Sittings · Document

Draft report (COM(2020)0610 – C9-0309/2020 – 2020/0279(COD)) 2021-12-09

Asylum and migration management and amending Council Directive (EC) 2003/109 and the proposed Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Fund]

Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

AM_Com_LegReport

Amendment 1589

Pietro Bartolo, Sylvie Guillaume, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Bettina Vollath, Javier Moreno Sánchez, Domènec Ruiz Devesa, Giuliano Pisapia, Elena Yoncheva, Thijs Reuten, Franco Roberti, Cyrus Engerer, Caterina Chinnici

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 23

deleted

Application in an international transit area of an airport

Where the application for international protection is made in the international transit area of an airport of a Member State by a third-country national or a stateless person, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application.

Or. en

Amendment 1590

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the application for international protection is made in the international transit area of an airport of a Member State by a third-country national or a stateless person, pursuant to Article 1(1) of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application.

Or. en

Amendment 1591

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 23 a

Automatic relocation

Where it is not possible to determine the Member State responsible in accordance with the criteria in this Chapter, the Member State responsible shall be identified from among the ten Member States with the lowest numbers of applicants relative to their share pursuant to the reference key referred to in Article 54, and shall be determined through the procedure outlined in 23b of this Regulation.

Or. en

Amendment 1592

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 23 a

Where it is not possible to determine a Member State responsible in accordance with the criteria set in this Chapter, the Member State responsible shall be determined according to the procedure set out in Article 31a of this Regulation.

Or. en

Amendment 1593

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 23 b

Application of the reference key

1a. Where the Member State responsible cannot be determined in accordance with the criteria set out in Chapter II, the determining Member State shall communicate to the applicant that his or her application for international protection will be examined by a Member State of allocation.

1b. On the basis of the reference key referred to in Article 54, a list of ten Member States with the lowest number of applicants relative to their share pursuant to that reference key shall be determined.

1c. The determining Member State shall communicate the list referred to in paragraph 1b, together with information about the Member States on that list, to the applicant. Within five days of that communication the applicant shall be given the opportunity to select three Member States of allocation in order of preference among the Member States included in the list.

If the applicant does not select a Member State in accordance with the first subparagraph of this paragraph, the determining Member State shall allocate the applicant to the Member State on the list with the lowest number of applicants relative to their share pursuant to the reference key referred to in Article 54 when the list was compiled in accordance with paragraph 1b of this Article.

Or. en

Amendment 1594

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 23 c

Commission delegated acts for the automated mechanism

The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 68 concerning the methods for automatically applying:

(a) the reference key in Article 54, and

(b) the procedure in Article 23b.

In exercising its powers to adopt delegated acts, the Commission shall consult the Asylum Agency. The Commission shall also consult the EU Relocation Coordinator with regard to the application of these Articles to Part IV of this Regulation.

Or. en

Amendment 1595

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Part III – Chapter III – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

III DEPENDENT PERSONS AND DISCRETIONARY CLAUSES

III DEPENDENT PERSONS, DISCRETIONARY CLAUSES AND LIGHT PROCEDURES

Or. en

Amendment 1596

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Where, on account of pregnancy, having a new-born child, serious illness, severe disability, severe trauma or old age, an applicant is dependent on the assistance of his or her child or parent legally resident in one of the Member States, or his or her child or parent legally resident in one of the Member States is dependent on the assistance of the applicant, Member States shall normally keep or bring together the applicant with that child or parent, provided that family ties existed before the applicant arrived on the territory of the Member States, that the child or parent or the applicant is able to take care of the dependent person and that the persons concerned expressed their desire in writing.

1. Where, on account of pregnancy an applicant is dependent on the assistance of his or her spouse, child, sibling or parent legally resident in one of the Member States, or his or her spouse, child, sibling or parent legally resident in one of the Member States is dependent on the assistance of the applicant, Member States shall keep or bring together the applicant with that spouse, child, sibling or parent, provided that the spouse, child, sibling or parent or the applicant is able to take care of the dependent person and that the persons concerned expressed their desire in writing.

Or. en

Amendment 1597

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Where, on account of pregnancy, having a new-born child, serious illness, severe disability, trauma, old age, or other relevant psychological and/or physical vulnerabilities an applicant is in need of the assistance of his or her child, sibling, parent, or grandparent legally resident in one of the Member States, or his or her child, sibling, parent or grandparent legally resident in one of the Member States in need of the assistance of the applicant, Member States shall normally keep or bring together the applicant with that child, sibling, parent, or grandparent provided that the child, sibling, parent or grandparent or the applicant is able to take care of the dependent person and that the persons concerned expressed their desire in writing.

Or. en

Amendment 1598

Maria Walsh, Deirdre Clune, Seán Kelly, Frances Fitzgerald, Colm Markey

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Where, on account of pregnancy, having a new-born child, serious illness, severe disability, severe trauma or old age, an applicant is dependent on the assistance of his or her child, sibling or parent legally resident in one of the Member States, or his or her child, sibling or parent legally resident in one of the Member States is dependent on the assistance of the applicant, Member States shall normally keep or bring together the applicant with that child, sibling or parent, provided that family ties existed before the applicant arrived on the territory of the Member States, that the child, sibling or parent or the applicant is able to take care of the dependent person and that the persons concerned expressed their desire in writing.

Or. en

Amendment 1599

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Where an applicant is dependent on the assistance of his or her spouse, child, sibling or parent legally resident in one of the Member States, or his or her spouse, child, sibling or parent legally resident in one of the Member States is dependent on the assistance of the applicant, Member States shall keep or bring together the applicant with that spouse, child, sibling or parent, provided that family ties existed before the applicant arrived on the territory of the Member States, that the spouse, child, sibling or parent or the applicant is able to take care of the dependent person and that having been informed of this possibility, the persons concerned expressed their desire in writing.

Or. en

Amendment 1600

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where there are indications that a child or parent is legally resident on the territory of the Member State where the dependent person is present, that Member State shall verify whether the child or parent can take care of the dependent person, before making a take charge request pursuant to Article 29.

Where there are indications that a child, sibling, parent or grandparent is legally resident on the territory of the Member State where the dependent person is present, that Member State shall verify whether the child, sibling, parent or grandparent can take care of the dependent person, before making a take charge request pursuant to Article 29.

Or. en

Amendment 1601

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where there are indications that a spouse, child, sibling or parent is legally resident on the territory of the Member State where the dependent person is present, that Member State shall verify whether the spouse, child, sibling or parent can take care of the dependent person, before making a take charge request pursuant to Article 29.

Or. en

Amendment 1602

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1603

Maria Walsh, Deirdre Clune, Seán Kelly, Frances Fitzgerald, Colm Markey

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where there are indications that a child, sibling or parent is legally resident on the territory of the Member State where the dependent person is present, that Member State shall verify whether the child, sibling or parent can take care of the dependent person, before making a take charge request pursuant to Article 29.

Or. en

Amendment 1604

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where the child or parent referred to in paragraph 1 is legally resident in a Member State other than the one where the applicant is present, the Member State responsible shall be the one where the child or parent is legally resident unless the applicant’s health prevents him or her from travelling to that Member State for a significant period of time. In such a case, the Member State responsible shall be the one where the applicant is present. Such Member State shall not be subject to the obligation to bring the child or parent of the applicant to its territory.

2. Where the spouse, child, sibling or parent referred to in paragraph 1 is legally resident in a Member State other than the one where the applicant is present, the Member State responsible shall be the one where the spouse, child, sibling or parent is legally resident unless the applicant’s health prevents him or her from travelling to that Member State for a significant period of time. In such a case, the Member State responsible shall be the one where the applicant is present.

Or. en

Amendment 1605

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1606

Maria Walsh, Deirdre Clune, Seán Kelly, Frances Fitzgerald, Colm Markey

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where the child, sibling or parent referred to in paragraph 1 is legally resident in a Member State other than the one where the applicant is present, the Member State responsible shall be the one where the child, sibling or parent is legally resident unless the applicant’s health prevents him or her from travelling to that Member State for a significant period of time. In such a case, the Member State responsible shall be the one where the applicant is present. Such Member State shall not be subject to the obligation to bring the child, sibling or parent of the applicant to its territory.

Or. en

Amendment 1607

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where the child , sibling, parent or grandparent referred to in paragraph 1 is legally resident in a Member State other than the one where the applicant is present, the Member State responsible shall be the one where the child, sibling, parent or grandparent is legally resident . In such a case, the Member State responsible shall be the one where the applicant is present. Such Member State shall not be subject to the obligation to bring the child, sibling, parent or grandparent of the applicant to its territory.

Or. en

Amendment 1608

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 68 concerning:

deleted

(a) the elements to be taken into account in order to assess the dependency link;

(b) the criteria for establishing the existence of proven family links;

(d) the elements to be taken into account in order to assess the inability to travel for a significant period of time.

Or. en

Amendment 1609

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 3 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1610

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

In exercising its powers to adopt delegated acts, the Commission shall consult experts in the field of the rights of the child, medicine and social welfare.

Or. en

Amendment 1611

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3a. In exercising its powers to adopt delegated acts, the Commission shall consult relevant experts including child rights, medical and socio-medical experts including children's rights NGOs.

Or. en

Amendment 1612

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish uniform conditions for the consultation and exchange of information between Member States. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2). The Member States shall use the Common and secured electronic transmission and communication system referred to in Article 40a to exchange information under the present Article.

Or. en

Amendment 1613

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 24 a

Sponsorship

1. A Member State may provide the possibility that recognised organisations working in that Member State in the field of refugee protection programmes and prevention of trafficking in human beings become the sponsor of an applicant who has applied for international protection in the Union. The sponsoring organization shall arrange for the applicant's relocation and stay in the Member State until a final decision is taken on his or her application for international protection.

2. If the Member State in which the organization is established agrees to take charge of the applicant, it becomes the Member State responsible for examining the application for international protection.

Or. en

Amendment 1614

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. By way of derogation from Article 8(1), each Member State may decide to examine an application for international protection by a third-country national or a stateless person registered with it, even if such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in this Regulation.

1. By way of derogation from Article 8(1), each Member State may decide to examine an application for international protection by a third-country national or a stateless person. pursuant to Article 1(1) of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, registered with it, even if such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in Chapter II.

Or. en

Amendment 1615

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. By way of derogation from Article 8(1), each Member State may decide to examine an application for international protection by a third-country national or a stateless person lodged with it, even if such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in this Regulation.

Or. en

Amendment 1616

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1a. An applicant may request any Member State to apply this paragraph. Such a request shall be made in writing and shall be duly motivated

Or. en

Amendment 1617

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Member State in which an application for international protection is registered and which is carrying out the process of determining the Member State responsible, or the Member State responsible, may, at any time before a first decision regarding the substance is taken, request another Member State to take charge of an applicant in order to bring together any family relations, on humanitarian grounds based in particular on family or cultural considerations, even where that other Member State is not responsible under the criteria laid down in Articles 15 to 18 and 24. The persons concerned shall express their consent in writing.

2. The Member State in which an application for international protection is made and which is carrying out the process of determining the Member State responsible, or the Member State responsible, may, at any time before a first decision regarding the substance is taken, request another Member State to take charge of an applicant in order to bring together any family relations, in particular on humanitarian grounds based in particular on family, cultural or social considerations, language skills or other meaningful links which would facilitate his or her integration even where that other Member State is not responsible under the criteria laid down in Chapter II. The persons concerned must express their consent in writing.

Or. en

Amendment 1618

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Member State in which an application for international protection is registered and which is carrying out the process of determining the Member State responsible, or the Member State responsible, may, at any time before a first decision regarding the substance is taken, request another Member State to take charge of an applicant in order to bring together any family relations, on humanitarian grounds based in particular on family, cultural considerations or social ties, language skills or other meaningful links which would facilitate his or her integration into that other Member state, even where that other Member State is not responsible under the criteria laid down in Articles 15 to 18 and 24. The persons concerned shall express their consent in writing.

Or. en

Amendment 1619

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Member State in which an application for international protection is registered and which is carrying out the process of determining the Member State responsible, or the Member State responsible, may, at any time before a first decision regarding the substance is taken, request another Member State to take charge of an applicant in order to bring together any family relations, on humanitarian grounds based in particular on family or cultural considerations, or to support a Member State under migratory pressure or with a risk of migratory pressure even where that other Member State is not responsible under the criteria laid down in Articles 15 to 18 and 24. The persons concerned shall express their consent in writing.

Or. en

Amendment 1620

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The requested Member State shall carry out any necessary checks to examine the humanitarian grounds cited, and shall reply to the requesting Member State within two months of receipt of the request using the electronic communication network set up under Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003. A reply refusing the request shall state the reasons on which the refusal is based.

The requested Member State shall carry out any necessary checks to examine the humanitarian grounds cited, and shall reply to the requesting Member State within one month of receipt of the request using the electronic communication network set up under Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003. A reply refusing the request shall state the reasons on which the refusal is based. Where the requested Member State accepts the request, responsibility for examining the application shall be transferred to it.

Or. en

Amendment 1621

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The requested Member State shall carry out any necessary checks to examine the humanitarian grounds cited, and shall reply to the requesting Member State within two months of receipt of the request using the electronic communication network set up under Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003. Where no reply is provided within the set time limit, acceptance is presumed. A reply refusing the request shall state the reasons on which the refusal is based.

Or. en

Amendment 1622

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The requested Member State shall carry out any necessary checks to examine the humanitarian grounds cited, and shall reply to the requesting Member State within two months of receipt of the request using the Common and secured electronic transmission and communication system under Article 40a of this Regulation. A reply refusing the request shall state the reasons on which the refusal is based.

Or. en

Amendment 1623

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The requested Member State shall carry out any necessary checks to examine the grounds cited, and shall reply to the requesting Member State within two months of receipt of the request using the electronic communication network set up under Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003. A reply refusing the request shall state the reasons on which the refusal is based.

Or. en

Amendment 1624

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2a. An applicant may request a Member State in which the application for international protection was registered to apply paragraph 2. Such a request shall be made in writing, shall be duly motivated and shall be addressed to the competent authorities of the determining Member State with which that application has been registered. The competent authorities of the determining Member State shall ensure that a request of this paragraph is forwarded to the competent authorities responsible in the Member State requested by the applicant. The requested Member State shall indicate, within two weeks of receipt of the request, whether it intends to assume responsibility for the application for international protection. The requested Member State may extend the deadline by two additional weeks if this is notified to the Member State where the application for international protection was lodged in writing. If a reply has not been received within that deadline the request shall be considered to have been accepted.

Or. en

Amendment 1625

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 2 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2b. Where the requested Member State accepts the request in accordance with paragraph 2a, it shall become the Member State responsible. The Member State where the application for international protection was lodged shall ensure that the applicant is transferred to the Member State responsible.

Or. en

Amendment 1626

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 2 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2c. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, draw up a common form to be used for the purpose of the procedure referred to in paragraph 2a

Or. en

Amendment 1627

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 25 a

Family reunification procedure

1. The determining Member State shall be responsible for conducting a special family reunification procedure for the applicant in order to ensure swift family reunification and access to the asylum procedures for applicants where there are, prima facie, sufficient indicators showing that they are likely to have the right to family reunification in accordance with Article 15, 16, 17 or 18.

2. In establishing whether there are sufficient indicators that the applicant has family members and /or relatives in the Member State he or she claims, the determining Member State shall ensure that the applicant has understood the applicable definition of family members and/or relatives and ensure that the applicant is certain that the alleged family members and/or relatives are not present in another Member State. The determining Member State shall also ensure that the applicant understands that he or she will not be allowed to stay in the Member State where he or she claims to have family members and/or relatives unless such a claim can be verified by that Member State. If the information provided by the applicant does not give manifest reasons to doubt the presence of family members and/or relatives in the Member State indicated by the applicant, it shall be concluded that, prima facie, there are sufficient indicators that the applicant has family members and/or relatives in that Member State in order to meet the requirements of paragraph 1.

The competent authorities of the Member State where the applicant claims to have family members and/or relatives present shall assist the competent authorities of the determining Member State with answering any questions aimed at clarifying whether the alleged family links are correct.

3. If it is determined pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 that an applicant likely has, prima facie, the right of family reunification in accordance with Article 15,16,17 or 18, the determining Member State shall notify the Member State of allocation thereof and the applicant shall be transferred to that Member State.

4. The determining Member State shall transfer all the information provided by the applicant to the Member State of allocation using the 'DubliNet' electronic communication network set up under Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003.

5. In accordance with the procedure referred to in paragraph 3, the Member State of allocation shall make the determination of whether the conditions for family reunifications in accordance with Article 15, 16, 17 or 18 are met. If this is the case, the Member State of allocation shall become the Member State responsible.

6. If it is determined that the conditions for family reunification are not met, the Member State of allocation shall ensure that the applicant is relocated to another Member State responsible in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23b.

Or. en

Amendment 1628

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 25 a

Family reunification procedure

3. If it is determined pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 that an applicant likely has, prima facie, the right of family reunification in accordance with Article 15, 16, 17 or 18, the determining Member State shall notify the Member State of allocation thereof and the applicant shall be transferred to that Member State.

Or. en

Amendment 1629

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 25 a

Light Family procedure

2. If it is determined pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 that an applicant has, prima facie, the right to family reunification in accordance with Article 13, 15, 16 24a, the determining Member State shall notify the Member State of allocation thereof and the applicant shall be transferred to that Member State.

3. In accordance with the procedure referred to in paragraph 2, the Member State of allocation shall make the determination of whether the conditions for family reunification in accordance with Article 18 are met. If this is the case the Member state of allocation shall become the Member State responsible.

Or. en

Amendment 1630

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 25 b

Light procedure in situations of risk of pressure on the asylum or reception system

1. Where the Commission determines that a Member State’s asylum or reception system is at risk of pressure, the determining Member State shall swiftly determine a Member State of allocation where there is, prima facie, sufficient indicators showing that an applicant has meaningful links in accordance with any of the criteria in Chapter II with a particular Member State other than the determining Member State.

2. In establishing whether there are sufficient indicators showing that the applicant has meaningful links to a particular Member State, the determining Member State shall base its determination on the evidence and other information provided by the applicant and shall consult relevant Union databases. The determining Member State shall also ensure that the applicant understands that he or she will not be allowed to stay in the Member State of allocation unless the evidence and information provided can be verified by that Member State. If the information provided by the applicant, or gathered through the relevant Union databases, does not give rise to manifest reasons to doubt that the criteria in Chapter II apply for a particular Member State, the determining Member State shall conclude that, prima facie, there are sufficient indicators showing that the links in question meet the requirements of paragraph 1 of this Article.

The competent authorities of the Member State where the applicant could have a link shall assist the competent authorities of the determining Member State with answering any questions aiming to clarify whether the alleged links are correct.

3. If the determining Member State considers, pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2, that a particular Member State is likely, prima facie, to be the Member State of allocation in accordance with the criteria set out in Chapter II, the determining Member State shall notify the Member State of allocation and the applicant shall be transferred to that Member State.

5. The Member State of allocation shall, in accordance with the procedure referred to in paragraph 3, determine whether the conditions in Chapter II are met. If so, the Member State of allocation shall become the Member State responsible.

6. If it is determined that the conditions are not met, the Member State of allocation shall ensure that the applicant is relocated to another Member State responsible in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23b.

Or. en

Amendment 1631

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 25 b

Light procedure for meaningful links

1. The determining Member State shall swiftly determine a Member State of allocation where there is, prima facie, sufficient indicators showing that an applicant has meaningful links in accordance with Article 19 or 20 with a particular Member State other than the determining Member State.

2. In establishing whether there is sufficient indicators showing that the applicant has meaningful links to a particular Member State in accordance with Article 19 or 20, the determining Member State shall base its determination on the evidence and other information provided by the applicant and shall consult relevant Union databases. The determining Member State shall also ensure that the applicant understands that he or she will not be allowed to stay in the Member State of allocation unless the evidence and information provided can be verified by that Member State. If the information provided by the applicant, or gathered through the relevant Union databases, does not give rise to manifest reasons to doubt that Article 19 or 20 applies for a particular Member State, the determining Member State shall conclude that, prima facie, there are sufficient indicators showing that the links in question meet the requirements of paragraph 1 of this Article. The competent authorities of the Member State where the applicant could have a link in accordance with 19 or 20 shall assist the competent authorities of the determining Member State with answering any questions aiming to clarify whether the alleged links are correct.

3. If the determining Member State considers, pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2, that a particular Member State is likely, prima facie, to be the Member State of allocation in accordance with Article 19 or 20, the determining Member State shall notify the Member State of allocation and the applicant shall be transferred to that Member State.

5. The Member State of allocation shall, in accordance with the procedure referred to in paragraph 3, determine whether the conditions in Article 19 or 20 are met. If so, the Member State of allocation shall become the Member State responsible.

Or. en

Amendment 1632

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Part III – Chapter IV – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

IV OBLIGATIONS OF THE MEMBER STATE RESPONSIBLE

IV OBLIGATIONS OF THE MEMBER STATES

Or. en

Amendment 1633

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article -26 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article -26

Obligations of the Member States during the process of determination

1. Member States shall cooperate closely and effectively with a view to ensure a fair and efficient process of determination of the Member State responsible of an application for international protection.

2. During the process of determination, where the applicant declares to have family members pursuant to Article 15 to 17, the Member State where the family is deemed to be present shall work closely with the determining Member State to quickly establish whether it is or not responsible for that applicant.

Member States shall use the Common and secured electronic transmission and communication system to facilitate for this purpose.

Or. en

Amendment 1634

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) take charge, under the conditions laid down in Articles 29, 30 and 35, of an applicant whose application was registered in a different Member State;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1635

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) take charge, under the conditions laid down in Articles 29, 30 and 35, of an applicant whose application was registered in a different Member State;

(a) take charge, under the conditions laid down in Articles 29, 30 and 35, of an applicant who has made an application for international protection in a different Member State;

Or. en

Amendment 1636

Charlie Weimers, Laura Huhtasaari, Peter Kofod

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(aa) reject all requests for international protection made by applicants who have entered a Member State of the European Union by illegal means, or who have passed through a safe country on the way to the Member State.

Or. en

Amendment 1637

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) take back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 31 and 35 of this Regulation, an applicant or a third-country national or a stateless person in relation to whom that Member State has been indicated as the Member State responsible under Article 11(1) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation];

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1638

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) take back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 31 and 35 of this Regulation, an applicant in relation to whom that Member State has been indicated as the Member State responsible under Article 11(1) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation];

Or. en

Amendment 1639

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1640

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) take back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 31 and 35 of this Regulation, a beneficiary of international protection in relation to whom that Member State has been indicated as the Member State responsible under Article 11(1) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation];

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1641

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1642

Maria Walsh, Deirdre Clune, Seán Kelly, Frances Fitzgerald, Colm Markey

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Justification

Article 26 expands the scope of the take back procedure to include beneficiaries of international protection and those who have arrived via resettlement under the proposed Union Resettlement Framework. While the Pact includes a proposal to amend the Long Term Residences Directive so that BIPs are entitled to long-term residency after three years rather than the current five, the restriction proposed here is likely to affect more people.

Amendment 1643

Balázs Hidvéghi, Loránt Vincze

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1644

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1645

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1646

Balázs Hidvéghi, Loránt Vincze

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) take back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 31 and 35 of this Regulation, a resettled or admitted person who has made an application for international protection or who is irregularly staying in a Member State other than the Member State which accepted to admit him or her in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Union Resettlement Framework Regulation] or which granted international protection or humanitarian status under a national resettlement scheme.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1647

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1648

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1649

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1650

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1651

Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Patryk Jaki, Beata Kempa

on behalf of the ECR Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. pl

Amendment 1652

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) take back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 31 and 35 of this Regulation, a resettled or admitted person who has made an application for international protection or who is illegally staying in a Member State other than the Member State which accepted to admit him or her in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Union Resettlement Framework Regulation] or which granted international protection or humanitarian status under a national resettlement scheme.

Or. en

Amendment 1653

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(da) Member States shall make all necessary practical and legal arrangements to comply with their obligations under the first subparagraph.

Or. en

Justification

Should be a subparagraph below point (d), instead of a new point (da)

Amendment 1654

Nicolaus Fest, Jaak Madison, Bernhard Zimniok, Gunnar Beck, Tom Vandendriessche, Peter Kofod, Roman Haider, Georg Mayer, Harald Vilimsky, Laura Huhtasaari, Philippe Olivier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. For the purposes of this Regulation, the situation of a minor who is accompanying the applicant and meets the definition of family member shall be indissociable from that of his or her family member and the minor shall be taken charge of or taken back by the Member State responsible for examining the application for international protection of that family member, even if the minor is not individually an applicant, unless it is demonstrated that this is not in the best interests of the child. The same principle shall be applied to children born after the applicant arrives on the territory of the Member States, without the need to initiate a new procedure for taking charge of them.

2. For the purposes of this Regulation, the situation of a minor or child who is accompanying the applicant and meets the definition of family member shall be indissociable from that of his or her family member and the minor or child shall be taken charge of or taken back by the Member State responsible for examining the application for international protection of that family member, even if the minor is not individually an applicant, unless it is demonstrated that this is not in the best interests of the child. The same principle shall be applied to children born after the applicant arrives on the territory of the Member States, without the need to initiate a new procedure for taking charge of them.

Or. en

Amendment 1655

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. In the situations referred to in paragraph 1, points (a) and (b), the Member State responsible shall examine or complete the examination of the application for international protection pursuant to Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedure Regulation].

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1656

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 26 a

Consequences of non-compliance for the Member State responsible

1. Following a decision under Article 26(1), if a Member State does not apply a take charge or take back, either formally or in practice, such as by not providing for proper arrangements for arrival, and after a reasonable period of time to allow for the practical arrangements of the transfer, and unless the applicant absconded or Article 8(3) applies, the Member State where the applicant is present may notify the Commission and inform the Member State responsible.

2. After a notification under paragraph 1, the Commission shall inform the Member State responsible and allow a period of 15 days for executing the transfer of the applicant.

In case the transfer is not executed within this period, the Commission shall impose a financial penalty of 1000 EUROS per day, calculated from the day of notification referred to in the first paragraph, until the transfer of the applicant.

In addition, to cover the costs of reception incurred by the Member State where the applicant is present, the Member State responsible shall allocate a daily compensation, calculated on the basis of the standard of living in that Member State. This daily allowance shall be paid into the reserve referred to in Article 20a of Regulation 2021/1147 [Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund].

Where a Member State responsible fails to pay the financial penalty or the daily compensation to cover the reception costs as referred to in paragraph 2, the Commission shall withhold the same amount from the payments due to that Member State from other Union funds. The total amount of the financial penalty shall be allocated in priority to Member States facing a migratory pressure in a fair way in order to support the application of the present Regulation.

As soon as the Member State responsible execute the take charge or take back of the applicant, the Commission shall cease to apply a penalty under paragraph 2.

3. To calculate the daily compensation as referred to in paragraph 2, third sub-paragraph, the Commission is empowered to adopt a delegated act.

4. By way of derogation, the present Article shall not apply to a Member State under pressure pursuant to article 51 or a to Member State where search and rescue operations generate recurring arrivals pursuant to Articles 47, 48 and 49.

Or. en

Amendment 1657

Balázs Hidvéghi, Loránt Vincze

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Where a Member State issues a residence document to the applicant, decides to apply Article 25, or does not transfer the person concerned to the Member State responsible within the time limits set out in Article 35, that Member State shall become the Member State responsible and the obligations laid down in Article 26 shall be transferred to that Member State. Where applicable, it shall inform the Member State previously responsible, the Member State conducting a procedure for determining the Member State responsible or the Member State which has been requested to take charge of the applicant or has received a take back notification, using the electronic communication network set up under Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003.

1. Where a Member State issues a residence document to the applicant, decides to apply Article 25, or does not transfer the person concerned to the Member State responsible within the time limits set out in Article 35, that Member State shall become the Member State responsible and the obligations laid down in Article 26 shall be transferred to that Member State. Where applicable, it shall inform the Member State previously responsible, the Member State conducting a procedure for determining the Member State responsible or the Member State which has been requested to take charge of the applicant or has received a take back request, using the electronic communication network set up under Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003.

Or. en

Amendment 1658

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Where a Member State issues a residence document to the applicant, decides to apply Article 25, or does not transfer the person concerned to the Member State responsible within the time limits set out in Article 35, that Member State shall become the Member State responsible and the obligations laid down in Article 26 shall be transferred to that Member State. Where applicable, it shall inform the Member State previously responsible, the Member State conducting a procedure for determining the Member State responsible or the Member State which has been requested to take charge of or take back the applicant, using the electronic communication network set up under Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003 .

Or. en

Amendment 1659

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The first subparagraph shall not apply if the person has already been granted international protection by the responsible Member State.

The first subparagraph shall not apply if the person has already been granted international protection by the responsible Member State, provided that the beneficiary does not claim before a judge that in the Member State primarily designated as responsible there are substantial grounds for believing that he or she would be in danger of being subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatments and punishments, in contrast with Article 4 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, pursuant to Article 8 (3).

Or. en

Amendment 1660

Balázs Hidvéghi, Loránt Vincze

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The first subparagraph shall not apply if the person has already been granted international protection by the responsible Member State.

The first subparagraph shall not apply if the person has already been granted international protection by the responsible Member State or if the person's status is under review by the responsible Member State.

Or. en

Amendment 1661

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The obligation laid down in Article 26(1), point (b), of this Regulation to take back a third-country national or a stateless person shall cease where it can be established, on the basis of the update of the data set referred to in Article 11(2)(c) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation], that the person concerned has left the territory of the Member States, on either a compulsory or a voluntary basis, in compliance with a return decision or removal order issued following the withdrawal or rejection of the application.

2. The obligations specified in Article 26 shall cease where the Member State responsible can establish, when requested to take charge or take back an applicant or another person as referred to in Article 26, that the person concerned has left the territory of the Member States for at least three months, unless the person concerned is in possession of a valid residence document issued by the Member State responsible. An application registered after the period of absence referred to in the first subparagraph shall be regarded as a new application giving rise to a new procedure for determining the Member State responsible.

Or. en

Amendment 1662

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The obligations specified in Article 26 shall cease where the Member State responsible can establish, when requested to take charge of or take back an applicant as referred to in Article 26, that the person concerned has left the territory of the Member States for at least three months, unless the person concerned is in possession of a valid residence document issued by the Member State responsible. An application registered after the period of absence referred to in the first subparagraph shall be regarded as a new application giving rise to a new procedure for determining the Member State responsible.

Or. en

Amendment 1663

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The obligation laid down in Article 26(1), point (b), of this Regulation to take back a third-country national or a stateless person shall cease where it can be established, on the basis of the update of the data set referred to in Article 11(2)(c) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation], that the person concerned has left the territory of the Member States, on either a compulsory or a voluntary basis, whether or not in compliance with a return decision or removal order issued following the withdrawal or rejection of the application.

Or. en

Amendment 1664

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

An application registered after an effective removal has taken place shall be regarded as a new application for the purpose of this Regulation, thereby giving rise to a new procedure for determining the Member State responsible.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1665

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1666

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

An application registered after the person concerned has left the territory of the Member States shall be regarded as a new application for the purpose of this Regulation, thereby giving rise to a new procedure for determining the Member State responsible.

Or. en

Amendment 1667

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2a. The obligations specified in Article 26 shall cease where the Member State responsible can establish, when requested to take charge of or take back an applicant or another person as referred in Article 26, that the person concerned has left the territory of the Member States for at least three months, unless the person concerned is in possession of a valid residence document issued by the Member State responsible.

An application registered after the period of absence referred to in the first subparagraph shall be regarded as a new application giving rise to a new procedure for determining the Member State responsible.

Or. en

Amendment 1668

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Michal Šimečka, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The Member State where an application for international protection is first registered pursuant to Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedure Regulation] or, where applicable, the Member State of relocation shall start the process of determining the Member State responsible without delay.

1. The Member State where an application for international protection is first registered pursuant to Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedure Regulation], where the third-country national is legally present or, where applicable, the Member State of relocation shall start the process of determining the Member State responsible without delay.

Or. en

Amendment 1669

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The Member State where an application for international protection is first registered pursuant to Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedure Regulation] shall start the process of determining the Member State responsible without delay.

Or. en

Amendment 1670

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1671

Balázs Hidvéghi, Loránt Vincze

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1672

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The Member State which has justified reasons to believe that another Member State is responsible for the examination of an application for international protection shall immediately start the process of submitting a take charge requestor a take back notification pursuant to Articles 29 and 31.

Or. en

Amendment 1673

Nicolaus Fest, Jaak Madison, Bernhard Zimniok, Gunnar Beck, Tom Vandendriessche, Peter Kofod, Roman Haider, Georg Mayer, Harald Vilimsky, Laura Huhtasaari, Philippe Olivier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1a. The process of determining the Member State responsible takes place, in case the applicant has crossed the border by land, in facilities close to the point of entry or close to the border, which are equipped to register and process applications without delay; in case the applicant has entered by land or by the sea the determination shall take place at the port or the airport;

Or. en

Amendment 1674

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Member State where an application is first registered or, where applicable, the Member State of relocation shall continue the process of determining the Member State responsible if the applicant leaves the territory of that Member State without authorisation or is otherwise not available to the competent authorities of that Member State.

2. The requesting or notifying Member State shall continue the process of determining the Member State responsible if the applicant leaves the territory of that Member State without authorisation or is otherwise not available to the competent authorities of that Member State.

Or. en

Amendment 1675

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Without prejudice to the cessation of responsibility provided in Article 27(2), the Member State where an application is first registered shall continue the process of determining the Member State responsible if the applicant leaves the territory of that Member State without authorisation or is otherwise not available to the competent authorities of that Member State.

Or. en

Amendment 1676

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Member State referred to in the first paragraph shall continue the process of determining the Member State responsible if the applicant leaves the territory of that Member State without authorisation or is otherwise not available to the competent authorities of that Member State.

Or. en

Amendment 1677

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Member State where an application is first registered shall continue the process of determining the Member State responsible if the applicant leaves the territory of that Member State without authorisation or is otherwise not available to the competent authorities of that Member State.

Or. en

Amendment 1678

Balázs Hidvéghi, Loránt Vincze

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1679

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 3 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The Member State which has conducted the process of determining the Member State responsible or which has become responsible pursuant to Article 8(4) of this Regulation shall indicate in Eurodac without delay pursuant to Article 11(1) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation]:

3. The Member State which has conducted the process of determining the Member State responsible or which has become responsible pursuant to Article 8(4) of this Regulation or by relocation of the applicant to its territory shall indicate in Eurodac without delay pursuant to Article 11(1) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation]:

Or. en

Amendment 1680

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ba) its responsibility following relocation pursuant to Article 23a or Part IV of this Regulation

Or. en

Amendment 1681

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 4 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. An applicant who is present in another Member State without a residence document or who there makes an application for international protection during the process of determining the Member State responsible, shall be taken back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 31 and 35, by the Member State with which that application was first registered.

Or. en

Amendment 1682

Nicolaus Fest, Jaak Madison, Bernhard Zimniok, Gunnar Beck, Tom Vandendriessche, Peter Kofod, Roman Haider, Georg Mayer, Harald Vilimsky, Laura Huhtasaari, Philippe Olivier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 4 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. An applicant who is present in another Member State without a residence document can be returned to his or her country of origin. Freedom of movement within the EU does not apply to applicants for asylum.

Or. en

Amendment 1683

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 4 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1684

Nicolaus Fest, Jaak Madison, Bernhard Zimniok, Gunnar Beck, Tom Vandendriessche, Peter Kofod, Roman Haider, Georg Mayer, Harald Vilimsky, Laura Huhtasaari, Philippe Olivier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

That obligation shall cease where the Member State determining the Member State responsible can establish that the applicant has obtained a residence document from another Member State.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1685

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

That obligation shall cease where the Member State determining the Member State responsible can establish that the applicant has obtained a residence document from another Member State.

That obligation shall cease where the Member State determining the Member State responsible can establish that the applicant has obtained a residence document from another Member State or where the Member State where the applicant is present decides to take responsibility for the examination of the application for international protection pursuant to Article 25.

Or. en

Amendment 1686

Nicolaus Fest, Jaak Madison, Bernhard Zimniok, Gunnar Beck, Tom Vandendriessche, Peter Kofod, Roman Haider, Georg Mayer, Harald Vilimsky, Laura Huhtasaari, Philippe Olivier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. An applicant who is present in a Member State without a residence document or who there makes an application for international protection after another Member State has confirmed to relocate the person concerned pursuant to Article 57(7), and before the transfer has been carried out to that Member State pursuant to Article 57(9), shall be taken back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 31 and 35, by the Member State of relocation.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1687

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1688

Nicolaus Fest, Jaak Madison, Bernhard Zimniok, Gunnar Beck, Tom Vandendriessche, Peter Kofod, Roman Haider, Georg Mayer, Harald Vilimsky, Laura Huhtasaari, Philippe Olivier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. If a Member State where an application for international protection has been registered considers that another Member State is responsible for examining the application, it shall, without delay and in any event within two months of the date on which the application was registered, request that other Member State to take charge of the applicant.

1. If, after having established the identity of the applicant, a Member State where an application for international protection has been registered considers that another Member State is responsible for examining the application, it shall, without delay and in any event within two months of the date on which the application was registered, request that other Member State to take charge of the applicant.

Or. en

Amendment 1689

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. If a Member State referred to in Article 28(1) considers that another Member State is responsible for examining the application, it shall, without delay and in any event within two months of the date on which the application was registered, request that other Member State to take charge of the applicant.

Or. en

Amendment 1690

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. If a Member State where an application for international protection has been registered considers that another Member State is responsible for examining the application, it shall, without delay and in any event within three months of the date on which the application was registered, request that other Member State to take charge of the applicant.

Or. en

Amendment 1691

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. If a Member State where an application for international protection has been registered considers that another Member State is responsible for examining the application, it shall, without delay and in any event within three months of the date on which the application was registered, request that other Member State to take charge of the applicant.

Or. en

Amendment 1692

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. If a Member State where an application for international protection has been registered considers that another Member State is responsible for examining the application, it shall, without delay and in any event within three months of the date on which the application was registered, request that other Member State to take charge of the applicant.

Or. en

Amendment 1693

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. If a Member State where an application for international protection has been registered considers that another Member State is responsible for examining the application, it shall, without delay and in any event within three months of the date on which the application was registered, request that other Member State to take charge of the applicant.

Or. en

Amendment 1694

Laura Ferrara, Sabrina Pignedoli

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. If a Member State where an application for international protection has been registered considers that another Member State is responsible for examining the application, it shall, without delay and in any event within three months of the date on which the application was registered, request that other Member State to take charge of the applicant.

Or. it

Amendment 1695

Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Loucas Fourlas

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. If a Member State where an application for international protection has been registered considers that another Member State is responsible for examining the application, it shall, immediately and in any event within three months of the date on which the application was registered, request that other Member State to take charge of the applicant.

Or. en

Amendment 1696

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Notwithstanding the first subparagraph, in the case of a Eurodac hit with data recorded pursuant to Articles 13 and 14a of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation] or of a VIS hit with data recorded pursuant to Article 21 of Regulation (EC) No 767/2008, the request to take charge shall be sent within one month of receiving that hit.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1697

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1698

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1699

Laura Ferrara, Sabrina Pignedoli

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. it

Amendment 1700

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1701

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1702

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1703

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the request to take charge of an applicant is not made within the periods laid down in the first and second subparagraphs, responsibility for examining the application for international protection shall lie with the Member State where the application was registered.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1704

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the applicant is an unaccompanied minor, the determining Member State may, where it considers that it is in the best interest of the minor, continue the procedure for determining the Member State responsible and request another Member State to take charge of the applicant despite the expiry of the time limits laid down in the first and second subparagraphs.

Where the applicant is an unaccompanied minor or the request is based on Article 16 or 17, the determining Member State may, continue the procedure for determining the Member State responsible and request another Member State to take charge of the applicant despite the expiry of the time limits laid down in the first and second subparagraphs.

With regard to minors, for the purpose of calculating the deadlines referred to in the first and second subparagraphs of this paragraph, time shall start to run when a guardian has been appointed and when the best interests assessment pursuant to Article 13, 15, 16, 17, 25a has been concluded.

Or. en

Justification

The deletion of the "best interest of the minor" is proposed in order to avoid misusing this international well-known guarantee for the minor in its prejudice when it comes to family reunification.

Amendment 1705

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the applicant is a minor, for the purpose of calculating the deadlines referred to in the first and second subparagraphs of this paragraph, time shall start to run when a representative has been appointed and when the best interests assessment pursuant to Article 13 has been concluded. Additionally, the determining Member State may continue the procedure for determining the Member State responsible and request another Member State to take charge of the applicant despite the expiry of the time limits laid down in the first and second subparagraphs.

Or. en

Amendment 1706

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the applicant is an unaccompanied minor, time referred to in subparagraph 1 and 2 shall start to run when a guardian has been appointed and when the best interests of the child assessment has been concluded. The determining Member State may also, where it considers that it is in the best interest of the minor, continue the procedure for determining the Member State responsible and request another Member State to take charge of the applicant despite the expiry of the time limits laid down in the first and second subparagraphs.

Or. en

Amendment 1707

Maria Walsh, Deirdre Clune, Seán Kelly, Frances Fitzgerald, Colm Markey

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the applicant is an unaccompanied minor or the request is based on Article 16 or 17, the determining Member State may, where it considers that it is in the best interest of the minor, continue the procedure for determining the Member State responsible and request another Member State to take charge of the applicant despite the expiry of the time limits laid down in the first and second subparagraphs.

Or. en

Amendment 1708

Nicolaus Fest, Jaak Madison, Bernhard Zimniok, Gunnar Beck, Tom Vandendriessche, Peter Kofod, Roman Haider, Georg Mayer, Harald Vilimsky, Laura Huhtasaari, Philippe Olivier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the applicant is an unaccompanied child, the determining Member State may, where it considers that it is in the best interest of the child, continue the procedure for determining the Member State responsible and request another Member State to take charge of the applicant despite the expiry of the time limits laid down in the first and second subparagraphs.

Or. en

Amendment 1709

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the applicant is a minor, or the request is based on Article 16, 17, 18 or 24, the determining Member State shall, continue the procedure for determining the Member State responsible and request another Member State to take charge of the applicant despite the expiry of the time limits laid down in the first and second subparagraphs.

Or. en

Amendment 1710

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the applicant is an unaccompanied minor or the request is based on Article 16, 17, 18 or 24 the determining Member State shall, continue the procedure for determining the Member State responsible and request another Member State to take charge of the applicant despite the expiry of the time limits laid down in the first and second subparagraphs.

Or. en

Amendment 1711

Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Loucas Fourlas

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The Member State first determined to be responsible may request another Member State to take charge of the applicant, pursuant the application of the criteria on unaccompanied minors and family members, until a decision on the application is taken and despite the expiry of the time limits laid down in the first subparagraph.

Or. en

Amendment 1712

Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Patryk Jaki, Beata Kempa

on behalf of the ECR Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The request shall state the reasons warranting an urgent reply and the period within which a reply is requested. That period shall be at least one week.

The request shall state the reasons warranting an urgent reply and the period within which a reply is requested. That period shall be at least two weeks.

Or. pl

Amendment 1713

Nicolaus Fest, Jaak Madison, Bernhard Zimniok, Gunnar Beck, Tom Vandendriessche, Peter Kofod, Roman Haider, Georg Mayer, Harald Vilimsky, Laura Huhtasaari, Philippe Olivier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 3 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. In the cases referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, the take charge request by another Member State shall be made using a standard form and including proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists referred to in Article 30(4) and/or relevant elements from the applicant’s statement, enabling the authorities of the requested Member State to check whether it is responsible on the basis of the criteria laid down in this Regulation.

3. In the cases referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2,the take charge request by another Member State shall be made using a standard form and including documents confirming the identity of the applicant as well as proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists referred to in Article 30(4) and/or relevant elements from the applicant’s statement, enabling the authorities of the requested Member State to check whether it is responsible on the basis of the criteria laid down in this Regulation.

Or. en

Amendment 1714

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt uniform conditions on the preparation and submission of take charge requests. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2).

The information shall be communicated between the Member States through the Common and secured electronic transmission and communication system referred to in Article 40a. In accordance with that article, the Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt uniform conditions on the preparation and submission of take charge requests.

Or. en

Amendment 1715

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The requested Member State shall make the necessary checks, and shall give a decision on the request to take charge of an applicant within one month of receipt of the request.

1. The requested Member State shall make the necessary checks, and shall give a decision on the request to take charge of an applicant within two months of receipt of the request.

Or. en

Amendment 1716

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The requested Member State shall make the necessary checks, and shall give a decision on the request to take charge of an applicant within one month of receipt of the request.

1. The requested Member State shall make the necessary checks, and shall give a decision on the request to take charge of an applicant within two weeks of receipt of the request.

Or. en

Amendment 1717

Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Patryk Jaki, Beata Kempa

on behalf of the ECR Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The requested Member State shall make the necessary checks, and shall give a decision on the request to take charge of an applicant within one month of receipt of the request.

1. The requested Member State shall make the necessary checks, and shall give a decision on the request to take charge of an applicant within two months of receipt of the request.

Or. pl

Amendment 1718

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Notwithstanding the first paragraph, in the case of a Eurodac hit with data recorded pursuant to Article 13 and 14a of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation] or of a VIS hit with data recorded pursuant to Article 21(2) of Regulation (EC) No 767/2008, the requested Member State shall give a decision on the request within two weeks of receipt of the request.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1719

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1720

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1721

Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Patryk Jaki, Beata Kempa

on behalf of the ECR Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. pl

Amendment 1722

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1723

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 4 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish, and review periodically, two lists, indicating the relevant elements of proof and circumstantial evidence in accordance with the criteria set out in points (a) and (b) of this paragraph. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2).

4. The Commission shall, by means of delegated acts, establish, and review periodically, two lists, indicating the relevant elements of proof and circumstantial evidence in accordance with the criteria set out in points (a) and (b) of this paragraph.

Or. en

Amendment 1724

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 4 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 68, establishing, and reviewing periodically, two lists, indicating the relevant elements of proof and circumstantial evidence in accordance with the criteria set out in points (a) and (b) of this paragraph.

Or. en

Amendment 1725

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 4 – point a – point ii

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ii) the Member States shall provide the Committee provided for in Article 67 with models of the different types of administrative documents, in accordance with the typology established in the list of formal proofs;

(ii) the Member States shall provide the Commission with models of the different types of administrative documents, in accordance with the typology established in the list of formal proofs;

Or. en

Amendment 1726

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 4 – point a – point ii

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ii) the Member States shall provide the Commission with models of the different types of administrative documents, in accordance with the typology established in the list of formal proofs;

Or. en

Amendment 1727

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

6. The requested Member State shall acknowledge its responsibility if the circumstantial evidence is coherent, verifiable and sufficiently detailed to establish responsibility.

6. The requested Member State shall acknowledge its responsibility after considering all available circumstantial evidence, including photos, proof of contact and witness statements to make a fair appraisal of the relationship.

Or. en

Amendment 1728

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

6. The requested Member State shall acknowledge its responsibility if the circumstantial evidence is coherent, verifiable and sufficiently detailed to establish responsibility.

6. The requested Member State shall acknowledge its responsibility after considering all available circumstantial evidence including photos, proof of contact and witness statements to make a fair appraisal of the relationship.

Or. en

Amendment 1729

Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Patryk Jaki, Beata Kempa

on behalf of the ECR Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

7. Where the requesting Member State has asked for an urgent reply pursuant to Article 29(2), the requested Member State shall reply within the period requested or, failing that, within two weeks of receipt of the request.

Or. pl

Amendment 1730

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

8. Where the requested Member State does not object to the request within the one-month period set out in paragraph 1 by a reply which gives full and detailed reasons, or where applicable within the two-week period set out in paragraphs 2 and 7, this shall be tantamount to accepting the request, and entail the obligation to take charge of the person, including the obligation to provide for proper arrangements for arrival.

8. Where the requested Member State does not object to the request within the two-month period set out in paragraph 1 by a reply which gives full and detailed reasons, or where applicable within the one-month or two-week period set out respectively in paragraphs 2 and 7, this shall be tantamount to accepting the request, and entail the obligation to take charge of the person, including the obligation to provide for proper arrangements for arrival.

Or. en

Amendment 1731

Balázs Hidvéghi, Loránt Vincze

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

8. Where the requested Member State does not object to the request within the one-month period set out in paragraph 1 by a reply which gives full and substantiated reasons based on all circumstances of the case, or where applicable within the two-week period set out in paragraphs 2 and 7, this shall be tantamount to accepting the request, and entail the obligation to take charge of the person, including the obligation to provide for proper arrangements for arrival.

Or. en

Amendment 1732

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

8. Where the requested Member State does not object to the request within the one-month period set out in paragraph 1 by a reply which gives full and detailed reasons, or where applicable within the four working days period set out in paragraphs 2 and 7, this shall be tantamount to accepting the request, and entail the obligation to take charge of the person, including the obligation to provide for proper arrangements for arrival.

Or. en

Amendment 1733

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Part III – Chapter V – Section III – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

III Procedures for take back notifications

III Procedures for take back requests

Or. en

Amendment 1734

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Part III – Chapter V – Section III – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

III Procedures for take back notifications

III Procedures for take back requests

Or. en

Amendment 1735

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Part III – Chapter V – Section III – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

III Procedures for take back notifications

III Procedures for take back requests

Or. en

Amendment 1736

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Part III – Chapter V – Section III – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

III Procedures for take back notifications

III Procedures for take back requests

Or. en

Amendment 1737

Balázs Hidvéghi, Loránt Vincze

Proposal for a regulation

Part III – Chapter V – Section III – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

III Procedures for take back notifications

III Procedures for take back requests

(This amendment applies through the whole text.)

Or. en

Amendment 1738

Laura Ferrara, Sabrina Pignedoli

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Submitting a take back notification

Submitting a take back request

Or. it

Amendment 1739

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Submitting a take back notification

Submitting a take back request

Or. en

Amendment 1740

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

31 Submitting a take back notification

31 Submitting a take back request

Or. en

Amendment 1741

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Submitting a take back notification

Submitting a take back request

Or. en

Amendment 1742

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Submitting a take back notification

Submitting a take back request

Or. en

Amendment 1743

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Submitting a take back notification

Submitting a take back request

Or. en

Amendment 1744

Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Loucas Fourlas

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. In a situation referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d) the Member State where the person is present shall make a take back notification without delay and in any event within two weeks after receiving the Eurodac hit.

1. In a situation referred to in Article 26(1), point(b), (c) or (d) the Member State where the person is present shall a take back request immediately and in any event within two weeks after receiving the Eurodac hit.

Where the take back request is not made within the periods laid down in paragraph 1,responsibility for examining the application for international protection shall lie with the requesting Member State.

Or. en

Amendment 1745

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. In a situation referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), the Member State where the person is present shall make a take back request without delay and in any event within two weeks after receiving the Eurodac hit. Where the take back request is not made within the established time limit, the responsibility for examining the application for international protection shall lie with the Member State where the applicant is present.

Or. en

Amendment 1746

Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Patryk Jaki, Beata Kempa

on behalf of the ECR Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. pl

Amendment 1747

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. In a situation referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d) the Member State where the person is present shall make a take back request without delay and in any event within two months after receiving the Eurodac hit.

Or. en

Amendment 1748

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1749

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1750

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. In a situation referred to in Article 26(1), point (b) the Member State where the person is present shall make a take back request without delay and in any event within two weeks after receiving the Eurodac hit.

Or. en

Amendment 1751

Balázs Hidvéghi, Loránt Vincze

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1752

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. A take back notification shall be made using a standard form and shall include proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists referred to in Article 30(4) and/or relevant elements from the statements of the person concerned.

2. A take back request shall be made using a standard form and shall include proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists referred to in Article 30(4) and/or relevant elements from the statements of the person concerned, enabling the authorities of the requested Member State to check whether it is responsible on the basis of the criteria laid down in Chapter II of this Regulation.

Or. en

Amendment 1753

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. A take back request shall be made using a standard form and shall include proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists referred to in Article 30(4) and/or relevant elements from the statements of the person concerned enabling the authorities of the requested Member State to check whether it is responsible on the basis of the criteria laid down in Chapter II of this Regulation.

Or. en

Amendment 1754

Laura Ferrara, Sabrina Pignedoli

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. it

Amendment 1755

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1756

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1757

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The notified Member State shall confirm receipt of the notification to the Member State which made the notification within one week, unless the notified Member State can demonstrate within that time limit that its responsibility has ceased pursuant to Article 27.

3. The requested Member State shall make the necessary checks and shall give a decision on the request to take back the person concerned as quickly as possible and in any event no later than one month from the date on which the request was received. When the request is based on data obtained from the Eurodac system, that time limit shall be reduced to two weeks.

Or. en

Amendment 1758

Balázs Hidvéghi, Loránt Vincze

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The requested Member State shall confirm receipt of the request to the Member State which made the request within one week, unless the requested Member State can demonstrate within that time limit that its responsibility has ceased pursuant to Article 27. The requested Member State shall have the right to reply to the request and explain its reasons.

Or. en

Amendment 1759

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The requested Member State shall make the necessary checks and shall give a decision on the request to take back the person concerned no later than one month from the date on which the request was received unless the requested Member State can demonstrate within that time limit that its responsibility has ceased pursuant to Article 27.

Or. en

Amendment 1760

Laura Ferrara, Sabrina Pignedoli

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The Member State to which the request is made shall confirm receipt of the request to the Member State which made the request within one week, unless the Member State to which the request is made can demonstrate within that time limit that its responsibility has ceased pursuant to Article 27.

Or. it

Amendment 1761

Maria Walsh, Deirdre Clune, Seán Kelly, Frances Fitzgerald, Colm Markey

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The notified Member State shall confirm receipt of the notification to the Member State which made the notification within four weeks, unless the notified Member State can demonstrate within that time limit that its responsibility has ceased pursuant to Article 27.

Or. en

Justification

The deadline of two weeks for lodging an appeal is too short as to be unreasonable within the meaning of Article 47 of the Charter.

Amendment 1762

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The requested Member State shall accept the request to the Member State which made the request within four weeks, unless the requested Member State can demonstrate within that time limit that it is not responsible pursuant to Article 27.

Or. en

Amendment 1763

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The requested Member State shall accept the request of the Member State which made the request within four weeks, unless the requested Member State can demonstrate within that time limit that it is not responsible pursuant to Article 27.

Or. en

Amendment 1764

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1765

Laura Ferrara, Sabrina Pignedoli

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Failure to act within the one-week period set out in paragraph 3 shall be tantamount to confirming the receipt of the notification.

deleted

Or. it

Amendment 1766

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Failure to act within the one-week period set out in paragraph 3 shall be tantamount to confirming the receipt of the notification.

4. Failure to act within the one month or two weeks period set out in paragraph 3 shall be tantamount to confirming the receipt of the notification.

Or. en

Amendment 1767

Maria Walsh, Deirdre Clune, Seán Kelly, Frances Fitzgerald, Colm Markey

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Failure to act within the one-week period set out in paragraph 3 shall be tantamount to confirming the receipt of the notification.

4. Failure to act within the four-week period set out in paragraph 3 shall be tantamount to confirming the receipt of the notification.

Or. en

Justification

The deadline of two weeks for lodging an appeal is too short as to be unreasonable within the meaning of Article 47 of the Charter.

Amendment 1768

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Failure to act within the one-week period set out in paragraph 3 shall be tantamount to confirming the receipt of the notification.

4. Failure to act within the four-weeks period set out in paragraph 3 shall be tantamount to confirming the receipt of the request.

Or. en

Amendment 1769

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Failure to act within the one-week period set out in paragraph 3 shall be tantamount to confirming the receipt of the notification.

4. Failure to act within the four-week period set out in paragraph 3 shall be tantamount to confirming the receipt of the request.

Or. en

Amendment 1770

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Failure to act within the one-week period set out in paragraph 3 shall be tantamount to confirming the receipt of the notification.

4. Failure to act within the four-week period set out in paragraph 3 shall be tantamount to confirming the receipt of the request.

Or. en

Amendment 1771

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt uniform conditions for the preparation and submission of take back notifications. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2).

Or. en

Amendment 1772

Laura Ferrara, Sabrina Pignedoli

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt uniform conditions for the preparation and submission of take back requests. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure laid down in Article 67(2).

Or. it

Amendment 1773

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1774

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1775

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1776

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt uniform methods for the preparation and submission of take back requests. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2).

Or. en

Amendment 1777

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 31 a

Allocation of applicants with no meaningful links

1. Where the Member State responsible cannot be determined in accordance with the criteria set out in Chapters II, the determining Member State shall communicate to the applicant that his or her application for international protection will be examined by a Member State of allocation.

2. On the basis of the distribution key referred to in Article 54, a short list of five Member States with the lowest number of applicants relative to their share pursuant to that distribution key shall be determined by means of the automated system referred to in Article 45.

3. The determining Member State shall communicate the short list referred to in paragraph 2, together with information about the Member States on that short list, to the applicant. Within five days of that communication the applicant shall be given the opportunity to select a Member State of allocation among the five Member States included in the short list. If the applicant does not select a Member State in accordance with the first subparagraph of this paragraph, the determining Member State shall allocate the applicant to the Member State on the short list with the lowest number of applicants relative to their share pursuant to the distribution key referred to in Article 54 when the list was compiled in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article.

4. Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall apply mutatis mutandis in the case where applicants have registered as families, relatives or groups of applicants having requested to be registered as travelling together. In cases where a unanimous selection cannot be reached between the members of the group, each of the members of the former group shall be able to select a Member State of allocation, from the list drawn up for the former group, in accordance with paragraph 2. Where a selection is not communicated to the determining authorities within the five days, the applicant shall be allocated to the Member State with the lowest number of applicants relative to their share pursuant to the distribution key referred to in Article 54 when the list was compiled in accordance with paragraph 2.

Or. en

Amendment 1778

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The determining Member State whose take charge request as regards the applicant referred to in Article 26(1), point (a) was accepted or who made a take back notification as regards persons referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) and (d) shall take a transfer decision at the latest within one week of the acceptance or notification.

1. The determining Member State whose take charge or take back request was accepted shall take a transfer decision at the latest within one week of the acceptance or notification.

Or. en

Amendment 1779

Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Patryk Jaki, Beata Kempa

on behalf of the ECR Group

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. pl

Amendment 1780

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The determining Member State whose take charge request as regards the applicant referred to in Article 26(1), point (a) was accepted or who made a take back request as regards persons referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) and (d) shall take a transfer decision at the latest within two weeks of the acceptance or notification.

Or. en

Amendment 1781

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The determining Member State whose take charge request as regards the applicant referred to in Article 26(1), point (a) was accepted or who made a take back notification as regards persons referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), shall take a transfer decision at the latest within one week of the acceptance or notification.

Or. en

Amendment 1782

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1783

Balázs Hidvéghi, Loránt Vincze

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The determining Member State whose take charge request as regards the applicant referred to in Article 26(1), point (a) was accepted or who made a take back request as regards persons referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), shall take a transfer decision at the latest within 10 days of the acceptance or notification.

Or. en

Amendment 1784

Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Loucas Fourlas

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where the requested Member State accepts to take charge of an applicant or to take back a person referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d), the requesting or the notifying Member State shall notify the person concerned in writing without delay of the decision to transfer him or her to the Member State responsible and, where applicable, of the fact that it will not examine his or her application for international protection.

2. The requesting Member State shall immediately notify the person concerned in writing or orally, in a language that he or she understands or is reasonably expected to understand, of the decision to transfer him or her to the Member State responsible, the consequences of such decision, including the time limits for carrying out the transfer and the obligations for the applicant set out in Article 9(5).The notification shall, if necessary, also include information on the place where and the date on which the person concerned is required to appear, if that person is travelling to the Member State responsible by his or her own means.

Or. en

Amendment 1785

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where the requested Member State accepts to take charge or tack back of an applicant the requesting Member State shall notify the person concerned in writing within one week of the decision to transfer him or her to the Member State responsible and, where applicable, of the fact that it will not examine his or her application for international protection.

Or. en

Amendment 1786

Maria Walsh, Deirdre Clune, Seán Kelly, Frances Fitzgerald, Colm Markey

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where the requested Member State accepts to take charge of an applicant or to take back a person referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d), the requesting or the notifying Member State shall notify the person concerned in writing in a language they understand without delay of the decision to transfer him or her to the Member State responsible, the consequences of this decision, necessary actions that the applicant needs to take and the timelines that bind them.

Or. en

Amendment 1787

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where the requested Member State accepts to take charge of an applicant or to take back a person referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d), the requesting or the notifying Member State shall notify the person concerned in writing within five days of the decision to transfer him or her to the Member State responsible and, where applicable, of the fact that it will not examine his or her application for international protection.

Or. en

Amendment 1788

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where the requested Member State accepts to take charge of an applicant or to take back a person referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), the requesting or the notifying Member State shall notify the person concerned in writing within one week of the decision to transfer him or her to the Member State responsible and, where applicable, of the fact that it will not examine his or her application for international protection.

Or. en

Amendment 1789

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where the requested Member State accepts to take charge of an applicant or to take back a person referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d), the requesting Member State shall notify the person concerned in writing without delay of the decision to transfer him or her to the Member State responsible and, where applicable, of the fact that it will not examine his or her application for international protection.

Or. en

Amendment 1790

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where the requested Member State accepts to take charge of an applicant or to take back a person referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d), the requesting Member State shall notify the person concerned in writing within 5 days of the decision to transfer him or her to the Member State responsible and, where applicable, of the fact that it will not examine his or her application for international protection.

Or. en

Amendment 1791

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. If a legal advisor or other counsellor is representing the person concerned, Member States may choose to notify the decision to such legal advisor or counsellor instead of to the person concerned and, where applicable, communicate the decision to the person concerned.

3. If a legal advisor or other counsellor is representing the person concerned, Member States shall notify the decision to such legal advisor or counsellor as well as to the person concerned.

Or. en

Amendment 1792

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. If a legal advisor or other counsellor is representing the person concerned, Member States shall notify the decision to such legal advisor or counsellor and communicate the decision to the person concerned.

Or. en

Amendment 1793

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 4 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The decision referred to in paragraph 1 shall contain information on the legal remedies available, including on the right to apply for suspensive effect, and on the time limits applicable for seeking such remedies and for carrying out the transfer, and shall, if necessary, contain information on the place where, and the date on which, the person concerned is required to appear, if that person is travelling to the Member State responsible by his or her own means.

4. The decision referred to in paragraph 1 shall be written in a language understandable to the applicant and contain information on the legal remedies available, including on the right to apply for suspensive effect, and on the time limits applicable for seeking such remedies and for carrying out the transfer, and shall, if necessary, contain information on the place where, and the date on which, the person concerned is required to appear, if that person is travelling to the Member State responsible by his or her own means.

Or. en

Amendment 1794

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 4 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The decision referred to in paragraph 1 shall contain information on the legal remedies available and on the time limits applicable for seeking such remedies and for carrying out the transfer, and shall, if necessary, contain information on the place where, and the date on which, the person concerned is required to appear, if that person is travelling to the Member State responsible by his or her own means.

Or. en

Amendment 1795

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Michal Šimečka, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 4 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The decision referred to in paragraph 1 shall contain information in a plain language on the legal remedies available, including on the right to apply for suspensive effect, and on the time limits applicable for seeking such remedies and for carrying out the transfer, and shall, if necessary, contain information on the place where, and the date on which, the person concerned is required to appear, if that person is travelling to the Member State responsible by his or her own means.

Or. en

Amendment 1796

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1797

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall ensure that information on persons or entities that may provide legal assistance to the person concerned is communicated to the person concerned together with the decision referred to in paragraph 1, when that information has not been already communicated. Without prejudice to the applicant's right to choose his or her own legal advisor or other counselor at his or her own cost, Member States shall ensure that the person concerned has access to legal assistance and representation and, where necessary, to linguistic assistance and intercultural mediation, at all stages of the procedure provided for in this Regulation

Or. en

Amendment 1798

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall ensure that information on persons or entities that may provide legal assistance to the person concerned is communicated to the person concerned prior to the decision referred to in paragraph 1.

Or. en

Amendment 1799

Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Sophia in 't Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Moritz Körner, Abir Al-Sahlani

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1800

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. Where the person concerned is not assisted or represented by a legal advisor or other counsellor, Member States shall inform him or her of the main elements of the decision, which shall always include information on the legal remedies available and the time limits applicable for seeking such remedies, in a language that the person concerned understands or is reasonably supposed to understand.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1801

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. Where the person concerned is not assisted or represented by a legal advisor or other counsellor, Member States shall inform him or her of the main elements of the decision, which shall always include information on the legal remedies available, the right to apply for suspensive effect and the time limits applicable for seeking such remedies and for carrying out the transfer, in a language that the person concerned understands and is able to communicate in.

Or. en

Amendment 1802

Maria Walsh, Deirdre Clune, Seán Kelly, Frances Fitzgerald, Colm Markey

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1803

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1804

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Michal Šimečka, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1805

Nicolaus Fest, Jaak Madison, Bernhard Zimniok, Gunnar Beck, Tom Vandendriessche, Peter Kofod, Roman Haider, Georg Mayer, Harald Vilimsky, Laura Huhtasaari, Philippe Olivier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

[...]

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1806

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The applicant or another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) and (d) shall have the right to an effective remedy, in the form of an appeal or a review, in fact and in law, against a transfer decision, before a court or tribunal.

1. The applicant or another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (a), (b), (c) and (d) shall have the right to an effective remedy enshrined in Article 47 of the Charter, in the form of an appeal or a review, in fact and in law, against a transfer decision or a decision to reject a take charge request, before a court or tribunal.

Or. en

Amendment 1807

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The applicant shall have the right to an effective remedy, in the form of an appeal or a review, in fact and in law, against a transfer decision, a failure to make a transfer decision, a rejection of a request for family reunification or a decision to reject a take charge request before a court or tribunal.

Or. en

Amendment 1808

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The applicant or another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), shall have the right to an effective remedy with automatic suspensive effect, in the form of an appeal or a review, in fact and in law, against a transfer decision, before a court or tribunal.

Or. en

Amendment 1809

Balázs Hidvéghi, Loránt Vincze

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The applicant or another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b) shall have the right to an effective remedy, in the form of an appeal or a review, in fact and in law, against a transfer decision, before a court or tribunal.

Or. en

Amendment 1810

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The scope of the remedy shall be limited to an assessment of:

deleted

(a) whether the transfer would result in a real risk of inhuman or degrading treatment for the person concerned within the meaning of Article 4 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights;

(b) whether Articles 15 to 18 and Article 24 have been infringed, in the case of the persons taken charge of pursuant to Article 26(1), point (a).

Or. en

Amendment 1811

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The scope of the remedy shall be limited to an assessment of:

deleted

(a) whether the transfer would result in a real risk of inhuman or degrading treatment for the person concerned within the meaning of Article 4 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights;

(b) whether Articles 15 to 18 and Article 24 have been infringed, in the case of the persons taken charge of pursuant to Article 26(1), point (a).

Or. en

Amendment 1812

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The scope of the remedy shall be limited to an assessment of:

The scope of the remedy shall include at least an assessment of:

Or. en

Amendment 1813

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) whether the transfer would result in a real risk of inhuman or degrading treatment for the person concerned within the meaning of Article 4 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights;

(a) whether the transfer or failure to transfer would result in a real risk of inhuman or degrading treatment for the person concerned within the meaning of Article 4 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights;

Or. en

Amendment 1814

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(aa) whether the transfer or failure to transfer would result in a real risk of violating other fundamental rights such as the right to family life or health

Or. en

Amendment 1815

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ba) whether the applicant is in possession of new and tangible elements or evidence, which the competent authorities did not assess, proving that another Member State is responsible for his or her application according to Chapter II of Part III.

Or. en

Amendment 1816

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Member States shall provide for a period of two weeks after the notification of a transfer decision within which the person concerned may exercise his or her right to an effective remedy pursuant to paragraph 1.

2. Member States shall provide for a period of at least four weeks after the notification of a transfer decision or a decision to reject a take charge request within which the person concerned may exercise his or her right to an effective remedy pursuant to paragraph 1. No transfer shall take place before the decision on the appeal or review is taken.

Or. en

Amendment 1817

Maria Walsh, Deirdre Clune, Seán Kelly, Frances Fitzgerald, Colm Markey

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Member States shall provide for a period of at least four weeks after the notification of a transfer decision within which the person concerned may exercise his or her right to an effective remedy pursuant to paragraph 1.

Or. en

Justification

The deadline of two weeks for lodging an appeal is too short as to be unreasonable within the meaning of Article 47 of the Charter.

Amendment 1818

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Member States shall provide for a period of at least one month after the notification of a transfer decision within which the person concerned may exercise his or her right to an effective remedy pursuant to paragraph 1.

Or. en

Amendment 1819

Balázs Hidvéghi, Loránt Vincze

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Member States shall provide for a period of 3 days after the notification of a transfer decision within which the person concerned may exercise his or her right to an effective remedy pursuant to paragraph 1.

Or. en

Amendment 1820

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The person concerned shall have the right to request, within a reasonable period of time from the notification of the transfer decision, a court or tribunal to suspend the implementation of the transfer decision pending the outcome of his or her appeal or review. Member States shall ensure that an effective remedy is in place by suspending the transfer until the decision on the first suspension request is taken. Any decision on whether to suspend the implementation of the transfer decision shall be taken within one month of the date when that request reached the competent court or tribunal.

deleted

Where the person concerned has not exercised his or her right to request suspensive effect, the appeal against, or review of, the transfer decision shall not suspend the implementation of a transfer decision.

A decision not to suspend the implementation of the transfer decision shall state the reasons on which it is based.

If suspensive effect is granted, the court or tribunal shall endeavour to decide on the substance of the appeal or review within one month of the decision to grant suspensive effect.

Or. en

Amendment 1821

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

A decision not to suspend the implementation of the transfer decision shall state the reasons on which it is based.

If suspensive effect is granted, the court or tribunal shall endeavour to decide on the substance of the appeal or review within one month of the decision to grant suspensive effect.

Or. en

Amendment 1822

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 3 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The implementation of the transfer decision shall be suspended pending the outcome of the applicant's appeal or review.

Or. en

Amendment 1823

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 3 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Member States shall ensure that an effective remedy shall confer on the person concerned the right to remain in the Member state concerned pending the outcome of the appeal or review, the transfer shall be automatically suspended until the decision on the first suspension request is taken. Any decision to suspend the implementation of the transfer decision shall be taken within one month of the date when that request reached the competent court or tribunal.

Or. en

Amendment 1824

Balázs Hidvéghi, Loránt Vincze

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 3 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The person concerned shall have the right to request, within 3 days from the notification of the transfer decision, a court or tribunal to suspend the implementation of the transfer decision pending the outcome of his or her appeal or review. Member States shall ensure that an effective remedy is in place by suspending the transfer until the decision on the first suspension request is taken. Any decision on whether to suspend the implementation of the transfer decision shall be taken within one month of the date when that request reached the competent court or tribunal.

Or. en

Amendment 1825

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1826

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1827

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

A decision not to suspend the implementation of the transfer decision shall state the reasons on which it is based.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1828

Nadine Morano

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

A decision not to suspend the implementation of the transfer decision shall state the reasons on which it is based.

A decision to suspend the implementation of the transfer decision shall state the reasons on which it is based.

Or. fr

Amendment 1829

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

If suspensive effect is granted, the court or tribunal shall endeavour to decide on the substance of the appeal or review within one month of the decision to grant suspensive effect.

The court or tribunal shall endeavour to decide on the substance of the appeal or review within one month.

Or. en

Amendment 1830

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Member States shall ensure that the person concerned has access to legal assistance and, where necessary, to linguistic assistance.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1831

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Member States shall ensure that the person concerned has access to legal assistance and, where necessary, to linguistic assistance.

4. Without prejudice to the applicant's right to choose his or her own legal advisor or other counsellor at his or her own cost, Member States shall ensure that the person concerned has access to legal assistance and representation and, where necessary, to linguistic assistance and intercultural mediation, at all stages of the procedure provided for in this Regulation.

Or. en

Amendment 1832

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Member States shall ensure that the person concerned has access to legal assistance and, where necessary, to linguistic assistance.

4. Member States shall ensure that the person concerned has access, where necessary, to linguistic assistance.

Or. en

Amendment 1833

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. Member States shall ensure that legal assistance is granted on request free of charge where the person concerned cannot afford the costs involved. Member States may provide that, as regards fees and other costs, the treatment of persons subject to this Regulation shall not be more favourable than the treatment generally accorded to their nationals in matters pertaining to legal assistance.

deleted

Without arbitrarily restricting access to legal assistance, Member States may provide that free legal assistance and representation is not to be granted where the appeal or review is considered by the competent authority or a court or tribunal to have no tangible prospect of success.

Where a decision not to grant free legal assistance and representation pursuant to the second subparagraph is taken by an authority other than a court or tribunal, Member States shall provide the right to an effective remedy before a court or tribunal to challenge that decision. Where the decision is challenged, that remedy shall be an integral part of the remedy referred to in paragraph 1.

In complying with the requirements set out in this paragraph, Member States shall ensure that legal assistance and representation is not arbitrarily restricted and that effective access to justice for the person concerned is not hindered.

Legal assistance shall include at least the preparation of the required procedural documents and representation before a court or tribunal and may be restricted to legal advisors or counsellors specifically designated by national law to provide assistance and representation.

Procedures for access to legal assistance shall be laid down in national law.

Or. en

Amendment 1834

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 5 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. Member States shall ensure that legal assistance is granted free of charge, at all stages of the procedure, where the person concerned cannot afford the costs involved, according to Article 11a of this Regulation. Member States may provide that, as regards fees and other costs, the treatment of persons subject to this Regulation shall not be more favourable than the treatment generally accorded to their nationals in matters pertaining to legal assistance.

Or. en

Amendment 1835

Maria Walsh, Deirdre Clune, Seán Kelly, Frances Fitzgerald, Colm Markey

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 5 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. Member States shall ensure that legal assistance is granted on request free of charge and at the earliest stage possible where the person concerned cannot afford the costs involved. Member States may provide that, as regards fees and other costs, the treatment of persons subject to this Regulation shall not be more favourable than the treatment generally accorded to their nationals in matters pertaining to legal assistance.

Or. en

Amendment 1836

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 5 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. Member States shall ensure that legal assistance is granted on request free of charge at the earliest stage possible where the person concerned cannot afford the costs involved. Member States may provide that, as regards fees and other costs, the treatment of persons subject to this Regulation shall not be more favourable than the treatment generally accorded to their nationals in matters pertaining to legal assistance.

Or. en

Amendment 1837

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 5 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. Member States shall ensure that legal assistance is granted but the person concerned must bear the costs involved. Member States shall provide that, as regards fees and other costs, the treatment of persons subject to this Regulation shall not be more favourable than the treatment generally accorded to their nationals in matters pertaining to legal assistance.

Or. en

Amendment 1838

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1839

Maria Walsh, Deirdre Clune, Seán Kelly, Frances Fitzgerald, Colm Markey

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Justification

The CJEU has ruled that access to legal aid is an important component of the general principle of effective judicial protection in EU law. When assessing whether the grant of legal aid is necessary or not, national courts must ensure compliance with the principle of effective judicial protection and take several criteria into account. Thus, effective access to legal aid is deemed necessary to comply with the rights under the Charter, including Articles 18, 19 and 47. A “competent authority” is not an impartial body – the appeal will be against the decision of this authority so it has a strong interest in the outcome which is in turn highly likely to be influenced by the availability or otherwise of legal assistance or representation. To give the competent authority a role in judging the prospects of the appeal and then denying legal assistance on that basis, opens up the prospect of arbitrary denial of legal assistance, not to mention blanket or biased denial.

Amendment 1840

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1841

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1842

Maria Walsh, Deirdre Clune, Seán Kelly, Frances Fitzgerald, Colm Markey

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Justification

Same as above.

Amendment 1843

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1844

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1845

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1846

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1847

Maria Walsh, Deirdre Clune, Seán Kelly, Frances Fitzgerald, Colm Markey

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Justification

Same as above.

Amendment 1848

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Legal assistance shall be in line with Article 11a.

Or. en

Amendment 1849

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Legal assistance shall include at least the preparation of the required procedural documents and representation before a court or tribunal.

Or. en

Amendment 1850

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Procedures for access to legal assistance shall be laid down in national law.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1851

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 33 a

Right to free legal assistance and representation

1. Without prejudice to the applicant's right to choose his or her own legal representative at his or her own cost, Member States shall provide free legal assistance and representation on matters relating to the application of this Regulation at all stages of the procedure.

2. The free legal assistance and representation shall, at least, include:

(a) the provision of information on the procedure in the light of the applicant's individual circumstances;

(b) assistance in the preparation of the personal interview and supporting documents and evidence to be provided as part of the interview, including participation in the personal interview as necessary;

(c) explanation of the reasons for and consequences of a transfer decision as well as information as to how to challenge that decision or how to access remedies in situations where no transfer decision is taken pursuant to Article 33.

3. In complying with this paragraph, Member States shall ensure that legal assistance and representation is not arbitrarily restricted and that the applicant’s effective access to justice is not hindered.

4. Procedures for access to legal assistance shall be laid down in national law.

Or. en

Amendment 1852

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Member States shall not hold a person in detention for the sole reason that he or she is subject to the procedure established by this Regulation.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1853

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Member States shall not hold a person in detention for the sole reason that he or she is subject to the procedure established by this Regulation.

1. Member States shall not hold a person in detention for the sole reason that he or she is subject to the procedure established by this Regulation. Detention shall, in any case, be a measure of last resort when alternatives are not available.

Or. en

Amendment 1854

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Member States shall not hold a person in detention for the sole reason that he or she is subject to the procedure established by this Regulation.

1. Member States can if they deem necessary for security or other reasons hold a person in detention for the sole reason that he or she is subject to the procedure established by this Regulation.

Or. en

Amendment 1855

Nicolaus Fest, Jaak Madison, Bernhard Zimniok, Gunnar Beck, Tom Vandendriessche, Peter Kofod, Roman Haider, Georg Mayer, Harald Vilimsky, Laura Huhtasaari, Philippe Olivier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Member States shall not hold a person in detention for the sole reason that he or she is subject to the procedure established by this Regulation.

1. Member States other than the Member State of first entry shall not hold a person in detention for the sole reason that he or she is subject to the procedure established by this Regulation.

Or. en

Amendment 1856

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Member States shall not hold a person in detention for the sole reason that he or she is subject to the procedure established by this Regulation.

1. Member States shall not hold a person in detention based on this Regulation. If Member States choose as a measure of last resort to detain people, the following safeguards shall apply.

Or. en

Amendment 1857

Nadine Morano

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Member States shall not hold a person in detention for the sole reason that he or she is subject to the procedure established by this Regulation.

1. Member States may hold a person in detention or place him or her under house arrest for the sole reason that he or she is subject to the procedure established by this Regulation.

Or. fr

Amendment 1858

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1a. Minors, whether accompanied or unaccompanied, and vulnerable people according to Directive 2013/33 shall not be detained. In accordance with the principle of family unity, parents or legal or customary primary caregivers shall not be detained. Unaccompanied minors shall be placed in appropriate alternative care settings in the national child protection system in line with their best interest and taking into consideration their views and needs. Families with minor children shall be accommodated together in non-custodial, community-based placements while their immigration status is being resolved.

Or. en

Amendment 1859

Caterina Chinnici, Javier Moreno Sánchez

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1a. Minors, whether accompanied or unaccompanied, shall not be detained. Consistent with the principle of family unity, parents or legal or customary primary caregivers shall not be detained. Unaccompanied children shall be placed in appropriate alternative care settings in the national child protection system in line with their best interests and taking into consideration their views. Families with minor children shall be accommodated together in non-custodial, community-based placements while their immigration status is being resolved.

Or. en

Amendment 1860

Hilde Vautmans, Fabienne Keller, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Sophia in 't Veld, Moritz Körner

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1a. The responsible authorities shall explore alternatives to detention, in particular for minors and applicants with specific vulnerabilities. Where possible, minors should be accommodated in non-custodial community-based placements while their immigration status is being resolved. Unaccompanied minors shall never be detained and shall be placed in appropriate alternative care settings in the national child protection system in line with their best interests and taking into account their views.

Or. en

Amendment 1861

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where there is a proven significant risk of absconding, Member States may as a measure of last resort detain the person concerned in order to secure a transfer decision after a final transfer decision has been taken and notified in accordance with this Regulation, on the basis of an individual assessment and only in so far as detention is proportional and other less coercive alternative measures cannot be applied effectively, based on an individual assessment of the person’s circumstances. Minors and vulnerable persons shall not be detained. Member States shall accommodate minors, families with minors and vulnerable applicants in non-custodial, community-based placements while their application is processed.

Or. en

Amendment 1862

Nadine Morano

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where there is a risk of absconding, Member States may detain the person concerned in order to secure transfer procedures in accordance with this Regulation.

Or. fr

Amendment 1863

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where there is a risk of absconding, Member States may detain the person concerned in order to secure transfer procedures in accordance with this Regulation.

Or. en

Amendment 1864

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where there is a risk of absconding, Member States may detain the person concerned in order to secure transfer procedures in accordance with this Regulation, on the basis of an individual assessment and only in so far as detention is proportional and other less coercive alternative measures cannot be applied effectively, based on an individual assessment of the person’s circumstances. Such alternatives to detention shall be available both in fact and law in the Member States, in particular for minors and applicants with vulnerabilities and specific needs.

Or. en

Amendment 1865

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where there is a risk of absconding, Member States may detain the person concerned in order to secure transfer procedures in accordance with this Regulation, on the basis of an individual assessment and only in so far as detention is proportional and other less coercive alternative measures cannot be applied effectively, based on an individual assessment of the person’s circumstances. Member States may also detain an applicant who represents a danger to national security or public order.

Or. en

Amendment 1866

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where there is a proven risk of absconding, Member States, as measure of last resort, may detain the person concerned in order to secure a transfer after a final transfer decision has been taken and notified in accordance with this Regulation, on the basis of an individual assessment and only in so far as detention is proportional and other less coercive alternative measures cannot be applied effectively, based on an individual assessment of the person’s circumstances.

Or. en

Amendment 1867

Nicolaus Fest, Jaak Madison, Bernhard Zimniok, Gunnar Beck, Tom Vandendriessche, Peter Kofod, Roman Haider, Georg Mayer, Harald Vilimsky, Laura Huhtasaari, Philippe Olivier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where there is a risk of absconding, or when an applicant fails to produce documents proving his or her identity, Member States may detain the person concerned in order to secure transfer procedures in accordance with this Regulation, on the basis of an individual assessment and only in so far as detention is proportional and other less coercive alternative measures cannot be applied effectively, based on an individual assessment of the person’s circumstances.

Or. en

Amendment 1868

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1869

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Only where there is a serious and proven risk of absconding and as a last resort, Member States may detain the applicant in order to secure transfer procedures in accordance with this Regulation, on the basis of an individual assessment and only in so far as detention is proportional and other less coercive alternative measures cannot be applied effectively, based on an individual assessment of the person’s circumstances.

Or. en

Amendment 1870

Maria Walsh, Deirdre Clune, Seán Kelly, Frances Fitzgerald, Colm Markey

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where there is a significant risk of absconding, Member States may detain the person concerned in order to secure transfer procedures in accordance with this Regulation, on the basis of an individual assessment and only in so far as detention is proportional and other less coercive alternative measures cannot be applied effectively, based on an individual assessment of the person’s circumstances.

Or. en

Amendment 1871

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2a. Member States shall detain an applicant who represents a danger to national security and public order and for any other reason that might be considered relevant according to national law.

Or. en

Amendment 1872

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Detention shall be for as short a period as possible and shall be for no longer than the time reasonably necessary to fulfil the required administrative procedures with due diligence until the transfer under this Regulation is carried out. Detention is never in the best interests of children and the detention of minors under this Regulation shall therefore be prohibited. Member States shall accommodate minors and families with minors in non-custodial, community-based placements while their application is processed. Unaccompanied children shall be placed in appropriate alternative care settings in the national child protection system in line with their best interests and taking into consideration their views.

Or. en

Amendment 1873

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The length and conditions for detention shall be determined by national legislation.

Or. en

Amendment 1874

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1875

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Detention shall be for as short a period as long as necessary to fulfil the required administrative procedures with due diligence until the transfer under this Regulation is carried out.

Or. en

Amendment 1876

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Detention shall be for no longer than the time reasonably necessary to fulfil the required administrative procedures with due diligence until the transfer under this Regulation is carried out.

Or. en

Amendment 1877

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where an applicant or another person referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d) is detained pursuant to this Article, the period for submitting a take charge request or a take back notification shall not exceed two weeks from the registration of the application. Where a person is detained at a later stage than the registration of the application, the period for submitting a take charge request or a take back notification shall not exceed one week from the date on which the person was placed in detention. The Member State carrying out the procedure in accordance with this Regulation shall ask for an urgent reply on a take charge request. Such reply shall be given within one week of receipt of the take charge request. Failure to reply within the one-week period shall be tantamount to accepting the take charge request and shall entail the obligation to take charge of the person, including the obligation to provide for proper arrangements for arrival.

Or. en

Amendment 1878

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where an applicant or another person referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d) is detained pursuant to this Article, the period for submitting a take charge request or a take back request shall not exceed two months from the registration of the application. Where a person is detained at a later stage than the registration of the application, the period for submitting a take charge request or a take back notification shall not exceed two weeks from the date on which the person was placed in detention. The Member State carrying out the procedure in accordance with this Regulation shall ask for an urgent reply on a take charge request. Such reply shall be given within two weeks of receipt of the take charge request. Failure to reply within the two-week period shall be tantamount to accepting the take charge request and shall entail the obligation to take charge of the person, including the obligation to provide for proper arrangements for arrival.

Or. en

Amendment 1879

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where an applicant is detained pursuant to this Article, the period for submitting a take charge request or a take back request shall not exceed two weeks from the registration of the application. Where a person is detained at a later stage than the registration of the application, the period for submitting a take charge request or a take back request shall not exceed one week from the date on which the person was placed in detention. The Member State carrying out the procedure in accordance with this Regulation shall ask for an urgent reply on a take charge request. Such reply shall be given within one week of receipt of the take charge request. Failure to reply within the one-week period shall be tantamount to accepting the take charge request and shall entail the obligation to take charge of the person, including the obligation to provide for proper arrangements for arrival.

Or. en

Amendment 1880

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where an applicant or another person referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d) is detained, the period for submitting a take charge request or a take back request shall not exceed two weeks from the registration of the application. Where a person is detained at a later stage than the registration of the application, the period for submitting a take charge request or a take back request shall not exceed one week from the date on which the person was placed in detention. The Member State carrying out the procedure in accordance with this Regulation shall ask for an urgent reply on a take charge request. Such reply shall be given within one week of receipt of the take charge request. Failure to reply within the one-week period shall be tantamount to accepting the take charge request and shall entail the obligation to take charge of the person, including the obligation to provide for proper arrangements for arrival.

Or. en

Amendment 1881

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where an applicant or another person referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d) is detained pursuant to this Article, the period for submitting a take charge request or a take back request shall not exceed one month from the registration of the application. Where a person is detained at a later stage than the registration of the application, the period for submitting a take charge request or a take back request shall not exceed two weeks from the date on which the person was placed in detention. The Member State carrying out the procedure in accordance with this Regulation shall ask for an urgent reply on a take charge request. Such reply shall be given within two weeks of receipt of the take charge request. Failure to reply within the two -week period shall be tantamount to accepting the take charge request and shall entail the obligation to take charge of the person, including the obligation to provide for proper arrangements for arrival

Or. en

Amendment 1882

Balázs Hidvéghi, Loránt Vincze

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where an applicant or another person referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), is detained pursuant to this Article, the period for submitting a take charge request or a take back request shall not exceed one month from the registration of the application. Where a person is detained at a later stage than the registration of the application, the period for submitting a take charge request or a take back request shall not exceed 2 weeks from the date on which the person was placed in detention. The Member State carrying out the procedure in accordance with this Regulation shall ask for an urgent reply on a take charge request. Such reply shall be given within 2 weeks of receipt of the take charge request. Failure to reply within the 2-weeks period shall be tantamount to accepting the take charge request and shall entail the obligation to take charge of the person, including the obligation to provide for proper arrangements for arrival.

Or. en

Amendment 1883

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where an applicant or another person referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), is detained pursuant to this Article, the period for submitting a take charge request or a take back request shall not exceed two weeks from the registration of the application. Where a person is detained at a later stage than the registration of the application, the period for submitting a take charge request or a take back notification shall not exceed one week from the date on which the person was placed in detention. The Member State carrying out the procedure in accordance with this Regulation shall ask for an urgent reply on a take charge request. Such reply shall be given within one week of receipt of the take charge request. Failure to reply within the one-week period shall be tantamount to accepting the take charge request and shall entail the obligation to take charge of the person, including the obligation to provide for proper arrangements for arrival.

Or. en

Amendment 1884

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where a person is detained pursuant to this Article, the transfer of that person from the requesting or notifying Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within four weeks of:

Where a person is detained pursuant to this Article, the transfer of that person from the requesting or requested Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within four weeks of:

Or. en

Amendment 1885

Balázs Hidvéghi, Loránt Vincze

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1886

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where an applicant is detained pursuant to this Article, the transfer of that person from the requesting Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within four weeks of:

Or. en

Amendment 1887

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where a person is detained pursuant to this Article, the transfer of that person from the requesting Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within four weeks of:

Or. en

Amendment 1888

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) the date on which the request was accepted or the take back notification was confirmed, or

(a) the date on which the request was accepted

Or. en

Amendment 1889

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) the date on which the request was accepted or the take back notification was confirmed, or

(a) the date on which the request was accepted, or

Or. en

Amendment 1890

Balázs Hidvéghi, Loránt Vincze

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the requesting or notifying Member State fails to comply with the time limits for submitting a take charge request or take back notification or to take a transfer decision within the time limit laid down in Article 32(1) or where the transfer does not take place within the period of four weeks referred to in the third subparagraph of this paragraph, the person shall no longer be detained. Articles 29, 31 and 35 shall continue to apply accordingly.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1891

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the requesting Member State fails to comply with the time limits for submitting a take charge request or take back request or to take a transfer decision within the time limit laid down in Article 32(1) or where the transfer does not take place within the period of four weeks referred to in the third subparagraph of this paragraph, the person shall no longer be detained. Articles 29, 31 and 35 shall continue to apply accordingly.

Or. en

Amendment 1892

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1893

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the requesting Member State fails to comply with the time limits for submitting a take charge request or take back request or to take a transfer decision within the time limit laid down in Article 32(1) or where the transfer does not take place within the period of eight weeks referred to in the third subparagraph of this paragraph, the person shall no longer be detained. Articles 29, 31 and 35 shall continue to apply accordingly.

Or. en

Amendment 1894

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Where an applicant is detained pursuant to this Article, the detention shall be ordered in writing by judicial authorities. The detention order shall state the reasons in fact and in law on which it is based and shall contain a reference to the consideration of the available alternatives and the reasons as to why they could not be applied effectively.

Or. en

Amendment 1895

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Where a person is detained pursuant to this Article, the detention shall be ordered in writing by judicial authorities. The detention order shall state the reasons in fact and in law on which it is based and shall contain a reference to the consideration of the available alternatives and the reasons as to way they could not be applied effectively.

Or. en

Amendment 1896

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Where a person is detained, the detention shall be ordered in writing by judicial authorities. The detention order shall state the reasons in fact and in law on which it is based and shall contain a reference to the consideration of the available alternatives and the reasons as to why they could not be applied effectively.

Or. en

Amendment 1897

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Where a person is detained pursuant to this Article, the detention shall be ordered in writing by the competent national authority.

Or. en

Amendment 1898

Balázs Hidvéghi, Loránt Vincze

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Where a person is detained pursuant to this Article, the detention shall be ordered in writing by the administrative and judicial authorities. The detention order shall state the reasons in fact and in law on which it is based.

Or. en

Amendment 1899

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. As regards the detention conditions and the guarantees applicable to applicants detained, in order to secure the transfer procedures to the Member State responsible, Articles 9, 10 and 11 of Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Reception Conditions Directive] shall apply.

5. As regards the detention conditions, which shall fully respect the person's fundamental rights and the guarantees applicable to applicants detained, in order to secure the transfer procedures to the Member State responsible, Articles 9, 10 and 11 of Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Reception Conditions Directive] shall apply.

Or. en

Amendment 1900

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. As regards the detention conditions which shall fully respect the person's fundamental rights and the guarantees applicable to applicants detained, in order to secure the transfer procedures to the Member State responsible, Articles 9, 10 and 11 of Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Reception Conditions Directive] shall apply.

Or. en

Amendment 1901

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

[...]

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1902

Lukas Mandl

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The transfer of an applicant or of another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) and (d), from the requesting or notifying Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out in accordance with the national law of the requesting or notifying Member State, after consultation between the Member States concerned, as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within six months of the acceptance of the take charge request or of the confirmation of the take back notification by another Member State or of the final decision on an appeal or review of a transfer decision where there is a suspensive effect in accordance with Article 33(3). That time limit may be extended up to a maximum of one year if the transfer cannot be carried out due to imprisonment of the person concerned.

Or. en

Justification

In the past, most transfers could not be enforced due to the absconding of applicants and the 6 months deadline which leads to a shift of responsibility. Secondary migration is a key problem undermining the effectiveness of the Common European Asylum System. Therefore, the 6-months should be deleted.

Amendment 1903

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The transfer of an applicant from the requesting Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out in accordance with the national law of the requesting Member State, after consultation between the Member States concerned, as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within six months of the acceptance of the take charge or take back request by another Member State or of the final decision on an appeal or review of a transfer decision in accordance with Article 33(3). In the case of take charge request only, that time limit may be extended up to a maximum of one year if the transfer cannot be carried out due to imprisonment of the person concerned.

Or. en

Amendment 1904

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The transfer of an applicant or of another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) and (d), from the requesting or notifying Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out in accordance with the national law of the requesting or notifying Member State, after consultation between the Member States concerned, as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within four months of the acceptance of the take charge request or of the confirmation of the take back notification by another Member State or of the final decision on an appeal or review of a transfer decision where there is a suspensive effect in accordance with Article 33(3), unless the applicant has absconded. That time limit may be extended up to a maximum of one year if the transfer cannot be carried out due to imprisonment of the person concerned.

Or. en

Amendment 1905

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The transfer of an applicant or of another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) and (d), from the requesting Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out in accordance with the national law of the requesting Member State, after consultation between the Member States concerned, as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within six months of the acceptance of the take charge request or of the take back request by another Member State or of the final decision on an appeal or review of a transfer decision where there is a suspensive effect in accordance with Article 33(3). That time limit may be extended up to a maximum of one year if the transfer cannot be carried out due to imprisonment of the person concerned.

Or. en

Amendment 1906

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The transfer of an applicant or of another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), from the requesting or notifying Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out in accordance with the national law of the requesting or notifying Member State, after consultation between the Member States concerned, as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within six months of the acceptance of the take charge request or of the confirmation of the take back request by another Member State or of the final decision on an appeal or review of a transfer decision where there is a suspensive effect in accordance with Article 33(3). That time limit may be extended up to a maximum of one year if the transfer cannot be carried out due to imprisonment of the person concerned for criminal purposes.

Or. en

Amendment 1907

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The transfer of an applicant or of another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) and (d), from the requesting Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out in accordance with the national law of the requesting Member State, after consultation between the Member States concerned, as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within six months of the acceptance of the take charge request by another Member State or of the final decision on an appeal or review of a transfer decision where there is a suspensive effect in accordance with Article 33(3). In the case of take charge request only, that time limit may be extended up to a maximum of one year if the transfer cannot be carried out due to imprisonment of the person concerned.

Or. en

Amendment 1908

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The transfer of an applicant or of another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) and (d), from the requesting Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out in accordance with the national law of the requesting Member State, after consultation between the Member States concerned, as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within six months of the acceptance of the take charge or take back request by another Member State or of the final decision on an appeal or review of a transfer decision where there is a suspensive effect in accordance with Article33(3). That time limit may be extended up to a maximum of one year as the last day of imprisonment if the transfer cannot be carried out due to imprisonment of the person concerned.

Or. en

Amendment 1909

Lena Düpont

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The transfer of an applicant or of another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) and (d), from the requesting or notifying Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out in accordance with the national law of the requesting or notifying Member State, after consultation between the Member States concerned, as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within 12 months of the acceptance of the take charge request or of the confirmation of the take back notification by another Member State or of the final decision on an appeal or review of a transfer decision where there is a suspensive effect in accordance with Article 33(3). That time limit may be extended up to a maximum of 18 months if the transfer cannot be carried out due to imprisonment of the person concerned.

Or. en

Amendment 1910

Balázs Hidvéghi, Loránt Vincze

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The transfer of an applicant or of another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), from the requesting or notifying Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out in accordance with the national law of the requesting or notifying Member State, after consultation between the Member States concerned, as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within six months of the acceptance of the take charge request or of the confirmation of the take back notification by another Member State or of the final decision on an appeal or review of a transfer decision where there is a suspensive effect in accordance with Article 33(3). That time limit may be extended up to a maximum of one year if the transfer cannot be carried out due to imprisonment of the person concerned.

Or. en

Amendment 1911

Balázs Hidvéghi, Loránt Vincze

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the transfer is carried out for the purpose of relocation, the transfer shall take place within the time limit set out in Article 57(9).

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1912

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the transfer is carried out for the purpose of relocation, the transfer shall take place within the time limit set out in Article 57(9).

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1913

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

If transfers to the Member State responsible are carried out by supervised departure or under escort, Member States shall ensure that they are carried out in a humane manner and with full respect for fundamental rights and human dignity.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1914

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1915

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

If necessary, the applicant shall be supplied by the requesting or notifying Member State with a laissez passer. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish the design of the laissez passer. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2).

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1916

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1917

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

If necessary, the applicant shall be supplied by the requesting Member State with a laissez passer. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish the design of the laissez passer. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2).

Or. en

Amendment 1918

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The Member State responsible shall inform the requesting or notifying Member State, as appropriate, of the safe arrival of the person concerned or of the fact that he or she did not appear within the set time limit.

The Member State responsible shall inform the requesting Member State of the safe arrival of the person concerned or of the fact that he or she did not appear within the set time limit.

Or. en

Amendment 1919

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The Member State responsible shall inform the requesting Member State, as appropriate, of the safe arrival of the person concerned or of the fact that he or she did not appear within the set time limit.

Or. en

Amendment 1920

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1921

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where the transfer does not take place within the time limits set out in paragraph 1, first subparagraph, the Member State responsible shall be relieved of its obligations to take charge of or to take back the person concerned and responsibility shall be transferred to the requesting or notifying Member State.

Or. en

Amendment 1922

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1923

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1924

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1925

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1926

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Notwithstanding the first subparagraph, where the person concerned absconds and the requesting or notifying Member State informs the Member State responsible before the expiry of the time limits set out in paragraph 1, first subparagraph, that the person concerned has absconded, the transferring Member State shall retain the right to carry out the transfer within the remaining time at a later stage, should the person become available to the authorities again, unless another Member State has carried out the procedures in accordance with this Regulation and transferred the person to the responsible Member State after the person absconded.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1927

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1928

Maria Walsh, Deirdre Clune, Seán Kelly, Frances Fitzgerald, Colm Markey

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1929

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1930

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Notwithstanding the first subparagraph, where the person concerned absconds and the requesting Member State informs the Member State responsible before the expiry of the time limits set out in paragraph 1, first subparagraph, that the person concerned has absconded, the transferring Member State shall retain the right to carry out the transfer within the remaining time at a later stage, should the person become available to the authorities again, unless another Member State has carried out the procedures in accordance with this Regulation and transferred the person to the responsible Member State after the person absconded.

Or. en

Amendment 1931

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish uniform conditions for the consultation and exchange of information between Member States, in particular in the event of postponed or delayed transfers, transfers following acceptance by default, transfers of minors or dependent persons, and supervised transfers. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2).

4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish uniform methods for the consultation and exchange of information between Member States, in particular in the event of postponed or delayed transfers, transfers following acceptance by default, transfers of minors or dependent persons, and supervised transfers. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2).

Or. en

Amendment 1932

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Pursuant to Article 40a, the Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish uniform conditions for the consultation and exchange of information between Member States in the Common and secured electronic transmission and communication system, in particular in the event of postponed or delayed transfers, transfers following acceptance by default, transfers of minors or dependent persons, and supervised transfers.

Or. en

Amendment 1933

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 36 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. In accordance with Article 17 of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Fund], a contribution shall be paid to the Member State carrying out the transfer for the transfer of an applicant or another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d), pursuant to Article 35.

1. In accordance with Article 17 of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Fund], a contribution of 10 000 EUR shall be paid to the Member State carrying out the transfer of an applicant or another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d), pursuant to Article 35 to a third country partner state for processing and potential facilitation of international protection.

Or. en

Amendment 1934

Proposal for a regulation

Article 36 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The costs necessary to transfer an applicant or another person to the Member state responsible shall be met by the General Budget of the Union.

Or. en

Amendment 1935

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 36 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. In accordance with Article 20 of Regulation (EU) 2021/1147 [Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund], a contribution shall be paid to the Member State carrying out the transfer for the transfer of an applicant or another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d), pursuant to Article 35.

Or. en

Amendment 1936

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Exchange of relevant information before a transfer is carried out

Exchange of relevant information before a transfer to a third country partner state is carried out

Or. en

Amendment 1937

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The Member State carrying out the transfer of an applicant or of another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d), shall communicate to the Member State responsible such personal data concerning the person to be transferred as is adequate, relevant and limited to what is necessary for the sole purposes of ensuring that the competent authorities, in accordance with national law in the Member State responsible, are in a position to provide that person with adequate assistance, including the provision of immediate health care required in order to protect his or her vital interests, to ensure continuity in the protection and rights afforded by this Regulation and by other applicable asylum legal instruments. Those data shall be communicated to the Member State responsible within a reasonable period of time before a transfer is carried out, in order to ensure that its competent authorities in under national law have sufficient time to take the necessary measures.

1. The Member State carrying out the transfer of an applicant shall communicate to the Member State responsible such personal data concerning the person to be transferred as is adequate, relevant and limited to what is necessary for the sole purposes of ensuring that the competent authorities, in accordance with national law in the Member State responsible, are in a position to provide that person with adequate assistance, including the provision of immediate health care required in order to protect his or her vital interests, to ensure continuity in the protection and rights afforded by this Regulation and by other applicable asylum legal instruments. Those data shall be communicated to the Member State responsible within a reasonable period of time before a transfer is carried out, in order to ensure that its competent authorities in under national law have sufficient time to take the necessary measures.

Or. en

Amendment 1938

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The Member State carrying out the transfer of an applicant or of another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d), shall communicate to the Member State responsible such personal data concerning the person to be transferred as is necessary, proportionate and limited to what is necessary for the sole purposes of ensuring that the competent authorities, in the Member State responsible, are in a position to provide that person with adequate assistance including the provision of immediate health care required in order to protect his or her vital interests, to ensure continuity in the protection and rights afforded by this Regulation and by other applicable asylum legal instruments. Those data shall be communicated to the Member State responsible within a reasonable period of time before a transfer is carried out, in order to ensure that its competent authorities under national law have sufficient time to take the necessary measures.

Or. en

Amendment 1939

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The Member State carrying out the transfer of an applicant or of another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), shall communicate to the Member State responsible such personal data concerning the person to be transferred as is adequate, relevant and limited to what is necessary for the sole purposes of ensuring that the competent authorities, in accordance with national law in the Member State responsible, are in a position to provide that person with adequate assistance, including the provision of immediate health care required in order to protect his or her vital interests, to ensure continuity in the protection and rights afforded by this Regulation and by other applicable asylum legal instruments. Those data shall be communicated to the Member State responsible within a reasonable period of time before a transfer is carried out, in order to ensure that its competent authorities in under national law have sufficient time to take the necessary measures.

Or. en

Amendment 1940

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Michal Šimečka, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The transferring Member State shall transmit to the Member State responsible any information that is essential in order to safeguard the rights and immediate special needs of the person to be transferred, and in particular:

2. The transferring Member State shall transmit to the Member State responsible any information that is essential in order to safeguard the rights and immediate specific needs of the person to be transferred, and in particular:

Or. en

Amendment 1941

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) any immediate measures which the Member State responsible is required to take in order to ensure that the special needs of the person to be transferred are adequately addressed, including any immediate health care that may be required;

Or. en

Amendment 1942

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) any immediate measures which the Member State responsible is required to take in order to ensure that the specific needs of the person to be transferred are adequately addressed, including any immediate health care that may be required;

Or. en

Amendment 1943

Maria Walsh, Deirdre Clune, Seán Kelly, Frances Fitzgerald, Colm Markey

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) in the case of minors, the best interests of the child assessment and information as set out in Article 13, including on their education;

Or. en

Amendment 1944

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Michal Šimečka, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1945

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 2 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) an assessment of the age of an applicant;

(d) an assessment of the age of an applicant; where relevant

Or. en

Amendment 1946

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The exchange of information under this Article shall only take place between the authorities notified to the Commission in accordance with Article 41 of this Regulation using the electronic communication network set up under Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003. The information exchanged shall only be used for the purposes set out in paragraph 1 of this Article and shall not be further processed.

3. The exchange of information under this Article shall only take place between the authorities notified to the Commission in accordance with Article 41 of this Regulation using the Common and secured electronic transmission and communication system as referred to in Article 40a. The information exchanged shall only be used for the purposes set out in paragraph 1 of this Article and shall not be further processed.

Or. en

Amendment 1947

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. With a view to facilitating the exchange of information between Member States, the Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, draw up a standard form for the transfer of the data required pursuant to this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure laid down in Article 67(2).

4. With a view to facilitating the exchange of information between Member States, the Commission shall, by means of delegated acts, draw up a standard form for the transfer of the data required pursuant to this Article.

Or. en

Amendment 1948

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. With a view to facilitating the exchange of information between Member States, the Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 68 concerning a standard form for the transfer of the data required pursuant to this Article.

Or. en

Amendment 1949

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1950

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 38

deleted

Exchange of security-relevant information before a transfer is carried out

Where the Member State carrying out a transfer is in possession of information that indicates that there are reasonable grounds to consider the applicant or another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d), a danger to national security or public order in a Member State, that Member State shall also communicate such information to the Member State responsible.

Or. en

Amendment 1951

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Exchange of security-relevant information before a transfer is carried out

Exchange of security-relevant information before a transfer to a third country partner state is carried out

Or. en

Amendment 1952

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 1953

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1954

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1955

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 39 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Exchange of health data before a transfer is carried out

Exchange of health data before a transfer to a third country partner state is carried out

Or. en

Amendment 1956

Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Sophia in 't Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Moritz Körner, Fabienne Keller, Abir Al-Sahlani

Proposal for a regulation

Article 39 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. For the sole purpose of the provision of medical care or treatment, in particular concerning disabled persons, elderly people, pregnant women, minors and persons who have been subject to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical and sexual violence, the transferring Member State shall, in so far as it is available to the competent authority in accordance with national law, transmit to the Member State responsible information on any special needs of the person to be transferred, which in specific cases may include information on that person’s physical or mental health. That information shall be transferred in a common health certificate with the necessary documents attached. The Member State responsible shall ensure that those special needs are adequately addressed, including in particular any essential medical care that may be required.

1. For the sole purpose of the provision of medical care or treatment, in particular concerning vulnerable persons including disabled persons, elderly people, pregnant women, minors and persons who have been subject to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical and sexual violence, the transferring Member State shall, in so far as it is available to the competent authority in accordance with national law, transmit to the Member State responsible information on any special needs of the person to be transferred, which in specific cases may include information on that person’s physical or mental health. That information shall be transferred in a common health certificate with the necessary documents attached. The Member State responsible shall ensure that those special needs are adequately addressed, including in particular any essential medical care that may be required.

Or. en

Amendment 1957

Nicolaus Fest, Jaak Madison, Bernhard Zimniok, Gunnar Beck, Tom Vandendriessche, Peter Kofod, Roman Haider, Georg Mayer, Harald Vilimsky, Laura Huhtasaari, Philippe Olivier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 39 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. For the sole purpose of the provision of medical care or treatment, in particular concerning disabled persons, elderly people, pregnant women, minors, children and persons who have been subject to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical and sexual violence, the transferring Member State shall, in so far as it is available to the competent authority in accordance with national law, transmit to the Member State responsible information on any special needs of the person to be transferred, which in specific cases may include information on that person’s physical or mental health. That information shall be transferred in a common health certificate with the necessary documents attached. The Member State responsible shall ensure that those special needs are adequately addressed, including in particular any essential medical care that may be required.

Or. en

Amendment 1958

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Michal Šimečka, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 39 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. For the sole purpose of the provision of medical care or treatment, in particular concerning disabled persons, elderly people, pregnant women, minors and persons who have been subject to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical and sexual violence, the transferring Member State shall, in so far as it is available to the competent authority in accordance with national law, transmit to the Member State responsible information on any specific needs of the person to be transferred, which in specific cases may include information on that person’s physical or mental health. That information shall be transferred in a common health certificate with the necessary documents attached. The Member State responsible shall ensure that those specific needs are adequately addressed, including in particular any essential medical care that may be required.

Or. en

Amendment 1959

Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Sophia in 't Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Moritz Körner, Fabienne Keller, Abir Al-Sahlani

Proposal for a regulation

Article 39 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, draw up the common health certificate. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure laid down in Article 67(2).

The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, draw up the common health and vulnerabilities certificate. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure laid down in Article 67(2).

Or. en

Amendment 1960

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 39 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The transferring Member State shall only transmit the information referred to in paragraph 1 to the Member State responsible after having obtained the explicit consent of the applicant and/or of his or her representative or when such transmission is necessary to protect public health and public security, or, where the person concerned is physically or legally incapable of giving his or her consent, to protect the vital interests of the person concerned or of another person. The lack of consent, including a refusal to consent, shall not constitute an obstacle to the transfer.

2. The transferring Member State shall only transmit the information referred to in paragraph 1 to the Member State responsible after having obtained the explicit consent of the applicant and/or of his or her guardian or when such transmission is necessary to protect public health and public security, or, where the person concerned is physically or legally incapable of giving his or her consent, to protect the vital interests of the person concerned or of another person.

Or. en

Amendment 1961

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 39 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The transferring Member State shall only transmit the information referred to in paragraph 1 to the Member State responsible after having obtained the explicit consent of the applicant and/or of his or her representative or when such transmission is necessary to protect public health and public security, or, where the person concerned is physically or legally incapable of giving his or her consent, to protect the vital interests of the person concerned or of another person in accordance with Article 9 (2) (h) Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Or. en

Amendment 1962

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 39 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt uniform conditions and practical arrangements for exchanging the information referred to in paragraph 1. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure laid down in Article 67(2).

5. The Commission shall, by means of delegated acts, adopt uniform conditions and practical arrangements for exchanging the information referred to in paragraph 1. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure laid down in Article 67(2).

Or. en

Amendment 1963

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 39 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. Pursuant to Article 40a, the Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt uniform conditions and practical arrangements for exchanging the information referred to in paragraph 1 in the Common and secured electronic transmission and communication system.

Or. en

Amendment 1964

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Each Member State shall communicate to any Member State that so requests such personal data concerning the person covered by the scope of this Regulation as is adequate, relevant and limited to what is necessary for:

1. The determining Member State shall communicate to the responsible Member State, and the other way around, that requests such personal data concerning the person covered by the scope of this Regulation, as is necessary, proportionate and limited to the purpose of:

Or. en

Amendment 1965

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) personal details of the person concerned, and, where appropriate, his or her family members, relatives or any other family relations (full name and where appropriate, former name; nicknames or pseudonyms; nationality, present and former; date and place of birth);

(a) personal details of the person concerned, and, where necessary and proportionate, his or her family members, relatives or any other family relations (full name and where relevant, former name; nationality, present and former; date and place of birth);

Or. en

Amendment 1966

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) identity and travel papers (references, validity, date of issue, issuing authority, place of issue, etc.);

(b) identity and travel papers (references, validity, date of issue, issuing authority, place of issue);

Or. en

Amendment 1967

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) other information necessary for establishing the identity of the person concerned, including biometric data taken of the applicant by the Member State, in particular for the purposes of Article 57(6) of this Regulation, in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation];

Or. en

Amendment 1968

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1969

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ca) implementing a return decision.

Or. en

Amendment 1970

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) places of residence and routes travelled;

(d) places of residence

Or. en

Amendment 1971

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) places of residence and routes travelled;

(d) places of residence;

Or. en

Amendment 1972

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point f

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(f) the place where the application was lodged;

(f) the place where the application was made;

Or. en

Amendment 1973

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point g

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(g) the date on which any previous application for international protection was lodged, the date on which the current application was registered, the stage reached in the proceedings and the decision taken, if any.

(g) the date on which any previous application for international protection was made, the date on which the current application was registered, the stage reached in the proceedings and the decision taken, if any.

Or. en

Amendment 1974

Annalisa Tardino

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ga) Criminal record

Or. en

Amendment 1975

Nicolaus Fest, Jaak Madison, Bernhard Zimniok, Gunnar Beck, Tom Vandendriessche, Peter Kofod, Roman Haider, Georg Mayer, Harald Vilimsky, Laura Huhtasaari, Philippe Olivier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Provided it is necessary for the examination of the application for international protection, the Member State responsible may request another Member State to let it know on what grounds the applicant bases his or her application and, where applicable, the grounds for any decisions taken concerning the applicant. The other Member State may refuse to respond to the request submitted to it, if the communication of such information is likely to harm its essential interests or the protection of the liberties and fundamental rights of the person concerned or of others. In any event, communication of the information requested shall be subject to the written approval of the applicant for international protection, obtained by the requesting Member State. In that case, the applicant must know for what specific information he or she is giving his or her approval.

Or. en

Amendment 1976

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. A Member State may refuse to respond to the request submitted to it, if the communication of such information is likely to harm its essential interests or the protection of the liberties and fundamental rights of the person concerned or of others. In any event, communication of the information requested shall be subject to the written approval of the applicant for international protection, obtained by the requesting Member State. In that case, the applicant must know for what specific information he or she is giving his or her approval.

Or. en

Amendment 1977

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Provided it is necessary for the examination of the application for international protection, the Member State responsible may request another Member State to let it know on what grounds the applicant bases his or her application and, where applicable, the grounds for any decisions taken concerning the applicant. The other Member State may refuse to respond to the request submitted to it, if the communication of such information is likely to harm the protection of the liberties and fundamental rights of the person concerned or of others. In any event, communication of the information requested shall be subject to the written approval of the applicant for international protection, obtained by the requesting Member State. In that case, the applicant must know for what specific information he or she is giving his or her approval.

Or. en

Amendment 1978

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Any request for information shall only be sent in the context of an individual application for international protection or transfer for the purpose of relocation. It shall set out the grounds on which it is based and, where its purpose is to check whether there is a criterion that is likely to entail the responsibility of the requested Member State, shall state on what evidence, including relevant information from reliable sources on the ways and means by which applicants enter the territories of the Member States, or on what specific and verifiable part of the applicant’s statements it is based. Such relevant information from reliable sources is not in itself sufficient to determine the responsibility and the competence of a Member State under this Regulation, but it may contribute to the evaluation of other indications relating to an individual applicant.

4. Any request for information shall only be sent in the context of an individual application for international protection or transfer for the purpose of relocation. It shall set out the grounds on which it is based and, where its purpose is to check whether there is a criterion that is likely to entail the responsibility of the requested Member State, shall state on what evidence or on what specific and verifiable part of the applicant’s statements it is based. Such relevant information from reliable sources is not in itself sufficient to determine the responsibility and the competence of a Member State under this Regulation, but it may contribute to the evaluation of other indications relating to an individual applicant.

Or. en

Amendment 1979

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Any request for information shall only be sent in the context of an individual application for international protection or transfer for the purpose of relocation. It shall set out the grounds on which it is based and, where its purpose is to check whether there is a criterion that is likely to entail the responsibility of the requested Member State, shall state on what evidence, or on what specific and verifiable part of the applicant’s statements it is based. Such relevant information from reliable sources is not in itself sufficient to determine the responsibility and the competence of a Member State under this Regulation, but it may contribute to the evaluation of other indications relating to an individual applicant.

Or. en

Amendment 1980

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. The requested Member State shall be obliged to reply within three weeks. Any delays in the reply shall be duly justified. Non-compliance with the three week time limit shall not relieve the requested Member State of the obligation to reply. If the research carried out by the requested Member State which did not respect the maximum time limit withholds information which shows that it is responsible, that Member State may not invoke the expiry of the time limits provided for in Article 29 as a reason for refusing to comply with a request to take charge. In that case, the time limits provided for in Article 29 for submitting a request to take charge shall be extended by a period of time equivalent to the delay in the reply by the requested Member State.

5. The requested Member State shall be obliged to reply within five weeks. Any delays in the reply shall be duly justified. Non-compliance with the five week time limit shall not relieve the requested Member State of the obligation to reply. If the research carried out by the requested Member State which did not respect the maximum time limit withholds information which shows that it is responsible, that Member State may not invoke the expiry of the time limits provided for in Article 29 as a reason for refusing to comply with a request to take charge. In that case, the time limits provided for in Article 29 for submitting a request to take charge shall be extended by a period of time equivalent to the delay in the reply by the requested Member State.

Or. en

Amendment 1981

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

9. In each Member State concerned, a record shall be kept, in the individual file for the person concerned or in a register, of the transmission and receipt of information exchanged.

9. In each Member State concerned, a record shall be kept, in the individual file for the person concerned or in a register, of the transmission and receipt of information exchanged. The security and confidentiality of this record shall be ensured.

Or. en

Amendment 1982

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 40 a

Common and secured electronic transmission and communication system

1. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish a ‘Common and secured electronic transmission and communication system’ at the European level between the competent authorities referred to in Article 41(1) and between those authorities and the Asylum Agency for transmitting information related to the application of this Regulation.

The 'DubliNet' electronic communication network set up under Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003 shall be used as basis for the Common and secured electronic transmission and communication system and upgraded accordingly. EU-LISA should be responsible for the preparation, development and the operational management of this system, its interoperability with other systems and the communication infrastructure between the central system and the national infrastructures. From the budgetary appropriations to implement the present Regulation, an appropriate allocation shall be secured for EU-LISA to complete this task.

2. The Member States shall use the Common and secured electronic transmission and communication system to share any type of information relevant for the application of this Regulation, including biometric data taken in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation], requests, notifications, replies and all written correspondence and for ensuring that senders automatically receive an electronic proof of delivery.

3. The Common and secured electronic transmission and communication system shall have different channels for each type of information requiring different rules in terms of access, conditions of exchange, confidentiality, or any other specificity. In particular, different channels shall be created for the purpose of Articles 37, 38, 39 and 40.

4. For the purpose of this Regulation, the Member States and the Union bodies and Agencies, as well as any actor involved in the processing of personal data of the applicants shall apply Regulation (EU) 2016/679 [General Data Protection Regulation].

5. The implementing act referred to in the first paragraph shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2), no later than four months after the entry into force of this Regulation.

Or. en

Amendment 1983

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 41 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Each Member State shall notify the Commission without delay of the specific authorities responsible for fulfilling the obligations arising under this Regulation, and any amendments thereto. The Member States shall ensure that those authorities have the necessary resources for carrying out their tasks and in particular for replying within the prescribed time limits to requests for information, requests to take charge, take back notifications and, if applicable, complying with their obligations under Chapters I-III of Part IV.

1. Each Member State shall notify the Commission without delay of the specific authorities responsible for fulfilling the obligations arising under this Regulation, and any amendments thereto, and of the share of competences between different authorities in a Member State where applicable. The Member States shall ensure that those authorities have the necessary human, material and financial resources for carrying out their tasks and in particular for applying the procedures for determining the Member State responsible in a rapid and efficient manner, safeguarding applicants’ procedural and fundamental rights, replying within the prescribed time limits to requests for information, requests to take charge, take back notifications and, if applicable, complying with their obligations under Chapters I-III of Part IV.

Or. en

Amendment 1984

Nicola Procaccini

Proposal for a regulation

Article 41 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Each Member State shall notify the Commission without delay of the specific authorities responsible for fulfilling the obligations arising under this Regulation, and any amendments thereto. The Member States shall ensure that those authorities have the necessary resources for carrying out their tasks and in particular for replying within the prescribed time limits to requests for information, requests to take charge, take back notifications and, if applicable, complying with their obligations under Chapters I-III of Part IV.

1. Each Member State shall notify the Commission without delay of the specific authorities responsible for fulfilling the obligations arising under this Regulation, and any amendments thereto. The Member States shall ensure that those authorities have the necessary resources for carrying out their tasks and in particular for replying within the prescribed time limits to requests for information, requests to take charge, take back requests and, if applicable, complying with their obligations under Chapters I-III of Part IV.

Or. en

Amendment 1985

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 41 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Each Member State shall notify the Commission without delay of the specific authorities responsible for fulfilling the obligations arising under this Regulation, and any amendments thereto. The Member States shall ensure that those authorities have the necessary resources for carrying out their tasks and in particular for replying within the prescribed time limits to requests for information, requests to take charge, take back notifications and, if applicable, complying with their obligations under Chapters I-III of Part IV.

1. Each Member State shall notify the Commission without delay of the specific authorities responsible for fulfilling the obligations arising under this Regulation, and any amendments thereto. The Member States shall ensure that those authorities have the necessary resources for carrying out their tasks and in particular for replying within the prescribed time limits to requests for information, requests to take charge or take back and, if applicable, complying with their obligations under Chapters I-III of Part IV.

Or. en

Amendment 1986

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 41 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Each Member State shall notify the Commission without delay of the specific authorities responsible for fulfilling the obligations arising under this Regulation, and any amendments thereto. The Member States shall ensure that those authorities have the necessary resources for carrying out their tasks and in particular for replying within the prescribed time limits to requests for information, requests to take charge, take back notifications and, if applicable, complying with their obligations under Chapters I-III of Part IV.

1. Each Member State shall notify the Commission without delay of the specific authorities responsible for fulfilling the obligations arising under this Regulation, and any amendments thereto. The Member States shall ensure that those authorities have the necessary resources for carrying out their tasks and in particular for replying within the prescribed time limits to requests for information, requests to take charge or take back and, if applicable, complying with their obligations under Chapters I-III of Part IV.

Or. en

Amendment 1987

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 41 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Member States shall ensure that the authorities referred to in paragraph 1 shall receive the necessary training with respect to the application of this Regulation.

3. Member States shall ensure that the authorities referred to in paragraph 1 continuously receive the necessary human resources who have the qualifications, training, expertise and independence with respect to the application of this Regulation. In particular, the authorities shall receive appropriate staff to take in charge applicants with specific needs. Where a Member State requests it, the Commission should assist the competent authorities in planning the allocation of staff, with a view to ensure the application of the present Regulation and a level playing field in all Member States.

Or. en

Amendment 1988

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 41 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish secure electronic transmission channels between the authorities referred to in paragraph 1 and between those authorities and the Asylum Agency for transmitting information, biometric data taken in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation], requests, notifications, replies and all written correspondence and for ensuring that senders automatically receive an electronic proof of delivery. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2).

4. In a situation of significant increase of the workload of that authorities, Member States shall provide additional staff, to continue complying with their obligations under the present Regulation.

Member States should also seek the support from Union bodies, offices and agencies, international organisations and non-governmental organisations.

Or. en

Justification

Deleted part is moved to Article 40a.

Amendment 1989

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 41 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish secure electronic transmission channels between the authorities referred to in paragraph 1 and between those authorities and the Asylum Agency for transmitting information, biometric data taken in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation], requests, replies and all written correspondence and for ensuring that senders automatically receive an electronic proof of delivery. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2).

Or. en

Amendment 1990

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 41 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish secure electronic transmission channels between the authorities referred to in paragraph 1 and between those authorities and the Asylum Agency for transmitting information, biometric data taken in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation], requests, replies and all written correspondence and for ensuring that senders automatically receive an electronic proof of delivery. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2).

Or. en

Amendment 1991

Cornelia Ernst, Konstantinos Arvanitis, Sira Rego, Pernando Barrena Arza, Malin Björk, Miguel Urbán Crespo, Anne-Sophie Pelletier

Proposal for a regulation

Article 42 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1992

Charlie Weimers

Proposal for a regulation

Article 42 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 1993

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 42 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

By way of derogation, such administrative arrangements shall remain outside the objective and scope of the Common and secured electronic transmission and communication system as referred to in Article 40a.

Or. en

Amendment 1994

Proposal for a regulation

Article 42 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Before concluding or amending any arrangement as referred to in paragraph 1, point (b), the Member States concerned shall consult the Commission as to the compatibility of the arrangement with this Regulation.

Or. en

Amendment 1995

Proposal for a regulation

Article 42 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. If the Commission considers the arrangements referred to in paragraph 1, point (b), to be incompatible with this Regulation, it shall, within a reasonable period, notify the Member States concerned. The Member States shall take all appropriate steps to amend the arrangement concerned within a reasonable time in such a way as to eliminate any incompatibilities observed.

4. If the Commission considers the arrangements referred to in paragraph 1, point (b), to be incompatible with this Regulation, and with any other relevant provisions of EU Law including the Charter of Fundamental Rights, it shall, within a reasonable period, notify the Member States concerned. The Member States shall take all appropriate steps to amend the arrangement concerned within a reasonable time in such a way as to eliminate any incompatibilities observed.

Or. en

Amendment 1996

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 43 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The Asylum Agency shall set up and facilitate the activities of a network of the competent authorities referred to in Article 41(1), with a view to enhancing practical cooperation and information sharing on all matters related to the application of this Regulation, including the development of practical tools and guidance, enhancing convergence in the application of the Regulation and in practices, as well as building at the European a common culture between agents from competent authorities, both at national and European level.

Or. en

Amendment 1997

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 43 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

This network may be structured into several formations, composed of agents at different levels of hierarchy, in order to support cooperation and convergence from operational activities to higher level of decision-making and responsibility. Meetings of these formations shall be organised regularly, as much as deemed necessary and at least every month.

Or. en

Amendment 1998

Fabienne Keller, Hilde Vautmans, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Malik Azmani, Sophia in 't Veld, Karen Melchior

Proposal for a regulation

Article 43 – paragraph 1 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Other relevant Union offices, bodies or agencies may also participate in this network.

Or. en

Amendment 1999

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 44 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. In order to facilitate the proper functioning of the mechanisms set up under this Regulation and resolve difficulties in the application thereof, where two or more Member States encounter difficulties in their cooperation under this Regulation or in its application between them, the Member States concerned shall, upon request by one or more of them, hold consultations without delay with a view to finding appropriate solutions within a reasonable time, in accordance with the principle of sincere cooperation.

1. In order to facilitate the proper functioning of the mechanisms set up under this Regulation and resolve difficulties in the application thereof, where two or more Member States encounter difficulties in their cooperation under this Regulation or in its application between them, the Member States concerned shall, upon request by one or more of them or the Commission, hold consultations without delay with a view to finding appropriate solutions within four weeks of the request, in accordance with the principle of sincere cooperation. If the difficulties concern the implementation of Part IV of this Regulation, the EU Relocation Coordinator shall be invited to attend these consultations.

Or. en

Amendment 2000

Damien Carême

Proposal for a regulation

Article 44 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where no solution is found under paragraph 1 or the difficulties persist, one or more of the Member States concerned may request the Commission to hold consultations with the Member States concerned with a view to finding appropriate solutions. The Commission shall hold such consultations without delay. The Member States concerned shall actively participate in the consultations and, as well as the Commission, take all appropriate measures to promptly resolve the matter. The Commission may adopt recommendations addressed to the Member States concerned indicating the measures to be taken and the appropriate deadlines.

2. Where no solution is found under paragraph 1 or the difficulties persist, the Commission shall hold consultations with the Member States concerned with a view to finding appropriate solutions. The Commission shall hold such consultations within four weeks of the request. The Member States concerned shall actively participate in the consultations and, as well as the Commission, take all appropriate measures to promptly resolve the matter. The Commission, as appropriate in consultation with the EU Relocation Coordinator, may adopt recommendations addressed to the Member States concerned indicating the measures to be taken and the appropriate deadlines.

Or. en