Changes from report parliamentary committee draft to plenary report

Change 9

RemovedThe Commission has made a separate legal proposal with a separate legal base on the issue of instrumentalisation. It is not an issue to be addressed through the Schengen Borders Code.

Change 10

RemovedThe Commission has made a separate legal proposal with a separate legal base on the issue of instrumentalisation. It is not an issue to be addressed through the Schengen Borders Code.

AddedRecital 13: (13) The European Border and Coast Guard Agency assists Member States with implementing the operational aspects of external border management, including information exchange, the provision of equipment, capacity building and training to national border guards, targeted information and risk analysis, the deployment of the Standing Corps, as well as assistance in search and rescue operations for persons in distress at sea launched and carried out in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 656/20141a. The Agency’s new mandate offers considerable opportunities for Member States to be assisted in their border control activities, including with regard to return operations and a launch of rapid border intervention and/or return intervention at the request and on the territory of the host Member State concerned. These activities are to be conducted in compliance with fundamental rights obligations. / 1a Regulation (EU) No 656/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 establishing rules for the surveillance of the external sea borders in the context of operational cooperation coordinated by the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (OJ L 189, 27.6.2014, p. 93).

RemovedRecital 13: (13) The European Border and Coast Guard Agency assists Member States with implementing the operational aspects of external border management, including the provision of equipment, capacity building and training to national border guards, targeted information and risk analysis, as well as the deployment of the Standing Corps. The Agency’s new mandate offers considerable opportunities for Member States to be assisted in their border control activities, including with regard to return operations and a launch of rapid border intervention and/or return intervention at the request and on the territory of the host Member State concerned.

AddedRecital 14: (14) By virtue of Article 41(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1896, on the basis of the results of a vulnerability assessment or where a critical impact level is attributed to one or more external border sections of a Member State, the Executive Director of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency is required to recommend to a Member State that it request the Agency to initiate, carry out or adjust the Agency’s support. This competence of the Executive Director is without prejudice to the general support that the Agency may provide to the Member States.

RemovedNo screening procedure presently exists under EU law.

AddedRecital 15: (15) Where a Member State considers it necessary to reinforce border control, and where it considers using modern technologies including drones and motion sensors, as well as mobile units, it is important that the use of any such technologies capable of collecting personal datarespects EU primary law, especially the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and Union data protection law, and that it is based on and exercised in accordance with clearly defined provisions of national law.

Change 11

RemovedThe text is similar to the current recital 26 of the Schengen Borders Code. As this is an amending Regulation, this principle in this Regulation should be restated.

AddedRecital 20: (20) To counteract irregular migration and cross-border crime linked to irregular migration, such as human trafficking, migrant smuggling and document fraud, and to combat other forms of cross-border crime, Member States could be required to take measures to verify the identity, nationality and residence status of persons provided that such verifications are, not systematically carried out at the border or in border regions, do not breach the principle of non-discrimination, and are carried out on the basis of risk analysis.

RemovedRecital 20: (20) To counteract irregular migration and cross-border crime linked to irregular migration, such as human trafficking, migrant smuggling and document fraud, and to combat other forms of cross-border crime, Member States could be required to take measures to verify the identity, nationality and residence status of persons provided that such verifications are not systematically carried out at the border or in border regions, do not breach the principle of non-discrimination, and are carried out on the basis of risk analysis.

AddedRecital 21: (21) The use of modern technologies to monitor traffic flows, notably on motorways and other important roads determined by the Member States, can be instrumental in addressing threats to public policy or internal security. The prohibition of internal border controls should not be understood as preventing the lawful exercise of police or other public powers to carry out checks that entail the use of monitoring and surveillance technologies which are generally used in the territory or that are based on a risk assessment for the purpose of protecting internal security.

RemovedThe actions taken by Member States to tackle irregular migration cannot be allowed to justify internal border control.

RemovedRecital 21: (21) The use of modern technologies to monitor traffic flows, notably on motorways and other important roads determined by the Member States, can be instrumental in addressing threats to public policy or internal security. The prohibition of internal border controls should not be understood as preventing the lawful exercise of police powers to carry out checks that entail the use of monitoring and surveillance technologies which are generally used in the territory or that are based on a risk assessment for the purpose of protecting internal security. In order to allow for such technologies to be effective, it should be possible to apply proportionate speed limits at road crossings.

Change 12

RemovedRecital 25: (25) In order to strengthen the functioning of the Schengen area, and to assist Member States in countering irregular migration, including between Member States, and combat unlawful stays, within the last ten years, the Union has adopted numerous flanking measures, including the establishment of an Entry/Exit System (EES), the establishment of a European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS), the establishment of a European Criminal Records database in respect of third country nationals, the reform of the Schengen Information System (SIS), the reform of the Visa Information System (VIS), two substantial overhauls of the mandate of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, and the establishment of an interoperability framework to allow Union databases in the area of freedom, security and justice to communicate with one another.

AddedRecital 23: deleted

RemovedIt is important to highlight the measures already taken to protect the Schengen Area without internal border control. The deletion is consequential to the deletion of Article 23a.

AddedRecital 24 a (new): (24a) Before resorting to the reintroduction of border control at internal borders, Member States should give precedence to alternative measures. Member States should assess whether the situation could be adequately addressed by way of increased cross-border cooperation, both from an operational point of view and from that of information exchange between police services and other competent authorities of the Member State.

RemovedRecital 26: deleted

AddedRecital 24 b (new): (24b) In the absence of internal border controls, targeted joint patrols in intra-EU border areas are a valuable tool to counter migrant smuggling and trafficking in human beings, to prevent irregular stays and cross-border crime linked to irregular migration. It is possible that such checks prove more effective than internal border controls, in particular as they are more flexible and can be adapted more easily to evolving risks. When opting for cross-border police cooperation, it is important that they are devised and executed in a manner clearly distinct from systematic checks on persons at the external borders and in a non-discriminatory manner.

Change 13

RemovedThe standstill clause in the Return Directive was intended to ensure that the EU moves to a more harmonised approach. The Rapporteur does not want to move backwards in that respect, by encouraging more bilateral agreements within the Schengen Area that only serve to bi-pass EU rules.

AddedRecital 28: (28) In exceptional cases, addressing identified threats to the Schengen area may, as a last resort, require the adoption of measures at the internal borders by the Member States. As free movement of persons is affected by the temporary reintroduction of internal border control, any decision to reintroduce such control should be taken in accordance with commonly agreed criteria and should be duly notified to the Commission, the Parliament and the Council or be recommended by a Union institution. Within the framework and limits laid down in this Regulation, Member States remain competent to determine the need for the temporary reintroduction of border controls. Under the existing rules, the reintroduction of controls at internal borders is provided for in circumstances where a serious threat to internal security or public policy manifests itself in a single Member State for a limited period of time. In particular, terrorism and organised crime, large scale public health emergencies or large scale or high profile international events such as sporting, trade or political events can amount to a serious threat to public policy or internal security.

Change 14

ChangedRecital 28: (28)29: In(29) exceptionalFurthermore, cases,it addressingis threatspossible to the Schengen area may require the adoption,consider bythat thea Memberserious States,threat ofto measurespublic atpolicy theor internal borders. As freesecurity movementcould ofalso personsresult isfrom affectedan byexceptional thesituation temporaryin reintroductionwhich ofthere internalis borderan control,unexpected anyand decisionsudden tolarge-scale reintroduceunauthorised suchmovement controlof shouldirregular bemigrants takenbetween inthe accordanceMember withStates, commonlywhere agreedthis criteriacreates anda shouldsituation beputting dulyat notifiedrisk toof the Commission or be recommended by a Unionoverall institution.functioning Underof the existing rules,area thewithout introductioninternal ofborder controlscontrols, atwhere internalthe bordersother ismeans provided for inunder circumstancesthis whereRegulation aare seriousassessed threatnot to internal securitybe orsufficient publicto policyaddress manifeststhese itselfinflows inand amovements. singleIn Memberthis Statecontext, forMember aStates limitedshould periodbe ofable time.to Inrely particular,on terrorismobjective and organised crime, large scale public health emergencies or largequantified scalereports oron highunauthorised profilemovements internationalwhenever eventsavailable, suchin asparticular, sporting,when tradeproduced oron politicala eventsregular canbasis amountby tothe acompetent seriousUnion threatagencies toin publicline policywith ortheir internalrespective security.mandates.

Change 15

RemovedThe basis on which the temporary reintroduction of internal border control should take place is already set out in the current version of the Schengen Borders Code, see Recital 23. This basis should not be confused by new recitals suggesting a different approach.

AddedRecital 30: (30) While action at Union level is provided for in circumstances where the nature of a threat derives from persistent serious deficiencies at the external borders, there is no Union-wide mechanism to ensure Union-wide coordination where, within the Schengen area, a serious threat to internal security or public policy area is affecting several Member States at the same time, putting at risk the well-functioning of the Schengen area. The gap should be filled by putting in place a new Schengen area safeguard mechanism permitting coordinated solutions to protect the interests of persons entitled to benefit from the area without controls at internal borders, by maximising the effectiveness of the measures taken while minimising their negative side-effects.

RemovedRecital 29: deleted

AddedRecital 31: (31) Given the politically sensitive nature of a decision which regulates the possibility for Member States to reintroduce or prolong internal border control in particular circumstances, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU should be delegated to the Commission to initiate the new Union-level Schengen area safeguard mechanism authorising the reintroduction or prolongation of internal border controls, where this is justified by a particular threat, identified on the basis of notifications received from several individual Member States, a risk assessment, and other available information, and to provide supplementary rules on mitigating measures that should be established at national and Union level. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. When preparing and drawing up delegated acts, the Commission should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council.

RemovedThe need for reform in other policy areas should not be used as a pretext for internal border control. This recital is simply offering Member States a new ground for introducing internal border control which was until now not lawful. It is impossible to reconcile this recital with the legal basis as laid down in Article 77(2)(e).

AddedRecital 32: (32) In determining whether a reintroduction or prolongation of internal border controls by the Member States is justified, the Commission should take into account that internal border control remains a measure of last resort which has a serious impact on all persons having the right to move within the area without internal border control. The Commission should assess whether the measure is appropriate, necessary and proportionate. The scope and duration of any temporary reintroduction of such measures should be restricted to the minimum needed to respond to the serious threat to public policy or internal security. The Commission should consider whether any other measures that could ensure a high level of security within the territory are available. In the event that a prolongation of the controls is not considered justified, internal border controls should be lifted immediately and the Commission should recommend the use of other measures deemed more appropriate to address the identified threat.

Change 16

RemovedThe cumulation of periods of internal border control is not conducive to reducing the use of internal border control and has been ruled unlawful by the CJEU. Precisely this sort of cumulation of grounds for internal border controls was used by Member States to keep border controls in place for longer.

AddedRecital 36: (36) The reintroduction of border controls at internal borders, whether on the basis of Union level decisions or unilateral decisions of the Member States, has serious implications for the functioning of the Schengen area and the rights of individuals. In order to ensure that any decision to reintroduce border controls is only taken where necessary, as a measure of last resort, the decision on temporary reintroduction or prolongation of border controls should be based on common criteria and be strictly necessary and proportionate. The proportionality principle requires that the reintroduction of internal border controls be subject to safeguards that are to be respected before internal border controls are considered and that increase over time.

RemovedRecital 36: (36) The reintroduction of border controls at internal borders, whether on the basis of Union level decisions or unilateral decisions of the Member States, has serious implications for the functioning of the Schengen area. In order to ensure that any decision to reintroduce border controls is only taken where necessary, as a measure of last resort, the decision on temporary reintroduction or prolongation of border controls should be based on common criteria and be strictly necessary and proportionate. The proportionality principle requires that the reintroduction of internal border controls be subject to safeguards that increase over time.

AddedRecital 36 a (new): (36a) Any derogation from the fundamental principle of free movement of persons should be interpreted strictly and the concept of public policy presupposes the existence of a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society. Where Member States reintroduce internal border controls for foreseeable threats, they should be able to do so for a period of three months, renewable up to a maximum period of 18 months.

RemovedRecital 36 a (new): (36 a) Any derogation from the fundamental principle of free movement of persons should be interpreted strictly and the concept of public policy presupposes the existence of a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society.

AddedRecital 37: (37) In the first instance, Member States should assess the appropriateness of internal border controls having regard to the nature of the serious threat identified as well as the appropriateness of alternative measures to pursue the same objectives as internal border controls, such as proportionate checks as carried out in the exercise of police or other public powers or through forms of police cooperation as provided for under Union law, including the possibility to use the transfer procedure. In this context, the Member States should pay particular attention to and assess the likely impact of internal border controls on the movement of persons within the area without internal border controls and the functioning of the cross-border regions. This assessment should be part of the notification that Member States are required to transmit to the Commission, the Parliament and the Council. In case of prolongation of internal border controls for foreseeable events beyond a period of six months, the Member State should also carry out a risk assessment. That risk assessment should also include details on the scale and anticipated evolution of the identified serious threat, information on how long that serious threat is expected to persist and which sections of the internal borders are affected, information on coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by such measures and the measures that the Member State concerned has taken and intends to take…

Change 17

ChangedRecital 40: (40) In order to44: ensure(44) thatThe internalCommission borderand controlsMember areStates trulyshould aretain lastthe resortpossibility measureto appliedexpress onlyany forconcern as longregards asthe necessarynecessity and in orderproportionality toof allowa fordecision assessingof thea necessityMember andState proportionalityto ofreintroduce internal border controls to addressfor foreseeablereason threats,of Memberurgency Statesor shouldto prepareaddress a riskforeseeable assessmentthreat. toIn becase submittedcontrols toat theinternal Commissionborders whenare internalreintroduced borderand controlsprolonged arefor prolongedforeseeable beyondthreats anfor initialcombined threeperiods monthsexceeding innine responsemonths, toit foreseeableshould threats.be Thea Memberrequirement Statesfor mustthe inCommission particular,to explain,issue an opinion assessing the scalenecessity and evolutionproportionality of thesuch identifiedinternal seriousborder threat,controls. includingSuch howan longopinion theis identifiedwithout seriousprejudice threatto isthe expectedenforcement tomeasures, persistincluding andinfringement actions, which sectionsthe Commission, in its role as guardian of the internalTreaties, bordersis mayrequired beto affected,take whyat alternativeany measurestime willagainst notany resolveMember theState identifiedfor threat,failure asto wellcomply aswith theirits coordinationobligations measuresunder withUnion thelaw. otherWhere Memberan Statesopinion thatis areissued, impactedthe orCommission likelyshould tolaunch beconsultations impactedwith bythe suchMember measures.States concerned.

Change 18

RemovedRecital 42: (42) In order to ensure sufficient level of supervision, transparency and accountability with regard to actions taken by Member States affecting travel without internal border controls, the Member States should provide detailed information to the European Parliament and the Council on the planned reintroduction of border controls. In justified cases, Member States may also classify such information. Every year, pursuant to Article 33 of the Schengen Borders Code, the Commission should present to the European Parliament and to the Council a report on the functioning of the area without internal border control (‘State of Schengen report’) which should pay particular attention to the border controls that have been in place for longer than six months. It should also assess the necessity and proportionality of the all reintroductions of border controls in the period covered by that Report. The State of Schengen report shall also cover the reporting obligations resulting from Article 20 of the Schengen Evaluation Mechanism46 .

AddedRecital 44 a (new): (44a) Where a Member State considers that there are exceptional situations justifying the continued need for internal border control in excess of the maximum period of 18 months based on the same foreseeable serious threat, it should be able to request the Commission to propose to the Council an implementing decision authorising the prolongation of internal border control for a period of three months. If the Council adopts such an implementing decision, and at the end of that three-month period, the Member State in question still considers that the exceptional situation remains, it may make a maximum of two further requests to the Commission for a prolongation of a further three months.

RemovedThe State of Schengen Report should focus on the Schengen Area without internal border control and the lifting of internal border controls that have been introduced.

AddedRecital 45: (45) In order to enable the post factum analysis of the decision on the temporary reintroduction of border controls at the internal borders, Member States should remain obliged to submit a report on the reintroduction of border control at internal borders to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission once they lift the controls. Where the controls are kept in place for a period exceeding six months, such a report should also be submitted after that six-month period and every six months thereafter., if exceptionally controls are maintained and for as long as the controls are maintained. The report should outline, in particular, the initial and follow-up assessment of the necessity of internal border controls and the respect of the criteria for reintroduction of border controls at internal borders. The Commission should adopt in an implementing act a template and make it available online.

RemovedRecital 43: (43) The mechanism for the temporary reintroduction of border controls at internal borders in urgent situations or to address foreseeable threats should provide for the Commission to organise consultations between Member States, including at the request of any Member State. Relevant Union Agencies may be involved in this process in order to share their expertise, where appropriate. Such consultations should look at the possibility of applying alternative measures, and if necessary the modalities of carrying out internal border controls, their time-line and possible mitigating measures. Where the Commission or a Member State has issued an opinion expressing concerns regarding the reintroduction of border controls, such consultations should be mandatory.

RemovedRecital 44: (44) The Commission and Member States should retain the possibility to express any concern as regards the necessity and proportionality of a decision of a Member State to reintroduce internal border controls for reason of urgency or to address a foreseeable threat. In case controls at internal borders are reintroduced and prolonged for foreseeable threats for combined periods exceeding six months, it should be a requirement for the Commission to issue an opinion assessing the necessity and proportionality of such internal border controls. Such an opinion is without prejudice to the enforcement measures, including infringement actions, which the Commission is required to take at any time against any Member State for failure to comply with its obligations under Union law. Where an opinion is issued, the Commission should launch consultations with the Member States concerned.

Change 19

RemovedAlligned with Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

AddedRecital 47: (47) The competent authorities referred to in this Regulation shall in all their activities undertaken in accordance with this Regulation fully respect the rules on data protection under Union law. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council or Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council apply to the processing of personal data by competent national authorities for the purposes of this Regulation, in their respective field of application.

RemovedRegulation (EU) 2016/399

AddedRecital 56: (56) Regulation (EU) No 2016/399 should therefore be amended accordingly,

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b, Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 27: 27. ‘large scale public health emergency’ means a situation where the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control has identified the existence in one or more third countries of an infectious disease with epidemic potential as defined by the relevant instruments of the World Health Organization.

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 20

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 21

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b, Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 27: deleted

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b, Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 27 a (new): 27a. ‘large scale public health emergency’ means a public health emergency where a serious cross-border threat to health necessitates coordination at Union level in order to ensure a high level of protection of public health, recognised by the Commission at Union level in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/2371;

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 22

RemovedIt is not clear why Member States, who are already entitled to close border crossing points (BCP) under the current Schengen Borders Code, need new grounds on which to do so. From a practical perspective, if persons are arriving at the external border seeking protection, it is important that BCPs remain open so that they can effectively exercise their right to seek protection.

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

RemovedRegulation (EU) 2016/399

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3, Article 13 – paragraph 1: 1. The main purpose of border surveillance shall be to prevent unauthorised border crossings, to provide situational awareness, to counter cross-border criminality and to take measures against persons who have crossed the border irregularly. / Without prejudice to Articles 3 and 4, a person who has crossed a border irregularly and who has no right to stay on the territory of the Member State concerned shall be apprehended and made subject to procedures respecting Directive 2008/115/EC.

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3, Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2: Without prejudice to Articles 3 and 4, a person who has crossed a border irregularly and who has no right to stay on the territory of the Member State concerned shall be apprehended and made subject to procedures respecting Directive 2008/115/EC.

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 23

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 24

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3, Article 13 – paragraph 4: 4. Surveillance shall be carried out by stationary or mobile units which perform their duties by patrolling or stationing themselves at places known or perceived to be sensitive, the aim of such surveillance being to prevent unauthorised border crossings or apprehend individuals crossing the border irregularly. Surveillance may also be carried out by technical means, including electronic means, equipment and surveillance systems and shall be conducted in accordance with Article 5 of Regulation (EU) .../... of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act) and amending certain Union legislative acts.

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3, Article 13 – paragraph 3: 3. Surveillance between border crossing points shall be carried out by border guards whose numbers and methods shall be adapted to existing or foreseen risks and threats, including the possible risk to life of those seeking to cross the border. It shall involve frequent and sudden changes to surveillance periods and other methods or techniques, so that it is possible for unauthorised border crossings to be effectively prevented.

RemovedIn a time of rapid technological advances, in particular in the field of artificial intelligence, it is important to underline the that there are limitations on equipment that should be used for border surveillance.

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

RemovedRegulation (EU) 2016/399

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3, Article 13 – paragraph 4: 4. Surveillance shall be carried out by stationary or mobile units which perform their duties by patrolling or stationing themselves at places known or perceived to be sensitive, the aim of such surveillance being to prevent unauthorised border crossings or apprehend individuals crossing the border irregularly. Surveillance may also be carried out by technical means, including electronic means, equipment and surveillance systems, where it is conducted in accordance with Article 5 of the future Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act).

Change 25

RemovedConsequential amendment based on the Rapporteur’s view that instrumentalisation should not form part of the SBC. It is not clear what the remaining added value of the provision would be.

Change 26

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3, Article 13 – parargaph 6: deleted / (deleted) / (deleted)

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3, Article 13 – paragraph 6: 6. Without prejudice to the support that the European Border and Coast Guard Agency may provide to the Member States, where a Member State introduces internal border controls on the basis of Article 25(1)(c), the Agency may, upon request of that Member State, also carry out a vulnerability assessment as provided for in Articles 10(1), point (c), and Article 32 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and Council57 , with a view to providing the necessary support to the Member State concerned.

RemovedConsequential amendment based on the Rapporteur’s view that instrumentalisation should not form part of the SBC. It is not clear what the remaining added value of the provision would be. This provision does not alter the mandate of the EBCG, therefore it has no added value.

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

RemovedRegulation (EU) 2016/399

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3, Article 13 – paragraph 7: 7. For the purposes of paragraph 4, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 37 concerning additional measures governing surveillance, including the development of standards for border surveillance, in particular the use of surveillance and monitoring technologies at the external borders, in line with the prohibitions, safeguards and transparency obligations laid down in the Artificial Intelligence Act, taking into account the type of borders, the impact levels attributed to each external border section in accordance with Article 34 of the Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 and other relevant factors.

Change 27

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 28

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – introductory part, Chapter V – title: (4) Chapter V is renamed as follows: “Specific measures relating to the external borders control”

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – paragraph 1, Article 21a – paragraph 1: 1. This Article shall apply to a large scale public health emergency, where a serious cross-border threat to health necessitates coordination at Union level in order to ensure a high level of human health protection, recognised by the Commission at Union level in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/2371 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 November 2022 on serious cross-border threats to health and repealing Decision No 1082/2013/EU.

Change 29

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 30

ChangedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – paragraph 1, Article 21a – paragraph 1: 1. This Article shall2: apply2. toIn situations where the European Centreof fora Diseaselarge Preventionscale andpublic Controlhealth identifyemergency the existence inCommission oneshall orbe moreempowered thirdto countriesadopt ofdelegated anacts infectiousin diseaseaccordance with epidemicArticle potential37 asproviding definedfor bytemporary therestrictions relevanton instrumentstravel ofto the World HealthMember Organization.States.

Change 31

RemovedIn order to avoid confusion or politicisation, the identification of such infectious diseases should be left to the competent Agency.

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

RemovedRegulation (EU) 2016/399

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – paragraph 1, Article 21a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2: Such temporary restrictions on travel may include restrictions on entry to the Member States and other measures considered necessary for the protection of public health in the area without controls at internal borders, such as testing, quarantine, and self-isolation.

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – paragraph 1, Article 21a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1: The Council, on the basis of a proposal by the Commission, and after having consulted the European Parliament, may adopt an implementing regulation, providing for temporary restrictions on travel to the Member States.

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 32

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 33

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5, Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii: ii) are based on general police information and experience of the competent authorities regarding possible threats to public security or public policy and aim, in particular, to:

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – paragraph 1, Article 21a – paragraph 4 – introductory part: 4. The delegated act referred to in paragraph 2 shall, where appropriate:

Change 34

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 35

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5, Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii – indent 2: deleted

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – paragraph 1, Article 21a – paragraph 5a: 5a. Where, in a situation of a large scale public health emergency, imperative grounds of urgency so require, the procedure provided for in Article 37a shall apply to delegated acts adopted pursuant to this Article.

RemovedIn accordance with Recital 26 of the current Schengen Borders Code, migration should not, per se, be considered to be a threat to public policy or internal security. The use of border control measures to prevent migration within the Schengen area is contrary to the requirements on co-legislators laid down in Article 77(2)(e) TFEU.

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

RemovedRegulation (EU) 2016/399

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5, Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point a: That exercise of police or other public powers by the competent authorities of the Member States in their territory, in particular in their border areas, shall not have a disproportionate impact on the fluid traffic flow at road crossing-points at internal borders, in particular, by leading to excessive waiting times. Within the meaning of the first subparagraph, the exercise by competent authorities of their powers may not, in particular, be considered equivalent to the exercise of border checks when the measures:

Change 36

RemovedThis provision is not appropriate in the light of the CJEU ruling in Case C-817/19

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

RemovedRegulation (EU) 2016/399

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6, Article 23a – title: Procedure for the possible transfer of persons apprehended in the vicinity of the internal borders

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6, Article 23a: deleted / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted)

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 37

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 38

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8, Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a: (a) a direct and immediate threat of acts of terrorism or of serious organised crime;

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6, Article 23a – paragraph 1 – point a: deleted

RemovedIt is important to recall that internal border control is a measure of last resort. The provision as proposed is much too broad in that context.

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

RemovedRegulation (EU) 2016/399

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6, Article 23a – paragraph 1 – point b: deleted

Change 39

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 40

ChangedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9, Article 25a – paragraph 2: 2. The Member State shall, at the same time as reintroducing border control under paragraph 1, notify the Commission, the Europeantitle: Parliament,Procedure andfor the other Member Statestemporary ofreintroduction theor reintroductionprolongation of border controls, in accordancecontrol withat Articleinternal 27(1).borders

Change 41

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 42

ChangedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9, Article 25a – paragraph 5: 5. For the purposes of paragraph 4, and without prejudice2: to2. ArticleThe 27a(4),Member borderState controlshall, at internal borders may be reintroduced for a period of up to three months. Where the serious threat to public policy or internal security persists beyond that period, the Member Statesame maytime prolongas thereintroducing border control at internal borders for renewable periods of up to three months. /under Anyparagraph prolongation1, shallnotify bethe notifiedEuropean toParliament, the Commission,Council, the European ParliamentCommission and the other Member States in accordance with Article 27 and withinof the time limits referred to in paragraph 4. The maximum durationreintroduction of border control at internal borderscontrols, shallin notaccordance exceedwith oneArticle year.27(1).

Change 43

RemovedGiven that internal border control should remain the exception and not the rule, a period of six months internal border control without further assessment is deemed too long. Internal border control cannot become the de facto situation in an area without internal border control. The Member State should be in a position, within a period of one year, to resolve the identified threat or to have implemented other measures to properly manage the threat.

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

RemovedRegulation (EU) 2016/399

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9, Article 25a – paragraph 4: 4. Where a serious threat to public policy or internal security is foreseeable in a Member State, the Member State may, as a last resort, reintroduce internal border control at internal borders in accordance with this Article. That Member State shall notify the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission and the other Member States in accordance with Article 27(1), at the latest four weeks before the planned reintroduction of border controls, or within a shorter period where the circumstances giving rise to the need to reintroduce border controls at internal borders become known less than four weeks before the planned reintroduction.

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9, Article 25a – paragraph 5: 5. For the purposes of paragraph 4, and without prejudice to Article 27a(4), border control at internal borders may be reintroduced for a period of up to three months. Where the serious threat to public policy or internal security persists beyond that period, the Member State may prolong the border control at internal borders for renewable periods of up to three months. / Any prolongation shall be notified to the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission and the other Member States in accordance with Article 27 and within the time limits referred to in paragraph 4. Subject to Article 27a(5), the maximum duration of border control at internal borders shall not exceed 18 months.

Change 44

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 45

ChangedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10, Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b:introductory (b)part: whether1. measuresTo otherestablish thanwhether the temporary reintroduction or prolongation of border control at internal borders areis likelynecessary toand sufficientlyproportionate remedyin theaccordance threatwith toArticle public25, policya orMember internalState security;shall /first (deleted)assess /in (deleted)particular:

Change 46

RemovedIt is important to set out clear and detailed requirements for the Member States when assessing whether internal border control is necessary and proportionate. If the internal border will not remedy the threat identified, the Member State should not introduce internal border control.

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

RemovedRegulation (EU) 2016/399

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10, Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new): (aa) whether the reintroduction of border controls at internal borders is likely to adequately remedy the serious threat to public policy or internal security;

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10, Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b a new: (ba) the proportionality of the temporary reintroduction of border control in relation to the threat to public policy and internal security by taking into account: / – movement of persons within the area without internal border control / and / - the functioning of the cross-border regions, taking into account the strong social and economic ties between them;

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 47

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 48

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11, Article 27 – paragraph 2: 2. Where border controls have been in place for three months in accordance with Article 25a(4), any subsequent notification for the prolongation of such controls shall include a risk assessment in accordance with Article 26(2). The risk assessment shall present the scale and anticipated evolution of the identified serious threat, in particular how long the identified serious threat is expected to persist and which sections of the internal borders may be affected, as well as information regarding coordination measures with the other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by such measures.

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10, Article 26 – paragraph 2 – point c: deleted

Change 49

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 50

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11, Article 27 – paragraph 3: deleted

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10, Article 26 – paragraph 2 a (new): 2a. In addition to the elements laid down in Article 26(1), the risk assessment shall include the following: / (a) the scale and anticipated evolution of the identified serious threat; / (b) information on how long the identified serious threat is expected to persist and which sections of the internal borders are affected or risk being affected; / (c) information regarding coordination measures with other Member States impacted or likely to be impacted by such measures; / (d) the measures the Member State concerned has taken and intends to take to alleviate the threat, with a view to lifting internal border controls in order to reinstate the principle of free movement.

Change 51

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 52

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11, Article 27 – paragraph 4: 4. The Member State concerned shall upon request by the Commission, provide any further information, including on the coordination measures with the Member States affected by the planned prolongation of border control at internal borders as well as further information needed to assess the possible use of measures referred to in Article 23.

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10, Article 26 – paragraph 3: 3. Where border controls at internal borders have been reintroduced or prolonged, the Member States concerned shall, where necessary, ensure that they are accompanied by appropriate measures that mitigate the impacts resulting from the reintroduction of border controls on persons and the transport of goods, giving particular consideration to the specific vulnerabilities of cross-border regions. / Where border controls at internal borders have been prolonged beyond a period of six months, the necessity, proportionality and duration of those controls shall be discussed in the Schengen Forum convened for that purpose.

Change 53

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 54

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12, Article 27a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2: The consultation shall concern in particular the identified threat to public policy or internal security, the proportionality and necessity of the intended reintroduction of border controls, including by taking into account the appropriateness of alternative measures, as well as the ways of ensuring implementation of the mutual cooperation between the Member States in relation to the reintroduced border controls.

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11, Article 27 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point e: (e) the assessment as to the necessity and proportionality referred to in Article 26(1) and, in the case of a prolongation beyond a period of six months, the risk assessment as referred to in Article 26(2);

RemovedThe principles of necessity and proportionality should guide decisions on internal border controls and not a test of relevance.

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

RemovedRegulation (EU) 2016/399

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11, Article 27 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point f: (f) where appropriate, the measures to be taken by other Member States.

Change 55

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 56

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12, Article 27a – paragraph 5: deleted

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11, Article 27 – paragraph 3: 3. Where the reintroduction of border controls or its prolongation refers to an exceptional situation as referred to in Article 25(1) point (c), the risk assessment shall also provide information on the sudden and unexpected large-scale unauthorised movements, including any information obtained from the relevant EU agencies in line with their respective mandates and data analysis from relevant information systems.

Change 57

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 58

ChangedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13,11, Article 2827 – paragraph 1:5: 1.5. WhereMember theStates Commission,submitting establishesa thatnotification aunder particularlyparagraphs serious1 threator to2 internalmay, securitywhere ornecessary publicand policyin affectsaccordance awith majoritynational oflaw, Memberdecide Statesto atclassify parts of the samenotified time,information. in/ suchSuch aclassification wayshall asnot preclude access to putinformation, atthrough immediateappropriate riskand secure police cooperation channels, by the overallother functioningMember ofStates affected by the areatemporary withoutreintroduction of border controls at internal border,borders itor may,information makebeing amade proposalavailable to the CouncilEuropean toParliament. adoptThe ‒transmission afterand havinghandling consultedof Europeaninformation Parliamentand ‒documents antransmitted implementingto decisionthe authorisingEuropean theParliament reintroductionaccording ofto borderthis controlsparagraph byshall Membercomply Stateswith whererules concerning the availableforwarding measuresand referredhandling toof inclassified Articlesinformation 23which are notapplicable sufficientbetween tothe addressEuropean Parliament and the threat.Commission.

Change 59

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 60

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13, Article 28 – paragraph 2: 2. The decision shall cover a period of up to six months and may be renewed no more than three times, upon proposal from the Commission, for further periods of up to six months, taking into account the review referred to in paragraph 5. The maximum duration of the internal border controls on the basis of the particularly serious threat identified shall not exceed two years.

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12, Article 27a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1: Following receipt of notifications, submitted under Article 27(1), the Commission may establish a consultation process, where appropriate, including joint meetings between the Member State that is planning to reintroduce or prolong border control at internal borders, and the other Member States, especially those directly affected by such measures and the relevant Union agencies. Such a consultation process shall be mandatory if requested by one or more Member States.

RemovedSince the threat is particularly serious and exists at a Union level, a potentially longer period for resolving the problem is acceptable. Nevertheless, the mechanism must come to an end after two years, as is required under Article 29 in respect of the specific procedure where exceptional circumstances put the overall functioning of the area without internal border control at risk.

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

RemovedRegulation (EU) 2016/399

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12, Article 27a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2: The consultation shall concern in particular the identified threat to public policy or internal security, the proportionality and necessity of the intended reintroduction of border controls, including by taking into account the appropriateness of alternative measures, the impact of such border controls where they have already been reintroduced, as well as the ways of ensuring implementation of the mutual cooperation between the Member States in relation to the reintroduced border controls.

Change 61

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 62

ChangedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13,12, Article 2827a – paragraph 6:4: 6.4. MemberWhere Statesan shallopinion immediatelyreferred notifyto thein Commission,paragraphs the2 Europeanor Parliament,3 andis theissued, otherthe MemberCommission Statesshall inestablish thea Councilconsultation ofprocess, ain reintroductionaccordance ofwith borderparagraph controls1, in accordanceorder withto thediscuss decisionthe referredopinion towith inthe paragraphMember 1.States.

Change 63

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 64

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13, Article 28 – paragraph 7: 7. The Commission may issue a recommendation indicating other measures as referred to in Article 23 that could complement internal border controls or be more suitable to address the identified threat to internal security or public policy as referred to in paragraph 1.

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12, Article 27a – paragraph 5: 5. Where a Member State considers that there are exceptional situations justifying the continued need for internal border control in excess of the maximum period referred to in Article 25(5), based on the same foreseeable serious threat to public policy or internal security that justified the introduction of internal border control pursuant to paragraph 4, it may request the Commission to propose to the Council an implementing decision authorising the prolongation of border control by the Member State concerned beyond that maximum period in respect of that ongoing serious threat to public policy or internal security. / In that request, the Member State shall substantiate the continue threat to public policy or internal security, taking into account the opinion of the Commission given pursuant to paragraph 3 of Article 27a. / The Commission shall make such a proposal to the Council only where it considers that the prolongation of internal border control in the specific Member State is justified as a measure of last resort to protect the common interests within the area without internal border controls, and where all other measures, in particular those referred to in Article 23 and Article 23a, are ineffective in mitigating the serious threat identified. In evaluating the request of a Member State, the Commission shall determine whether the criteria laid down in Article 26 are met. / When adopting an implementing decision as referred to in the first subparagraph, the Council sh…

Change 65

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 66

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point b, Article 31 – paragraph 2 – introductory part: 2. Where a Member State notifies the Commission and the other Member States of the reintroduction of border controls in accordance with Article 27(1), it shall at the same time provide the notification to the European Parliament and the Council of the following:

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13, Article 28 – paragraph 1: 1. Where the Commission receives multiple notifications in accordance with Article 27(1), and establishes, on its own initiative or at the request of more than one Member State, that a particularly serious threat to internal security or public policy affects a majority of Member States at the same time, in such a way as to put at immediate risk the overall functioning of the area without internal border, it shall be empowered, after having assessed the fulfilment of the criteria laid down in Article 26, to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 37 authorising the reintroduction of border controls by Member States where the available measures referred to in Articles 23 and 23a are not sufficient to address that serious threat.

RemovedThere is no need for additional bureaucracy regarding notifications of internal border controls. The Member States should send the same notification - with the same level of detail - to the Parliament and the Council, without prejudice to their right to classify some of the information in the notification.

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

RemovedRegulation (EU) 2016/399

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13, Article 28 – paragraph 2: 2. The delegated act shall cover a period of up to six months and may be renewed no more than three times for further periods of up to six months, taking into account the review referred to in paragraph 5. The maximum duration of the internal border controls on the basis of the particularly serious threat identified shall not exceed two years.

Change 67

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 68

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point b, Article 31 – paragraph 2 – point b: deleted

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 69

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 70

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 71

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 72

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point b, Article 31 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1: 3The provision of information may be subject to classification of information by Member States pursuant to Article 27(5).

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 73

RemovedThe right of Member States to classify the information should be retained. A further right not to provide the information is counter-productive and contrary to the spirit of mutual and sincere cooperation.

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

RemovedRegulation (EU) 2016/399

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point b, Article 31 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3: deleted

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15, Article 33 – paragraph 2: 2. Without prejudice to the first paragraph 1, where border controls are prolonged as referred to in Article 25a(5), the Member State concerned shall submit a report at the expiry of six months if border control is exceptionally maintained.

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 74

ChangedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

Change 75

RemovedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19, Annex XII: deleted / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted) / (deleted)

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 a (new), Article 37: (15a) Article 37 is replaced by the following: / "Article 37 / 2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 13(5), Article 21a(2), 28(1) and Article 36 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time. / 3. The delegation of powers referred to in Article 13(5), Article 21a(2), 28(1) and Article 36 may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force. / 3a. Before adopting a delegated act, the Commission shall consult experts designated by each Member State in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making / 5. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 13(5), Article 21a(2), 28(1) and Article 36 shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of two months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament o…

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 b (new), Article 37a (new): (15b) The following Article 37a is inserted : / Article 37a / Urgency procedure / 1. Delegated acts adopted under this Article shall enter into force without delay and shall apply for as long as no objection is expressed in accordance with paragraph 2. The notification of a delegated act to the European Parliament and to the Council shall state the reasons for the use of the urgency procedure. / 2. Either the European Parliament or the Council may object to a delegated act in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 37(5). In such a case, the Commission shall repeal the act immediately following the notification of the decision to object by the European Parliament or by the Council.

AddedRegulation (EU) No 2016/399

AddedArticle 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19, Annex XII – part A – title: Procedure for the possible transfer of persons apprehended in the vicinity of internal borders

Change 76

RemovedThe standstill clause in the Return Directive was intended to ensure that the EU moves to a more harmonised approach. The Rapporteur does not want to move backwards in that respect, by encouraging more bilateral agreements within the Schengen Area that only serve to bypass EU rules.

Change 77

AddedArticle 4 – paragraph 2: deleted

Change 78 under “EXPLANATORY STATEMENT”

RemovedFurthermore, and in this same context, the Rapporteur considers - as set out in the recitals of the current Schengen Borders Code - that migration does not, per se, pose “a serious threat to internal security”. As such, she does not agree with the introduction of the concept of large-scale unauthorised movements of third country nationals as a Schengen concept, as proposed by the Commission. She has proposed to delete this concept.

AddedRegarding the amendments to the Return directive, the Rapporteur prefers also to suggest that they do not belong in the Schengen Borders Code, based on the principle that they are not consistent with a legal basis that requires the absence of any controls on persons, whatever their nationality, when crossing internal borders. It cannot be the role of the Schengen Borders Code to resolve problems that have arisen in the stalled reform of the EU’s asylum and migration policy. Such provisions are clearly contrary to the spirit of the Schengen Area without internal border control. Moreover, the standstill clause in the Return Directive was intended to ensure that the EU moves to a more harmonised approach. The Rapporteur does not want to move backwards in that respect, by encouraging more bilateral agreements within the Schengen Area that serve only to bi-pass EU rules.

RemovedRegarding the new procedure for internal Schengen returns (Article 23a), and the amendments to the Return directive, the Rapporteur prefers also to suggest that they do not belong in the Schengen Borders Code, based on the principle that they are not consistent with a legal basis that requires the absence of any controls on persons, whatever their nationality, when crossing internal borders. It cannot be the role of the Schengen Borders Code to resolve problems that have arisen in the stalled reform of the EU’s asylum and migration policy. Such provisions are clearly contrary to the spirit of the Schengen Area without internal border control. Moreover, the standstill clause in the Return Directive was intended to ensure that the EU moves to a more harmonised approach. The Rapporteur does not want to move backwards in that respect, by encouraging more bilateral agreements within the Schengen Area that serve only to bi-pass EU rules.

Change 79 under “EXPLANATORY STATEMENT”

ChangedThe draft report contains strict time limits on the reintroduction of internal border controls for Member States, and clear provisions indicating how long they can be maintained.. Viewing the Commission’s proposal as too open-ended in this regard, the Rapporteur has therefore proposed time limits of:maintained.

Change 80 under “EXPLANATORY STATEMENT”

Removed(i) 1 month, renewable up to 3 months for unforeseeable threats;

AddedIn its proposal, the Commission decided to introduce new provisions governing a serious threat to public policy or internal security which would put at risk the overall functioning of the area without internal border controls, allowing for a Council Decision covering the reintroduction of internal border control in several or more Member States at the same time. The Rapporteur can accept such a mechanism, but believes it should be tightly regulated. The reintroduction of border controls at EU-level should be possible for periods of 6 months, renewable up to a maximum of 2 years.

Removed(ii) 3 months, renewable for periods of 3 months up to maximum of 1 year for foreseeable threats; and that

Removed(iii) where a MS intends to renew internal border control after 3 months, it is required to provide a risk assessment;

Removed(iv) where a MS intends to renew internal border control for a period beyond 6 months, the Commission would then be obliged to give its opinion on the necessity and proportionality of such internal border control.

RemovedIn its proposal, the Commission decided to introduce new provisions governing a serious threat to public policy or internal security which would put at risk the overall functioning of the area without internal border controls, allowing for a Council Decision covering the reintroduction of internal border control in several or more Member States at the same time. The Rapporteur can accept such a mechanism, but believes it should be tightly regulated. The reintroduction of border controls at EU-level should be possible for periods of 6 months, renewable up to a maximum of 2 years. This requires a proposal from the Commission for a Council Decision.