Sittings · Document

Draft report (COM(2016)0272 – C8-0179/2016 – 2016/0132(COD)) 2017-03-03

Establishment of 'Eurodac' for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective application of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, for identifying an illegally staying third-country national or stateless person and on requests for the comparison with Eurodac data by Member States' law enforcement authorities and Europol for law enforcement purposes (recast)

Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

Official HTML ↗ PDF DOCX

Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

2016/0132(COD)

3.3.2017

AMENDMENTS

272 - 455

AM_Com_LegReport

Amendment 272

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek, Hilde Vautmans

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

CHAPTER IIa: THIRD-COUNTRY NATIONALS OR STATELESS PERSONS FOR WHOM A MEMBER STATE INTENDS TO CONDUCT A RESETTLEMENT PROCEDURE

Article 12a: Collection and transmission of fingerprints and facial image data

1. Each Member States shall promptly take the fingerprints of all fingers and record a facial image of every third-country national or stateless person of at least six years of age for whom it intends to conduct a resettlement procedure and shall, as soon as possible following the registration of that person as defined in Article 10(2) of Regulation XXX/XXX, transmit them, together with the other data referred to in Article 10 of that Regulation, to the Central System.

Non-compliance with the time-scale for the taking of all the fingerprints and the recording of the facial image shall not relieve Member States of the obligation to take and transmit the fingerprints to the Central System. Where the condition of the fingertips does not allow the taking of the fingerprints of a quality ensuring appropriate comparison under Article 26, the Member State of origin shall retake the fingerprints of the applicant and resend them as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after they have been successfully retaken.

2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, where it is not possible to take the fingerprints, facial image or both of a third-country national or stateless person for whom a Member State intends to conduct a resettlement procedure on account of measures taken to ensure his or her health or the protection of public health, Member States shall take and send such fingerprints, facial image or both as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after those health grounds no longer prevail.

3. The fingerprints, facial images and other data referred to in Article 10(2) of Regulation XXX/XXX may also be taken and transmitted by experts from the European Asylum Agency (EUAA) when performing tasks pursuant to the EUAA Regulation.

Article 12b Recording of data

Only the following data shall be recorded in the Central System:

(a) fingerprint data;

(b) a facial image;

(c) surname(s) and forename(s), name(s) at birth and previously used names and any aliases, which may be entered separately;

(d) nationality(ies);

(e) place and date of birth

(f) Member State of origin, place and date of the registration;

(g) sex;

(h) where applicable, the type and number of identity or travel document; three letter code of the issuing country and validity;

(i) reference number used by the Member State of origin;

(j) date on which the fingerprints and/or facial image were taken;

(k) date on which the data were transmitted to the Central System;

(l) operator user ID;

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: la création de ce nouveau chapitre se justifie par la proposition d’inclure dans Eurodac les ressortissants de pays tiers et les apatrides pour lesquels un Etat membre entend exécuter une procédure de réinstallation conformément au règlement XXX/XXX. L'article 10 dudit règlement prévoit que les États membres enregistrent les données des personnes qu’ils entendent réinstaller et les stockent ensuite. Il n’est pas précisé dans quelle base de données celles-ci sont enregistrées. Il est donc proposé de les enregistrer directement dans Eurodac afin qu’elles puissent bénéficier des garanties offertes par le présent règlement et qu’elles soient soumises au même régime que les données des autres bénéficiaires de protection internationale. Cet enregistrement permettra aussi de pouvoir déterminer l’État membre de réinstallation et ce, afin de contrôler les mouvements secondaires comme cela est avancé par la Commission dans sa proposition.

Amendment 273

Malin Björk, Barbara Spinelli, Marina Albiol Guzmán

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 3 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

THIRD-COUNTRY NATIONALS OR STATELESS PERSONS APPREHENDED IN CONNECTION WITH THE IRREGULAR CROSSING OF AN EXTERNAL BORDER

deleted

Or. en

Justification

In many cases, asylum seekers who enter the EU in an irregular manner are first fingerprinted as irregular border crossers. When they formally lodge a claim for international protection, they are fingerprinted again as applicants for international protection. Double fingerprinting could lead to an excessive interference into the right to respect for private life enshrined in Article 7 of the Charter and Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). It could also create situations of tensions leading to the use of coercive measures to enforce fingerprinting. Moreover, the EU legislator should carefully assess the necessity and proportionality of centrally storing the name, surname, nationality, date and place of birth, as well as information on the travel document of an applicant for international protection for a period as long as 10 years. To reduce risk of abuse, the EU legislator should consider blocking the personal data of international protection applicants listed in Article 13 (2) (c)-(e) and (h) of the proposal until the international protection claim is rejected in the final instance that these are not automatically visible in case of a Eurodac match. Where such data are needed to achieve the objectives laid down in Article 1 (1) (a) and (c) of the proposed recast Eurodac Regulation, it should be exchanged bilaterally between Member States as it is currently the case under Regulation (EU) No. 603/2013.

Amendment 274

Malin Björk, Barbara Spinelli, Marina Albiol Guzmán

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

[...]

deleted

Or. en

Justification

Amendment 275

Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Josef Weidenholzer, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Péter Niedermüller, Kati Piri, Maria Grapini, Juan Fernando López Aguilar

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Each Member State shall promptly take the fingerprints of all fingers and capture a facial image of every third-country national or stateless person of at least six years of age who is apprehended by the competent control authorities in connection with the irregular crossing by land, sea or air of the border of that Member State having come from a third country and who is not turned back or who remains physically on the territory of the Member States and who is not kept in custody, confinement or detention during the entirety of the period between apprehension and removal on the basis of the decision to turn him or her back.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is directly linked to the change of age from 14 years to 6 years proposed by the Commission in this Article.

Amendment 276

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Each Member State shall promptly take the fingerprints of all fingers of every third-country national or stateless person of at least 18 years of age who is apprehended by the competent control authorities in connection with the irregular crossing by land, sea or air of the border of that Member State having come from a third country and who is not turned back or who remains physically on the territory of the Member States and who is not kept in custody, confinement or detention during the entirety of the period between apprehension and removal on the basis of the decision to turn him or her back.

Or. en

Justification

This is linked to the introduction of a new paragraph 1Anew to this Article, aimed at better protecting child victims of trafficking and supporting the identification and protection of children who go missing.

Amendment 277

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1a. For the purpose of Article 1(1)(ca), each Member State shall promptly take the fingerprints of all fingers and capture a facial image of every third-country national child of at least six years of age who is apprehended by the competent control authorities in connection with the irregular crossing by land, sea or air of the border of that Member State having come from a third country and who remains physically on the territory of the Member States.

Or. en

Justification

Amendment 278

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) a facial image;

(b) a facial image where the data subject is a minor;

Or. en

Amendment 279

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) surname(s) and forename(s), name(s) at birth and previously used names and any aliases, which may be entered separately;

Or. en

Amendment 280

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) nationality(ies);

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 281

Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Josef Weidenholzer, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Péter Niedermüller, Kati Piri, Maria Grapini, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Caterina Chinnici

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) nationality(ies);

(d) nationality(ies) or presumed and declared nationality or status as stateless person in accordance with Article 1(1) of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons;

Or. en

Amendment 282

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point e

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(e) place and date of birth

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 283

Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Josef Weidenholzer, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Péter Niedermüller, Kati Piri, Maria Grapini, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Caterina Chinnici

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ga) details of family links of minors, such as names of family members and accompanying persons or any other relevant information that could help for possible family tracing or reunification;

Or. en

Justification

As the European Commission highlighted in its explanatory memorandum accompanying the proposed Eurodac recast, the lowering of the minimum age from 14 years to 6 years in Article 10(1) et al. should serve in order to protect child victims of trafficking and support the identification and protection of unaccompanied children. In order to comply with Article 7, 8 and 24 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights the processing of children’s' biometric data could be only justified by a child protection purpose. Therefore this amendment is directly linked to the changes which the Commission proposed.

Amendment 284

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point h

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(h) type and number of identity or travel document; three letter code of the issuing country and validity;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 285

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek, Hilde Vautmans

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point i a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ia) return decision taken, or removal order issued, by the Member State of origin;

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: With a view to stepping up cooperation between Member States in managing irregular migration, illegally staying nationals should give the name of the removal measure taken by the Member State which entered the data in Eurodac instead of the asylum request number.

Amendment 286

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point m

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(m) where applicable in accordance with paragraph 6, the date when the person concerned left or was removed from the territory of the Member States.

deleted

Or. en

Justification

This should be recorded in SIS. Any data remaining in Eurodac after the person left or was returned should be erased.

Amendment 287

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

By way of derogation from paragraph 1, where it is not possible to take the fingerprints and facial image of the apprehended person on account of measures taken to ensure his or her health or the protection of public health, the Member State concerned shall take and send such fingerprints and facial image as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after those health grounds no longer prevail.

By way of derogation from paragraph 1, where it is not possible to take the fingerprints, facial image or both of the apprehended person on account of measures taken to ensure his or her health or the protection of public health, the Member State concerned shall take and send such fingerprints, facial image or both as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after those health grounds no longer prevail.

Or. en

Amendment 288

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

6. As soon as the Member State of origin ensures that the person concerned whose data was recorded in Eurodac in accordance with paragraph (1) has left the territory of the Member States in compliance with a return decision or removal order, it shall update its data set recorded in conformity with paragraph (2) relating to the person concerned by adding the date of his or her removal or when he or she left the territory.

6. As soon as the responsible Member State ensures that the person concerned whose data was recorded in Eurodac in accordance with paragraph (1) has been granted a residence permit or has left the territory of the Member States in compliance with a return decision or removal order, it shall erase its data set recorded in conformity with paragraph (2) relating to the person concerned.

Or. en

Amendment 289

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

7. Fingerprint data may also be taken and transmitted by members of the European Border [and Coast] Guard Teams when performing tasks and exercising powers in accordance with [Regulation on the European Border [and Coast] Guard and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004, Regulation (EC) No 863/2007 and Council Decision 2005/267/EC].

7. Fingerprint data shall be taken and transmitted by Member State asylum experts who have received specific training on fundamental rights, the right to asylum and on how to address the special needs of vulnerable migrants, including children.

Or. en

Amendment 290

Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Josef Weidenholzer, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Péter Niedermüller, Kati Piri, Maria Grapini, Juan Fernando López Aguilar

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

7. Fingerprint and facial image data may also be taken and transmitted by members of the European Border [and Coast] Guard Teams when performing tasks and exercising powers in accordance with [Regulation on the European Border [and Coast] Guard and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004, Regulation (EC) No 863/2007 and Council Decision 2005/267/EC].

Or. en

Amendment 291

Judith Sargentini

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 4 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

THIRD-COUNTRY NATIONALS OR STATELESS PERSONS FOUND ILLEGALLY STAYING IN A MEMBER STATE

deleted

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is admissible as inextricably linked to the admissible amendments deleting Article 14(1), Article 14(2), Article 14(4), Article 14(5) and Article 14(6)

Amendment 292

Malin Björk, Barbara Spinelli, Marina Albiol Guzmán

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 4 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

THIRD-COUNTRY NATIONALS OR STATELESS PERSONS FOUND ILLEGALLY STAYING IN A MEMBER STATE

THIRD-COUNTRY NATIONALS OR STATELESS PERSONS FOUND IRREGULARLY STAYING IN A MEMBER STATE

Or. en

Justification

Related to Amendment on definition in Article 3 paragraph 1 point d. This amendment applies throughout the text.

Amendment 293

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

[...]

deleted

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is admissible as inextricably linked to the admissible amendments deleting Article 14(1), Article 14(2), Article 14(4), Article 14(5) and Article 14(6)

Amendment 294

Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Josef Weidenholzer, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Péter Niedermüller, Kati Piri, Maria Grapini, Juan Fernando López Aguilar

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Each Member State shall promptly take the fingerprints of all fingers and capture a facial image of every third-country national or stateless person of at least six years of age who is found illegally staying within its territory. The taking of fingerprints and capturing of facial images of children is especially for the purpose laid down in Article 1(1)(ca).

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is directly linked to the change of age from 14 years to 6 years proposed by the Commission in this Article.

Amendment 295

Malin Björk, Barbara Spinelli, Marina Albiol Guzmán

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1a. With a view to checking whether a third-country national or a stateless person found irregularly staying within its territory has previously lodged an application for international protection in another Member State, a Member State may transmit to the Central System any fingerprint data relating to fingerprints which it may have taken of any such third-country national or stateless person of at least 14 years of age together with the reference number used by that Member State.

Or. en

Justification

Amendment aiming to restore paragraph 1 of the text of Article 14 in force.

Amendment 296

Malin Björk, Barbara Spinelli, Marina Albiol Guzmán

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) a facial image;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 297

Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Josef Weidenholzer, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Péter Niedermüller, Kati Piri, Maria Grapini, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Caterina Chinnici

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) nationality(ies);

(d) nationality(ies) or presumed and declared nationality or status as stateless person in accordance with Article 1(1) of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons;

Or. en

Amendment 298

Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Josef Weidenholzer, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Péter Niedermüller, Kati Piri, Maria Grapini, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Caterina Chinnici

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ga) details of family links of minors, such as names of family members and accompanying persons or any other relevant information that could help for possible family tracing or reunification.

Or. en

Justification

Amendment 299

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek, Hilde Vautmans

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point i a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ia) return decision taken, or removal order issued, by the Member State of origin;

Or. fr

Justification

With a view to stepping up cooperation between Member States in managing irregular migration, illegally staying nationals should give the name of the removal measure taken by the Member State which entered the data in Eurodac instead of the asylum request number.

Amendment 300

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek, Hilde Vautmans

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2a. Member States may waive the obligations laid down in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article in respect of illegally residing third-country nationals who entered by legally crossing the external border of the Schengen area and have overstayed the legal period of residence by no more than 15 days.

Or. fr

Justification

Les données de ressortissant de pays tiers en séjour irrégulier seront enregistrées pour une période de 5 ans dans Eurodac. C'est pourquoi, les personnes qui sont entrée légalement sur le territoire de l'UE et qui font l'objet d'un dépassement très court de la durée de séjour autorisée et pour lesquels soit un retour volontaire est imminent soit une procédure de régularisation est cours et qu'ils ne présentent aucun risque de fuite, les Etats membres devrait disposer d'une marge d'appréciation et leur octroyer un délai raisonnable pour quitter le territoire ou se régulariser avant d'enregistrer leur données pour une si longue durée. Il convient donc que pour les personnes entré illégalement sur le territoire d'un Etat membre, ces données soient directement enregistrées dans Eurodac mais que pour celles entré légalement un délai raisonnable de 15 jours leur soit laissé.

Amendment 301

Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Josef Weidenholzer, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Péter Niedermüller, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Caterina Chinnici

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2a. Member States may waive the obligations laid down in paragraphs 1 and 2 in respect of illegally residing third-country nationals who entered by irregularly crossing the external border of the Schengen area and have overstayed the legal period of residence by no more than 15 days.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is directly linked to the Article 14 in the Commission proposal. The extension of the scope in order to include "third-country nationals or stateless persons found illegally staying in a Member State" must be accompanied by safeguards if a person has entered legally the EU and overstays his visit for some days due to reasons that could be unintentional.

Amendment 302

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The fingerprint data of a third-country national or a stateless person as referred to in paragraph 1 shall be transmitted to the Central System and compared with the fingerprint data of persons fingerprinted for the purposes of Article 10(1), 13(1) and 14(1) transmitted by other Member States and already recorded in the Central System.

3. The fingerprint and facial image data of a third-country national or a stateless person as referred to in paragraph 1 shall be transmitted to the Central System and compared with the fingerprint and facial image data of persons for the purposes of Article 10(1), 13(1) and 14(1) transmitted by other Member States and already recorded in the Central System.

Or. en

Justification

Correction of the commission's proposal that doesn't insert in all the required places both 'fingerprints' and 'facial image', which is in line with the obligation as mentioned in article 2.

Amendment 303

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Non-compliance with the 72-hour time-limit referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article shall not relieve Member States of the obligation to take and transmit the fingerprints to the Central System. Where the condition of the fingertips does not allow the taking of fingerprints of a quality ensuring appropriate comparison under Article 26, the Member State of origin shall retake the fingerprints of persons apprehended as described in paragraph 1 of this Article, and resend them as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after they have been successfully retaken.

4. Non-compliance with the 72-hour time-limit referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article shall not relieve Member States of the obligation to take and transmit the fingerprints and facial image data to the Central System. Where the condition of the fingertips does not allow the taking of fingerprints of a quality ensuring appropriate comparison under Article 26, the Member State of origin shall retake the fingerprints of persons apprehended as described in paragraph 1 of this Article, and resend them as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after they have been successfully retaken.

Or. en

Justification

Correction of the commission's proposal that doesn't insert in all the required places both 'fingerprints' and 'facial image', which is in line with the obligation as mentioned in article 2.

Amendment 304

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 5 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

PROCEDURE FOR COMPARISON OF DATA FOR APPLICANTS FOR INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION AND THIRD-COUNTRY NATIONALS APPREHENDED CROSSING THE BORDER IRREGULARLY OR ILLEGALLY STAYING IN THE TERRITORY OF A MEMBER STATE

PROCEDURE FOR COMPARISON OF DATA FOR APPLICANTS FOR INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION, THIRD-COUNTRY NATIONALS AND STATELESS PERSONS FOR WHOM A MEMBER STATE INTENDS TO CONDUCT A RESETTLEMENT PROCEDURE AND THIRD-COUNTRY NATIONALS APPREHENDED CROSSING THE BORDER IRREGULARLY OR ILLEGALLY STAYING IN THE TERRITORY OF A MEMBER STATE

Or. fr

Justification

Recast : This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 305

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 5 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

PROCEDURE FOR COMPARISON OF DATA FOR APPLICANTS FOR INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION AND THIRD-COUNTRY NATIONALS APPREHENDED CROSSING THE BORDER IRREGULARLY

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is admissible as inextricably linked to the admissible amendments deleting Article 14(1), Article 14(2), Article 14(4), Article 14(5) and Article 14(6)

Amendment 306

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 5 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

PROCEDURE FOR COMPARISON OF DATA FOR APPLICANTS FOR INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION AND THIRD-COUNTRY NATIONALS AND STATELESS PERSONS APPREHENDED CROSSING THE BORDER IRREGULARLY OR ILLEGALLY STAYING IN THE TERRITORY OF A MEMBER STATE

Or. en

Justification

Correction of the commission' proposal that doesn't insert in all the required places the wording 'and stateless persons', which is in line with the purpose of Eurodac as mentioned in article 1(a)

Amendment 307

Malin Björk, Barbara Spinelli, Marina Albiol Guzmán

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 5 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

PROCEDURE FOR COMPARISON OF DATA FOR APPLICANTS FOR INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION AND THIRD-COUNTRY NATIONALS APPREHENDED IRREGULARLY STAYING IN THE TERRITORY OF A MEMBER STATE

Or. en

Amendment 308

Malin Björk, Barbara Spinelli, Marina Albiol Guzmán

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Fingerprint and facial image data transmitted by any Member State, with the exception of those transmitted in accordance with Article 11(b) and (c) , shall be compared automatically with the fingerprint data transmitted by other Member States and already stored in the Central System in accordance with Article 10(1), 13(1) and 14(1) .

1. Fingerprint data transmitted by any Member State, with the exception of those transmitted in accordance with Article 11(b) and (c) , shall be compared automatically with the fingerprint data transmitted by other Member States and already stored in the Central System in accordance with Article 10(1), 13(1) and 14(1) .

Or. en

Amendment 309

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Fingerprint and, as a last resort, facial image data transmitted by any Member State, with the exception of those transmitted in accordance with Article 11(b) and (c) , shall be compared automatically with the fingerprint data transmitted by other Member States and already stored in the Central System in accordance with Article 10(1) and Article 13(1) .

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is admissible as inextricably linked to the admissible amendments deleting Article 14(1), Article 14(2), Article 14(4), Article 14(5) and Article 14(6). The insertion of “as a last resort” is necessary to ensure consistency with Article 16 of the recast proposal, based on EDPS comments.

Amendment 310

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. fr

Justification

Recast : This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 311

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Central System shall ensure, at the request of a Member State, that the comparison referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article covers the fingerprint and facial image data previously transmitted by that Member State, in addition to the fingerprint and facial image data from other Member States.

2. The Central System shall ensure, at the request of a Member State, that the comparison referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article covers the fingerprint data, facial image data or both previously transmitted by that Member State, in addition to the fingerprint data, facial image data or both from other Member States.

Or. en

Amendment 312

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The Central System shall automatically transmit the hit or the negative result of the comparison to the Member State of origin following the procedures set out in Article 26(4) . Where there is a hit, it shall transmit for all data sets corresponding to the hit the data referred to in Article 12, 13(2) and 14(2) along with, where appropriate, the mark referred to in Article 19(1) and (4) . Where a negative hit result is received, the data referred to in Article 12, 13(2) and 14(2) shall not be transmitted.

3. The Central System shall automatically transmit the hit or the negative result of the comparison to the Member State of origin following the procedures set out in Article 26(4) . Where there is a hit, it shall transmit for all data sets corresponding to the hit the data referred to in Article 12 and Article 13(2) along with, where appropriate, the mark referred to in Article 19(1) . Where a negative hit result is received, the data referred to in Article 12 and Article 13(2) shall not be transmitted.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is admissible as inextricably linked to the admissible amendments deleting Article 14(1), Article 14(2), Article 14(4), Article 14(5) and Article 14(6)

Amendment 313

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The Central System shall automatically transmit the hit or the negative result of the comparison to the Member State of origin following the procedures set out in Article 26(4). Where there is a hit, it shall transmit for all data sets corresponding to the hit the data referred to in Article 12, 13(2) and 14(2) along with, where appropriate, the mark referred to in Article 19(1) and (4). Where a negative result is received, the data referred to in Article 12, 13(2) and 14(2) shall not be transmitted.

Or. en

Amendment 314

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The Central System shall automatically transmit the hit or the negative result of the comparison to the Member State of origin following the procedures set out in Article 26(4) . Where there is a hit, it shall transmit for all data sets corresponding to the hit the data referred to in Articles 12, 12b, 13(2) and 14(2) along with, where appropriate, the mark referred to in Article 19(1) (3a) and (4) . Where a negative hit result is received, the data referred to in Articles 12, 12b, 13(2) and 14(2) shall not be transmitted.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 315

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Where evidence of a hit is received by a Member State from Eurodac that can assist that Member State to carry out its obligations under Article 1(1)(a), that evidence shall take precedence over any other hit received.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 316

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Where evidence of a hit is received by a Member State from Eurodac that can assist that Member State to carry out its obligations under Article 1(1)(ca) and Article 1(1)(a), that evidence shall take precedence over any other hit received.

Or. en

Amendment 317

Malin Björk, Barbara Spinelli, Marina Albiol Guzmán

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 16

deleted

Comparison of facial image data

(1) Where the condition of the fingertips does not allow for the taking of fingerprints of a quality ensuring appropriate comparison under Article 26 or where a person referred to in Article 10(1), 13(1) and 14(1) refuses to comply with the fingerprinting process, a Member State may carry out a comparison of facial image data as a last resort.

(2) Facial image data and data relating to the sex of the data-subject may be compared automatically with the facial image data and personal data relating to the sex of the data-subject transmitted by other Member States and already stored in the Central System in accordance with Article 10(1), 13(1) and 14(1) with the exception of those transmitted in accordance with Article 11(b) and (c).

(3) The Central System shall ensure, at the request of a Member State that the comparison referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article covers the facial image data previously transmitted by that Member State, in addition to the facial image data from other Member States.

(4) The Central System shall automatically transmit the hit or the negative result of the comparison to the Member State of origin following the procedures set out in Article 26(4). Where there is a hit, it shall transmit for all data sets corresponding to the hit the data referred to in Article 12, 13(2) and 14(2) along with, where appropriate, the mark referred to in Article 17(1) and (4). Where a negative hit result is received, the data referred to in Article 12, 13(2) and 14(2) shall not be transmitted.

(5) Where evidence of a hit is received by a Member State from Eurodac that can assist that Member State to carry out its obligations under Article 1(1)(a), that evidence shall take precedence over any other hit received.

Or. en

Amendment 318

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Comparison of facial image data

Comparison of facial image data of minors

Or. en

Amendment 319

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Comparison of facial image data

Comparison of facial image data only

Or. en

Amendment 320

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1) Where the condition of the fingertips does not allow for the taking of fingerprints of a quality ensuring appropriate comparison under Article 26, a Member State may carry out a comparison of facial image data of minors as a last resort.

Or. en

Amendment 321

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1) Where the condition of the fingertips does not allow for the taking of fingerprints of a quality ensuring appropriate comparison under Article 26 or where a person referred to in Article 10(1), 13(1) and 14(1) refuses to comply with the fingerprinting process, a Member State shall carry out a comparison of facial image data as a last resort.

Or. en

Amendment 322

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 323

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(3) Facial image data and data relating to the sex of the data-subject may be compared automatically with the facial image data and personal data relating to the sex of the data-subject transmitted by other Member States and already stored in the Central System in accordance with Article 10(1), 13(1) and 14(1) with the exception of those transmitted in accordance with Article 11(b) and (c).

(3) Facial image data and data relating to the sex of the data-subject may be compared automatically with the facial image data and personal data relating to the sex of the data-subject transmitted by other Member States and already stored in the Central System in accordance with Articles 10(1), 12a, 13(1) and 14(1) with the exception of those transmitted in accordance with Article 11(b) and (c).

Or. fr

Justification

Recast : This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 324

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4) The Central System shall automatically transmit the hit or the negative result of the comparison to the Member State of origin following the procedures set out in Article 26(4). Where there is a hit, it shall transmit for all data sets corresponding to the hit the data referred to in Article 12, 13(2) and 14(2) along with, where appropriate, the mark referred to in Article 19(1) and (4). Where a negative hit result is received, the data referred to in Article 12, 13(2) and 14(2) shall not be transmitted.

Or. en

Amendment 325

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4) The Central System shall automatically transmit the hit or the negative result of the comparison to the Member State of origin following the procedures set out in Article 26(5). Where there is a hit, it shall transmit for all data sets corresponding to the hit the data referred to in Article 12 and Article 13(2) along with, where appropriate, the mark referred to in Article 19(1). Where a negative hit result is received, the data referred to in Article 12, 13(2) shall not be transmitted.

Or. en

Amendment 326

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 327

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5) The Central System shall automatically transmit the hit or the negative result of the comparison to the Member State of origin following the procedures set out in Article 26(4). Where there is a hit, it shall transmit for all data sets corresponding to the hit the data referred to in Article 12, 13(2) and 14(2) along with, where appropriate, the mark referred to in Article 17(1) and (4). Where a negative hit result is received, the data referred to in Article 12, 13(2) and 14(2) shall not be transmitted.

(5) The Central System shall automatically transmit the hit or the negative result of the comparison to the Member State of origin following the procedures set out in Article 26(4). Where there is a hit, it shall transmit for all data sets corresponding to the hit the data referred to in Articles 12, 12b, 13(2) and 14(2) along with, where appropriate, the mark referred to in Article 17(1) and (4). Where a negative hit result is received, the data referred to in Articles 12, 12b, 13(2) and 14(2) shall not be transmitted.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 328

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5) Where evidence of a hit is received by a Member State from Eurodac that can assist that Member State to carry out its obligations under Article 1(1)(a) or (ca), that evidence shall take precedence over any other hit received.

Or. en

Amendment 329

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. For the purposes laid down in Article 10(1), each set of data relating to an applicant for international protection , as referred to in Article 12, shall be stored in the Central System for ten years from the date on which the fingerprints were taken.

1. For the purposes laid down in Article 10(1), each set of data relating to an applicant for international protection, as referred to in Article 12, shall be stored in the Central System for ten years from the date on which his or her fingerprints and facial image were taken.

Or. en

Justification

Correction of the commission's proposal that doesn't insert in all the required places both 'fingerprints' and 'facial image', which is in line with the obligation as mentioned in article 2.

Amendment 330

Sophia in 't Veld

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. For the purposes laid down in Article 10(1), each set of data relating to an applicant for international protection , as referred to in Article 12, shall be stored in the Central System for five years from the date on which the fingerprints were first taken.

Or. en

Justification

In accordance with rule 104 of the rules of procedure, this amendment is necessary because it is inextricably linked to other admissible amendments related to the purposes of Eurodac (Article 1), introducing references to compliance with the principles of necessity and proportionality under Article 52 (1) of the Charter and the relevant CJEU case law.

Amendment 331

Christine Revault D'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Sylvie Guillaume

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. For the purposes laid down in Article 10(1), each set of data relating to an applicant for international protection , as referred to in Article 12, shall be stored in the Central System for five years from the date on which the fingerprints were taken.

Or. en

Justification

The retention period of 10 years is not justified and excessive when considering its impact on the private life (cf article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the EU regarding the right for private life). I propose a retention period of 5 years - it corresponds to the retention period proposed today by the Commission for those entering the EU irregularly. There is no sense to have 5 years more for those who are lawfully on the territory

Amendment 332

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1a. For the purposes of Article 12a, each set of data concerning a person for whom a Member State intends to conduct a resettlement procedure shall be kept in the Central System for 10 years starting from the date on which the fingerprints were taken in the case of a positive decision on the resettlement of the person concerned.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast : This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard. It specifies the length of time that the data on persons on whom Member States intend to conduct resettlement procedures should be kept. It is proposed that the data be kept for 10 years in the case of a positive decision being adopted on resettlement. The length of time proposed is also justified by the fact that it is the same as the period established in the current regulation in respect of data on other persons granted international protection.

Amendment 333

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1b. In the event of non-completion of a resettlement procedure, Member States shall delete from Eurodac the data they have registered in accordance with Article 10(2) of Regulation XXX/XXX.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard. It is proposed that the data registered be deleted from Eurodac in the event of the resettlement procedure not being successfully completed.

Amendment 334

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. For the purposes laid down in Article 13(1), each set of data relating to a third-country national or stateless person as referred to in Article 13(2) shall be stored in the Central System for one year from the date of the first fingerprinting processed by a Member State, or, where an entry ban against that third-country national or stateless person has been issued, for the duration of the entry ban starting from the date of the first fingerprinting processed by a Member State, up to a maximum of five years.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is based on the comments by the European Data Protection Supervisor to ensure that the data retention period is proportionate to the purpose of the data collection. Since the data should be kept mainly for entry ban purposes, we propose to align the retention of data to the duration of the entry ban. Should there be no entry ban, the data should be retained for one year instead of five.

Amendment 335

Sophia in 't Veld

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. For the purposes laid down in Article 13(1), each set of data relating to a third-country national or stateless person as referred to in Article 13(2) shall be stored in the Central System for a period limited to the duration of a measure taken upon a specific individual with a maximum of five years from the date on which his or her fingerprints were first taken.

Or. en

Amendment 336

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 337

Fabio Massimo Castaldo, Laura Ferrara, Ignazio Corrao

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. it

Amendment 338

Monika Hohlmeier, Heinz K. Becker, Rachida Dati, Brice Hortefeux, Mariya Gabriel

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 339

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2a. For the purposes laid down in Article 10(1a) and Article 13(1a), each set of data relating to minors shall be stored in the Central System for five years from the date of the first fingerprinting processed by a Member State.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed to maintain the logic of the text as it should serve to protect child victims of trafficking and support the identification and protection of unaccompanied children who go missing, disappear or abscond, as the European Commission highlighted in its explanatory memorandum accompanying the proposed recast Eurodac Regulation. To respect the duty to give a primary consideration to the best interests of the child, fingerprints should not be compared anymore with those taken in the past if the likelihood of a wrong match increases. In case of young children, the reliability of matches of fingerprints after more than five years have passed is not yet proven. To avoid the negative consequences of a possible mismatch after a certain period has elapsed, fingerprints of children younger than 14 years should only be automatically compared for a maximum of five years. Following this period, dactyloscopic experts should only carry out manually such comparisons to avoid disadvantages for the child.

Amendment 340

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. For the purposes laid down in Article 14(1), each set of data relating to a third-country national or stateless person as referred to in Article 14(2) shall be stored in the Central System for five years from the date on which his or her fingerprints were taken.

deleted

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is admissible as inextricably linked to the admissible amendments deleting Article 14(1), Article 14(2), Article 14(4), Article 14(5) and Article 14(6).

Amendment 341

Sophia in 't Veld

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. For the purposes laid down in Article 14(1), each set of data relating to a third-country national or stateless person as referred to in Article 14(2) shall be stored in the Central System for a period limited to the duration of a measure taken upon a specific individual with a maximum of five years from the date on which his or her fingerprints were first taken.

Or. en

Amendment 342

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. For the purposes laid down in Article 14(1), each set of data relating to a third-country national or stateless person as referred to in Article 14(2) shall be stored in the Central System for ten years from the date on which his or her fingerprints and facial image were taken.

Or. en

Amendment 343

Fabio Massimo Castaldo, Laura Ferrara, Ignazio Corrao

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. For the purposes laid down in Article 14(1), each set of data relating to a third-country national or stateless person as referred to in Article 14(2) shall be stored in the Central System for eighteen months from the date on which his or her fingerprints were taken.

Or. it

Amendment 344

Monika Hohlmeier, Heinz K. Becker, Rachida Dati, Brice Hortefeux, Mariya Gabriel

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. For the purposes laid down in Article 14(1), each set of data relating to a third-country national or stateless person as referred to in Article 14(2) shall be stored in the Central System for ten years from the date on which his or her fingerprints were taken.

Or. en

Amendment 345

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Upon expiry of the data storage periods referred to in paragraphs 1 to 3 of this Article , the Central System shall automatically erase the data of the data-subjects from the Central System.

4. Upon expiry of the data storage periods referred to in paragraphs 1 to 2a of this Article , the Central System shall automatically erase the data of the data-subjects from the Central System.

Or. en

Amendment 346

Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Josef Weidenholzer, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Péter Niedermüller, Kati Piri, Maria Grapini, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Dietmar Köster

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Data relating to a person who has acquired citizenship of any Member State before expiry of the period referred to in Article 17(1) , (2) or (3) shall be erased from the Central System in accordance with Article 28(4) as soon as the Member State of origin becomes aware that the person concerned has acquired such citizenship.

1. Data relating to a person who has acquired citizenship of any Member State before expiry of the period referred to in Article 17(1) , (2) or (3) shall be erased from the Central System in accordance with Article 28(4). The Member State of origin shall be informed immediately if the person concerned has acquired such citizenship in order to erase the data.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is linked to Article 17(2)new and Article 17(3)new of the Commission proposal. Due to the extension of the data detention period for data subjects there should be a clear obligation that the data is erased as soon as the person acquires the citizenship of any Member State.

Amendment 347

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Data relating to a person who has acquired citizenship of any Member State before expiry of the period referred to in Article 17(1), (2) or (3) shall be erased as soon as possible from the Central System in accordance with Article 28(4) as soon as the person concerned has acquired such citizenship.

Or. en

Justification

Databases should always be updated as soon as possible in order to function well.

Amendment 348

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Data relating to a person who has acquired citizenship of any Member State before expiry of the period referred to in Article 17(1), (2) or (3) shall be erased from the Central System in accordance with Article 28(4) as soon as the Member State of origin becomes aware that the person concerned has acquired such citizenship.

1. Data relating to a person who has acquired citizenship of any Member State before expiry of the period referred to in Article 17(1) and (1a), (2) or (3) shall be erased from the Central System in accordance with Article 28(4) as soon as the Member State of origin becomes aware that the person concerned has acquired such citizenship.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 349

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Data relating to a person who has acquired citizenship of any Member State before expiry of the period referred to in Article 17(1) , (2) or (2a) shall be erased from the Central System in accordance with Article 28(4) as soon as the Member State of origin becomes aware that the person concerned has acquired such citizenship.

Or. en

Amendment 350

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1a. Data relating to a person who has reached the age of 18 before expiry of the period referred to in Article 17(2a) shall be erased from the Central System in accordance with Article 28(4) as soon as the Member State of origin becomes aware that the person concerned has reached the age of 18.

Or. en

Justification

Amendment 351

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Central System shall, as soon as possible and no later than after 72 hours, inform all Member States of origin of the erasure of data in accordance with paragraph 1 by another Member State of origin having produced a hit with data which they transmitted relating to persons referred to in Article 10(1), 13(1) or 14(1) .

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 352

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Central System shall, as soon as possible and no later than after 72 hours, inform all Member States of origin of the erasure of data in accordance with paragraphs 1 and 1a by another Member State of origin having produced a hit with data which they transmitted relating to persons referred to in Article 10(1), 13(1).

Or. en

Justification

Amendment 353

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a), the Member State of origin which granted international protection to an applicant for international protection whose data were previously recorded in the Central System pursuant to Article 12 shall mark the relevant data in conformity with the requirements for electronic communication with the Central System established by eu-LISA . That mark shall be stored in the Central System in accordance with Article 17(1) for the purpose of transmission under Article 15 . The Central System shall , as soon as possible and no later than 72 hours, inform all Member States of origin of the marking of data by another Member State of origin having produced a hit with data which they transmitted relating to persons referred to in Article 10(1), 13(1) or 14(1) . Those Member States of origin shall also mark the corresponding data sets.

1. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a), the Member State of origin which granted international protection to an applicant for international protection whose data were previously recorded in the Central System pursuant to Article 12 shall mark the relevant data in conformity with the requirements for electronic communication with the Central System established by eu-LISA . That mark shall be stored in the Central System in accordance with Article 17(1) for the purpose of transmission under Article 15 . The Central System shall , as soon as possible and no later than 72 hours, inform all Member States of origin of the marking of data by another Member State of origin having produced a hit with data which they transmitted relating to persons referred to in Article 10(1) or 13(1) . Those Member States of origin shall also mark the corresponding data sets.

Or. en

Amendment 354

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a), the Member State of origin which granted international protection to an applicant for international protection whose data were previously recorded in the Central System pursuant to Article 12 shall mark the relevant data in conformity with the requirements for electronic communication with the Central System established by eu-LISA . That mark shall be stored in the Central System in accordance with Article 17(1) for the purpose of transmission under Articles 15 and 16. The Central System shall, as soon as possible and no later than 72 hours, inform all Member States of origin of the marking of data by another Member State of origin having produced a hit with data which they transmitted relating to persons referred to in Article 10(1), 13(1) or 14(1). Those Member States of origin shall also mark the corresponding data sets.

Or. en

Amendment 355

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The data of beneficiaries of international protection stored in the Central System and marked pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article shall be made available for comparison for the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c) for a period of three years after the date on which the data subject was granted international protection.

The data of beneficiaries of international protection stored in the Central System and marked pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article shall be made available for comparison for the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c) until such data is automatically erased from the Central System in accordance with Article 17(4).

Or. en

Justification

Databases should always be updated as soon as possible in order to function well, therefore the deletion requirement in article 17(4) should be linked with this subparagraph.

Amendment 356

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where there is a hit, the Central System shall transmit the data referred to in Article 12 (b) to (s) for all the data sets corresponding to the hit. The Central System shall not transmit the mark referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article. Upon the expiry of the period of three years, the Central System shall automatically block such data from being transmitted in the event of a request for comparison for the purposes laid down in Article 1 (1)(c), whilst leaving those data available for comparison for the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a) until the point of their erasure. Blocked data shall not be transmitted, and the Central System shall return a negative result to the requesting Member State in the event of a hit.

deleted

Or. en

Justification

Databases should be available as long as it is not deleted in accordance with article 17(4).

Amendment 357

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The Member State of origin shall unmark or unblock data concerning a third-country national or stateless person whose data were previously marked or blocked in accordance with paragraphs 1 or 2 of this Article if his or her status is revoked or ended or the renewal of his or her status is refused under [Articles 14 or 19 of Directive 2011/95/EU].

3. The Member State of origin shall unmark data concerning a third-country national or stateless person whose data were previously marked in accordance with paragraphs 1 or 2 of this Article if his or her status is revoked or ended or the renewal of his or her status is refused under [Articles 14 or 19 of Directive 2011/95/EU].

Or. en

Justification

In line with previous amendment

Amendment 358

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3a. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a), the Member State of origin which issued a positive resettlement decision in respect of a third-country national or stateless person by virtue of Regulation XXX/XXX whose data were previously recorded in the Central System pursuant to Article 12 shall mark the relevant data in conformity with the requirements for electronic communication with the Central System established by eu-LISA. That mark shall be stored in the Central System in accordance with Article 17(1a) for the purpose of transmission under Articles 15 and 16. The Central System shall, as soon as possible and no later than 72-hours, inform all Member States of origin of the marking of data by another Member State of origin having produced a hit with data which they transmitted relating to persons referred to in Article 12a. Those Member States of origin shall also mark the corresponding data sets.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 359

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 3 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3b. In the event of the non-completion of a resettlement procedure initiated in respect of a third-country national or a stateless person under Regulation XXX/XXX, the Member State concerned shall delete from Eurodac the data registered in accordance with Article 10(2) of that Regulation.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 360

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 3 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3c. The data of beneficiaries of international protection resettled in a Member State and marked pursuant to paragraph 3a of this Article shall be made available for comparison for the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c) for a period of three years after the date on which the person concerned was resettled.

Where there is a hit, the Central System shall transmit the data referred to in Article 12 (b) to (l) for all the data sets corresponding to the hit. The Central System shall not transmit the mark referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article. Upon the expiry of the period of three years, the Central System shall automatically block such data from being transmitted in the event of a request for comparison for the purposes laid down in Article 1 (1)(c), whilst leaving those data available for comparison for the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a) until the point of their erasure. Blocked data shall not be transmitted, and the Central System shall return a negative result to the requesting Member State in the event of a hit.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 361

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 3 d (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3d. The Member State of origin shall unmark or unblock data concerning a third-country national or stateless person whose data were previously marked or blocked in accordance with paragraphs 3a or 4 of this Article if his or her status is revoked or ended or the renewal of his or her status is refused under [Articles 14 or 19 of Directive 2011/95/EU].

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 362

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(b), the Member State of origin which granted a residence document to an illegally staying third-country national or stateless person whose data were previously recorded in the Central System pursuant to Article 13(2) and 14(2) shall mark the relevant data in conformity with the requirements for electronic communication with the Central System established by eu-LISA. That mark shall be stored in the Central System in accordance with Article 17(2) and (3) for the purpose of transmission under Article 15 and 16. The Central System shall, as soon as possible and no later than 72-hours, inform all Member States of origin of the marking of data by another Member State of origin having produced a hit with data which they transmitted relating to persons referred to in Articles 13(1) or 14(1). Those Member States of origin shall also mark the corresponding data sets.

deleted

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is admissible as inextricably linked to the admissible amendment deleting Article 1(1)(b).

Amendment 363

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. The data of illegally staying third-country nationals or stateless persons stored in the Central System and marked pursuant to paragraph 4 of this Article shall be made available for comparison for the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c) until such data is automatically erased from the Central System in accordance with Article 17(4).

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 364

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Procedure for comparison of fingerprint data with Eurodac data

Procedure for comparison of fingerprint, facial image and alphanumeric data with Eurodac data

Or. en

Justification

Correction of the commission's proposal that doesn't insert in all the required places both 'fingerprints' and 'facial image', which is in line with the obligation as mentioned in article 2. With regards to the search on alphanumeric data: In line with the purpose extension in Article1(1)(c) of proposal (non-codified) which provides that Eurodac will serve not only the purpose of implementation of the Dublin Regulation, but also law enforcement purposes. In order to fulfil the obligation of Member States designated authorities and Europol the procedure for access to Eurodac should be quick and effective, but should still take into consideration that the main purpose of Eurodac is to support the Member States in applying the Dublin regulation.

Amendment 365

Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Josef Weidenholzer, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Péter Niedermüller, Kati Piri, Maria Grapini, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Caterina Chinnici

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c), the designated authorities referred to in Articles 6(1) and 8(2) may submit a reasoned electronic request as provided for in Article 21(1) together with the reference number used by them, to the verifying authority for the transmission for comparison of fingerprint and facial image data to the Central System via the National Access Point. Upon receipt of such a request, the verifying authority shall verify whether all the conditions for requesting a comparison referred to in Articles 21 or 22, as appropriate, are fulfilled.

1. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c), the designated authorities referred to in Articles 6(1) and 8(2) may submit a reasoned electronic request as provided for in Article 21(1) together with the reference number used by them, to the verifying authority for the transmission for comparison of fingerprint and facial image data to the Central System, the designated authorities referred to in Article 6(1) via the National Access Point. Upon receipt of such a request, the verifying authority shall verify whether all the conditions for requesting a comparison referred to in Articles 21 or 22, as appropriate, are fulfilled.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is linked to article 1(1) c). Both due to technical and data protection reasons Europol is at the moment not capable to request a comparison via the national contact point, even though the legislator had allowed Europol to do so during the last recast-procedure in 2013. Therefore, Europol should be allowed to request a comparison without detours.

Amendment 366

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c), the designated authorities referred to in Articles 6(1) and 8(2) may submit a reasoned electronic request as provided for in Article 21(1) together with the reference number used by them, to the verifying authority for the transmission for comparison of fingerprint data, facial image data or both to the Central System via the National Access Point. Upon receipt of such a request, the verifying authority shall verify whether all the conditions for requesting a comparison referred to in Articles 21 or 22, as appropriate, are fulfilled.

Or. en

Amendment 367

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c), the designated authorities referred to in Articles 6(1) may submit a reasoned electronic request as provided for in Article 21(1) together with the reference number used by them, to the verifying authority for the transmission for comparison of fingerprint, facial image and alphanumeric data to the Central System via the National Access Point. Upon receipt of such a request, the verifying authority shall verify whether all the conditions for requesting a comparison referred to in Articles 21 or 22, as appropriate, are fulfilled.

Or. en

Justification

Same justification as the justification of the amendment on the title of Article 20.

Amendment 368

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where all the conditions for requesting a comparison referred to in Articles 21 or 22 are fulfilled, the verifying authority shall transmit the request for comparison to the National Access Point which will process it to the Central System in accordance with Articles 15 and 16 for the purpose of comparison with the fingerprint and facial image data transmitted to the Central System pursuant to Articles 10(1), 13 (1) and 14(1) .

2. Where all the conditions for requesting a comparison referred to in Articles 21 or 22 are fulfilled, the verifying authority shall transmit the request for comparison to the National Access Point which will process it to the Central System in accordance with Articles 15 and 16 for the purpose of comparison with the fingerprint data, facial image data or both transmitted to the Central System pursuant to Articles 10(1), 13 (1) .

Or. en

Amendment 369

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where all the conditions for requesting a comparison referred to in Articles 21 or 22 are fulfilled, the verifying authority shall transmit the request for comparison to the National Access Point which will process it to the Central System in accordance with Articles 15 and 16 for the purpose of comparison with the fingerprint, facial image and alphanumeric data transmitted to the Central System pursuant to Articles 10(1), 13 (1) and 14(1) .

Or. en

Justification

Same justification as the justification of the amendment on the title of Article 20.

Amendment 370

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 371

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. In exceptional cases of urgency where there is a need to prevent an imminent danger associated with a terrorist offence or other serious criminal offence, the verifying authority may transmit the fingerprint data to the National Access Point for comparison immediately upon receipt of a request by a designated authority and only verify ex-post whether all the conditions for requesting a comparison referred to in Article 21 or Article 22 are fulfilled, including whether an exceptional case of urgency actually existed. The ex-post verification shall take place without undue delay after the processing of the request.

4. In exceptional cases of urgency where there is a need to prevent an imminent danger associated with a terrorist offence or other serious criminal offence, the verifying authority may transmit the fingerprint, facial image and alphanumeric data to the National Access Point for comparison immediately upon receipt of a request by a designated authority and only verify ex-post whether all the conditions for requesting a comparison referred to in Article 21 or Article 22 are fulfilled, including whether an exceptional case of urgency actually existed. The ex-post verification shall take place without undue delay after the processing of the request.

Or. en

Justification

Same justification as the justification of the amendment on the title of Article 20.

Amendment 372

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c), designated authorities may submit a reasoned electronic request for the comparison of fingerprint data with the data stored in the Central System within the scope of their powers only if comparisons with the following databases did not lead to the establishment of the identity of the data subject:

1. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c), designated authorities may submit a reasoned electronic request for the comparison of fingerprint, facial image and alphanumeric data with the data stored in the Central System within the scope of their powers only if prior check has been conducted in:

Or. en

Justification

In line with the purpose extension in Article1(1)(c) of proposal(non-codified) which provides that Eurodac will serve not only the purpose of implementation of the Dublin Regulation, but also law enforcement purposes. In order to fulfil the obligation of Member States designated authorities and Europol the procedure for access to Eurodac should be quick and effective, but should still take into consideration that the main purpose of Eurodac is to support the Member States in applying the Dublin regulation.

Amendment 373

Sophia in 't Veld

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 1 – indent 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

- the automated fingerprinting identification systems of all other Member States under Decision 2008/615/JHA where comparisons are technically available, unless there are reasonable grounds to believe that a comparison with such systems would not lead to the establishment of the identity of the data subject. Such reasonable grounds shall be included in the reasoned electronic request for comparison with Eurodac data sent by the designated authority to the verifying authority; and

- the automated fingerprinting identification systems of all other Member States under Decision 2008/615/JHA ; and

Or. en

Justification

Amendment 374

Sophia in 't Veld

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Requests for comparison with Eurodac data shall be limited to searching with fingerprint or facial image data.

2. Requests for comparison with Eurodac data shall be limited to what is strictly necessary and proportionate, and in any case to searching with fingerprint or facial image data.

Or. en

Justification

Amendment 375

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Requests for comparison with Eurodac data shall be limited to searching with fingerprint or facial image data.

2. Requests for comparison with Eurodac data shall be limited to searching with fingerprint, facial image or alphanumeric data.

Or. en

Justification

Same justification as the justification of the amendment on the title of Article 20.

Amendment 376

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Requests for comparison with Eurodac data shall be limited to searching with fingerprint or facial image data.

2. Requests for comparison with Eurodac data shall be limited to searching with fingerprint data, facial image data or both.

Or. en

Amendment 377

Malin Björk, Barbara Spinelli, Marina Albiol Guzmán

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 22

deleted

Conditions for access to Eurodac by Europol

1. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c), Europol's designated authority may submit a reasoned electronic request for the comparison of fingerprint data with the data stored in the Central System within the limits of Europol's mandate and where necessary for the performance of Europol's tasks only if comparisons with fingerprint data stored in any information processing systems that are technically and legally accessible by Europol did not lead to the establishment of the identity of the data subject and where the following cumulative conditions are met:

(a) the comparison is necessary to support and strengthen action by Member States in preventing, detecting or investigating terrorist offences or other serious criminal offences falling under Europol's mandate, which means that there is an overriding public security concern which makes the searching of the database proportionate;

(b) the comparison is necessary in a specific case (i.e. systematic comparisons shall not be carried out); and

(c) there are reasonable grounds to consider that the comparison will substantially contribute to the prevention, detection or investigation of any of the criminal offences in question. Such reasonable grounds exist in particular where there is a substantiated suspicion that the suspect, perpetrator or victim of a terrorist offence or other serious criminal offence falls in a category covered by this Regulation.

2. Requests for comparison with Eurodac data shall be limited to comparisons of fingerprint and facial image data.

3. Processing of information obtained by Europol from comparison with Eurodac data shall be subject to the authorisation of the Member State of origin. Such authorisation shall be obtained via the Europol national unit of that Member State.

(This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)

Or. en

Justification

In its original form, the Eurodac Regulation was conceived to assist in the detection of multiple asylum applications. As such, access to data was restricted to immigration and asylum authorities. In 2013, the Eurodac Regulation was amended to introduce the possibility for Member States' law enforcement authorities and Europol to access Eurodac for the purposes of prevention, detection and investigation of terrorist offences and other serious criminal offences. The proposal to add a secondary objective not envisaged in the original architecture of the system raised considerable concerns. In its opinion, the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) argued that the necessity and proportionality of law enforcement access were not sufficiently demonstrated and applicable data protection law aspects had not been sufficiently considered. In particular, it argued that the additional purpose of Eurodac presented a ‘function creep’ and was hard to reconcile with the principle of purpose limitation, and that the access to a database of vulnerable persons (international protection applicants) was potentially discriminatory. The rapporteur has opened up this part of the regulation in order to give Europol direct access to the Eurodac database. However, the concerns raised in 2013 against the enlargement of the scope remains, and there has yet not been an assessment of necessity or proportionality. As long as necessity and proportionality have not been proven for each of these elements, the Regulation risks violating the Charter and could be challenged before the CJEU. As recommended by the EDPS, such an expansion should not be done before a careful assessment of the suitability of Eurodac to meet these objectives.

Amendment 378

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c), Europol's designated authority may submit a request to access the data stored in the Central System within the limits of Europol's mandate and where necessary for the performance of Europol's tasks only if a prior check has been conducted in any information processing systems that are technically and legally accessible by Europol and where the following cumulative conditions are met:

Or. en

Justification

Amendment 379

Sophia in 't Veld

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Requests for comparison with Eurodac data shall be limited to comparisons of fingerprint and facial image data.

2. Requests for comparison with Eurodac data shall be limited to what is strictly necessary and proportionate and in any case to comparisons of fingerprint and facial image data.

Or. en

Justification

Amendment 380

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Requests for comparison with Eurodac data shall be limited to comparisons of fingerprint and facial image data.

2. Requests for comparison with Eurodac data shall be limited to comparisons of fingerprint and facial image and alphanumeric data

Or. en

Justification

Same justification as the justification of the amendment on the title of Article 20.

Amendment 381

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Requests for comparison with Eurodac data shall be limited to comparisons of fingerprint and facial image data.

2. Requests for comparison with Eurodac data shall be limited to comparisons of fingerprint data, facial image data or both.

Or. en

Amendment 382

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c), fingerprints shall be digitally processed by the Member States and transmitted in the data format as set out in the agreed Interface Control Document , in order to ensure that the comparison can be carried out by means of the computerised fingerprint recognition system.

2. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c), fingerprints and the facial image shall be digitally processed by the Member States and transmitted in the data format as set out in the agreed Interface Control Document , in order to ensure that the comparison can be carried out by means of the computerised fingerprint and facial recognition system.

Or. en

Justification

Correction of the commission's proposal that doesn't insert in all the required places both 'fingerprints' and 'facial image', which is in line with the obligation as mentioned in article 2.

Amendment 383

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) fingerprints and facial images are taken lawfully;

(a) fingerprints, facial images or both are taken lawfully;

Or. en

Amendment 384

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) fingerprint data and the other data referred to in Article 12, Article 13(2) and Article 14(2) are lawfully transmitted to the Central System;

(b) fingerprint data and the other data referred to in Article 12, Article 12a, Article 13(2) and Article 14(2) are lawfully transmitted to the Central System;

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 385

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point e

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(e) the results of fingerprint and facial image data comparisons transmitted by the Central System are lawfully processed.

(e) the results of fingerprint data comparisons, the facial image data comparisons or both transmitted by the Central System are lawfully processed.

Or. en

Amendment 386

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Fingerprints shall be digitally processed and transmitted in the data format as set out in the agreed Interface Control Document . As far as necessary for the efficient operation of the Central System, eu-LISA shall establish the technical requirements for transmission of the data format by Member States to the Central System and vice versa. eu-LISA shall ensure that the fingerprint data and facial images transmitted by the Member States can be compared by the computerised fingerprint and facial recognition system.

1. Fingerprints and the facial image shall be digitally processed and transmitted in the data format as set out in the agreed Interface Control Document. As far as necessary for the efficient operation of the Central System, eu-LISA shall establish the technical requirements for transmission of the data format by Member States to the Central System and vice versa. eu-LISA shall ensure that the fingerprint data and facial images transmitted by the Member States can be compared by the computerised fingerprint and facial recognition system.

Or. en

Justification

Correction of the commission's proposal that doesn't insert in all the required places both 'fingerprints' and 'facial image', which is in line with the obligation as mentioned in article 2.

Amendment 387

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Member States shall transmit the data referred to in Article 12, Article 13(2) and Article 14(2) electronically. The data referred to in Article 12, Article 13(2) and Article 14(2) shall be automatically recorded in the Central System. As far as necessary for the efficient operation of the Central System, eu-LISA shall establish the technical requirements to ensure that data can be properly electronically transmitted from the Member States to the Central System and vice versa.

2. Member States shall transmit the data referred to in Article 12 and Article 13(2) electronically. The data referred to in Article 12 and Article 13(2) shall be automatically recorded in the Central System. As far as necessary for the efficient operation of the Central System, eu-LISA shall establish the technical requirements to ensure that data can be properly electronically transmitted from the Member States to the Central System and vice versa.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is admissible as inextricably linked to the admissible amendments deleting Article 14(1), Article 14(2), Article 14(4), Article 14(5) and Article 14(6)

Amendment 388

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Member States shall transmit the data referred to in Article 12, Article 12a, Article 13(2) and Article 14(2) electronically. The data referred to in Article 12, Article 12a, Article 13(2) and Article 14(2) shall be automatically recorded in the Central System. As far as necessary for the efficient operation of the Central System, eu-LISA shall establish the technical requirements to ensure that data can be properly electronically transmitted from the Member States to the Central System and vice versa.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 389

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The reference number referred to in Articles 12(i), 13(2)(i), 14 (2)(i) and 20(1) shall make it possible to relate data unambiguously to one particular person and to the Member State which is transmitting the data. In addition, it shall make it possible to tell whether such data relate to a person referred to in Article 10(1), 13(1) or 14(1).

3. The reference number referred to in Articles 12(i), 12a, 13(2)(i), 14 (2)(i) and 20(1) shall make it possible to relate data unambiguously to one particular person and to the Member State which is transmitting the data. In addition, it shall make it possible to tell whether such data relate to a person referred to in Articles 10(1), 12a, 13(1) or 14(1).

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 390

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The reference number referred to in Articles 12(i), 13(2)(i), and 20(1) shall make it possible to relate data unambiguously to one particular person and to the Member State which is transmitting the data. In addition, it shall make it possible to tell whether such data relate to a person referred to in Article 10(1) and Article 13(1).

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is admissible as inextricably linked to the admissible amendments deleting Article 14(1), Article 14(2), Article 14(4), Article 14(5) and Article 14(6)

Amendment 391

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The reference number shall begin with the identification letter or letters by which the Member State transmitting the data is identified. The identification letter or letters shall be followed by the identification of the category of person or request. "1” refers to data relating to persons referred to in Article 10(1), "2" to persons referred to in Article 13(1), "3” to persons referred to in Article 14(1), "4" to requests referred to in Article 21, "5" to requests referred to in Article 22 and "9" to requests referred to in Article 30.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 392

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The reference number shall begin with the identification letter or letters by which the Member State transmitting the data is identified. The identification letter or letters shall be followed by the identification of the category of person or request. "1" refers to data relating to persons referred to in Article 10(1), "2" to persons referred to in Article 13(1), "3" to persons referred to in Article 14(1), "4" to requests referred to in Article 21, "5" to requests referred to in Article 22 and "9" to requests referred to in Article 30.

4. The reference number shall begin with the identification letter or letters by which the Member State transmitting the data is identified. The identification letter or letters shall be followed by the identification of the category of person or request. "1" refers to data relating to persons referred to in Article 10(1), "2" to persons referred to in Article 13(1), "4" to requests referred to in Article 21, "5" to requests referred to in Article 22 and "9" to requests referred to in Article 30.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is admissible as inextricably linked to the admissible amendments deleting Article 14(1), Article 14(2), Article 14(4), Article 14(5) and Article 14(6)

Amendment 393

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Member States shall ensure the transmission of fingerprint data of an appropriate quality for the purpose of comparison by means of the computerised fingerprint and facial recognition system. As far as necessary to ensure that the results of the comparison by the Central System reach a very high level of accuracy, eu-LISA shall define the appropriate quality of transmitted fingerprint data. The Central System shall, as soon as possible, check the quality of the fingerprint and facial image data transmitted. If fingerprint or facial image data do not lend themselves to comparison using the computerised fingerprint and facial recognition system, the Central System shall inform the Member State concerned. That Member State shall then transmit fingerprint or facial image data of the appropriate quality using the same reference number as the previous set of fingerprint or facial image data.

1. Member States shall ensure the transmission of fingerprint data of an appropriate quality for the purpose of comparison by means of the computerised fingerprint and facial recognition system. As far as necessary to ensure that the results of the comparison by the Central System reach a very high level of accuracy, eu-LISA shall define the appropriate quality of transmitted fingerprint data. The Central System shall, as soon as possible, check the quality of the fingerprint data or facial image data transmitted. If fingerprint or facial image data do not lend themselves to comparison using the computerised fingerprint and facial recognition system, the Central System shall inform the Member State concerned. That Member State shall then transmit fingerprint or facial image data of the appropriate quality using the same reference number as the previous set of fingerprint or facial image data.

Or. en

Amendment 394

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Member States shall ensure the transmission of fingerprint and facial image data of an appropriate quality for the purpose of comparison by means of the computerised fingerprint and facial recognition system. As far as necessary to ensure that the results of the comparison by the Central System reach a very high level of accuracy, eu-LISA shall define the appropriate quality of transmitted fingerprint and facial image data. The Central System shall, as soon as possible, check the quality of the fingerprint and facial image data transmitted. If fingerprint or facial image data do not lend themselves to comparison using the computerised fingerprint and facial recognition system, the Central System shall inform the Member State concerned. That Member State shall then transmit fingerprint or facial image data of the appropriate quality using the same reference number as the previous set of fingerprint or facial image data.

Or. en

Justification

Correction of the commission's proposal that doesn't insert in all the required places both 'fingerprints' and 'facial image', which is in line with the obligation as mentioned in article 2.

Amendment 395

Sophia in 't Veld

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The result of the comparison of fingerprint data carried out pursuant to Article 15 shall be immediately checked in the receiving Member State by a fingerprint expert as defined in accordance with its national rules, specifically trained in the types of fingerprint comparisons provided for in this Regulation. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a) and (b) of this Regulation, final identification shall be made by the Member State of origin in cooperation with the other Member States concerned.

4. The result of the comparison of fingerprints and facial image carried out pursuant to Article 15 shall be immediately checked in the receiving Member State by a fingerprint and facial identification expert as defined in accordance with its national rules, specifically trained in the types of fingerprint and facial image comparisons provided for in this Regulation. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a) and (b) of this Regulation, final identification shall be made by the Member State of origin in cooperation with the other Member States concerned.

Or. en

Justification

Amendment 396

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The result of the comparison of fingerprint data carried out pursuant to Article 15 shall be immediately checked in the receiving Member State by a fingerprint expert as defined in accordance with its national rules, specifically trained in the types of fingerprint comparisons provided for in this Regulation. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a) and Article 1(1)(ca) of this Regulation, final identification shall be made by the Member State of origin in cooperation with the other Member States concerned.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is admissible as inextricably linked to the admissible amendment deleting Article 1(1)(b). This amendment furthermore is needed to maintain the logic of the text as it should serve to protect child victims of trafficking and support the identification and protection of unaccompanied children who go missing, disappear or abscond, as the European Commission highlighted in its explanatory memorandum accompanying the proposed recast Eurodac Regulation. In order to comply with Article 7, Article 8 and Article 24 of the Charter, the processing of children’s biometric data as young as six years of age can only be justified if it expressly pursues a child protection objective.

Amendment 397

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The result of the comparison of fingerprint data carried out pursuant to Article 15 shall be immediately checked in the receiving Member State by a fingerprint expert as defined in accordance with its national rules, specifically trained in the types of fingerprint comparisons provided for in this Regulation. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a) (aa) and (b) of this Regulation, final identification shall be made by the Member State of origin in cooperation with the other Member States concerned.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 398

Malin Björk, Barbara Spinelli, Marina Albiol Guzmán

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The result of the comparison of facial image data carried out pursuant to Article 16 shall be immediately checked and verified in the receiving Member State. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a) and (b) of this Regulation, final identification shall be made by the Member State of origin in cooperation with the other Member States concerned.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 399

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The result of the comparison of facial image data carried out pursuant to Article 16 shall be immediately checked and verified in the receiving Member State. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a) and Article 1(1)(ca) of this Regulation, final identification shall be made by the Member State of origin in cooperation with the other Member States concerned.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is admissible as inextricably linked to the admissible amendment deleting Article 1(1)(b).

Amendment 400

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The result of the comparison of facial image data carried out pursuant to Article 16 shall be immediately checked and verified in the receiving Member State. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a), (aa) and (b) of this Regulation, final identification shall be made by the Member State of origin in cooperation with the other Member States concerned.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 401

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The authorities of Member States which, pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article, have access to data recorded in the Central System shall be those designated by each Member State for the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a) and (b). That designation shall specify the exact unit responsible for carrying out tasks related to the application of this Regulation. Each Member State shall without delay communicate to the Commission and eu-LISA a list of those units and any amendments thereto. eu-LISA shall publish the consolidated list in the Official Journal of the European Union. Where there are amendments thereto, eu-LISA shall publish once a year an updated consolidated list online.

2. The authorities of Member States which, pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article, have access to data recorded in the Central System shall be those designated by each Member State for the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a), (aa) and (b). That designation shall specify the exact unit responsible for carrying out tasks related to the application of this Regulation. Each Member State shall without delay communicate to the Commission and eu-LISA a list of those units and any amendments thereto. eu-LISA shall publish the consolidated list in the Official Journal of the European Union. Where there are amendments thereto, eu-LISA shall publish once a year an updated consolidated list online.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 402

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Only the Member State of origin shall have the right to amend the data which it has transmitted to the Central System by correcting or supplementing such data, or to erase them, without prejudice to erasure carried out in pursuance of Article 18 .

Or. en

Amendment 403

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a) and (b), each Member State shall take the necessary measures in order to achieve the objectives set out in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article in relation to its national system. In addition, each Member State shall keep records of the staff duly authorised to enter or retrieve the data.

3. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a), (aa) and (b), each Member State shall take the necessary measures in order to achieve the objectives set out in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article in relation to its national system. In addition, each Member State shall keep records of the staff duly authorised to enter or retrieve the data.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 404

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. A person covered by Article 10(1), Article 13(1) or Article 14(1) shall be informed by the Member State of origin in writing, and where necessary, orally, in a language that he or she understands or is reasonably supposed to understand in a concise, transparent, intelligible and easily accessible form, using clear and plain language , of the following:

1. A person covered by Articles 10(1), 12a, Article 13(1) or Article 14(1) shall be informed by the Member State of origin in writing, and where necessary, orally, in a language that he or she understands or is reasonably supposed to understand in a concise, transparent, intelligible and easily accessible form, using clear and plain language , of the following:

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 405

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. A person covered by Article 10(1) or Article 13(1) shall be informed by the Member State of origin in writing, and where necessary, orally, in a language that he or she understands or is reasonably supposed to understand in a concise, transparent, intelligible and easily accessible form, using clear and plain language , of the following:

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is admissible as inextricably linked to the admissible amendments deleting Article 14(1), Article 14(2), Article 14(4), Article 14(5) and Article 14(6)

Amendment 406

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) the purpose for which his or her data will be processed in Eurodac, including a description of the aims of Regulation (EU) No […/…] , in accordance with Article 6 thereof and an explanation in intelligible form of the fact that Eurodac may be accessed by the Member States and Europol for law enforcement purposes;

(b) the purpose for which his or her data will be processed in Eurodac, including a description of the aims of Regulation (EU) No […/…] , in accordance with Article 6 thereof and, where applicable, of the aims of Regulation XXX/XXX and an explanation in intelligible form of the fact that Eurodac may be accessed by the Member States and Europol for law enforcement purposes;

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 407

Sophia in 't Veld

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 408

Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Josef Weidenholzer, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Péter Niedermüller, Maria Grapini, Juan Fernando López Aguilar

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 409

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) in relation to a person covered by Article 10(1) or 13(1) or 14(1) , the obligation to have his or her fingerprints taken;

(d) in relation to a person covered by Articles 10(1), 12a, 13(1) or 14(1) , the obligation to have his or her fingerprints taken;

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 410

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) in relation to a person covered by Article 10(1) or 13(1) or 14(1) , the obligation to have his or her fingerprints taken;

(d) in relation to a person covered by Article 10(1) or 13(1) or 14(1) , the obligation to have his or her fingerprints and facial image taken;

Or. en

Justification

Correction of the commission's proposal that doesn't insert in all the required places both 'fingerprints' and 'facial image', which is in line with the obligation as mentioned in article 2.

Amendment 411

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) in relation to a person covered by Article 10(1) or 13(1) or 14(1) , the obligation to have his or her fingerprints taken;

(d) in relation to a person covered by Article 10(1) or 13(1) , the obligation to have his or her fingerprints taken;

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is admissible as inextricably linked to the admissible amendments deleting Article 14(1), Article 14(2), Article 14(4), Article 14(5) and Article 14(6)

Amendment 412

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point f

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(f) the existence of the right to request from the controller access to data relating to him or her, and the right to request that inaccurate data relating to him or her be rectified and the completion of incomplete personal data or that unlawfully processed personal data concerning him or her be erased or restricted, as well as the right to receive information on the procedures for exercising those rights including the contact details of the controller and the supervisory authorities referred to in Article 32(1);

(f) the existence of the right to object to the processing of personal data, to request from the controller access to data relating to him or her, and the right to request that inaccurate data relating to him or her be rectified and the completion of incomplete personal data or that unlawfully processed personal data concerning him or her be erased or restricted, as well as the right to receive information on the procedures for exercising those rights including the contact details of the controller and the supervisory authorities referred to in Article 32(1);

Or. en

Justification

This amendment aligns the rights with those provided in Article 15 paragraph 1 of the General Data Protection Regulation.

Amendment 413

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point g

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(g) the right to lodge a complaint to the supervisory authority.

(g) the right to lodge a complaint to the national supervisory authority.

Or. en

Justification

In accordance with article 32.

Amendment 414

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

In relation to a person covered by Article 10(1) or 13(1) and 14(1) , the information referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be provided at the time when his or her fingerprints are taken.

In relation to a person covered by Articles 10(1), 12a, 13(1) and 14(1) , the information referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be provided at the time when his or her fingerprints are taken.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 415

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

In relation to a person covered by Article 10(1) or 13(1) and 14(1) , the information referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be provided at the time when his or her fingerprints are taken.

In relation to a person covered by Article 10(1) or 13(1) , the information referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be provided at the time when his or her fingerprints are taken.

Or. en

Amendment 416

Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Josef Weidenholzer, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Péter Niedermüller, Kati Piri, Maria Grapini, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Caterina Chinnici

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where a person covered by Article 10(1), Article 13(1) and Article 14(1) is a minor, Member States shall provide the information in an age-appropriate manner.

Where a person covered by Article 10(1), Article 13(1) and Article 14(1) is a minor, Member States shall provide the information in an age-appropriate manner and in a child-friendly environment.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is linked to the changes in Article 10, 13 and 14 of the Commission Proposal. In these articles the Commission is lowering the minimum age for taking fingerprints from 14 to 6. Therefore it is important to strengthen the safeguards for minors.

Amendment 417

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where a person covered by Article 10(1), Article 13(1) and Article 14(1) is a minor, Member States shall provide the information in an age-appropriate manner.

Where a person covered by Article 10(1), 12a, Article 13(1) and Article 14(1) is a minor, Member States shall provide the information in an age-appropriate manner.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 418

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where a person covered by Article 10(1), Article 13(1) and Article 14(1) is a minor, Member States shall provide the information in an age-appropriate manner.

Where a person covered by Article 10(1) and Article 13(1) is a minor, Member States shall provide the information in an age-appropriate manner.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is needed to maintain the logic of the text as it should serve to protect child victims of trafficking and support the identification and protection of unaccompanied children who go missing, disappear or abscond, as the European Commission highlighted in its explanatory memorandum accompanying the proposed recast Eurodac Regulation. In order to comply with Article 7, Article 8 and Article 24 of the Charter, the processing of children’s biometric data as young as six years of age can only be justified if it expressly pursues a child protection objective. Furthermore, this amendment is admissible as inextricably linked to the admissible amendments deleting Article 14(1), Article 14(2), Article 14(4), Article 14(5) and Article 14(6).

Amendment 419

Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Josef Weidenholzer, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Péter Niedermüller, Kati Piri, Maria Grapini, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Caterina Chinnici

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The leaflet shall be established in such a manner as to enable Member States to complete it with additional Member State-specific information. This Member State-specific information shall include at least the rights of the data subject, the possibility of information by the national supervisory authorities, as well as the contact details of the office of the controller and of the data protection officer, and the national supervisory authorities.

The leaflet shall be established in such a manner as to enable Member States to complete it with additional Member State-specific information. This Member State-specific information shall include at least the possible administrative sanctions under national law, which a person could face for non-compliance with the fingerprinting process and capturing a facial image, the rights of the data subject, the possibility of information and assistance by the national supervisory authorities, as well as the contact details of the office of the controller and of the data protection officer, and the national supervisory authorities.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is linked to Article 2 new. The Commission proposes there the possibility for Member States to introduce administrative sanctions under national law for non-compliance with the fingerprinting process and capturing a facial image. These sanctions should be named in the leaflet. The word "assistance" was replaced by "information" in the Commission proposal and is reintroduced with this amendment.

Amendment 420

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The leaflet shall be established in such a manner as to enable Member States to complete it with additional Member State-specific information. This Member State-specific information shall include at least the rights of the data subject, the possibility of assistance by the national supervisory authorities, as well as the contact details of the office of the controller and of the data protection officer, and the national supervisory authorities.

Or. en

Amendment 421

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a) and (b) of this Regulation, the data subject's rights of access, rectification and erasure shall be exercised in accordance ,with Chapter III of Regulation (EU) No. […/2016] and applied as set out in this Article .

1. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a), (aa) and (b) of this Regulation, the data subject's rights of access, rectification and erasure shall be exercised in accordance ,with Chapter III of Regulation (EU) No. […/2016] and applied as set out in this Article.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 422

Malin Björk, Barbara Spinelli, Marina Albiol Guzmán

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The right of access of the data subject in each Member State shall include the right to obtain communication of the data relating to him or her recorded in the Central System and of the Member State which transmitted them to the Central System. Such access to data may be granted only by a Member State. For the purposes laid down in Article 1(1), in each Member State, any person may request that data which are factually inaccurate be corrected or that data recorded unlawfully be erased. The correction and erasure shall be carried out without excessive delay by the Member State which transmitted the data, in accordance with its laws, regulations and procedures.

Or. en

Amendment 423

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. each Member State shall provide that The supervisory authority or authorities of each Member State designated pursuant to Article 41 of Directive referred to in Article [46(1)] of Regulation (EU) […/2016] shall monitor the lawfulness of the processing of personal data by the Member State in question for the purposes laid out in Article 1(1)(a) and (b) , including their transmission to the Central System.

1. each Member State shall provide that The supervisory authority or authorities of each Member State designated pursuant to Article 41 of Directive referred to in Article [46(1)] of Regulation (EU) […/2016] shall monitor the lawfulness of the processing of personal data by the Member State in question for the purposes laid out in Article 1(1)(a), (aa) and (b), including their transmission to the Central System.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 424

Sophia in 't Veld

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. For the purpose laid down in paragraph 3, the national supervisory authorities and the European Data Protection Supervisor shall meet at least twice a year. The costs and servicing of these meetings shall be for the account of the European Data Protection Supervisor. Rules of procedure shall be adopted at the first meeting. Further working methods shall be developed jointly as necessary. A joint report of activities shall be sent to the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission and eu-LISA every two years.

4. For the purpose laid down in paragraph 3, the national supervisory authorities and the European Data Protection Supervisor shall meet at least twice a year. The costs and servicing of these meetings shall be for the account of the European Data Protection Supervisor. Rules of procedure shall be adopted at the first meeting. Further working methods shall be developed jointly as necessary. A joint report of activities, assessing the application of the data protection provisions of this Regulation, as well as the necessity and proportionality of access to Eurodac for law enforcement purposes, shall be sent to the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission and eu-LISA every years.

Or. en

Justification

Amendment 425

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 36 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Member States shall inform eu-LISA of security incidents detected on their systems without prejudice to the notification and communication of a personal data breach pursuant to [Articles 31 and 32] of Regulation (EU) No […/2016] respectively [Articles 28 and 29] . eu-LISA shall inform the Member States, Europol and the European Data Protection Supervisor in case of security incidents. The Member States concerned, eu-LISA and Europol shall collaborate during a security incident.

3. Member States shall inform eu-LISA of security incidents detected on their systems without prejudice to the notification and communication of a personal data breach pursuant to [Articles 33 and 34] of Regulation (EU) 679/2016. In particular, data subjects shall be notified by eu-LISA without undue delay when a security incident is likely to result in a high risk to their rights and freedoms. eu-LISA shall inform the Member States, Europol and the European Data Protection Supervisor in case of security incidents. The Member States concerned, eu-LISA and Europol shall collaborate during a security incident.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment ensures that individuals are notified if there is a data breach that could pose a risk to their rights and freedoms. This is very important if a country of origin finds out, through a hack into Eurodac, specific details about its citizens, especially human rights defenders having fled their country.

Amendment 426

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Personal data obtained by a Member State or Europol pursuant to this Regulation from the Central System shall not be transferred or made available to any third country, international organisation or private entity established in or outside the Union. This prohibition shall also apply if those data are further processed at national level or between Member States within the meaning of [Article […] of Directive [2016/../EU] ].

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is necessary for pressing reasons in order to ensure that the internal logic of the text is maintained by ensuring a consistent application of the General Data Protection Regulation (Regulation (EU) 679/2016) and the Police Data Protection Directive (Directive 2016/680/EU) throughout the Eurodac regulation. This amendment is also based on comments by the European Data Protection Supervisor.

Amendment 427

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek, Hilde Vautmans

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. fr

Justification

The processing of personal data is also regulated in identical terms by Directive 95/46, which will be replaced by the General Data Protection Regulation in May 2018.

Amendment 428

Sophia in 't Veld

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Personal data obtained by a Member State or Europol pursuant to this Regulation from the Central System shall under no circumstances be transferred or made available to any third country, international organisation or private entity established in or outside the Union. This prohibition shall also apply if those data are further processed at national level or between Member States within the meaning of [Article [...] of Directive [(EU) 2016/...] ].

Or. en

Justification

Amendment 429

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Personal data which originated in a Member State and are exchanged between Member States following a hit obtained for the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c) shall not be transferred to third countries if there is a real risk that as a result of such transfer the data subject may be subjected to torture, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment or any other violation of his or her fundamental rights.

2. Personal data which originated in a Member State and are exchanged between Member States following a hit obtained for the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(c) shall not be transferred to third countries, including if there is a real risk that as a result of such transfer the data subject may be subjected to torture, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment or any other violation of his or her fundamental rights.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment is necessary for pressing reasons in order to ensure a consistent prohibition of transfers of personal data to third countries throughout the Eurodac regulation. This amendment is inextricably linked to the amendment to Article 37 paragraph 1. It is also based on comments by the European Data Protection Supervisor.

Amendment 430

Malin Björk, Barbara Spinelli, Marina Albiol Guzmán, Dennis de Jong

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. No information regarding the fact that an application for international protection has been made in a Member State shall be disclosed to any third-country for persons related to Article 10(1), particularly where that country is also the applicant's country of origin.

3. No information shall be disclosed to any third-country for persons related to Article 10(1).

Or. en

Amendment 431

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. No information shall be disclosed to any third-country for persons related to Article 10(1), particularly where that country is also the applicant's country of origin.

Or. en

Justification

This amendment ensures that no information at all is disclosed to third countries for persons related to Article 10(1).

Amendment 432

Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Josef Weidenholzer, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Péter Niedermüller, Kati Piri, Maria Grapini, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Dietmar Köster, Caterina Chinnici

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. No information regarding the fact that an application for international protection has been made in a Member State shall be disclosed to any third-country for persons related to Article 10(1).

Or. en

Amendment 433

Sophia in 't Veld

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. No information regarding the fact that an application for international protection has been made in a Member State shall be disclosed to any third-country for persons related to Article 10(1).

Or. en

Amendment 434

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. No information regarding the fact that an application for international protection has been made in a Member State shall be disclosed to any third-country for persons related to Article 10(1) or Article 12a, particularly where that country is also the applicant's country of origin.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: This amendment ties in to the proposal to add a new category (in Chapter IIa (new)) and seeks to ensure consistency in the text in this regard.

Amendment 435

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 38

deleted

Transfer of data to third countries for the purpose of return

1. By way of derogation from Article 37 of this Regulation, the personal data relating to persons referred to in Articles 10(1), 13(2), 14(1) obtained by a Member State following a hit for the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a) or (b) may be transferred or made available to a third-country in accordance with Article 46 of Regulation (EU) No. […/2016], if necessary in order to prove the identity of third-country nationals for the purpose of return, only where the following conditions are satisfied:

(b) the third country explicitly agrees to use the data only for the purpose for which they were provided and to what is lawful and necessary to secure the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(b) and to delete that data where it is no longer justified to keep it;

(c) the Member State of origin which entered the data in the Central System has given its consent and the individual concerned has been informed that his or her personal information may be shared with the authorities of a third-country.

2. No information regarding the fact that an application for international protection has been made in a Member State shall be disclosed to any third-country for persons related to Article 10(1), particularly where that country is also the applicant's country of origin.

3. A third-country shall not have direct access to the Central System to compare or transmit fingerprint data or any other personal data of a third-country national or stateless person and shall not be granted access via a Member State's designated National Access Point.

Or. en

Amendment 436

Malin Björk, Barbara Spinelli, Marina Albiol Guzmán, Dennis de Jong

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 38

deleted

Transfer of data to third countries for the purpose of return

Or. en

Amendment 437

Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Josef Weidenholzer, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Péter Niedermüller, Kati Piri, Maria Grapini, Juan Fernando López Aguilar

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. By way of derogation from Article 37 of this Regulation, only the necessary personal data relating to persons referred to in Articles 10(1), 13(2), 14(1) obtained by a Member State following a hit for the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a) or (b) may be transferred or made available to a third-country in accordance with Article 46 of Regulation (EU) No. […/2016], if necessary in order to prove the identity of third-country nationals for the purpose of return, only where the following conditions are satisfied:

Or. en

Amendment 438

Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Josef Weidenholzer, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Péter Niedermüller, Maria Grapini, Juan Fernando López Aguilar

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) the Member State of origin which entered the data in the Central System has given its consent and the individual concerned has been informed that his or her personal information will be shared with the authorities of that third-country.

Or. en

Amendment 439

Sophia in 't Veld

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) the Member State of origin which entered the data in the Central System has given its consent and the individual concerned has been informed that his or her personal information will be shared with the authorities of a specific third-country.

Or. en

Amendment 440

Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Josef Weidenholzer, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Péter Niedermüller, Kati Piri, Maria Grapini, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Caterina Chinnici

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ca) a final decision on the third-country national's application for international protection has been taken.

Or. en

Amendment 441

Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Josef Weidenholzer, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Péter Niedermüller, Maria Grapini, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Dietmar Köster, Caterina Chinnici

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1a. Personal data which originated in a Member State and are exchanged between Member States following a hit obtained for the purposes laid down in Article 1(1)(a) and (b) shall not be transferred to third countries if there is a real risk that as a result of such transfer the data subject may be subjected to torture, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment or any other violation of his or her fundamental rights.

Or. en

Amendment 442

Sophia in 't Veld

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. No information regarding the fact that an application for international protection has been made in a Member State shall be disclosed to any third-country for persons related to Article 10(1).

Or. en

Amendment 443

Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Josef Weidenholzer, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Péter Niedermüller, Kati Piri, Maria Grapini, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Caterina Chinnici

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. No information regarding the fact that an application for international protection has been made in a Member State shall be disclosed to any third-country for persons related to Article 10(1).

Or. en

Amendment 444

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. A third-country shall not have direct access to the Central System to compare or transmit fingerprint or facial image data or any other personal data of a third-country national or stateless person and shall not be granted access via a Member State's designated National Access Point.

Or. en

Justification

Correction of the commission's proposal that doesn't insert in all the required places both 'fingerprints' and 'facial image', which is in line with the obligation as mentioned in article 2.

Amendment 445

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek, Hilde Vautmans

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2a. Ultimate responsibility for the processing of personal data shall lie with the Member States, which are considered to be ‘controllers’ within the meaning of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: It should be specified that ultimate responsibility for the processing of personal data lies with the Member States, who are considered to be ‘controllers’ within the meaning of the General Data Protection Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2016/679).

Amendment 446

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 3 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Claims for compensation against a Member State for the damage referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be governed by the provisions of national law of the defendant Member State in accordance with Articles [75 and 76] of Regulation (EU) […/2016] and Articles [52 and 53] of Directive [2016/… /EU] .

3. Claims for compensation against a Member State for the damage referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be governed by the provisions of national law of the defendant Member State in accordance with Chapter VIII of Regulation (EU) [2016/679] and Chapter VIII of Directive [(EU) 2016/680] on remedies, liabilities and penalties.

Or. en

Amendment 447

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek, Hilde Vautmans

Proposal for a regulation

Article 42 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2a. eu-LISA shall establish a secure communication channel between the EES Central System and the Eurodac Central System to enable interoperability between them. The two systems need to be connected in order for the biometric data of a third-country national registered in the EES to be transferred to Eurodac where registration of that biometric data is laid down in this Regulation.

Or. fr

Justification

The purpose of the entry/exit system will be to register the entry and exit of non-EU nationals entering the Schengen area for a short stay and report any unauthorised overstays. Third-country nationals outstaying their authorised period of stay are therefore residing illegally and their data should therefore be recorded in Eurodac, in accordance with Article 14. Interoperability between the two systems will serve to prevent the Member State having to look for such persons and avoid duplication.

Amendment 448

Malin Björk, Barbara Spinelli, Marina Albiol Guzmán

Proposal for a regulation

Article 42 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. By [2020] eu-LISA shall conduct a study on the technical feasibility of adding facial recognition software to the Central System for the purposes of comparing facial images. The study shall evaluate the reliability and accuracy of the results produced from facial recognition software for the purposes of EURODAC and shall make any necessary recommendations prior to the introduction of the facial recognition technology to the Central System.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 449

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 42 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. By [2020] eu-LISA shall conduct a study on the technical feasibility and added value of adding facial recognition software to the Central System for the purposes of comparing facial images of minors. The study shall evaluate the reliability and accuracy of the results produced from facial recognition software for the purposes of EURODAC and shall make any necessary recommendations prior to the introduction of the facial recognition technology to the Central System. The study shall also carry out an impact assessment of the possible risks for the rights of privacy and human dignity, the rights of the child, as well as non-discrimination, of using facial recognition software. The study shall take into account the views of other Union agencies, the European Data Protection Supervisor, relevant actors as well as academics.

Or. en

Amendment 450

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 42 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4a. In 2020 at the latest, eu-LISA shall conduct a study to ascertain whether the combinations of biometric identifiers in the EU’s various databases need to be harmonised and whether Eurodac should limit its identification data to four fingerprints and a facial image, like the entry/exit system provided for in Regulation (EU) .../... of the European Parliament and of the Council.

Or. fr

Justification

The combinations of biometric identifiers in the EU's various databases should be harmonised in order to ensure that they are interoperable and used as effectively as possible.

Amendment 451

Sophia in 't Veld

Proposal for a regulation

Article 42 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. By […] and every four years thereafter, the Commission shall produce an overall evaluation of Eurodac, examining the results achieved against objectives and the impact on fundamental rights, including whether law enforcement access has led to indirect discrimination against persons covered by this Regulation, and assessing the continuing validity of the underlying rationale and any implications for future operations, and shall make any necessary recommendations. The Commission shall transmit the evaluation to the European Parliament and the Council.

5. By [...] and every four years thereafter, the Commission shall produce an overall evaluation of Eurodac, together with a full data protection and privacy impact assessment, examining the results achieved against objectives and the impact on fundamental rights, including whether law enforcement access has led to indirect discrimination against persons covered by this Regulation, and assessing the continuing validity of the underlying rationale and any implications for future operations, and shall make any necessary recommendations. The Commission shall transmit the evaluation to the European Parliament and the Council.

Or. en

Justification

Amendment 452

Jeroen Lenaers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 42 – paragraph 8 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

8. While respecting the provisions of national law on the publication of sensitive information, each Member State and Europol shall prepare annual reports on the effectiveness of the comparison of fingerprint data with Eurodac data for law enforcement purposes, containing information and statistics on:

8. While respecting the provisions of national law on the publication of sensitive information, each Member State and Europol shall prepare annual reports on the effectiveness of the comparison of fingerprint and facial image data with Eurodac data for law enforcement purposes, containing information and statistics on:

Or. en

Justification

Correction of the commission's proposal that doesn't insert in all the required places both 'fingerprints' and 'facial image', which is in line with the obligation as mentioned in article 2.

Amendment 453

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Article 44 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The provisions of this Regulation shall not be applicable to any territory to which [Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 does not apply].

The provisions of this Regulation shall not be applicable to any territory to which Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 does not apply, without prejudice to the provisions of Regulation XXX/XXX.

Or. fr

Justification

Recast: There is a need here to include a reference to the future scope of the Regulation establishing a Union Resettlement Framework to establish the extent to which this Regulation will apply to it.

Amendment 454

Judith Sargentini

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 47 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Articles 2(2), 32, 32 and, for the purposes referred to in Article 1(1)(a) and (b), Articles 28(4), 30 and 37 shall apply from the date referred to in Article 91(2) of Regulation (EU) […/2016]. Until this date Articles 2(2), 27(4), 29, 30 and 35 of Regulation 603/2013 shall apply.

Articles 2(2), 32, 32 and, for the purposes referred to in Article 1(1)(a), Articles 28(4), 30 and 37 shall apply from the date referred to in Article 91(2) of Regulation (EU) […/2016]. Until this date Articles 2(2), 27(4), 29, 30 and 35 of Regulation 603/2013 shall apply.

Or. en

Amendment 455

Gérard Deprez, Louis Michel, Petr Ježek

Proposal for a regulation

Annex I a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Annexe Ia: Common approach on Implementation of the Eurodac Regulation as regards obligation to take fingerprints

In cases where a Eurodac data-subject does not initially cooperate in the process of being fingerprinted, all reasonable and proportionate steps shall be taken to compel such cooperation. To that end, and in order to ensure that Union law is respected, Member States shall follow the approach set out below:

1. The Member State shall inform the data-subject of the obligation to be fingerprinted under Union law, and can explain to him/her that it is in his/her interests to fully and immediately cooperate and provide his/her fingerprints. In particular, it can be explained to the data-subject that, if he/she applies for asylum in another Member State, according to the Regulation (EU) [.../...] of the European Parliament and of the Council(the Dublin Regulation) it is possible to use either fingerprints or other circumstantial evidence as a basis for effecting his/her transfer to the Member State that is responsible for his/her asylum application. The Member State can also explain to the data-subject that, if he/she subsequently applies for asylum, there will likewise be an obligation to be fingerprinted.

2. If a data-subject who has not applied for asylum continues to refuse to cooperate in being fingerprinted, he/she can be considered to be an irregular migrant and Member States may consider, where other less coercive alternatives to detention cannot be applied effectively, detaining him/her according to the provisions of Article 15 of Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (the Return Directive). For as long as a data-subject refuses to cooperate in the initial identification process, including in the taking of his/her fingerprints as required by Union law and/or national law, it is not normally possible to conclude whether or not there is a realistic prospect of his/her return being carried out and, as such, Member States may consider, where other less coercive alternatives to detention cannot by applied effectively, resorting to detention under the terms of the Return Directive.

3. In cases where the data-subject has applied for asylum and refuses to cooperate in being fingerprinted, Member States may consider detaining him/her in order to determine or verify his or her identity or nationality, including by the taking of his/her fingerprints as required by Union law in accordance with the Directive (EU) .../... (Reception Conditions Directive).

4. If the Member State concerned has provided for the possibility of accelerated and/or border procedures in its national legal framework, the Member States can inform the asylum applicant that under Article 23(4)(m) of the current Asylum Procedures Directive (2005/85) or under Article 31(8)(i) of the recast Asylum Procedures Directive (to be transposed by 20 July 2015), their request for international protection may be subject to an accelerated and/or border procedure if they refuse to cooperate in being fingerprinted. The Member State can further explain that the consequence of their asylum application being dealt with via such an accelerated and/or border procedure could be that the application, following an adequate and complete examination of its merits, may be considered as manifestly unfounded. Such a finding could, if provided for in the national law of the Member State and in line with Union and international law, result in a significant limitation of the rejected applicant's right to remain on the territory pending an appeal against the rejection, and may result in him/her being returned before the appeal has been decided Furthermore, Member States can explain that, in such circumstances, an order to return may be accompanied by an Union-wide entry ban of up to five years.

5. The data-subject shall only be detained for as short a time as possible and necessary, as stipulated by Union law.

6. Irrespective of whether or not it is decided to detain the data-subject, Member States shall provide information and counselling to explain to the data-subject his/her rights and obligations (including the right to an effective remedy) either as an irregular migrant or as an asylum seeker. This shall include an explanation of the Dublin Regulation and could include use of the common leaflets under [Annex X to XII of the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 118/2014 ]. The explanation of the Dublin Regulation shall include elements that might be relevant should the data-subject apply for asylum, such as the rules on family reunification.

7. If the initial counselling does not succeed, the Member State may consider resorting, in full respect of the principle of proportionality and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, to coercion as a last resort. If a Member States chooses to do this the data-subject shall be informed that coercion may be used in order to take his/her fingerprints. If the data-subject still refuses to cooperate officials trained in the proportionate use of coercion may apply the minimum level of coercion required, while ensuring respect of the dignity and physical integrity of the data-subject, as specified in an approved procedure for taking fingerprints. This procedure shall include a clear explanation to the data-subject of the steps the official intends to take in order to compel cooperation. The official shall demonstrate that there was no other practicable alternative measure to using reasonable coercion. A case-by-case assessment shall always be made of whether there is no such alternative, taking into account the specific circumstances and vulnerabilities of the person concerned. Member States may consider that it is never appropriate to use coercion to compel the fingerprinting of certain vulnerable persons, such as minors or pregnant women. If some degree of coercion is used for vulnerable persons it shall be ensured that the procedure used is specifically adapted to such persons. The use of coercion shall always be recorded and a record of the procedure shall be retained for as long as necessary in order to enable the person concerned to legally challenge the actions of the authority.

8. Member States shall make an effort to avoid fingerprinting migrants twice. Therefore, Member States may consider carrying out identification for Asylum/Dublin purposes and identification of irregular migrants under national law for return and other lawful purposes, which are not incompatible with the Asylum/Dublin ones, within one act ("uno actu"), thereby limiting the burden for both the administration and the migrants. Member States shall have systems in place in order to be able to use the same set of fingerprints both for storage in their national AFIS and for transmitting to the Eurodac Central System. The identification and fingerprinting shall take place as early as possible in the procedure.

9. In cases where an applicant has damaged his/her fingertips or otherwise made it impossible to take the fingerprints (such as via the use of glue), and where there is a reasonable prospect that within a short period of time it will be possible to take such fingerprints, Member States may consider that is it necessary that he/she be kept in detention until such time as his/her fingerprints can be taken. Attempts to re-fingerprint data-subjects shall take place at regular intervals.

10. Following the successful taking of fingerprints, the data-subject shall be released from detention unless there is a specific reason as specified in the Return Directive or under the Union asylum legislation to detain them further.

Or. en

Justification

Recast: The results of an enquiry show that some MS permit the use of detention for the purpose of ensuring that migrants are fingerprinted, some permit the use of a proportionate degree of coercion, while others neither use detention nor coercion. It's necessary to harmonise the existing practices in order to ensure that their obligations under the Eurodac Regulation are fulfilled with the same level of safeguards.

Common approach developed by the Commission in the SWD (2015) 150 final.