing or exploring alternatives to detention for the whole family and protecting parents from removal while the procedure is ongoing. Where needed, appropriate care and accommodation arrangements that enable children and families to live together in communities shall be implemented.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendments tabled to recitals 28 and 40 and Article 18.

AM\1176638EN.docx 119/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN




2. Member States shall instead establish appropriate care arrangements and accommodate minors and families with minor children. Appropriate care arrangements and reception measures for minor children and their families shall be community based, the least intrusive possible and respect the right to privacy and family life. These care arrangements should provide for personnel and facilities which take into account the needs of persons their age.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendments tabled to recital 28. Instead of detention, minors and families with minor children should be provided with appropriate care arrangements.




2. Pending removal families and unaccompanied minors shall be provided with alternative measures to detention, with separate accommodation guaranteeing adequate privacy.

Or. en

PE634.774v01-00 120/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Justification





deleted

Or. en

Justification





deleted

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendments tabled to recital 28. As children should not be detained, this provision should be deleted.

AM\1176638EN.docx 121/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN




deleted

Or. it

Justification





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.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is necessary for pressing reasons of internal consistency of the text. According to the first Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child and to the General Comments No.22 and 23 of the Committee on the Rights of the Child, migrant and refugee children in detention may experience severe emotional distress and may have particular and often urgent mental health needs. Children should therefore have access to health care, including psychological support, equal to that of nationals, regardless of their

PE634.774v01-00 122/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

migration status.




3. Minors 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.

Or. en

Justification





deleted

Or. en

Justification


AM\1176638EN.docx 123/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN




deleted

Or. en

Justification





4. Unaccompanied minors shall, as appropriate, be provided with facilities and assisted by personnel, taking into account the needs of persons of their age.

Or. it

Justification

This amendment is necessary for pressing reasons relating to ensure consistency in the Parliament position in other asylum legislative files where it is stated that minors cannot be detained.

Amendment 626Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit

PE634.774v01-00 124/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Sippel, Dietmar KösterProposal for a directiveArticle 20 – paragraph 4



4. Minors shall be provided with accommodation in institutions provided with personnel and facilities which take into account the needs of persons of their age.

Or. en

Justification





deleted

Or. en

Justification



AM\1176638EN.docx 125/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN



deleted

Or. en

Justification





5. The best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration in all situations.

Or. en

Justification



PE634.774v01-00 126/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN



5. The best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration in the context of the treatment of minors pending removal.

Or. it

Justification


Amendment 631Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, Tokia Saïfi, Caterina Chinnici, Nathalie Griesbeck, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Julie WardProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

Justification



AM\1176638EN.docx 127/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN


21 Article 21 deleted

Emergency situations

1. In situations where an exceptionally large number of third-country nationals to be returned places an unforeseen heavy burden on the capacity of the detention facilities of a Member State or on its administrative or judicial staff, such a Member State may, as long as the exceptional situation persists, decide to allow for periods for judicial review longer than those provided for under the third subparagraph of Article 18(2) and to take urgent measures in respect of the conditions of detention derogating from those set out in Articles 19(1) and 20(2).

2. When resorting to such exceptional measures, the Member State concerned shall inform the Commission. It shall also inform the Commission as soon as the reasons for applying these exceptional measures have ceased to exist.

3. Nothing in this Article shall be interpreted as allowing Member States to derogate from their general obligation to take all appropriate measures, whether general or particular, to ensure fulfilment of their obligations under this Directive.

Or. en

Justification

The Shadow Rapporteur considers the deletion of this article crucial for the Recast of this Directive. Article 21 introduces a temporary derogation from certain important provisions of this Directive for example from articles 18.2, 20.2, 19.1. These derogations are in contrast with the general principle of equality, in respect of which Member State shall not detain a third-country national for the purpose of removal in prison accommodation together with ordinary prisoners even in the event of emergency situations, as recognized by CJEU in the case C-474/13, Pham.

PE634.774v01-00 128/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Amendment 633Laura Ferrara, Ignazio Corrao, Fabio Massimo CastaldoProposal for a directiveArticle 22


22 [...] deleted

Or. it

Amendment 634Sophia in 't Veld, Angelika Mlinar, Nathalie GriesbeckProposal for a directiveArticle 22


22 [...] deleted

Or. en

Justification

The proposal of the Commission for the border procedure in this context is problematic as this is linked to unclear outcome of the potential negotiations of the Asylum Procedures Regulation and furthermore presents a number of severe fundamental rights challenges, such as related to time limits for lodging appeals, suspensive effects and long extended periods of detention.

Amendment 635Sylvie Guillaume, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Ana Gomes, Josef Weidenholzer, Péter Niedermüller, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Birgit Sippel, Dietmar KösterProposal for a directiveArticle 22


22 [...] deleted

Or. en

Justification

This article is related to article 41 of Regulation (EU) .../...[Asylum Procedure Regulation].

AM\1176638EN.docx 129/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Until the final adoption of this Regulation it is not possible to work on the current article 22, due to legal uncertainty and risks to breach fundamental rights.



22 [...] deleted

Or. en

Amendment 637Emil RadevProposal for a directiveArticle 22 – paragraph 1


1. Member States shall establish return procedures applicable to illegally staying third-country nationals subject to an obligation to return following a decision rejecting an application for international protection taken by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation].

1. Member States may, on a voluntary basis, establish return procedures applicable to illegally staying third-country nationals subject to an obligation to return following a decision rejecting an application for international protection taken by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation].

Or. en



1. Member States shall establish return procedures applicable to illegally staying third-country nationals subject to an obligation to return following a decision

1. Member States shall establish return procedures applicable to irregularly staying third-country nationals subject to an obligation to return following a decision

PE634.774v01-00 130/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

rejecting an application for international protection taken by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation].

rejecting an application for international protection taken by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation].

Or. en

Amendment 639József Nagy, Anna Záborská, Andrea BocskorProposal for a directiveArticle 22


Article 22 Article 22

Border procedure Border procedure

1. Member States shall establish return procedures applicable to illegally staying third country nationals subject to an obligation to return following a decision rejecting an EN 37 EN application for international protection taken by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation].

1. Member States shall establish return procedures appropriate to illegally staying third-country nationals subject to an obligation to return following a decision rejecting an application for international protection taken by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation].

2. Except where otherwise provided in this Chapter, the provisions of Chapters II, III and IV apply to return procedures carried out in accordance with paragraph 1.

2. Except in cases, where otherwise provided in this Chapter, the provisions of Chapters II, III and IV apply to return procedures carried out in accordance with paragraph 1.

3. Return decisions issued in return procedures carried out in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article shall be given by means of a standard form as set out under national legislation, in accordance with Article 15(3).

3. Return decisions issued in return procedures carried out in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article shall be given by means of a standard form as set out under national legislation and in accordance with Article 15(3).

4. A period for voluntary departure shall not be granted. Member States shall however grant an appropriate period for voluntary departure in accordance with Article 9 to third-country nationals holding a valid travel document and fulfilling the obligation to cooperate with the competent authorities of the Member States at all stages of the return procedures established in accordance with Article 7. Member States shall require the third-country

4. A period for voluntary departure shall not be granted. Member States shall however grant an appropriate period of time for voluntary departure in accordance with Article 9 to third-country nationals holding a valid travel document and fulfilling the obligation to cooperate with the competent authorities of the Member States at all stages of the return procedures established in accordance with Article 7. Member States shall require the third-

AM\1176638EN.docx 131/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

nationals concerned to hand over the valid travel document to the competent authority until departure.

country nationals concerned to hand over the valid travel document to the competent authority until departure.

5. Member States shall grant a period not exceeding 48 hours to lodge an appeal against the return decisions based on a final decision rejecting an application for international protection taken by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation] at the border or in transit zones of the Member States.

5. Member States shall grant a period of time not exceeding 48 hours to lodge an appeal against the return decisions based on a final decision rejecting an application for international protection taken by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation] at the border or in transit zones of the Member States.

6. 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 the appeal, shall be automatically suspended where there is a risk of breach of the principle of non-refoulement and one of the following two conditions applies :

6. The enforcement of a return decision during the period of time for bringing the appeal at first instance and, where that appeal has been lodged within the period established, during the examination of the appeal, shall be automatically suspended where there is a risk of breach of the principle of non-refoulement and one of the following two conditions applies :

(a) new elements or findings have arisen or have been presented by the third country national concerned after a decision rejecting an application for international protection taken by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation], which significantly modify the specific circumstances of the individual case; or

(a) new elements or findings have arisen or have been presented by the third country national concerned after a decision rejecting an application for international protection taken by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation], which significantly modify the specific circumstances of the individual case; or

(b) the decision rejecting an application for international protection taken by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation(EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation] was not subject to an effective judicial review in accordance with Article 53 of that Regulation.


Where a further appeal against a first or subsequent appeal decision is lodged, and in all other cases, the enforcement of the return decision shall not be suspended unless a court or tribunal decides otherwise taking into account the specific circumstances of the individual case upon the applicant’s request or acting ex officio.


PE634.774v01-00 132/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

Member States shall provide that a decision on the request by the person concerned for a temporary suspension of the enforcement of a return decision shall be taken within 48 hours from the lodging of such a request by the third-country national concerned. In individual cases involving complex issues of fact or law, the time limits set out in this paragraph may be extended as appropriate by the competent judicial authority.

Member States shall provide that a decision on the request by the person concerned for a temporary suspension of the enforcement of a return decision shall be taken within 48 hours from the lodging of such a request by the third-country national concerned. In individual cases involving complex issues of fact or law, the time limits set out in this paragraph may be extended as appropriate by the competent judicial authority.

7. In order to prepare the return or carry out the removal process, or both, Member States may keep in detention a third-country national who has been detained in accordance with point (d) of Article 8(3) of Directive (EU) …/… [recast Reception EN 38 EN Condition Directive] in the context of a procedure carried out by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation], and who is subject to return procedures pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter.

7. In order to prepare the return or carry out the removal process, or both, Member States may keep in detention a third-country national who has been detained in accordance with point (d) of Article 8(3) of Directive (EU) …/… [recast Reception EN 38 EN Condition Directive] in the context of a procedure carried out by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation], and who is subject to return procedures pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter.

Detention shall be for as short a period as possible, which shall in no case exceed four months. It may be maintained only as long as removal arrangements are in progress and executed with due diligence.

Detention shall be for as short a period of time as possible, which shall in no case exceed four months. It may be maintained only as long as removal arrangements are in progress and executed with due diligence.

When the return decision cannot be enforced within the maximum period referred to in this paragraph, the third-country national may be further detained in accordance with Article 18.

When the return decision cannot be enforced within the maximum period referred to in this paragraph, the third-country national may be further detained in accordance with Article 18.

Or. en

Justification

While keeping the possibility for Member States to derogate from the application of the rules of the Return Directive for border cases covered by Article 2(2)(a), the proposal provides for specific, simplified rules applicable to third-country nationals who were subject to asylum border procedures. Border procedures are considered as added values to the return standards and procedures.

AM\1176638EN.docx 133/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Amendment 640Heinz K. Becker, Rachida Dati, Monika Hohlmeier, Kārlis ŠadurskisProposal for a directiveArticle 22 – paragraph 3


3. Return decisions issued in return procedures carried out in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article shall be given by means of a standard form as set out under national legislation, in accordance with Article 15(3).

3. In the context of procedures carried out in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article, Member States shall issue:

(a) either a return decisions given by means of a standard form as set out in the annex, or

(b) a refusal of entry in accordance with Article14 of Regulation 2016/399; paragraphs 4 to 7 shall not apply in this case.

Member States shall issue one of the decisions referred to in this paragraph as soon as possible, where possible under national law together with the decision rejecting an application for international protection taken by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation].

Or. en



5. Member States shall grant a period not exceeding 48 hours to lodge an appeal against the return decisions based on a final decision rejecting an application for international protection taken by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation] at the border or in transit zones of the Member States.

5. Member States shall grant a period not exceeding 48 hours to lodge an appeal once against the return decisions based on a decision rejecting an application for international protection taken by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation] at the border or in transit zones of the Member States against which there has been an

PE634.774v01-00 134/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

opportunity to appeal.

Or. en

Justification

It is necessary to limit the number of appeals to one and to clarify the starting point of the 2-day deadline for appeals.

Amendment 642Jussi Halla-ahoProposal for a directiveArticle 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 the appeal, shall be automatically suspended where there is a risk of breach of the principle of non-refoulement and one of the following two conditions applies :

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 whether there is a risk of breach of the principle of non-refoulement shall be suspended. The appeal shall be examined within a week from when it was lodged and shall only have suspensive effect in cases where there is a risk of breach of the principle of non-refoulement.

Or. en

Justification

The suspensive effect of an appeal against a return decision taken in border procedure is limited to cases where there is a risk of refoulement. In order to expedite return procedures, it is necessary to set a deadline (one week) for examining appeals in border return procedure.

Amendment 643Jussi Halla-ahoProposal for a directiveArticle 22 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point a


(a) new elements or findings have arisen or have been presented by the

deleted

AM\1176638EN.docx 135/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

third-country national concerned after a decision rejecting an application for international protection taken by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation], which significantly modify the specific circumstances of the individual case; or

Or. en

Amendment 644Jussi Halla-ahoProposal for a directiveArticle 22 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point b



deleted

Or. en




Where a further appeal against a first appeal decision is lodged, and in all other cases, the enforcement of the return decision shall not be suspended.

Or. en

PE634.774v01-00 136/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN



Member States shall provide that a decision on the request by the person concerned for a temporary suspension of the enforcement of a return decision shall be taken within 48 hours from the lodging of such a request by the third-country national concerned. In individual cases involving complex issues of fact or law, the time-limits set out in this paragraph may be extended as appropriate by the competent judicial authority.

deleted

Or. en



In order to prepare the return or carry out the removal process, or both, Member States may keep in detention a third-country national who has been detained in accordance with point (d) of Article 8(3) of Directive (EU) …/… [recast Reception Condition Directive] in the context of a procedure carried out by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation], and who is subject to return procedures pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter.

In order to prepare the return or carry out the removal process, or both, Member States shall keep in detention a third-country national who has been detained in accordance with point (d) of Article 8(3) of Directive (EU) …/… [recast Reception Condition Directive] in the context of a procedure carried out by virtue of Article 41 of Regulation (EU) …/… [Asylum Procedure Regulation], and who is subject to return procedures pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter.

Or. en

Justification

Detention should be continued as long as the person subject to detention is in either of the border procedures in order to dissuade illegal immigration, by not letting them enter the

AM\1176638EN.docx 137/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

territory of the Member State at any time.




deleted

Or. en

Justification

Detention should be continued as long as the person subject to detention is in either of the border procedures in order to dissuade illegal immigration, by not letting them enter the territory of the Member State at any time.




Detention shall be for as short a period as possible, which shall in no case exceed six months. It may be maintained only as long as removal arrangements are in progress and executed with due diligence.

Or. en



When the return decision cannot be deleted

PE634.774v01-00 138/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

enforced within the maximum period referred to in this paragraph, the third-country national may be further detained in accordance with Article 18.

Or. en

Amendment 651József Nagy, Anna Záborská, Andrea BocskorProposal for a directiveArticle 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.

Or. en

Justification

In order to prevent secondary movements a new Article or a new point should be added to border procedures.



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,

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,

AM\1176638EN.docx 139/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

propose amendments. propose amendments. Such report shall be accompanied by a full Commission impact assessment of the transposition and implementation of this Directive.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed as it is inextricably linked to amendments to Article 6 and other new Articles that entail changes of which the impact should be assessed. The Commission did unfortunately not do an impact assessment when proposing this recast, which runs counter to achieving better law making. Parliament had to commission an impact assessment itself. A future full impact assessment of the changes is needed, as a full monitoring should rely on proper data and findings.

Amendment 653Sophia in 't Veld, Angelika Mlinar, Nathalie GriesbeckProposal for a directiveArticle 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

PE634.774v01-00 140/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

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.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is a standard provision that is needed to accompany the amendment to Article 14(2) aimed at introducing an empowerment for the Commission to adopt delegated acts, more particularly for the establishment of the specific modalities for the operation of the central system for return management to be established in accordance with Article 50 of the future EBCG Regulation, and for the communication between the national systems and the central system.



Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with

Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with

AM\1176638EN.docx 141/142 PE634.774v01-00

EN

Articles 6 to 10, Articles 13 and 14(3), Article 16, Article 18 and Article 22 by [six months after the day of entry into force] and with Article 14(1) and (2) by [one year after the day of entry into force]. They shall immediately communicate the text of those measures to the Commission.

Articles 2 to 4, Articles 7 to 13, Article 14(3), Articles 15 and 16 and Articles 18 to 20 by [six months after the day of entry into force] and with Article 14(1) by [one year after the day of entry into force]. They shall immediately communicate the text of those measures to the Commission.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment ensures coherence with other amendments tabled by the Shadow Rapporteur.

PE634.774v01-00 142/142 AM\1176638EN.docx

EN

AM_Com_LegReport - europarl.europa.eu · Web viewThe word "illegal" is not considered as relevant...

Documents

Transcript of AM_Com_LegReport - europarl.europa.eu · Web viewThe word "illegal" is not considered as relevant...