Inhoudsopgave van deze pagina:
Delen
COUNCIL OFBrussels, 14 April 2011 THE EUROPEAN UNION
8526/11
Interinstitutional File: 2009/0165 (COD)
CODEC 565 ASILE 26 PE 153 NOTE
from: General Secretariat
to: Permanent Representatives Committee/Council
Subject: Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing international protection (Recast)
-
-Outcome of the European Parliament's first reading (Strasbourg, 4 to 7 April 2011)
I. INTRODUCTION
The rapporteur, Sylvie GUILLAUME (S&D - FR), presented a report on behalf of the Committee
on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, containing 96 amendments (amendments 1-96). In
addition, the EPP group tabled 19 amendments (amendments 100 - 118) and the Greens/EFA group
3 amendments (amendments 97 - 99).
II. DEBATE
The Rapporteur opened the debate that took place on 4 April 2011 and:
· recalled that with the vote of the Parliament on the proposal, a first but essential step would
be taken in relation to the "procedures" Directive which was a cornerstone of the asylum
package. She hoped that the 2012 deadline could be kept but at the same time regretted that
discussions were blocked in the Council;
· called on Europe to take its share of the burden, now mainly borne by developing countries
without the necessary means. Clear rules in Europe were necessary as the present rules did
not offer sufficient protection of asylum seekers' rights and as major divergences between
the Member States treatment of asylum seekers existed contrary to "Dublin II" that
presumes equivalence between national rules;
· supported the Commission's proposals to improve the quality of procedures in first instance.
This would benefit the asylum seekers, lead to better quality decisions and thus to less
appeals, shorter duration of the overall procedures as well as less abuses - and thereby in the
longer term lead to a reduction of costs;
· highlighted a series of essential points in the report: a) free legal assistance in first instance
which was an essential guarantee for quality; b) better protection of vulnerable persons and
-
c)the more ambitious appeal deadlines to ensure an effective appeal system and procedural
guarantees. She finally called for a common list of safe third countries to be adopted in co-
decision;
· concluded by saying that the report voted should send a strong signal to the Commission and
the Council, also as regards the need for harmonisation towards higher standards.
The Commissioner Cecilia MALMSTROEM:
· thanked the Rapporteur and echoed her comments on the importance of the proposal as a
cornerstone of the asylum package. The vote of the Parliament would feed into the revised
proposal that the Commission would submit in the near future to give a boost to the stalled
negotiations in the Council;
· spoke for the same level of treatment of asylum seekers across the EU as the present
differences were difficult to understand against the background that Member States shared
the same international conventions and the same European values;
· saw it as crucial that the rules were fair and efficient and while preventing abuses they
should respect fundamental rights. Ensuring the same high quality of decisions across the
EU was essential to achieving these objectives;
· highlighted some amendments in the report: the increases of the level of guarantees, in
particular for minors; the introduction of certain grounds for accelerated procedures; the safe
country notions (which she considered very ambitious) and the free legal assistance (which
she called interesting as a way to help resolving a tricky legal issue);
· called upon all parties to show willingness to compromise if the 2012 deadline set out in the
Stockholm programme was to be met, recalling that 2012 was also the 60th anniversary of
the Geneva Convention.
Speaking on behalf of the political groups:
Monika HOHLMEIER (EPP - DE):
· recalled some postive key points of the compromise found in the Committee: free legal
assistance; protection of minors; the definition of applicants with special needs and the list
of safe third countries;
· shared the goals of improving the quality of procedures and reducing the number of appeals
to the benefit of those that were really persecuted. She was explicitly in favour of
appropriate minimum standards in all Member States. However, the Commission text and
also some amendments introduced provisions that went contrary to these objectives and
would instead provide for ways to delay the process and even to abuse the system.
Claude MORAES (S&D - UK)
· stated that against the background of the North African and mediterranian crisis there was a
political imperative to complete the asylum package and supported the proposal by the
Committee as being sensitive and effective;
· argued that the lack of "front loading" of asylum cases and the ensuing poor-quality decision
making lead to more costs, not lower costs for Member States;
· underlined that the debate should also be about harmonising practices across the EU which
now vary too much (referring to it as "asylum lottery") and about fair and effective
procedures vital to those fleeing persecution. EU's responsibility in upholding international
obligations towards people seeking protection should be recognised.
Nadja HIRSCH (ALDE - DE):
· expressed support for compromises found and agreed that a clear signal should be sent to the
Council towards meeting the 2012 deadline but also on the Parliament's readiness to
negotiate;
· underlined that it should be clear that the main point was to have a common asylum system
instead of what is now almost a lottery;
· highlighted aspects of the report that were important to her group: the common list on safe
third countries; the improved first instance procedures that will also benefit Member States
and the improvement of the rights of minors.
Hélène FLAUTRE (Greens/EFA - FR):
· supported the Rapporteur's work and deplored the gap between the existing system and a
European system, a gap where the rights of asylum seekers and the credibility of Europe
were deteriorating;
· called upon the Council to consider the option proposed by the Commission, as reinforced
by the report, of improving the quality of decision making in first instance. One should
listen to those Member States that have the best standards in protecting asylum seekers.
Kyriacos TRIANTAPHYLLIDES (EUL/NGL - CY) expressed overall support for the report which
includes significant improvements to the current asylum procedures in Europe, naming the increase
in the assistance to asylum seekers as an example (the personal interview and the free legal advice).
Gerard BATTEN (EFD - UK) spoke against the proposal, referring to the influx of people as a
result of the crisis in North Africa as another beneficial crisis that gives the opportunity for the EU
to extend its powers and dominion. Asylum and immigration should be the sovereign decisions of
the individual States.
Daniël van der STOEP (NI - NL) stated that his party (the Freedom Party) continued to be against a
common asylum policy as asylum was a matter that was better handled at national level. If it were
up to Europe, borders would be wide open to fortune seekers and profiteers, if this was not already
the case. In a time of major influx, it should be made more difficult to get asylum, not easier.
Others speakers made the following points:
· the right to asylum is a key principle of human rights. Asylum seekers should not be
punished and welcomed with distrust but helped towards achieving their basic human rights.
Europe should show solidarity with people who flee from countries like Libya and be
prepared to accommodate more refugees in the future and equip itself with improved
procedures that also lead to better burden sharing (Tanja FAJON (S&D - SL));
· it was necessary to come up with an effective way of dealing with asylum applications and
with transparent procedures so that people who deserve asylum get it. It was equally
necessary with provisions to stop abuses of the system (Georgios PAPANIKOLAOU (EPP -
GR));
· some Member States had objections to the proposals and the Parliament should listen
carefully to the views of the Member States, else the work done will not bear any fruit
(Jaroslav PASKA (EFD - SK)).
III. VOTE
When it voted in pleanary on 6 April 2011, the Parliament adopted 97 amendments (1 - 11, 13, 15 -
48, 50 - 56, 58 - 63, 65 - 71, 73 - 85, 87 - 96, 103, 105, 107 - 110, 113 and 117).
The text of the amendments adopted and the European Parliament's legislative resolution are set out
in the Annex hereto.
ANNEX
(6.4.2011)
Granting and withdrawing international protection ***I
European Parliament legislative resolution of 6 April 2011 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing international protection (recast) (COM(2009)0554 C7-0248/2009 2009/0165(COD))
(Ordinary legislative procedure recast)
The European Parliament,
having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2009)0554),
having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 63, first indent, points 1(d) and 2(a), of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament
(C7-0248/2009),
having regard to the Commission Communication to Parliament and the Council entitled `Consequences of the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon for ongoing interinstitutional decision-making procedures' (COM(2009)0665),
having regard to Article 294(3) and Article 78(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 28 April 2010
having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 28 November 2001 on a more structured use of the recasting technique for legal acts ,
having regard to its resolution of 10 March 2009 on the future of the Common European Asylum System ,
having regard to the letter of 2 February 2010 from the Committee on Legal Affairs to the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs in accordance with Rule 87(3) of its Rules of Procedure,
having regard to Rules 87 and 55 of its Rules of Procedure,
having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A7- 0085/2011),
A. whereas, according to the Consultative Working Party of the legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, the proposal in question does not include any
substantive amendments other than those identified as such in the proposal and whereas, as regards the codification of the unchanged provisions of the earlier acts together with those amendments, the proposal contains a straightforward codification of the existing texts, without any change in their substance,
-
1.Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out, taking into account the recommendations of the Consultative Working Party of the legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission;
-
2.Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text;
-
3.Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.
Amendment 1
Proposal for a directive Recital 8
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(8) The resources of the European Refugee Fund and of the European Asylum Support Office should be mobilised to provide adequate support to the Member States' efforts relating to the implementation of the standards set in the second phase of the Common European Asylum System, in particular to those Member States which are faced with specific and disproportionate pressures on their asylum systems, due in particular to their geographical or demographic situation. (8) It is necessary for the resources of the European Refugee Fund and of the European Asylum Support Office to be mobilised, inter alia, to provide adequate support to the Member States' efforts relating to the implementation of the standards set in the second phase of the Common European Asylum System, in particular to those Member States which are faced with specific and disproportionate pressures on their asylum systems, due in particular to their geographical or demographic situation. It is also necessary that in Member States that receive a disproportionately large number of asylum applications in relation to the size of their population, financial support and administrative/technical support be mobilised immediately under the European Refugee Fund and the European Asylum Support Office respectively in order to enable them to comply with this Directive.
Amendment 2 Proposal for a directive Recital 13
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(13) This Directive respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In particular this Directive seeks to promote the application of Articles 1, 18, 19, 21, 24 and 47 of the Charter and has to be implemented accordingly. (13) This Directive respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In particular this Directive seeks to promote the application of Articles 1, 4, 18, 19, 21, 24 and 47 of the Charter and has to be implemented accordingly.
Amendment 3
Proposal for a directive Recital 14 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(14a) Member States are obliged to respect fully the principle of non- refoulement and the right to asylum, which includes access to an asylum procedure for any person who wishes to claim asylum and who is in their jurisdiction, including those under the effective control of a Union body or a body of a Member State.
Amendment 4 Proposal for a directive Recital 15
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(15) It is essential that decisions on all applications for international protection be taken on the basis of the facts and, in the first instance, by authorities whose personnel has the appropriate knowledge or receives the necessary training in the field of asylum and refugee matters. (15) It is essential that decisions on all applications for international protection be taken on the basis of the facts and, in the first instance, by authorities whose personnel has the appropriate knowledge and receives the necessary training in the field of asylum and refugee matters.
Amendment 5
Proposal for a directive Recital 18
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(18) In the interests of a correct recognition of those persons in need of protection as refugees within the meaning of Article 1 of the Geneva Convention or as persons eligible for subsidiary protection, every applicant should have an effective access to procedures, the opportunity to cooperate and properly communicate with the competent authorities so as to present the relevant facts of his/her case and sufficient procedural guarantees to pursue his/her case throughout all stages of the procedure. Moreover, the procedure in which an application for international protection is examined should normally provide an applicant at least with the right to stay pending a decision by the determining authority, access to the services of an interpreter for submitting his/her case if interviewed by the authorities, the opportunity to communicate with a representative of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and with organizations providing advice or counselling to applicants for international protection , the right to appropriate notification of a decision, a motivation of that decision in fact and in law, the opportunity to consult a legal adviser or other counsellor, and the right to be informed of his/her legal position at decisive moments in the course of the procedure, in a language he/she can reasonably be supposed to understand and, in the case of a negative decision, the right to an effective remedy before a court or tribunal. (18) In the interests of a correct recognition of those persons in need of protection as refugees within the meaning of Article 1 of the Geneva Convention or as persons eligible for subsidiary protection, every applicant should have an effective access to procedures, the opportunity to cooperate and properly communicate with the competent authorities so as to present the relevant facts of his/her case and effective procedural guarantees to pursue his/her case throughout all stages of the procedure. Moreover, the procedure in which an application for international protection is examined should normally provide an applicant at least with the right to stay pending a final decision by the determining authority and, in the case of a negative decision, the time necessary for seeking a judicial remedy, and for so long as a competent court or tribunal so authorises, access to the services of an interpreter for submitting his/her case if interviewed by the authorities, the opportunity to communicate with a representative of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and with organizations providing advice or counselling to applicants for international protection , the right to appropriate notification of a decision, a motivation of that decision in fact and in law, the opportunity to consult a legal adviser or other counsellor, and the right to be informed of his/her legal position at decisive moments in the course of the procedure, in a language he/she understands or may reasonably be supposed to understand and, in the case of a negative decision, the right to an effective remedy before a court or tribunal.
Amendment 6
Proposal for a directive Recital 19
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(19) With a view to ensuring an effective access to the examination procedure, officials who first come into contact with persons seeking international protection, in particular those carrying out surveillance of land or maritime borders or conducting border checks, should receive instructions and necessary training on how to recognise and deal with requests for international protection. They should be able to provide third country nationals or stateless persons who are present in the territory, including at the border, in the territorial waters or in the transit zones of the Member States, and wish to request international protection, with all relevant information as to where and how applications for international protection may be lodged. Where those persons are present in the territorial waters of a Member State, they should be disembarked in land and have their applications examined in accordance with this Directive. (19) With a view to ensuring an effective access to the examination procedure, officials who first come into contact with persons seeking international protection, in particular those carrying out surveillance of land or maritime borders or conducting border checks, should receive instructions and necessary training on how to recognise, register and forward to the competent determining authority requests for international protection. They should be able to provide third country nationals or stateless persons who are present in the territory, including at the border, in the territorial waters or in the transit zones of the Member States, and wish to request international protection, with all relevant information as to where and how applications for international protection may be lodged. Where those persons are present in the territorial waters of a Member State, they should be disembarked in land and have their applications examined in accordance with this Directive.
Amendment 7
Proposal for a directive Recital 20
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(20) In addition, special procedural guarantees for vulnerable applicants, such as minors, unaccompanied minors, persons who have been subjected to torture, rape or other serious acts of violence or disabled persons, should be laid down in order to create the conditions necessary for their effective access to procedures and presenting the elements needed to substantiate the application for international protection. (20) In addition, special procedural guarantees for vulnerable applicants, such as minors, unaccompanied minors, pregnant women, persons who have been subjected to torture, rape or other serious acts of violence, such as violence based on gender and harmful traditional practices, or disabled persons, should be laid down in order to create the conditions necessary for their effective access to procedures and presenting the elements needed to substantiate the application for international protection.
Amendment 8 Proposal for a directive Recital 22
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(22) With a view to ensuring substantive equality between female and male applicants, examination procedures should be gender sensitive. In particular, personal interviews should be organised in a way which makes its possible for both female and male applicants to speak about their past experiences in cases involving gender based persecution. The complexity of gender related claims should be properly taken into account in procedures based on the safe third country concept, the safe country of origin concept or the notion of subsequent applications. (22) With a view to ensuring substantive equality between female and male applicants, examination procedures should be gender sensitive. In particular, personal interviews should be organised in a way which makes its possible for both female and male applicants to speak about their past experiences in cases involving gender based persecution to an interviewer of the same sex if so requested, who has specific training on the issue of interviews regarding gender-based persecution. The complexity of gender related claims should be properly taken into account in procedures based on the safe third country concept, the safe country of origin concept or the notion of subsequent applications.
Amendment 9
Proposal for a directive Recital 24
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(24) Procedures for examining international protection needs should be organised in a way that makes it possible for the competent authorities to conduct a rigorous examination of applications for international protection. (24) Procedures for examining international protection needs should be organised in a way that makes it possible for the determining authorities to conduct a rigorous examination of applications for international protection.
Amendment 10
Proposal for a directive Recital 30
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (30) Member States should examine all applications on the substance, i.e. assess whether the applicant in question qualifies for international protection in accordance with Directive [.../../EC] [the Qualification (30) Member States should examine all applications on the substance, i.e. assess whether the applicant in question qualifies for international protection in accordance with Directive [.../../EC] [the Qualification
Directive] except where the present Directive provides otherwise, in particular where it can be reasonably assumed that another country would do the examination or provide sufficient protection. In particular, Member States should not be obliged to assess the substance of an application for international protection where a first country of asylum has granted the applicant refugee status or otherwise sufficient protection and the applicant will be readmitted to this country. Directive] except where this Directive provides otherwise, in particular where it can be ensured that another country would do the examination or provide effective protection. In particular, Member States should not be obliged to assess the substance of an application for international protection where a first country of asylum has granted the applicant refugee status or otherwise accessible and effective protection and the applicant will be readmitted to this country. Member States should proceed in this way only in cases where the applicant in question is safe in the third country concerned.
Amendment 11
Proposal for a directive Recital 32
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(32) Furthermore, with respect to certain European third countries, which observe particularly high human rights and refugee protection standards, Member States should be allowed to not carry out, or not to carry out full examination of asylum applications regarding applicants who enter their territory from such European third countries. deleted
Amendment 13
Proposal for a directive Article 2 point d
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(d) "applicant with special needs" means an applicant who due to age, gender, disability, mental health problems or consequences of torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violence is in need of special guarantees in order to benefit from the rights and comply with the obligations in (d) "applicant with special needs" means an applicant who due to age, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, physical or mental illnesses or consequences of torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violence is in need of special guarantees in order to benefit from the
-
accordance with this Directive; rights and comply with the obligations in accordance with this Directive;
Amendment 15
Proposal for a directive Article 2 point p b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(pb) "new facts and circumstances" means facts supporting the essence of the claim, which could contribute to the revision of an earlier decision.
Amendment 16
Proposal for a directive Article 4 paragraph 2 point a a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(aa) applicants with special needs, as defined in Article 2(d);
Amendment 17
Proposal for a directive Article 4 paragraph 2 point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(b) gender, trauma and age awareness; (b) gender, sexual orientation, trauma and age awareness, with particular attention being paid to unaccompanied minors;
Amendment 18
Proposal for a directive Article 4 paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
4.Where an authority is designated in accordance with paragraph 3, Member States shall ensure that the personnel of that authority have the appropriate knowledge or receive the necessary training to fulfil their obligations when 4. Where an authority is designated in accordance with paragraph 3, Member States shall ensure that the personnel of that authority have the appropriate knowledge and receive the necessary training to fulfil their obligations when
implementing this Directive. implementing this Directive.
Amendment 19
Proposal for a directive Article 6 paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
2.Member States shall ensure that a person who wishes to make an application for international protection has an effective opportunity to lodge the application with the competent authority as soon as possible. 2. Member States shall ensure that a person who wishes to make an application for international protection has an effective opportunity to lodge the application with the competent authority as soon as possible. Where applicants are unable to lodge their application in person, Member States shall ensure that a legal representative is able to lodge the application on their behalf.
Amendment 20
Proposal for a directive Article 6 paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
5.Member States shall ensure that a minor has the right to make an application for international protection either on his/her own behalf, or through his/her parents or other adult family members. 5. Member States shall ensure that a minor has the right to make an application for international protection either on his/her own behalf if he/she is considered under national law as capable of bringing proceedings or through his/her legal representative or the latter's authorised representative. In all other cases Article 6(6) shall apply.
Amendment 21 Proposal for a directive Article 6 paragraph 7 point c
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(c) the cases in which the lodging of an application for international protection is deemed to constitute also the lodging of an application for international protection for any unmarried minor. deleted
Amendment 22 Proposal for a directive Article 6 paragraph 8 subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
8.Member States shall ensure that border guards, police and immigration authorities, and personnel of detention facilities have instructions and receive necessary training for dealing with applications for international protection. If these authorities are designated as competent authorities pursuant to paragraph 1, the instructions shall include an obligation to register the application. In other cases, the instructions shall require to forward the application to the authority competent for this registration together with all relevant information. 8. Member States shall ensure that border guards, police and immigration authorities, and personnel of detention facilities have instructions and receive necessary training for recognising, registering and forwarding applications for international protection. If these authorities are designated as competent authorities pursuant to paragraph 1, the instructions shall include an obligation to register the application. In other cases, the instructions shall require to forward the application to the authority competent for this registration together with all relevant information.
Amendment 23
Proposal for a directive Article 7 paragraph 3 subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
3.Member States shall ensure that organizations providing advice and counseling to applicants for international protection have access to the border crossing points, including transit zones, and detention facilities subject to an agreement with the competent authorities of the Member State. 3. Member States shall ensure that organisations providing legal assistance and /or representation to applicants for international protection have swift access to the border crossing points, including transit zones, and detention facilities.
Amendment 24
Proposal for a directive Article 7 paragraph 3 subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
Member States may provide for rules covering the presence of such organizations in the areas referred to in this Article. Member States may provide for rules covering the presence of such organisations in the areas referred to in this Article, as long as they do not limit access by applicants to advice and counselling.
Amendment 25 Proposal for a directive Article 8 paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
1.Applicants shall be allowed to remain in the Member State, for the sole purpose of the procedure, until the determining authority has made a decision in accordance with the procedures at first instance set out in Chapter III. This right to remain shall not constitute an entitlement to a residence permit. 1. Applicants shall be allowed to remain in the Member State, for the sole purpose of the procedure, until the determining authority has made a final decision, including in cases where an applicant lodges an appeal, and for as long as a competent court or tribunal so authorises. This right to remain shall not constitute an entitlement to a residence permit.
Amendment 26
Proposal for a directive Article 8 paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
3.A Member State may extradite an applicant to a third country pursuant to paragraph 2 only where the competent authorities are satisfied that an extradition decision will not result in direct or indirect refoulement in violation of international obligations of the Member State. 3. A Member State may extradite an applicant to a third country pursuant to paragraph 2 only where an extradition decision will not result in direct or indirect refoulement in violation of international obligations of the Member State or expose the applicant to inhuman or degrading treatment upon arrival in the third country.
Amendment 27
Proposal for a directive Article 9 paragraph 3 point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b) precise and up-to-date information is obtained from various sources, such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the European Asylum Support Office, as to the general situation prevailing in the countries of origin of applicants and, where necessary, in countries through which they have transited, and that such information is made available to the personnel responsible (b) precise and up-to-date information is obtained from various sources, such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the European Asylum Support Office and international human rights organisations, as to the general situation prevailing in the countries of origin of applicants and, where necessary, in countries through which they have transited, and that such information is
-
for examining applications and taking decisions and, where the determining authority takes it into consideration for the purpose of taking a decision, to the applicant and his/her legal adviser; made available to the personnel responsible for examining applications and taking decisions and, where the determining authority takes it into consideration for the purpose of taking a decision, to the applicant and his/her legal adviser;
Amendment 28
Proposal for a directive Article 9 paragraph 3 point c
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(c) the personnel examining applications and taking decisions have the knowledge with respect to relevant standards applicable in the field of asylum and refugee law; (c) the personnel examining applications and taking decisions have the knowledge with respect to relevant standards applicable in the field of asylum and refugee law as well as human rights law and have completed the initial and follow- up training programme referred to in Article 4(1);
Amendment 29
Proposal for a directive Article 9 paragraph 3 point d
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(d) the personnel examining applications and taking decisions are instructed and have the possibility to seek advice, whenever necessary, from experts on particular issues, such as medical, cultural, child or gender issues. (d) the personnel examining applications and taking decisions are instructed and have the possibility to seek advice, whenever necessary, from experts on particular issues, such as medical, cultural, child, gender, religious or sexual orientation issues.
Amendment 30
Proposal for a directive Article 9 paragraph 3 point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(da) the applicant and his/her legal adviser have access to information provided by the experts referred to in point (d).
Amendment 31 Proposal for a directive Article 10 paragraph 2 subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
2.Member States shall also ensure that, where an application is rejected with regard to refugee status and/or subsidiary protection status, the reasons in fact and in law are stated in the decision and information on how to challenge a negative decision is given in writing. 2. Member States shall also ensure that, where an application is rejected or granted with regard to refugee status and/or subsidiary protection status, the reasons in fact and in law are clearly stated in the decision and information on how to challenge a negative decision is given in writing at the time of issuing the decision and signed upon receipt by the recipient.
Amendment 32
Proposal for a directive Article 10 paragraph 2 subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
Member States need not provide information on how to challenge a negative decision in writing in conjunction with a decision where the applicant has been provided with this information at an earlier stage either in writing or by electronic means accessible
to the applicant. deleted
Amendment 33
Proposal for a directive Article 10 paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
4.Paragraph 3 shall not apply to cases where disclosure of particular circumstances of a person to members of his/her family can jeopardize the interests of that person, including cases involving gender and/or age based persecution. In such cases, a separate decision shall be issued to the person concerned. 4. Paragraph 3 shall not apply to cases where disclosure of particular circumstances of a person to members of his/her family can jeopardize the interests of that person, including cases involving gender, sexual orientation, gender identity and/or age based persecution. In such cases, a separate decision shall be issued to the person concerned.
Amendment 34 Proposal for a directive Article 11 paragraph 1 point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(a) they shall be informed in a language which they may reasonably be supposed to understand of the procedure to be followed and of their rights and obligations during the procedure and the possible consequences of not complying with their obligations and not cooperating with the authorities. They shall be informed of the time-frame, as well as the means at their disposal for fulfilling the obligation to submit the elements as referred to in Article 4 of Directive [..../../EC] [the Qualification Directive ]. This information shall be given in time to enable them to exercise the rights guaranteed in this Directive and to comply with the obligations described in Article 12; (a) they shall be informed in a language which they understand or may reasonably be supposed to understand of the procedure to be followed and of their rights and obligations during the procedure and the possible consequences of not complying with their obligations and not cooperating with the authorities. They shall be informed of the time-frame, as well as the means at their disposal for fulfilling the obligation to submit the elements as referred to in Article 4 of Directive [..../../EC] [the Qualification Directive ]. This information shall be given in time to enable them to exercise the rights guaranteed in this Directive and to comply with the obligations described in Article 12;
Amendment 35
Proposal for a directive Article 11 paragraph 1 point e
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (e) they shall be informed of the result of the decision by the determining authority in a language that they may reasonably be supposed to understand when they are not assisted or represented by a legal adviser or other counsellor . The information provided shall include information on how to challenge a negative decision in accordance with the provisions of Article 10(2). (e) they shall be informed of the result of the decision by the determining authority in a language that they understand or may reasonably be supposed to understand when they are not assisted or represented by a legal adviser or other counsellor . The information provided shall include information on how to challenge a negative decision in accordance with the provisions
of Article 10(2).
Amendment 36 Proposal for a directive Article 12 paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
1.Applicants for international protection shall cooperate with the competent authorities with a view to establishing their identity and other elements referred to in Article 4(2) of Directive [..../../EC] [the Qualification Directive]. Member States may impose upon applicants other obligations to cooperate with the competent authorities insofar as these obligations are necessary for the processing of the application. 1. Applicants for international protection shall be required to assist, to the extent of their physical and psychological capacities, in clarifying the situation and to reveal their identity, nationality and other elements referred to in Article 4(2) of Directive [..../../EC] [the Qualification Directive] to the competent authorities. If they are not in possession of a valid passport or a document in lieu of a passport, applicants shall be required to cooperate in obtaining an identity document. So long as applicants are permitted to remain in the Member State under international protection during the consideration of the application, they shall not be required to enter into contact with authorities of their country of origin if there is reason to fear persecution by that State. Member States may impose upon applicants other obligations to cooperate with the competent authorities insofar as these obligations are necessary for the processing of the application.
Amendment 37
Proposal for a directive Article 12 paragraph 2 point d
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(d) the competent authorities may search the applicant and the items he/she carries with him/her, provided the search is carried out by a person of the same sex; (d) the competent authorities may search the applicant and the items he/she carries with him/her, provided the search is carried out by a person of the same sex who is sensitive to the applicant's age and culture and fully respects the principle of human dignity and physical and mental integrity;
Amendment 38 Proposal for a directive Article 13 paragraph 1 subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
1.Before a decision is taken by the determining authority, the applicant shall be given the opportunity of a personal interview on his/her application for international protection with a person competent under national law to conduct such an interview. Interviews on the substance of an application for international protection shall always be conducted by the personnel of the determining authority.
-
1.Before a decision is taken by the determining authority, the applicant shall be given the opportunity of a personal interview on his/her application for international protection in a language which he/she understands with a person competent under national law to conduct such an interview. Interviews on the admissibility of an application for international protection and on the substance of an application for international protection shall always be conducted by the personnel of the determining authority.
Amendment 39
Proposal for a directive Article 13 paragraph 1 subparagraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
Member States may determine in national legislation the cases in which a minor shall be given the opportunity of a personal interview. Member States shall determine in national legislation the cases in which a minor shall be given the opportunity of a personal interview, taking due account of the child's best interests and special needs.
Amendment 40
Proposal for a directive Article 13 paragraph 2 point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(b) the competent authority is of the opinion that the applicant is unfit or unable to be interviewed owing to enduring circumstances beyond his/her control. When in doubt, the competent authority shall consult a medical expert to establish whether the condition is temporary or permanent. (b) the determining authority is of the opinion that the applicant is unfit or unable to be interviewed owing to enduring circumstances beyond his/her control. When in doubt, the determining authority shall consult a medical expert to establish whether the condition is temporary or permanent.
Amendment 41 Proposal for a directive Article 13 paragraph 2 subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
Where the Member State does not provide the applicant with the opportunity for a personal interview pursuant to point (b), or where applicable, to the dependant, reasonable efforts shall be made to allow the applicant or the dependant to submit further information. Where the determining authority does not provide the applicant with the opportunity for a personal interview pursuant to point (b), or where applicable, to the dependant, the determining authority shall allow the applicant or the dependant to reschedule the personal interview and to submit further information.
Amendment 42 Proposal for a directive Article 13 paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
3.The absence of a personal interview in accordance with this Article shall not prevent the determining authority from taking a decision on an application for international protection . deleted
Amendment 43 Proposal for a directive Article 14 paragraph 3 point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(a) ensure that the person who conducts the interview is competent to take account of the personal or general circumstances surrounding the application, including the applicant's cultural origin, gender, or vulnerability; (a) ensure that the person who conducts the interview is qualified, trained and competent to take account of the personal and general circumstances surrounding the application, including the applicant's cultural origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or vulnerability;
Amendment 44
Proposal for a directive Article 14 paragraph 3 point c
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(c) select a competent interpreter who is able to ensure appropriate communication between the applicant and the person who conducts the interview. The (c) select a competent interpreter who is able to ensure appropriate communication between the applicant and the person who conducts the interview and is required to
-
communication need not necessarily take place in the language preferred by the applicant if there is another language which he/she understands and in which he/she is able to communicate clearly. Wherever possible, Member States shall provide an interpreter of the same sex if the applicant so requests; comply with a code of conduct laying down the rights and duties of the interpreter. The communication need not necessarily take place in the language preferred by the applicant if there is another language which he/she understands and in which he/she is able to communicate clearly. Wherever possible, Member States shall provide an interpreter of the same sex if the applicant so requests;
Amendment 45 Proposal for a directive Article 14 paragraph 3 point e
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
e)ensure that interviews with minors are conducted in a child-friendly manner. (e) ensure that interviews with minors are conducted in a child-friendly manner and by a person with the necessary knowledge of the special needs and rights of minors.
Amendment 46
Proposal for a directive Article 17 paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
3.Member States shall provide for relevant arrangements in order to ensure that impartial and qualified medical expertise is made available for the purpose of a medical examination referred to in paragraph 2. 3. Member States shall provide for relevant arrangements in order to ensure that impartial and qualified medical expertise is made available for the purpose of a medical examination referred to in paragraph 2 and that the less invasive medical examination is selected when the applicant is a minor.
Amendment 47
Proposal for a directive Article 18 Title
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
Right to legal assistance and representation Right to advice on procedural and legal aspects, legal assistance and representation
Proposal for a directive Article 18 paragraph 2 point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(a) provide for free legal assistance in procedures in accordance with Chapter III. This shall include, at least, the provision of information on the procedure to the applicant in the light of his/her particular circumstances and explanations of reasons in fact and in law in the case of a negative decision; (a) provide for free advice on procedural and legal aspects in procedures in accordance with Chapter III. This shall include, at least, the provision of information on the procedure to the applicant in the light of his/her particular circumstances, preparation of the necessary procedural documents, including during the personal interview, and explanations of reasons in fact and in law in the case of a negative decision. Such advice may be delivered by a qualified non-governmental organisation or by qualified professionals.
Amendment 50
Proposal for a directive Article 18 paragraph 3 subparagraph 1 point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(b) only to legal advisers or other counsellors specifically designated by national law to assist and/or represent applicants for international protection. (b) only for the services provided by legal advisers or other counsellors specifically designated by national law to assist and/or represent applicants for international protection.
Amendment 51
Proposal for a directive Article 18 paragraph 3 subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
With respect to the procedures provided for in Chapter V, Member States may choose to only make free legal assistance and/or representation available to applicants insofar as such assistance is necessary to ensure their effective access to justice. Member States shall ensure that legal assistance and/or representation granted pursuant to this paragraph is not arbitrarily With respect to the procedures provided for in Chapter V, Member States may choose to only make free legal assistance and/or representation available to applicants insofar as such assistance is necessary to ensure their effective access to justice. Member States shall ensure that legal assistance and/or representation granted pursuant to this paragraph is not arbitrarily
restricted. restricted. Member States may grant such legal assistance and/or representation only if there is a sufficient prospect of success as assessed by the court.
Amendment 52
Proposal for a directive Article 18 paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
5.Member States may allow non- governmental organisations to provide free legal assistance and/or representation to applicants for international protection in procedures provided for in Chapter III and/or Chapter V. 5. Member States shall allow and facilitate the provision by non-governmental organisations of free legal assistance and/or representation to applicants for international protection in procedures provided for in Chapter III and/or Chapter
V.
Amendment 53
Proposal for a directive Article 19 paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
3.Member States shall allow the applicant to bring to the personal interview a legal adviser or other counsellor admitted or permitted as such under national law. 3. Member States shall allow the applicant to bring to the personal interview a legal adviser or other counsellor admitted or permitted as such under national law, or a qualified expert.
Amendment 54
Proposal for a directive Article 20 paragraph -1 (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-1. In accordance with Article 21 of Directive [.../.../EU] [laying down minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers] (the Reception Conditions Directive), Member States shall establish procedures in national law with a view to identifying, as soon as an application for international protection is lodged, whether the applicant has special needs and indicating the nature of such needs.
Amendment 55 Proposal for a directive Article 20 paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
2.In cases where the determining authority consider that an applicant has been subjected to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violence as described in Article 21 of Directive [.../.../EC] [laying down minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers (the Reception Conditions Directive)], the applicant shall be granted sufficient time and relevant support to prepare for a personal interview on the substance of his/her application. 2. In cases where the determining authority consider that an applicant has been subjected to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violence as described in Article 21 of Directive [.../.../EC] [laying down minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers (the Reception Conditions Directive)], the applicant shall be granted sufficient time and relevant support to prepare for a personal interview on the substance of his/her application. Particular attention shall be given to those applicants who did not mention their sexual orientation at the outset.
Amendment 56
Proposal for a directive Article 20 paragraph 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
3a. In accordance with the conditions laid down in Article 18, applicants with special needs shall enjoy free legal assistance in all procedures provided for in this Directive.
Amendment 58
Proposal for a directive Article 21 paragraph 1 subparagraph 1 point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(b) ensure that the representative is given the opportunity to inform the unaccompanied minor about the meaning and possible consequences of the personal interview and, where appropriate, how to (b) ensure that the representative is given the opportunity to inform the unaccompanied minor about the meaning and possible consequences of the personal interview and, where appropriate, how to
prepare himself/herself for the personal interview. Member States shall ensure that a representative and/or a legal advisor or other counsellor admitted as such under national law are present at that interview and have an opportunity to ask questions or make comments, within the framework set by the person who conducts the interview. prepare himself/herself for the personal interview. Member States shall ensure that a representative and/or a legal advisor or other counsellor admitted as such under national law or other qualified professional are present at that interview and have an opportunity to ask questions or make comments, within the framework set by the person who conducts the interview.
Amendment 59
Proposal for a directive Article 21 paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
2.Member States may refrain from appointing a representative where the unaccompanied minor: deleted
-
a)will in all likelihood reach the age of maturity before a decision at first instance
is taken; or
-
b)is married or has been married.
Amendment 60
Proposal for a directive Article 21 paragraph 3 point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(a) If an unaccompanied minor has a personal interview on his/her application for international protection as referred to in Articles 13, 14 and 15 that interview is conducted by a person who has the necessary knowledge of the special needs of minors; (a) If an unaccompanied minor has a personal interview on his/her application for international protection as referred to in Articles 13, 14 and 15 that interview is conducted by a person who has the necessary knowledge of the special needs and rights of minors;
Amendment 61
Proposal for a directive Article 21 paragraph 3 point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b) an official with the necessary knowledge of the special needs of minors prepares the decision by the determining (b) an official with the necessary knowledge of the special needs and rights of minors prepares the decision by the
authority on the application of an unaccompanied minor. determining authority on the application of
an unaccompanied minor.
Amendment 62
Proposal for a directive Article 21 paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
4.Subject to the conditions set out in Article 18, unaccompanied minors shall be granted free legal assistance with respect to all procedures provided for in this Directive. 4. Subject to the conditions set out in Article 18, unaccompanied minors together with their appointed representative shall, with respect to all procedures provided for in this Directive, be granted free legal advice on procedural and legal aspects and free legal representation.
Amendment 63
Proposal for a directive Article 21 paragraph 5 subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
5.Member States may use medical examinations to determine the age of unaccompanied minors within the framework of the examination of an application for international protection , where, following his/her general statements or other relevant evidence, Member States still have doubts concerning his/her age. 5. Member States may use medical examinations to determine the age of unaccompanied minors within the framework of the examination of an application for international protection, where, following his/her general statements or other relevant evidence, Member States still have doubts concerning his/her age. If those doubts persist after the medical examination, any decision shall always be for the benefit of the unaccompanied minor.
Amendment 65
Proposal for a directive Article 21 paragraph 5 subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
Any medical examination shall be performed in full respect of the individual's dignity, selecting the less invasive exams. Any medical examination shall be performed in full respect of the individual's dignity, selecting the most reliable and the less invasive exams and carried out by
qualified and impartial medical experts.
Amendment 66
Proposal for a directive Article 21 paragraph 5 subparagraph 3 point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(a) unaccompanied minors are informed prior to the examination of their application for international protection , and in a language which they understand, of the possibility that their age may be determined by medical examination. This shall include information on the method of examination and the possible consequences of the result of the medical examination for the examination of the application for international protection , as well as the consequences of refusal on the part of the unaccompanied minor to undergo the medical examination; (a) unaccompanied minors are informed prior to the examination of their application for international protection, and in a language which they may reasonably be supposed to understand, of the possibility that their age may be determined by medical examination. This shall include information on the method of examination and the possible consequences of the result of the medical examination for the examination of the application for international protection, as well as the consequences of refusal on the part of the unaccompanied minor to undergo the medical examination;
Amendment 67
Proposal for a directive Article 21 paragraph 5 subparagraph 3 point c
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(c) the decision to reject an application for international protection from an unaccompanied minor who refused to undergo this medical examination shall not be based solely on that refusal. (c) the decision to reject an application for international protection from an unaccompanied minor who refused to undergo this medical examination shall not be based on that refusal.
Amendment 68
Proposal for a directive Article 22 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
Article 22a
Detention of minors
The detention of minors shall be strictly
prohibited in all circumstances.
Amendment 69
Proposal for a directive Article 23 paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
1.Insofar as Member States provide for the possibility of explicit withdrawal of the application under national law, when an applicant explicitly withdraws his/her application for international protection, Member States shall ensure that the determining authority takes a decision to either discontinue the examination or reject the application1. Insofar as Member States provide for the possibility of explicit withdrawal of the application under national law, when an applicant explicitly withdraws his/her application for international protection, Member States shall ensure that the determining authority takes a decision to discontinue the examination, and explain to the applicant the consequences of the withdrawal.
.
Amendment 103
Proposal for a directive Article 24 paragraph 1 subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
1.When there is reasonable cause to consider that an applicant for international protection has implicitly withdrawn or abandoned his/her application for international protection , Member States shall ensure that the determining authority takes a decision to discontinue the examination. 1. When there is reasonable cause to consider that an applicant for asylum has implicitly withdrawn, or abandoned his/her application for asylum without reasonable cause, Member States shall ensure that the determining authority takes a decision to either discontinue the examination or reject the application on the basis that the applicant has not established an entitlement to refugee status in accordance with Directive 2004/83/EC, if he/she in the addition to the above- mentioned reasons:
-
-has refused to cooperate, or
-
-has absconded illegally, or
-
-in all likelihood has no right to international protection, or
Amendment 70
Proposal for a directive Article 24 paragraph 2 subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
2.Member States shall ensure that the applicant who reports again to the competent authority after a decision to discontinue as referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article is taken, is entitled to request that his/her case be reopened . 2. Member States shall ensure that the applicant who reports again to the competent authority after a decision to discontinue as referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article is taken, is entitled to request that his/her case be reopened . Only one request for a case to be reopened may be submitted during an asylum procedure.
Amendment 71
Proposal for a directive Article 26 point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(b) obtain any information from the alleged actor(s) of persecution or serious harm in a manner that would result in such actor(s) being directly informed of the fact that an application has been made by the applicant in question, and would jeopardise the physical integrity of the applicant and his/her dependants, or the liberty and security of his/her family members still living in the country of origin. (b) obtain any information from the alleged actor(s) of persecution or serious harm in a manner that would result in such actor(s) being informed of the fact that an application has been made by the applicant in question, and would jeopardise the physical integrity of the applicant and his/her dependants, or the liberty and security of his/her family members still living in the country of origin.
Amendment 73
Proposal for a directive Article 27 paragraph 5 introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
5.Member States may prioritise an examination of an application for international protection in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees of Chapter II: 5. The determining authorities may prioritise an examination of an application for international protection in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees of Chapter II:
Proposal for a directive Article 27 paragraph 5 point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(b) where the applicant has special needs; (b) where the applicant has special needs, in particular unaccompanied minors;
Amendment 105
Proposal for a directive Article 27 paragraph 6 point a a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(aa) the applicant clearly does not qualify as a refugee or for refugee status in a Member State under Directive [..../../EC] [the Qualification Directive]; or
Amendment 75
Proposal for a directive Article 27 paragraph 6 point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(da) the applicant has made clearly inconsistent, contradictory, improbable, insufficient or false representations which make his/her claim plainly unconvincing in relation to his/her having been the object of persecution referred to in Directive [..../../EC] [the Qualification Directive]; or
Amendment 107
Proposal for a directive Article 27 paragraph 6 point d b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(db) the applicant has submitted a subsequent application which clearly does not raise any relevant new elements with respect to his/her particular circumstances or to the situation in his/her country of origin; or
Amendment 108
Proposal for a directive Article 27 paragraph 6 point dc (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(dc) the applicant has failed without reasonable cause to make his/her application earlier, having had opportunity to do so; or
Amendment 76
Proposal for a directive Article 27 paragraph 6 point e
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(e) the application was made by an unmarried minor to whom Article 6 (7) (c) applies, after the application of the parents or parent responsible for the minor has been rejected and no relevant new elements were raised with respect to his/her particular circumstances or to the situation in his/her country of origin; or deleted
Amendment 109
Proposal for a directive Article 27 paragraph 6 point f a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(fa) the applicant has failed without good reason to comply with his/her obligations to cooperate in the examination of the facts of his/her case and the establishment of his/her identity referred to in Article 4(1) and (2) of Directive [.../../EC] [the Qualification Directive] or in Article 12(1) and (2)(a), (b) and (c) and Article 24(1) of this Directive; or
Amendment 110
Proposal for a directive Article 27 paragraph 6 point f b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(fb) the applicant entered the territory of the Member State unlawfully or extended his/her stay unlawfully and, without good reason, has either not presented himself/herself to the authorities and/or filed an application for asylum as soon as possible, given the circumstances of his/her entry; or
Amendment 77
Proposal for a directive Article 27 paragraph 6 point f c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(fc) the applicant may for serious reasons be considered a danger to the national security of the Member State, or the applicant has been forcibly expelled for serious reasons of public security and public order under national law.
Amendment 78 Proposal for a directive Article 27 paragraph 9
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
9.The fact that an application for international protection was submitted after an irregular entry into the territory or at the border, including in transit zones, as well as the lack of documents or use of forged documents, shall not per se entail an automatic recourse to an accelerated examination procedure. 9. The fact that an application for international protection was submitted after an irregular entry into the territory or at the border, including in transit zones, as well as the lack of documents on entry or the use of forged documents, shall not per se entail an automatic recourse to an accelerated examination procedure.
Amendment 79
Proposal for a directive Article 28
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
Without prejudice to Article 23, Member States shall only consider an application for international protection as unfounded if the determining authority has established that the applicant does not qualify for international protection pursuant to Directive [..../../EC] [the Qualification Directive]. Member States shall only consider an application for international protection as unfounded if the determining authority has established that the applicant does not qualify for international protection pursuant to Directive [..../../EC] [the Qualification Directive].
Amendment 80
Proposal for a directive Article 30 paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
1.Member States shall allow applicants to present their views with regard to the application of the grounds referred to in Article 29 in their particular circumstances before a decision to consider an application inadmissible is taken. To that end, Member States shall conduct a personal interview on the admissibility of the application. Member States may make an exception only in accordance with Article 36 in cases 1. Member States shall allow applicants to present their views with regard to the application of the grounds referred to in Article 29 in their particular circumstances before a decision to consider an application inadmissible is taken. To that end, the determining authority shall conduct a personal interview on the admissibility of the application. Member States may make an exception only in accordance with Article 36 in cases of subsequent
of subsequent applications. applications.
Amendment 81
Proposal for a directive Article 30 paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
2a. Member States shall ensure that the member of staff of the determining authority who conducts the interview on the admissibility of the application does not wear a uniform.
Amendment 82
Proposal for a directive Article 31 paragraph 1 point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(b) he/she otherwise enjoys sufficient protection in that country, including benefiting from the principle of non- refoulement; (b) he/she otherwise enjoys effective protection in that country, including benefiting from the principle of non- refoulement;
Amendment 83 Proposal for a directive Article 31 paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
In applying the concept of first country of asylum to the particular circumstances of an applicant for international protection Member States may take into account Article 32 (1). In applying the concept of first country of asylum to the particular circumstances of an applicant for international protection Member States shall take into account Article 32 (1). The applicant shall be allowed to challenge the application of the concept of first country of asylum on the grounds that the first country of asylum in question is not safe in his or her particular case.
Amendment 84
Proposal for a directive Article 32
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
Article 32 deleted
The safe third country concept
-
1.Member States may apply the safe third country concept only where the competent authorities are satisfied that a person seeking international protection will be treated in accordance with the following principles in the third country concerned:
(a) life and liberty are not threatened on account of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group
or political opinion;
(b) there is no risk of serious harm as defined in [Directive ..../../EC] [the Qualification Directive];
(c) the principle of non-refoulement in accordance with the Geneva Convention
is respected;
(d) the prohibition of removal, in violation of the right to freedom from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment as laid down in international law, is respected; and (e) the possibility exists to request refugee status and, if found to be a refugee, to receive protection in accordance with the Geneva Convention.
-
2.The application of the safe third country concept shall be subject to rules laid down in national legislation,
including:
(a) rules requiring a connection between the person seeking international protection and the third country concerned on the basis of which it would be reasonable for that person to go to that country;
(b) rules on the methodology by which the competent authorities satisfy themselves that the safe third country concept may be applied to a particular country or to a particular applicant. Such methodology shall include case-by-case consideration of the safety of the country for a
-
particular applicant and/or national designation of countries considered to be generally safe;
(c) rules in accordance with international law, allowing an individual examination of whether the third country concerned is safe for a particular applicant which, as a minimum, shall permit the applicant to challenge the application of the safe third country concept on the grounds that the third country is not safe in his/her particular circumstances. The applicant shall also be allowed to challenge the existence of a connection between him/her and the third country in accordance with point (a) .When implementing a decision solely based on this Article, Member States shall:
-
3.When implementing a decision solely based on this Article, Member States
shall:
(a) inform the applicant accordingly; and (b) provide him/her with a document informing the authorities of the third country, in the language of that country, that the application has not been examined in substance.
-
4.Where the third country does not permit the applicant for international protection to enter its territory, Member States shall ensure that access to a procedure is given in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees described
in Chapter II.
-
5.Member States shall inform the Commission periodically of the countries to which this concept is applied in accordance with the provisions of this Article.
Amendment 85 Proposal for a directive Article 33
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
National designation of third countries as safe countries of origin
-
1.Member States may retain or introduce legislation that allows, in accordance with Annex II, for the national designation of safe countries of origin for the purposes of examining applications for international protection. .
-
2.Member States shall ensure a regular review of the situation in third countries designated as safe in accordance with this Article.
-
3.The assessment of whether a country is a safe country of origin in accordance with this Article shall be based on a range of sources of information, including in particular information from other Member States, the European Asylum Support Office, the UNHCR, the Council of Europe and other relevant international organisations.
-
4.Member States shall notify to the Commission the countries that are designated as safe countries of origin in accordance with this Article.
Amendment 87
Proposal for a directive Article 35 paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
1.Where a person who has applied for international protection in a Member State makes further representations or a subsequent application in the same Member State, that Member State shall examine these further representations or the elements of the subsequent application in the framework of the examination of the previous application or in the framework of the examination of the decision under review or appeal, insofar as the competent authorities can take into account and consider all the elements underlying the further representations or subsequent application within this 1. Where a person who has applied for international protection in a Member State makes further representations or a subsequent application in the same Member State, that Member State shall examine these further representations or the elements of the subsequent application in the framework of the examination of the previous application or in the framework of the examination of the decision under review or appeal, insofar as the determining authority can take into account and consider all the elements underlying the further representations or subsequent application within this
framework. framework.
Amendment 88
Proposal for a directive Article 35 paragraph 6
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
6.Member States may decide to further examine the application only if the applicant concerned was, through no fault of his/her own, incapable of asserting the situations set forth in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 of this Article in the previous procedure, in particular by exercising his/her right to an effective remedy pursuant to Article 41.deleted
Amendment 113
Proposal for a directive Article 35 paragraph 8 subparagraph 1 introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
8.If, following a final decision to consider a subsequent application inadmissible pursuant to Article 29 (2) (d) or a final decision to reject a subsequent application as unfounded, the person concerned lodges a new application for international protection in the same Member State before a return decision has been enforced, that Member State may: 8. If, after the procedure relating to the initial application has been terminated pursuant to paragraph 2, the person concerned lodges a new application for international protection in the same Member State before a return decision has been enforced, and that new application does not lead to a further examination pursuant to this Article, that Member State
may:
Amendment 89
Proposal for a directive Article 37 paragraph 1 point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
(a) the admissibility of an application made at such locations; and/or (a) the admissibility of an application, within the meaning of Article 29, made at such locations; and/or
Amendment 90 Proposal for a directive Article 37 paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
2.Member States shall ensure that a decision in the framework of the procedures provided for in paragraph 1 is taken within a reasonable time. When a decision has not been taken within four weeks, the applicant shall be granted entry to the territory of the Member State in order for his/her application to be processed in accordance with the other provisions of this Directive. 2. Member States shall ensure that a decision in the framework of the procedures provided for in paragraph 1 is taken within a reasonable time. When a decision has not been taken within four weeks, the applicant shall be granted entry to the territory of the Member State in order for his/her application to be processed in accordance with the other provisions of this Directive. The holding of applicants at Member States' borders or transit zones is equivalent to placing them in detention, as referred to in Article
22.
Amendment 91
Proposal for a directive Article 38
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
The European safe third countries concept The safe third countries concept 1. Member States may provide that no, or no full, examination of the asylum application and of the safety of the applicant in his/her particular circumstances as described in Chapter II, shall take place in cases where a competent authority has established, on the basis of the facts, that the applicant for international protection is seeking to enter or has entered illegally into its territory from a safe third country according to paragraph 2.
-
2.A third country can only be considered as a safe third country for the purposes of paragraph 1 where: 1. A third country may only be considered as a safe third country where a person seeking international protection will be treated in accordance with the following principles and conditions in the third country concerned
:
(a) it has ratified and observes the provisions of the Geneva Convention (a) life and liberty are not threatened on account of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group
-
without any geographical limitations; or political opinion;
(b) it has in place an asylum procedure prescribed by law; and (b) there is no risk of serious harm as defined in [Directive ..../../EC] [the Qualification Directive];
(c) it has ratified the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and observes its provisions, including the standards relating to effective remedies. (c) the principle of non-refoulement in accordance with the Geneva Convention
is respected;
(d) the prohibition of removal, in violation of the right to freedom from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment as laid down in international law, is respected;
(e) the possibility exists to request refugee status or another complementary form of protection comparable to that granted under [Directive .../... EU] [the Qualification Directive] and, if granted such status or protection, to receive protection comparable to that afforded under [Directive .../... EU][the Qualification Directive];
(f) it has ratified and observes the provisions of the Geneva Convention without any geographical limitations;
(g) it has in place an asylum procedure prescribed by law; and (h) it has been so designated by the Council and the Parliament in accordance with paragraph 2.
-
2.The European Parliament and the Council shall, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, adopt or amend a common list of third countries that shall be regarded as safe third countries for the purposes of paragraph 1.
-
3.The Member States concerned shall lay down in national law the modalities for implementing the provisions of paragraph 1 and the consequences of decisions pursuant to those provisions in accordance with the principle of non- refoulement, including providing for exceptions from the application of this Article for humanitarian or political reasons or for reasons of public international law. 3. The Member States concerned shall lay down in national law the modalities for implementing the provisions of paragraph 1 and rules requiring:
(a) a connection between the person seeking international protection and the third country concerned on the basis of which it would be reasonable for that person to go to that country;
(b) methodology by which the competent authorities satisfy themselves that the safe third country concept may be applied to a particular country or to a particular applicant. Such methodology shall include case-by-case consideration of the safety of the country for a particular applicant;
(c) rules in accordance with international law, allowing an individual examination of whether the third country concerned is safe for a particular applicant which, as a minimum, shall permit the applicant to challenge the application of the safe third country concept on the grounds that the third country is not safe in his/her particular circumstances. The applicant shall also be allowed to challenge the existence of a connection between him/her and the third country in accordance with point (a)
-
4.When implementing a decision solely based on this Article, the Member States concerned shall: 4. When implementing a decision based on this Article, the Member States concerned shall inform the applicant accordingly.
(a) inform the applicant accordingly; and (b) provide him/her with a document informing the authorities of the third country, in the language of that country, that the application has not been examined in substance.
-
5.Where the safe third country does not re- admit the applicant for asylum, Member States shall ensure that access to a procedure is given in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees described in Chapter II. 5. Where the safe third country does not re- admit the applicant for asylum, Member States shall ensure that access to a procedure is given in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees described
in Chapter II.
5a. Member States shall not designate national lists of safe countries of origin or national lists of safe third countries.
Amendment 92 Proposal for a directive Article 41 paragraph 4 subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
4.Member States shall provide for reasonable time-limits and other necessary rules for the applicant to exercise his/her right to an effective remedy pursuant to paragraph 1. 4. Member States shall provide for minimum time-limits and other necessary rules for the applicant to exercise his/her right to an effective remedy pursuant to paragraph 1.
Amendment 93 Proposal for a directive Article 41 paragraph 4 subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
The time limits shall not render impossible or excessively difficult the access of applicants to an effective remedy pursuant to paragraph 1. Member States may also provide for an ex officio review of decisions taken pursuant to Article 37. The Member States shall set a minimum time limit of forty-five working days during which applicants may exercise their right to an effective remedy. For applicants under the accelerated procedure referred to in Article 27(6), the Member States shall lay down a minimum time limit of thirty working days. The time limits shall not render impossible or excessively difficult the access of applicants to an effective remedy pursuant to paragraph 1. Member States may also provide for an ex officio review of decisions taken pursuant to Article 37.
Amendment 94
Proposal for a directive Article 41 paragraph 6 subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
6.In the case of a decision taken in the accelerated procedure pursuant to Article 27 (6) and of a decision to consider an application inadmissible pursuant to Article 29 (2) (d), and where the right to remain in the Member State pending the outcome of the remedy is not foreseen under national legislation, a court or tribunal shall have the power to rule 6. In the case of a decision taken in the accelerated procedure pursuant to Article 27 (6) and of a decision to consider an application inadmissible pursuant to Article 29 (2) (d), and if, in such cases, the right to remain in the Member State pending the outcome of the remedy is not foreseen under national legislation, a court or tribunal shall have the power to rule
whether or not the applicant may remain on the territory of the Member State, either upon request of the concerned applicant or acting on its own motion. whether or not the applicant may remain on the territory of the Member State, either upon request of the concerned applicant or acting on its own motion.
Amendment 117 Proposal for a directive Article 41 paragraph 7
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
-
7.Member States shall allow the applicant to remain in the territory pending the outcome of the procedure referred to in paragraph 6. 7. Member States shall allow the applicant to remain in the territory pending the outcome of the procedure referred to in paragraph 6; an exception may be made for subsequent applications which do not lead to a further examination pursuant to Articles 35 and 36, if a return decision pursuant to Article 3(4) of Directive 2008/115/EC has been taken, and for decisions in the procedure pursuant to Article 38 if this is provided for in national legislation.
Amendment 95
Proposal for a directive Article 45
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
No later than [...], the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Directive in the Member States and shall propose any amendments that are necessary. Member States shall send the Commission all the information that is appropriate for drawing up this report. After presenting the report, the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Directive in the Member States at least every five years. No later than [...], the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and the Council on the application and the financial cost of this Directive in the Member States and shall propose any amendments that are necessary. Member States shall send the Commission all the information and financial data that is appropriate for drawing up this report. After presenting the report, the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Directive in the Member States at least every two years.
Amendment 96 Proposal for a directive Article 46 subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment
Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Article 27(3) by [three years from the date of the transposition]. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions and a correlation table between those provisions and this Directive. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Article 27(3) by [two years from the date of the transposition]. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions and a correlation table between those provisions and this Directive.
- 2 dec '09COM(2009)665 - Gevolgen van de inwerkingtreding van het Verdrag van Lissabon voor de lopende interinstitutionele besluitvormingsprocedures
- 21 okt '09COM(2009)554 - Minimumnormen voor de procedures in de lidstaten voor internationale bescherming
- 12 sep '01COM(2001)510 - Minimumnormen voor de erkenning en de status van onderdanen van derde landen en staatlozen als vluchtelingen of als personen die anderszins internationale bescherming behoeven
