Free movement: Schengen reform to ensure border controls only as a last resort | Nieuws | Europees Parlement

 

Free movement: Schengen reform to ensure border controls only as a last resort 

Persbericht 
 
 
  • Restrictions and border controls must be temporary, targeted and justified 
  • EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers should be exempted from restrictions linked to health emergencies 
  • Enhanced police cooperation as an alternative to border controls 

Civil Liberties Committee MEPs backed proposals which would mean border controls within the free-movement Schengen area can only be reintroduced when absolutely necessary.

On Wednesday, MEPs adopted a draft report on the reform of the Schengen Borders Code with 39 votes in favour, 13 against, and 12 abstaining, and authorised the start of negotiations with the Council with 49 votes in favour, 14 against, and 0 abstentions. In response to increasingly permanent border controls within the Schengen area, the proposal seeks to clarify rules, strengthen free movement within the EU, and introduce targeted solutions to genuine threats.

MEPs want to ensure a coherent EU response in cases of large-scale public cross-border health emergencies, allowing temporary restrictions on entering the Schengen area, but exempting from them EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers.

As an alternative to border controls, the new rules would promote police cooperation in border regions. Where third-country nationals with irregular status are apprehended during joint patrols and there is evidence they have arrived directly from another EU country, these people may be transferred to that country if it participates in joint patrols. MEPs want to exclude several categories, including unaccompanied minors, from such returns.


Justified and time-limited border controls, for maximum two years, when necessary


In the text, MEPs propose clear criteria for the imposition of border controls in response to serious threats that endanger the functioning of the Schengen area. There would need to be a justified reason such as an “identified and immediate” threat of terrorism, with tighter time limits for border controls in response to foreseeable threats, up to a maximum of eighteen months. If the threat persists, more border controls could be authorised by a Council decision.

The proposals would also allow for the reintroduction of border controls in several countries when the Commission receives notifications about a particularly serious threat affecting a majority of countries simultaneously, for a period of up to two years.

At the same time, MEPs propose removing certain migration-related concepts from the proposal. They argue that the provisions on the instrumentalisation of migrants (where third countries facilitate or encourage migrants to cross into EU territory with the aim of destabilising countries) should be covered by a separate, dedicated proposal, which EU lawmakers are also currently discussing.


Quote


After the vote, rapporteur Sylvie Guillaume (S&D, France) said: “Protecting the Schengen free movement area and what it represents for 450 million Europeans is at the heart of this report. The negotiations have been difficult, but I am delighted we have managed to safeguard the essence of one of the European Union's greatest achievements.”


Background


The Parliament has called for a reform of the Schengen Borders Code “to strengthen mutual trust and solidarity, and to safeguard the integrity and full restoration of the Schengen area”, which currently encompasses 27 countries.

In a judgment in April 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that border controls re-installed because of serious threats may not exceed six months, and can only be extended when a new threat arises, unless there are exceptional circumstances putting the overall functioning of the Schengen area at risk.



 
  • Direct naar de inhoud van de pagina (druk op "Enter")
  • Direct naar de inhoud van de pagina (druk op "Enter")Direct naar de inhoud van de pagina (druk op "Enter")
  • Rechtstreeks naar talenmenu (druk op "Enter")
  • Rechtstreeks naar talenmenu (druk op "Enter")Rechtstreeks naar talenmenu (druk op "Enter")
  • Rechtstreeks naar zoekmenu (druk op "Enter")
  • Rechtstreeks naar zoekmenu (druk op "Enter")Rechtstreeks naar zoekmenu (druk op "Enter")
  • BG - български
  • BG - български BG - българскиBG - български
  • ES - español
  • ES - español ES - españolES - español
  • CS - čeština
  • CS - čeština CS - češtinaCS - čeština
  • DA - dansk
  • DA - dansk DA - danskDA - dansk
  • DE - Deutsch
  • DE - Deutsch DE - DeutschDE - Deutsch
  • ET - eesti keel
  • ET - eesti keel ET - eesti keelET - eesti keel
  • EL - ελληνικά
  • EL - ελληνικά EL - ελληνικάEL - ελληνικά
  • EN - English
  • EN - English EN - EnglishEN - English
  • FR - français
  • FR - français FR - françaisFR - français
  • GA - Gaeilge
  • GA - Gaeilge GA - GaeilgeGA - Gaeilge
  • HR - hrvatski
  • HR - hrvatski HR - hrvatskiHR - hrvatski
  • IT - italiano
  • IT - italiano IT - italianoIT - italiano
  • LV - latviešu valoda
  • LV - latviešu valoda LV - latviešu valodaLV - latviešu valoda
  • LT - lietuvių kalba
  • LT - lietuvių kalba LT - lietuvių kalbaLT - lietuvių kalba
  • HU - magyar
  • HU - magyar HU - magyarHU - magyar
  • MT - Malti
  • MT - Malti MT - MaltiMT - Malti
  • NL - Nederlands
  • NL - Nederlands NL - NederlandsNL - Nederlands
  • PL - polski
  • PL - polski PL - polskiPL - polski
  • PT - português
  • PT - português PT - portuguêsPT - português
  • RO - română
  • RO - română RO - românăRO - română
  • SK - slovenčina
  • SK - slovenčina SK - slovenčinaSK - slovenčina
  • SL - slovenščina
  • SL - slovenščina SL - slovenščinaSL - slovenščina
  • FI - suomi
  • FI - suomi FI - suomiFI - suomi
  • SV - svenska
  • SV - svenska SV - svenskaSV - svenska
  • Naar pagina gaan Nieuws
  • Naar pagina gaan Nieuws Naar pagina gaan Nieuws Naar pagina gaanNieuws
  • Naar pagina gaan Leden
  • Naar pagina gaan Leden Naar pagina gaan Leden Naar pagina gaanLeden
  • Naar pagina gaan Over het Parlement
  • Naar pagina gaan Over het Parlement Naar pagina gaan Over het Parlement Naar pagina gaanOver het Parlement
  • Naar pagina gaan Plenaire vergadering
  • Naar pagina gaan Plenaire vergadering Naar pagina gaan Plenaire vergadering Naar pagina gaanPlenaire vergadering
  • Naar pagina gaan Commissies
  • Naar pagina gaan Commissies Naar pagina gaan Commissies Naar pagina gaanCommissies
  • Naar pagina gaan Delegaties
  • Naar pagina gaan Delegaties Naar pagina gaan Delegaties Naar pagina gaanDelegaties
  • Submenu bekijken: Andere websites Submenu bekijken:Andere websites
  • Naar pagina gaan Multimedia Centre
  • Naar pagina gaan Multimedia Centre Naar pagina gaan Multimedia Centre Naar pagina gaanMultimedia Centre
  • Naar pagina gaan Webpagina van de Voorzitter
  • Naar pagina gaan Webpagina van de Voorzitter Naar pagina gaan Webpagina van de Voorzitter Naar pagina gaanWebpagina van de Voorzitter
  • Naar pagina gaan Secretariaat-generaal
  • Naar pagina gaan Secretariaat-generaal Naar pagina gaan Secretariaat-generaal Naar pagina gaanSecretariaat-generaal
  • Naar pagina gaan Think tank
  • Naar pagina gaan Think tank Naar pagina gaan Think tank Naar pagina gaanThink tank
  • Naar pagina gaan EP Newshub
  • Naar pagina gaan EP Newshub Naar pagina gaan EP Newshub Naar pagina gaanEP Newshub
  • Naar pagina gaan Tot uw dienst
  • Naar pagina gaan Tot uw dienst Naar pagina gaan Tot uw dienst Naar pagina gaanTot uw dienst
  • Naar pagina gaan Bezoeken
  • Naar pagina gaan Bezoeken Naar pagina gaan Bezoeken Naar pagina gaanBezoeken
  • Naar pagina gaan Legislative train
  • Naar pagina gaan Legislative train Naar pagina gaan Legislative train Naar pagina gaanLegislative train
  • Naar pagina gaan Contracten en subsidies
  • Naar pagina gaan Contracten en subsidies Naar pagina gaan Contracten en subsidies Naar pagina gaanContracten en subsidies
  • Naar pagina gaan Registreren
  • Naar pagina gaan Registreren Naar pagina gaan Registreren Naar pagina gaanRegistreren
  • Naar pagina gaan Opendataportaal
  • Naar pagina gaan Opendataportaal Naar pagina gaan Opendataportaal Naar pagina gaanOpendataportaal
    Nieuws Europees Parlement NieuwsNieuws Europees Parlement Europees Parlement Menu Menu
  • Nieuws
  • Nieuws Nieuws Nieuws
  • Naar pagina gaan Startpagina
  • Naar pagina gaan Startpagina Naar pagina gaan Startpagina Naar pagina gaanStartpagina
  • Naar pagina gaan Europese zaken
  • Naar pagina gaan Europese zaken Naar pagina gaan Europese zaken Naar pagina gaanEuropese zaken
  • Naar pagina gaan Wereld
  • Naar pagina gaan Wereld Naar pagina gaan Wereld Naar pagina gaanWereld
  • Naar pagina gaan Economie
  • Naar pagina gaan Economie Naar pagina gaan Economie Naar pagina gaanEconomie
  • Naar pagina gaan Maatschappij
  • Naar pagina gaan Maatschappij Naar pagina gaan Maatschappij Naar pagina gaanMaatschappij
  • Naar pagina gaan Veiligheid
  • Naar pagina gaan Veiligheid Naar pagina gaan Veiligheid Naar pagina gaanVeiligheid
  • Pers
  • Pers Pers Pers
  • Naar pagina gaan Startpagina
  • Naar pagina gaan Startpagina Naar pagina gaan Startpagina Naar pagina gaanStartpagina
  • Naar pagina gaan Accreditatie
  • Naar pagina gaan Accreditatie Naar pagina gaan Accreditatie Naar pagina gaanAccreditatie
  • Naar pagina gaan Online persdossier
  • Naar pagina gaan Online persdossier Naar pagina gaan Online persdossier Naar pagina gaanOnline persdossier
  • Naar pagina gaan Contact
  • Naar pagina gaan Contact Naar pagina gaan Contact Naar pagina gaanContact
  • Agenda
  • Agenda Agenda Agenda
  • Naar pagina gaan Hoogtepunten
  • Naar pagina gaan Hoogtepunten Naar pagina gaan Hoogtepunten Naar pagina gaanHoogtepunten
  • Naar pagina gaan Wekelijkse agenda
  • Naar pagina gaan Wekelijkse agenda Naar pagina gaan Wekelijkse agenda Naar pagina gaanWekelijkse agenda
  • Naar pagina gaan Briefing
  • Naar pagina gaan Briefing Naar pagina gaan Briefing Naar pagina gaanBriefing
  • Veelgestelde vragen
  • Veelgestelde vragen Veelgestelde vragen Veelgestelde vragen
  • Naar pagina gaan Mediakit verkiezingen
  • Naar pagina gaan Mediakit verkiezingen Naar pagina gaan Mediakit verkiezingen Naar pagina gaanMediakit verkiezingenNaar het zoekveld
    Zoekopdracht starten Europees Parlement
    Terug naar pagina : Pers Pers   Huidige pagina: Free movement: Schengen reform to ensure border controls only as a last resort  
    Terug naar pagina : Pers Pers   Terug naar pagina : Pers Pers  Terug naar pagina : PersPers  Huidige pagina: Free movement: Schengen reform to ensure border controls only as a last resort   Huidige pagina: Free movement: Schengen reform to ensure border controls only as a last resort   Huidige pagina:Free movement: Schengen reform to ensure border controls only as a last resort  Terug naar pagina : Pers Pers  Terug naar pagina : PersPers 
     

    Free movement: Schengen reform to ensure border controls only as a last resort 

    Persbericht 
     
     
    • Restrictions and border controls must be temporary, targeted and justified 
    • EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers should be exempted from restrictions linked to health emergencies 
    • Enhanced police cooperation as an alternative to border controls 

    Civil Liberties Committee MEPs backed proposals which would mean border controls within the free-movement Schengen area can only be reintroduced when absolutely necessary.

    On Wednesday, MEPs adopted a draft report on the reform of the Schengen Borders Code with 39 votes in favour, 13 against, and 12 abstaining, and authorised the start of negotiations with the Council with 49 votes in favour, 14 against, and 0 abstentions. In response to increasingly permanent border controls within the Schengen area, the proposal seeks to clarify rules, strengthen free movement within the EU, and introduce targeted solutions to genuine threats.

    MEPs want to ensure a coherent EU response in cases of large-scale public cross-border health emergencies, allowing temporary restrictions on entering the Schengen area, but exempting from them EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers.

    As an alternative to border controls, the new rules would promote police cooperation in border regions. Where third-country nationals with irregular status are apprehended during joint patrols and there is evidence they have arrived directly from another EU country, these people may be transferred to that country if it participates in joint patrols. MEPs want to exclude several categories, including unaccompanied minors, from such returns.


    Justified and time-limited border controls, for maximum two years, when necessary


    In the text, MEPs propose clear criteria for the imposition of border controls in response to serious threats that endanger the functioning of the Schengen area. There would need to be a justified reason such as an “identified and immediate” threat of terrorism, with tighter time limits for border controls in response to foreseeable threats, up to a maximum of eighteen months. If the threat persists, more border controls could be authorised by a Council decision.

    The proposals would also allow for the reintroduction of border controls in several countries when the Commission receives notifications about a particularly serious threat affecting a majority of countries simultaneously, for a period of up to two years.

    At the same time, MEPs propose removing certain migration-related concepts from the proposal. They argue that the provisions on the instrumentalisation of migrants (where third countries facilitate or encourage migrants to cross into EU territory with the aim of destabilising countries) should be covered by a separate, dedicated proposal, which EU lawmakers are also currently discussing.


    Quote


    After the vote, rapporteur Sylvie Guillaume (S&D, France) said: “Protecting the Schengen free movement area and what it represents for 450 million Europeans is at the heart of this report. The negotiations have been difficult, but I am delighted we have managed to safeguard the essence of one of the European Union's greatest achievements.”


    Background


    The Parliament has called for a reform of the Schengen Borders Code “to strengthen mutual trust and solidarity, and to safeguard the integrity and full restoration of the Schengen area”, which currently encompasses 27 countries.

    In a judgment in April 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that border controls re-installed because of serious threats may not exceed six months, and can only be extended when a new threat arises, unless there are exceptional circumstances putting the overall functioning of the Schengen area at risk.



     
     

    Free movement: Schengen reform to ensure border controls only as a last resort 

    Persbericht 
     
     

    Free movement: Schengen reform to ensure border controls only as a last resort 

    Persbericht 
     
     
     

    Free movement: Schengen reform to ensure border controls only as a last resort 

    Persbericht 
     

    Free movement: Schengen reform to ensure border controls only as a last resort 

    Persbericht 
     

    Free movement: Schengen reform to ensure border controls only as a last resort 

    Persbericht 
     

    Free movement: Schengen reform to ensure border controls only as a last resort 

    Free movement: Schengen reform to ensure border controls only as a last resort 
    Free movement: Schengen reform to ensure border controls only as a last resort 
    Persbericht 
     
    Persbericht 
    Persbericht  LIBE  LIBELIBE 
     
     
     
    • Restrictions and border controls must be temporary, targeted and justified 
    • EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers should be exempted from restrictions linked to health emergencies 
    • Enhanced police cooperation as an alternative to border controls 

    Civil Liberties Committee MEPs backed proposals which would mean border controls within the free-movement Schengen area can only be reintroduced when absolutely necessary.

    On Wednesday, MEPs adopted a draft report on the reform of the Schengen Borders Code with 39 votes in favour, 13 against, and 12 abstaining, and authorised the start of negotiations with the Council with 49 votes in favour, 14 against, and 0 abstentions. In response to increasingly permanent border controls within the Schengen area, the proposal seeks to clarify rules, strengthen free movement within the EU, and introduce targeted solutions to genuine threats.

    MEPs want to ensure a coherent EU response in cases of large-scale public cross-border health emergencies, allowing temporary restrictions on entering the Schengen area, but exempting from them EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers.

    As an alternative to border controls, the new rules would promote police cooperation in border regions. Where third-country nationals with irregular status are apprehended during joint patrols and there is evidence they have arrived directly from another EU country, these people may be transferred to that country if it participates in joint patrols. MEPs want to exclude several categories, including unaccompanied minors, from such returns.


    Justified and time-limited border controls, for maximum two years, when necessary


    In the text, MEPs propose clear criteria for the imposition of border controls in response to serious threats that endanger the functioning of the Schengen area. There would need to be a justified reason such as an “identified and immediate” threat of terrorism, with tighter time limits for border controls in response to foreseeable threats, up to a maximum of eighteen months. If the threat persists, more border controls could be authorised by a Council decision.

    The proposals would also allow for the reintroduction of border controls in several countries when the Commission receives notifications about a particularly serious threat affecting a majority of countries simultaneously, for a period of up to two years.

    At the same time, MEPs propose removing certain migration-related concepts from the proposal. They argue that the provisions on the instrumentalisation of migrants (where third countries facilitate or encourage migrants to cross into EU territory with the aim of destabilising countries) should be covered by a separate, dedicated proposal, which EU lawmakers are also currently discussing.


    Quote


    After the vote, rapporteur Sylvie Guillaume (S&D, France) said: “Protecting the Schengen free movement area and what it represents for 450 million Europeans is at the heart of this report. The negotiations have been difficult, but I am delighted we have managed to safeguard the essence of one of the European Union's greatest achievements.”


    Background


    The Parliament has called for a reform of the Schengen Borders Code “to strengthen mutual trust and solidarity, and to safeguard the integrity and full restoration of the Schengen area”, which currently encompasses 27 countries.

    In a judgment in April 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that border controls re-installed because of serious threats may not exceed six months, and can only be extended when a new threat arises, unless there are exceptional circumstances putting the overall functioning of the Schengen area at risk.



     
     
    • Restrictions and border controls must be temporary, targeted and justified 
    • EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers should be exempted from restrictions linked to health emergencies 
    • Enhanced police cooperation as an alternative to border controls 

    Civil Liberties Committee MEPs backed proposals which would mean border controls within the free-movement Schengen area can only be reintroduced when absolutely necessary.

    On Wednesday, MEPs adopted a draft report on the reform of the Schengen Borders Code with 39 votes in favour, 13 against, and 12 abstaining, and authorised the start of negotiations with the Council with 49 votes in favour, 14 against, and 0 abstentions. In response to increasingly permanent border controls within the Schengen area, the proposal seeks to clarify rules, strengthen free movement within the EU, and introduce targeted solutions to genuine threats.

    MEPs want to ensure a coherent EU response in cases of large-scale public cross-border health emergencies, allowing temporary restrictions on entering the Schengen area, but exempting from them EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers.

    As an alternative to border controls, the new rules would promote police cooperation in border regions. Where third-country nationals with irregular status are apprehended during joint patrols and there is evidence they have arrived directly from another EU country, these people may be transferred to that country if it participates in joint patrols. MEPs want to exclude several categories, including unaccompanied minors, from such returns.


    Justified and time-limited border controls, for maximum two years, when necessary


    In the text, MEPs propose clear criteria for the imposition of border controls in response to serious threats that endanger the functioning of the Schengen area. There would need to be a justified reason such as an “identified and immediate” threat of terrorism, with tighter time limits for border controls in response to foreseeable threats, up to a maximum of eighteen months. If the threat persists, more border controls could be authorised by a Council decision.

    The proposals would also allow for the reintroduction of border controls in several countries when the Commission receives notifications about a particularly serious threat affecting a majority of countries simultaneously, for a period of up to two years.

    At the same time, MEPs propose removing certain migration-related concepts from the proposal. They argue that the provisions on the instrumentalisation of migrants (where third countries facilitate or encourage migrants to cross into EU territory with the aim of destabilising countries) should be covered by a separate, dedicated proposal, which EU lawmakers are also currently discussing.


    Quote


    After the vote, rapporteur Sylvie Guillaume (S&D, France) said: “Protecting the Schengen free movement area and what it represents for 450 million Europeans is at the heart of this report. The negotiations have been difficult, but I am delighted we have managed to safeguard the essence of one of the European Union's greatest achievements.”


    Background


    The Parliament has called for a reform of the Schengen Borders Code “to strengthen mutual trust and solidarity, and to safeguard the integrity and full restoration of the Schengen area”, which currently encompasses 27 countries.

    In a judgment in April 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that border controls re-installed because of serious threats may not exceed six months, and can only be extended when a new threat arises, unless there are exceptional circumstances putting the overall functioning of the Schengen area at risk.



     
     
     

    Deel deze pagina: 

    Deel deze pagina: 
    Deel deze pagina: 
  • Facebook Facebook 
  • Twitter Twitter 
  • LinkedIn LinkedIn 
  • WhatsApp WhatsApp 
    • Restrictions and border controls must be temporary, targeted and justified 
    • EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers should be exempted from restrictions linked to health emergencies 
    • Enhanced police cooperation as an alternative to border controls 

    Civil Liberties Committee MEPs backed proposals which would mean border controls within the free-movement Schengen area can only be reintroduced when absolutely necessary.

    On Wednesday, MEPs adopted a draft report on the reform of the Schengen Borders Code with 39 votes in favour, 13 against, and 12 abstaining, and authorised the start of negotiations with the Council with 49 votes in favour, 14 against, and 0 abstentions. In response to increasingly permanent border controls within the Schengen area, the proposal seeks to clarify rules, strengthen free movement within the EU, and introduce targeted solutions to genuine threats.

    MEPs want to ensure a coherent EU response in cases of large-scale public cross-border health emergencies, allowing temporary restrictions on entering the Schengen area, but exempting from them EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers.

    As an alternative to border controls, the new rules would promote police cooperation in border regions. Where third-country nationals with irregular status are apprehended during joint patrols and there is evidence they have arrived directly from another EU country, these people may be transferred to that country if it participates in joint patrols. MEPs want to exclude several categories, including unaccompanied minors, from such returns.


    Justified and time-limited border controls, for maximum two years, when necessary


    In the text, MEPs propose clear criteria for the imposition of border controls in response to serious threats that endanger the functioning of the Schengen area. There would need to be a justified reason such as an “identified and immediate” threat of terrorism, with tighter time limits for border controls in response to foreseeable threats, up to a maximum of eighteen months. If the threat persists, more border controls could be authorised by a Council decision.

    The proposals would also allow for the reintroduction of border controls in several countries when the Commission receives notifications about a particularly serious threat affecting a majority of countries simultaneously, for a period of up to two years.

    At the same time, MEPs propose removing certain migration-related concepts from the proposal. They argue that the provisions on the instrumentalisation of migrants (where third countries facilitate or encourage migrants to cross into EU territory with the aim of destabilising countries) should be covered by a separate, dedicated proposal, which EU lawmakers are also currently discussing.


    Quote


    After the vote, rapporteur Sylvie Guillaume (S&D, France) said: “Protecting the Schengen free movement area and what it represents for 450 million Europeans is at the heart of this report. The negotiations have been difficult, but I am delighted we have managed to safeguard the essence of one of the European Union's greatest achievements.”


    Background


    The Parliament has called for a reform of the Schengen Borders Code “to strengthen mutual trust and solidarity, and to safeguard the integrity and full restoration of the Schengen area”, which currently encompasses 27 countries.

    In a judgment in April 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that border controls re-installed because of serious threats may not exceed six months, and can only be extended when a new threat arises, unless there are exceptional circumstances putting the overall functioning of the Schengen area at risk.



    • Restrictions and border controls must be temporary, targeted and justified 
    • EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers should be exempted from restrictions linked to health emergencies 
    • Enhanced police cooperation as an alternative to border controls 

    Civil Liberties Committee MEPs backed proposals which would mean border controls within the free-movement Schengen area can only be reintroduced when absolutely necessary.

    On Wednesday, MEPs adopted a draft report on the reform of the Schengen Borders Code with 39 votes in favour, 13 against, and 12 abstaining, and authorised the start of negotiations with the Council with 49 votes in favour, 14 against, and 0 abstentions. In response to increasingly permanent border controls within the Schengen area, the proposal seeks to clarify rules, strengthen free movement within the EU, and introduce targeted solutions to genuine threats.

    MEPs want to ensure a coherent EU response in cases of large-scale public cross-border health emergencies, allowing temporary restrictions on entering the Schengen area, but exempting from them EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers.

    As an alternative to border controls, the new rules would promote police cooperation in border regions. Where third-country nationals with irregular status are apprehended during joint patrols and there is evidence they have arrived directly from another EU country, these people may be transferred to that country if it participates in joint patrols. MEPs want to exclude several categories, including unaccompanied minors, from such returns.


    Justified and time-limited border controls, for maximum two years, when necessary


    In the text, MEPs propose clear criteria for the imposition of border controls in response to serious threats that endanger the functioning of the Schengen area. There would need to be a justified reason such as an “identified and immediate” threat of terrorism, with tighter time limits for border controls in response to foreseeable threats, up to a maximum of eighteen months. If the threat persists, more border controls could be authorised by a Council decision.

    The proposals would also allow for the reintroduction of border controls in several countries when the Commission receives notifications about a particularly serious threat affecting a majority of countries simultaneously, for a period of up to two years.

    At the same time, MEPs propose removing certain migration-related concepts from the proposal. They argue that the provisions on the instrumentalisation of migrants (where third countries facilitate or encourage migrants to cross into EU territory with the aim of destabilising countries) should be covered by a separate, dedicated proposal, which EU lawmakers are also currently discussing.


    Quote


    After the vote, rapporteur Sylvie Guillaume (S&D, France) said: “Protecting the Schengen free movement area and what it represents for 450 million Europeans is at the heart of this report. The negotiations have been difficult, but I am delighted we have managed to safeguard the essence of one of the European Union's greatest achievements.”


    Background


    The Parliament has called for a reform of the Schengen Borders Code “to strengthen mutual trust and solidarity, and to safeguard the integrity and full restoration of the Schengen area”, which currently encompasses 27 countries.

    In a judgment in April 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that border controls re-installed because of serious threats may not exceed six months, and can only be extended when a new threat arises, unless there are exceptional circumstances putting the overall functioning of the Schengen area at risk.



    • Restrictions and border controls must be temporary, targeted and justified 
    • EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers should be exempted from restrictions linked to health emergencies 
    • Enhanced police cooperation as an alternative to border controls 

    Civil Liberties Committee MEPs backed proposals which would mean border controls within the free-movement Schengen area can only be reintroduced when absolutely necessary.

    On Wednesday, MEPs adopted a draft report on the reform of the Schengen Borders Code with 39 votes in favour, 13 against, and 12 abstaining, and authorised the start of negotiations with the Council with 49 votes in favour, 14 against, and 0 abstentions. In response to increasingly permanent border controls within the Schengen area, the proposal seeks to clarify rules, strengthen free movement within the EU, and introduce targeted solutions to genuine threats.

    MEPs want to ensure a coherent EU response in cases of large-scale public cross-border health emergencies, allowing temporary restrictions on entering the Schengen area, but exempting from them EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers.

    As an alternative to border controls, the new rules would promote police cooperation in border regions. Where third-country nationals with irregular status are apprehended during joint patrols and there is evidence they have arrived directly from another EU country, these people may be transferred to that country if it participates in joint patrols. MEPs want to exclude several categories, including unaccompanied minors, from such returns.


    Justified and time-limited border controls, for maximum two years, when necessary


    In the text, MEPs propose clear criteria for the imposition of border controls in response to serious threats that endanger the functioning of the Schengen area. There would need to be a justified reason such as an “identified and immediate” threat of terrorism, with tighter time limits for border controls in response to foreseeable threats, up to a maximum of eighteen months. If the threat persists, more border controls could be authorised by a Council decision.

    The proposals would also allow for the reintroduction of border controls in several countries when the Commission receives notifications about a particularly serious threat affecting a majority of countries simultaneously, for a period of up to two years.

    At the same time, MEPs propose removing certain migration-related concepts from the proposal. They argue that the provisions on the instrumentalisation of migrants (where third countries facilitate or encourage migrants to cross into EU territory with the aim of destabilising countries) should be covered by a separate, dedicated proposal, which EU lawmakers are also currently discussing.


    Quote


    After the vote, rapporteur Sylvie Guillaume (S&D, France) said: “Protecting the Schengen free movement area and what it represents for 450 million Europeans is at the heart of this report. The negotiations have been difficult, but I am delighted we have managed to safeguard the essence of one of the European Union's greatest achievements.”


    Background


    The Parliament has called for a reform of the Schengen Borders Code “to strengthen mutual trust and solidarity, and to safeguard the integrity and full restoration of the Schengen area”, which currently encompasses 27 countries.

    In a judgment in April 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that border controls re-installed because of serious threats may not exceed six months, and can only be extended when a new threat arises, unless there are exceptional circumstances putting the overall functioning of the Schengen area at risk.



    • Restrictions and border controls must be temporary, targeted and justified 
    • EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers should be exempted from restrictions linked to health emergencies 
    • Enhanced police cooperation as an alternative to border controls 
    • Restrictions and border controls must be temporary, targeted and justified 
    • EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers should be exempted from restrictions linked to health emergencies 
    • Enhanced police cooperation as an alternative to border controls 
    • Restrictions and border controls must be temporary, targeted and justified 
    • EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers should be exempted from restrictions linked to health emergencies 
    • Enhanced police cooperation as an alternative to border controls 
    • Restrictions and border controls must be temporary, targeted and justified 
    • EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers should be exempted from restrictions linked to health emergencies 
    • Enhanced police cooperation as an alternative to border controls 
    • Restrictions and border controls must be temporary, targeted and justified 
    • EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers should be exempted from restrictions linked to health emergencies 
    • Enhanced police cooperation as an alternative to border controls 
  • Restrictions and border controls must be temporary, targeted and justified 
  • Restrictions and border controls must be temporary, targeted and justified 
    Restrictions and border controls must be temporary, targeted and justified 
  • EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers should be exempted from restrictions linked to health emergencies 
  • EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers should be exempted from restrictions linked to health emergencies 
    EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers should be exempted from restrictions linked to health emergencies 
  • Enhanced police cooperation as an alternative to border controls 
  • Enhanced police cooperation as an alternative to border controls 
    Enhanced police cooperation as an alternative to border controls 

    Civil Liberties Committee MEPs backed proposals which would mean border controls within the free-movement Schengen area can only be reintroduced when absolutely necessary.

    Civil Liberties Committee MEPs backed proposals which would mean border controls within the free-movement Schengen area can only be reintroduced when absolutely necessary.

    Civil Liberties Committee MEPs backed proposals which would mean border controls within the free-movement Schengen area can only be reintroduced when absolutely necessary.

    Civil Liberties Committee MEPs backed proposals which would mean border controls within the free-movement Schengen area can only be reintroduced when absolutely necessary.

    On Wednesday, MEPs adopted a draft report on the reform of the Schengen Borders Code with 39 votes in favour, 13 against, and 12 abstaining, and authorised the start of negotiations with the Council with 49 votes in favour, 14 against, and 0 abstentions. In response to increasingly permanent border controls within the Schengen area, the proposal seeks to clarify rules, strengthen free movement within the EU, and introduce targeted solutions to genuine threats.

    MEPs want to ensure a coherent EU response in cases of large-scale public cross-border health emergencies, allowing temporary restrictions on entering the Schengen area, but exempting from them EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers.

    As an alternative to border controls, the new rules would promote police cooperation in border regions. Where third-country nationals with irregular status are apprehended during joint patrols and there is evidence they have arrived directly from another EU country, these people may be transferred to that country if it participates in joint patrols. MEPs want to exclude several categories, including unaccompanied minors, from such returns.


    Justified and time-limited border controls, for maximum two years, when necessary


    In the text, MEPs propose clear criteria for the imposition of border controls in response to serious threats that endanger the functioning of the Schengen area. There would need to be a justified reason such as an “identified and immediate” threat of terrorism, with tighter time limits for border controls in response to foreseeable threats, up to a maximum of eighteen months. If the threat persists, more border controls could be authorised by a Council decision.

    The proposals would also allow for the reintroduction of border controls in several countries when the Commission receives notifications about a particularly serious threat affecting a majority of countries simultaneously, for a period of up to two years.

    At the same time, MEPs propose removing certain migration-related concepts from the proposal. They argue that the provisions on the instrumentalisation of migrants (where third countries facilitate or encourage migrants to cross into EU territory with the aim of destabilising countries) should be covered by a separate, dedicated proposal, which EU lawmakers are also currently discussing.


    Quote


    After the vote, rapporteur Sylvie Guillaume (S&D, France) said: “Protecting the Schengen free movement area and what it represents for 450 million Europeans is at the heart of this report. The negotiations have been difficult, but I am delighted we have managed to safeguard the essence of one of the European Union's greatest achievements.”


    Background


    The Parliament has called for a reform of the Schengen Borders Code “to strengthen mutual trust and solidarity, and to safeguard the integrity and full restoration of the Schengen area”, which currently encompasses 27 countries.

    In a judgment in April 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that border controls re-installed because of serious threats may not exceed six months, and can only be extended when a new threat arises, unless there are exceptional circumstances putting the overall functioning of the Schengen area at risk.



    On Wednesday, MEPs adopted a draft report on the reform of the Schengen Borders Code with 39 votes in favour, 13 against, and 12 abstaining, and authorised the start of negotiations with the Council with 49 votes in favour, 14 against, and 0 abstentions. In response to increasingly permanent border controls within the Schengen area, the proposal seeks to clarify rules, strengthen free movement within the EU, and introduce targeted solutions to genuine threats.

    MEPs want to ensure a coherent EU response in cases of large-scale public cross-border health emergencies, allowing temporary restrictions on entering the Schengen area, but exempting from them EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers.

    As an alternative to border controls, the new rules would promote police cooperation in border regions. Where third-country nationals with irregular status are apprehended during joint patrols and there is evidence they have arrived directly from another EU country, these people may be transferred to that country if it participates in joint patrols. MEPs want to exclude several categories, including unaccompanied minors, from such returns.


    Justified and time-limited border controls, for maximum two years, when necessary


    In the text, MEPs propose clear criteria for the imposition of border controls in response to serious threats that endanger the functioning of the Schengen area. There would need to be a justified reason such as an “identified and immediate” threat of terrorism, with tighter time limits for border controls in response to foreseeable threats, up to a maximum of eighteen months. If the threat persists, more border controls could be authorised by a Council decision.

    The proposals would also allow for the reintroduction of border controls in several countries when the Commission receives notifications about a particularly serious threat affecting a majority of countries simultaneously, for a period of up to two years.

    At the same time, MEPs propose removing certain migration-related concepts from the proposal. They argue that the provisions on the instrumentalisation of migrants (where third countries facilitate or encourage migrants to cross into EU territory with the aim of destabilising countries) should be covered by a separate, dedicated proposal, which EU lawmakers are also currently discussing.


    Quote


    After the vote, rapporteur Sylvie Guillaume (S&D, France) said: “Protecting the Schengen free movement area and what it represents for 450 million Europeans is at the heart of this report. The negotiations have been difficult, but I am delighted we have managed to safeguard the essence of one of the European Union's greatest achievements.”


    Background


    The Parliament has called for a reform of the Schengen Borders Code “to strengthen mutual trust and solidarity, and to safeguard the integrity and full restoration of the Schengen area”, which currently encompasses 27 countries.

    In a judgment in April 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that border controls re-installed because of serious threats may not exceed six months, and can only be extended when a new threat arises, unless there are exceptional circumstances putting the overall functioning of the Schengen area at risk.



    On Wednesday, MEPs adopted a draft report on the reform of the Schengen Borders Code with 39 votes in favour, 13 against, and 12 abstaining, and authorised the start of negotiations with the Council with 49 votes in favour, 14 against, and 0 abstentions. In response to increasingly permanent border controls within the Schengen area, the proposal seeks to clarify rules, strengthen free movement within the EU, and introduce targeted solutions to genuine threats.

    MEPs want to ensure a coherent EU response in cases of large-scale public cross-border health emergencies, allowing temporary restrictions on entering the Schengen area, but exempting from them EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers.

    As an alternative to border controls, the new rules would promote police cooperation in border regions. Where third-country nationals with irregular status are apprehended during joint patrols and there is evidence they have arrived directly from another EU country, these people may be transferred to that country if it participates in joint patrols. MEPs want to exclude several categories, including unaccompanied minors, from such returns.


    Justified and time-limited border controls, for maximum two years, when necessary


    In the text, MEPs propose clear criteria for the imposition of border controls in response to serious threats that endanger the functioning of the Schengen area. There would need to be a justified reason such as an “identified and immediate” threat of terrorism, with tighter time limits for border controls in response to foreseeable threats, up to a maximum of eighteen months. If the threat persists, more border controls could be authorised by a Council decision.

    The proposals would also allow for the reintroduction of border controls in several countries when the Commission receives notifications about a particularly serious threat affecting a majority of countries simultaneously, for a period of up to two years.

    At the same time, MEPs propose removing certain migration-related concepts from the proposal. They argue that the provisions on the instrumentalisation of migrants (where third countries facilitate or encourage migrants to cross into EU territory with the aim of destabilising countries) should be covered by a separate, dedicated proposal, which EU lawmakers are also currently discussing.


    Quote


    After the vote, rapporteur Sylvie Guillaume (S&D, France) said: “Protecting the Schengen free movement area and what it represents for 450 million Europeans is at the heart of this report. The negotiations have been difficult, but I am delighted we have managed to safeguard the essence of one of the European Union's greatest achievements.”


    Background


    The Parliament has called for a reform of the Schengen Borders Code “to strengthen mutual trust and solidarity, and to safeguard the integrity and full restoration of the Schengen area”, which currently encompasses 27 countries.

    In a judgment in April 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that border controls re-installed because of serious threats may not exceed six months, and can only be extended when a new threat arises, unless there are exceptional circumstances putting the overall functioning of the Schengen area at risk.



    On Wednesday, MEPs adopted a draft report on the reform of the Schengen Borders Code with 39 votes in favour, 13 against, and 12 abstaining, and authorised the start of negotiations with the Council with 49 votes in favour, 14 against, and 0 abstentions. In response to increasingly permanent border controls within the Schengen area, the proposal seeks to clarify rules, strengthen free movement within the EU, and introduce targeted solutions to genuine threats.

    border controls within the Schengen area

    MEPs want to ensure a coherent EU response in cases of large-scale public cross-border health emergencies, allowing temporary restrictions on entering the Schengen area, but exempting from them EU citizens, long-term residents and asylum-seekers.

    As an alternative to border controls, the new rules would promote police cooperation in border regions. Where third-country nationals with irregular status are apprehended during joint patrols and there is evidence they have arrived directly from another EU country, these people may be transferred to that country if it participates in joint patrols. MEPs want to exclude several categories, including unaccompanied minors, from such returns.


    Justified and time-limited border controls, for maximum two years, when necessary


    Justified and time-limited border controls, for maximum two years, when necessary


    In the text, MEPs propose clear criteria for the imposition of border controls in response to serious threats that endanger the functioning of the Schengen area. There would need to be a justified reason such as an “identified and immediate” threat of terrorism, with tighter time limits for border controls in response to foreseeable threats, up to a maximum of eighteen months. If the threat persists, more border controls could be authorised by a Council decision.


    The proposals would also allow for the reintroduction of border controls in several countries when the Commission receives notifications about a particularly serious threat affecting a majority of countries simultaneously, for a period of up to two years.

    At the same time, MEPs propose removing certain migration-related concepts from the proposal. They argue that the provisions on the instrumentalisation of migrants (where third countries facilitate or encourage migrants to cross into EU territory with the aim of destabilising countries) should be covered by a separate, dedicated proposal, which EU lawmakers are also currently discussing.

    by a separate, dedicated proposal


    Quote


    Quote


    After the vote, rapporteur Sylvie Guillaume (S&D, France) said: “Protecting the Schengen free movement area and what it represents for 450 million Europeans is at the heart of this report. The negotiations have been difficult, but I am delighted we have managed to safeguard the essence of one of the European Union's greatest achievements.”


    Sylvie Guillaume


    Background


    Background


    The Parliament has called for a reform of the Schengen Borders Code “to strengthen mutual trust and solidarity, and to safeguard the integrity and full restoration of the Schengen area”, which currently encompasses 27 countries.


    called for a reform of the Schengen Borders Codecurrently encompasses 27 countries

    In a judgment in April 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that border controls re-installed because of serious threats may not exceed six months, and can only be extended when a new threat arises, unless there are exceptional circumstances putting the overall functioning of the Schengen area at risk.

    judgment in April





    Contact: 

    Contact: 
    Contact: 
  • Janne OJAMO 

    Janne OJAMO Janne OJAMO 
    Press Officer 
    Press Officer Press Officer 
    Contactgegevens: 
    Contactgegevens: 
  • Telefoonnummer: (+32) 2 284 12 50 (BXL) 
  • Telefoonnummer: (+32) 2 284 12 50 (BXL) Telefoonnummer: (+32) 2 284 12 50 (BXL)Telefoonnummer: (BXL) 
  • Mobiel telefoonnummer: (+32) 470 89 21 92 
  • Mobiel telefoonnummer: (+32) 470 89 21 92 Mobiel telefoonnummer: (+32) 470 89 21 92Mobiel telefoonnummer:  
  • E-mail: janne.ojamo@europarl.europa.eu 
  • E-mail: janne.ojamo@europarl.europa.eu E-mail: janne.ojamo@europarl.europa.euE-mail:  
  • E-mail: libe-press@europarl.europa.eu 
  • E-mail: libe-press@europarl.europa.eu E-mail: libe-press@europarl.europa.euE-mail:  
  • Twitteraccount: @EP_Justice 
  • Twitteraccount: @EP_Justice Twitteraccount: @EP_JusticeTwitteraccount:  
     
     

    Further information 

    Further information 
    Further information 
  • Draft report and amendments  Draft report and amendments 
  • Video statement from the rapporteur Sylvie Guillaume (S&D, France) and extracts from the vote  Video statement from the rapporteur Sylvie Guillaume (S&D, France) and extracts from the vote 
  • Legislative train  Legislative train 
  • EP Briefing: Schengen reform - Key challenges and proposals (July 2022)   EP Briefing: Schengen reform - Key challenges and proposals (July 2022)  
  • Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs  Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs 
     
     
     
     
     

    Productinformatie 

    REF.:  20230918IPR05427 

    Productinformatie 

    Productinformatie 
    Productinformatie 
    Productinformatie 
    REF.:  20230918IPR05427 
    REF.:  20230918IPR05427 
    REF.: REF.:REF.: 20230918IPR05427 20230918IPR05427 

    Deel deze pagina: 

    Deel deze pagina: 
    Deel deze pagina: 
  • Facebook Facebook 
  • Twitter Twitter 
  • LinkedIn LinkedIn 
  • WhatsApp WhatsApp Aanmelden voor e-mailupdatesAanmelden voor e-mailupdatesPdf-versie Pdf-versie Nieuws  Bekijk het menu: nieuws  Bekijk het menu: nieuws Het Parlement in uw land 
  • Open als nieuwe pagina Brussels
  • Open als nieuwe pagina Brussels Open als nieuwe paginaBrussels
  • Open als nieuwe pagina Den Haag
  • Open als nieuwe pagina Den Haag Open als nieuwe paginaDen HaagTools 
  • Open als nieuwe pagina Wetgevingsobservatorium
  • Open als nieuwe pagina Wetgevingsobservatorium Open als nieuwe paginaWetgevingsobservatorium
  • Naar pagina gaan Multimedia Centre
  • Naar pagina gaan Multimedia Centre Naar pagina gaanMultimedia Centre
  • Open als nieuwe pagina EbS
  • Open als nieuwe pagina EbS Open als nieuwe paginaEbSDe Voorzitter van het Europees Parlement 
  • Open als nieuwe pagina Webpagina van de Voorzitter van het Parlement
  • Open als nieuwe pagina Webpagina van de Voorzitter van het Parlement Open als nieuwe paginaWebpagina van de Voorzitter van het Parlement Menu verbergen: Nieuws   Menu verbergen: Nieuws Europees Parlement  Menu bekijken: Europees Parlement   Menu bekijken: Europees Parlement 
  • Naar pagina gaan Nieuws 
  • Naar pagina gaan Nieuws  Naar pagina gaanNieuws 
  • Naar pagina gaan Leden 
  • Naar pagina gaan Leden  Naar pagina gaanLeden 
  • Naar pagina gaan Over het Parlement 
  • Naar pagina gaan Over het Parlement  Naar pagina gaanOver het Parlement 
  • Naar pagina gaan Plenaire vergadering 
  • Naar pagina gaan Plenaire vergadering  Naar pagina gaanPlenaire vergadering 
  • Naar pagina gaan Commissies 
  • Naar pagina gaan Commissies  Naar pagina gaanCommissies 
  • Naar pagina gaan Delegaties 
  • Naar pagina gaan Delegaties  Naar pagina gaanDelegaties Menu verbergen: Europees Parlement Menu verbergen: Europees Parlement  

    Het Parlement in de sociale media  

    Het Parlement in de sociale media 
  • Bekijk het Parlement op Facebook  
  • Bekijk het Parlement op Facebook   Bekijk het Parlement op Facebook 
  • Bekijk het Parlement op Twitter  
  • Bekijk het Parlement op Twitter   Bekijk het Parlement op Twitter 
  • Bekijk het Parlement op Flickr  
  • Bekijk het Parlement op Flickr   Bekijk het Parlement op Flickr 
  • Bekijk het Parlement op LinkedIn  
  • Bekijk het Parlement op LinkedIn   Bekijk het Parlement op LinkedIn 
  • Bekijk het Parlement op YouTube  
  • Bekijk het Parlement op YouTube   Bekijk het Parlement op YouTube 
  • Bekijk het Parlement op Instagram  
  • Bekijk het Parlement op Instagram   Bekijk het Parlement op Instagram 
  • Bekijk het Parlement op Pinterest  
  • Bekijk het Parlement op Pinterest   Bekijk het Parlement op Pinterest 
  • Bekijk het Parlement op Snapchat  
  • Bekijk het Parlement op Snapchat   Bekijk het Parlement op Snapchat 
  • Bekijk het Parlement op Reddit  
  • Bekijk het Parlement op Reddit   Bekijk het Parlement op Reddit Informatieve links 
  • Naar pagina gaanContact 
  • Naar pagina gaanContact Naar pagina gaanContact 
  • Naar pagina gaanRSS 
  • Naar pagina gaanRSS Naar pagina gaanRSS 
  • Naar pagina gaanSitemap 
  • Naar pagina gaanSitemap Naar pagina gaanSitemap 
  • Naar pagina gaanJuridische mededeling 
  • Naar pagina gaanJuridische mededeling Naar pagina gaanJuridische mededeling 
  • Naar pagina gaanPrivacybeleid 
  • Naar pagina gaanPrivacybeleid Naar pagina gaanPrivacybeleid 
  • Naar pagina gaanToegankelijkheid 
  • Naar pagina gaanToegankelijkheid Naar pagina gaanToegankelijkheid