### (5) apart from the information in relation to financial services , capital markets and sustainability that has to be made public under union law , investors , market participants , advisors and the public at large may have an interest in obtaining other information that an entity wants to make accessible. small and medium-sized enterprises may want to make more information publicly accessible in order to become more visible to potential investors and thereby increase funding and diversify funding opportunities. also , market participants may want to provide more information than that required by law or to make public the information required by national law but not available at union level in order to complement the information provided to the public at the union level. any entity should therefore be allowed to make financial , sustainability-related and other relevant information accessible on esap. pursuant to the principle of data minimisation , entities should ensure that no personal data are included , except where those data constitute a necessary element of the information about their economic activities , including when the name of the entity coincides with the name of the owner. where such information contains personal data , the entities should ensure that they can rely for such disclosure on one of the lawful grounds of processing laid down in article 6 of regulation (eu) 2016/679 of the european parliament and of the council26 . ### (5) apart from the information in relation to financial services , capital markets and sustainability that has to be made public under union law , investors , market participants , advisors and the public at large may have an interest in obtaining other information that an entity wants to make accessible. small and medium-sized enterprises may want to make more information publicly accessible in order to become more visible to potential investors and thereby increase funding and diversify funding opportunities. also , market participants may want to provide more information than that required by law or to make public the information required by national law but not available at union level in order to complement the information provided to the public at the union level. an entity governed by the law of a member state should therefore be allowed to make financial , sustainability-related and other relevant information accessible on esap. pursuant to the principle of data minimisation , entities should ensure that no personal data are included , except where those data constitute a necessary element of the information about their economic activities , including when the name of the entity coincides with the name of the owner. where such information contains personal data , the entities should ensure that they can rely for such disclosure on one of the lawful grounds of processing laid down in article 6 of regulation (eu) 2016/679 of the european parliament and of the council26 .


### (10) re-using information that is available on esap can improve the functioning of the internal market and promote the development of new services that combine and make use of such information. it is therefore necessary , where justified on grounds of a public interest objective , to allow re-use of the information that is available on esap for purposes other than the purposes for which the information was drawn up. however , the use and re-use of that information should be subject to objective , proportionate and non-discriminatory conditions. for that purpose , conditions corresponding to those laid down in open , standard licences within the meaning of directive (eu) 2019/1024 of the european parliament and of the council27 should apply. the licensing terms of those standard licences should allow for data and content to be freely accessible , used , modified and shared by anyone for any purpose. esma should bear no liability for the use and re-use of information accessible on esap. the submission of information by the collection bodies should either not be subject to conditions or be subject to an open standard licence enabling the licensing terms applying for information accessible in the esap. ### (10) re-using information that is available on esap can improve the functioning of the internal market and promote the development of new services that combine and make use of such information. it is therefore necessary , where justified on grounds of a public interest objective , to allow re-use of the information that is available on esap for purposes other than the purposes for which the information was drawn up. however , the use and re-use of that information should be subject to objective , proportionate and non-discriminatory conditions. for that purpose , conditions corresponding to those laid down in open , standard licences within the meaning of directive (eu) 2019/1024 of the european parliament and of the council27 should apply. the licensing terms of those standard licences should allow for data and content to be freely accessible , used , modified and shared by anyone for any purpose. neither esma nor the collection bodies should bear any form of liability for the use and re-use of information accessible on esap. the submission of information by the collection bodies should either not be subject to conditions or be subject to an open standard licence enabling the licensing terms applying for information accessible in the esap.


### 1. any natural or legal person may submit to a collection body the information referred to in article 1(1) , point (b) to make that information accessible on esap. when submitting that information , the natural or legal person shall: ### 1. any natural or legal person may submit to a collection body the information referred to in article 1(1) , point (b) to make that information accessible on esap. where the substance and format of that information does not have the same value and reliability as the information referred to in article 1(1) , point (a) , users shall be informed thereof by means of a clear disclaimer. when submitting the information referred to in article 1(1) , point (b) , the natural or legal person shall:


### 4. entities shall ensure the accuracy of the information they submit to the collection bodies. ### 4. entities shall ensure and shall be liable for the accuracy and completeness of the information that they submit to the collection bodies , as well as for the accompanying metadata.


### by [po , please insert a date 5 years after the entry into force of this regulation] , the commission shall review the functioning of esap and assess its effectiveness. the commission shall report to the european parliament and to the council on the results of this review. ### by [po , please insert a date 5 years after the entry into force of this regulation] , the commission shall review the functioning of esap and assess its effectiveness. the commission shall report to the european parliament and to the council on the results of this review. the progressive inclusion of information on esap shall be conditioned upon a prior and positive evaluation of an initial phase.


### (4) the information to be made publicly accessible on esap should be collected by collection bodies designated for the purpose of collecting the information that the entities are under an obligation to make public. in order to ensure the efficient functioning of esap , the collection bodies should make the information available to esap in automated ways through a single application programming interface. for the information to be digitally usable , entities should make such information available in a data extractable format or , where required by union law , in a machine-readable format. compared to data extractable formats , machine-readable formats are file formats structured so that software applications can easily identify , recognise and extract specific data , including individual statements of fact , and their internal structure. to ensure that entities submit the information in the correct format and to address possible technical issues encountered by the entities , the collection bodies should provide assistance to those entities. ### (4) the information to be made publicly accessible on esap should be collected by specialised collection bodies specifically designated by the relevant authorities for the purpose of collecting the information that the entities are under a legal obligation to make public. in order to ensure the efficient functioning of esap , the collection bodies should make the information available to esap in automated ways through a single application programming interface. for the information to be digitally usable , entities should make such information available in a data extractable format or , where required by union law , in a machine-readable format. compared to data extractable formats , machine-readable formats are file formats structured so that software applications can easily identify , recognise and extract specific data , including individual statements of fact , and their internal structure. to ensure that entities submit the information in the correct format and to address possible technical issues encountered by the entities , the collection bodies should provide assistance to those entities.


### (4) the information to be made publicly accessible on esap should be collected by collection bodies designated for the purpose of collecting the information that the entities are under an obligation to make public. in order to ensure the efficient functioning of esap , the collection bodies should make the information available to esap in automated ways through a single application programming interface. for the information to be digitally usable , entities should make such information available in a data extractable format or , where required by union law , in a machine-readable format. compared to data extractable formats , machine-readable formats are file formats structured so that software applications can easily identify , recognise and extract specific data , including individual statements of fact , and their internal structure. to ensure that entities submit the information in the correct format and to address possible technical issues encountered by the entities , the collection bodies should provide assistance to those entities. ### (4) the information to be made publicly accessible on esap should be collected by collection bodies designated for the purpose of collecting the information that the entities are under an obligation to make public. in order to ensure the efficient functioning of esap , the collection bodies should make the information available to esap in automated ways through a single application programming interface. for the information to be digitally usable , entities should make such information available in a data extractable format or , where required by union law , in a machine-readable format. compared to data extractable formats , machine-readable formats are file formats structured so that software applications can easily identify , recognise and extract specific data , including individual statements of fact , and their internal structure. draft implementing technical standards should be drawn up by the european supervisory authorities and , when relevant , through the joint committee of the european supervisory authorities for submission to the commission , specifying the characteristics of machine readable and data extractable formats and accounting for any evolving technology trends or standards. to ensure that entities submit the information in the correct format and to address possible technical issues encountered by the entities , the collection bodies should provide assistance to those entities.


### (11) the information available on esap should be accessible to the public in a timely manner. in that regard , the time between collecting the information and making it accessible to the public should be reasonable and , in any event , as short as technically possible. in order to ensure a uniform quality of information , the collection bodies should perform automated validations and reject invalid information. ### (11) the information available on esap should be accessible to the public in a timely manner. in that regard , the time between collecting the information and making it accessible to the public should be reasonable and , in any event , as short as technically possible. in order to ensure a uniform quality of information , the collection bodies should perform automated validations and reject invalid information. the possibility for human oversight must be guaranteed for any automated processing of data.


### (11) the information available on esap should be accessible to the public in a timely manner. in that regard , the time between collecting the information and making it accessible to the public should be reasonable and , in any event , as short as technically possible. in order to ensure a uniform quality of information , the collection bodies should perform automated validations and reject invalid information. ### (11) the information available on esap should be accessible to the public in a timely manner. in that regard , the time between collecting the information and making it accessible to the public should be reasonable and , in any event , as short as technically possible. in order to ensure a uniform quality of information , the collection bodies should perform automated validations and reject invalid information. the validity of the information should be assessed on the basis of its compliance with the requirements of this regulation and any accompanying amendments to sectoral legislation. in assessing the validity of the information , collection bodies should maintain discretion in rejecting information that falls outside the scope of esap and in any case if that information includes manifestly inappropriate or abusive content.


### other information of relevance to financial services provided in the union or to capital markets of the union or concerning sustainability that entities wish to make accessible on esap on a voluntary basis about their economic activities in accordance with article 3(1). ### other information of relevance to financial services provided in the union or to capital markets of the union or concerning sustainability that any entity governed by the law of a member state wishes to make accessible on esap on a voluntary basis about their economic activities in accordance with article 3(1) and pursuant to the material reporting requirements listed in the omnibus act .


### 2. esma shall ensure that anyone has direct and immediate access free of charge to the information available on esap. ### 2. esma shall ensure that anyone has direct and immediate access free of charge to the information made available on esap.


### 5. welcomes the follow-up done by the edps after the admonishment of europol; is concerned about the individual complaints introduced against europol and about this agency ignoring the recommendations and an order issued by the edps; ### deleted


### 1. highlights the role of international investigative journalism and whistleblowers in exposing tax avoidance and evasion , corruption , organised crime and money laundering; deems it necessary to further protect the confidentiality of the sources of investigative journalism , including whistleblowers; ### 1. highlights the role of international investigative journalism and whistleblowers in exposing tax avoidance and evasion , corruption , organised crime and money laundering; deems it necessary to protect the confidentiality of the sources of investigative journalism , including whistleblowers; draws attention to the many cases that have recently come to light in which spyware has been used to conduct surveillance on journalists in the eu and points out that these are extremely worrying and indicative of the hypocrisy of the political elites who pursue transparency in public life;


### b. whereas the pandora papers revealed how high-net-worth individuals , including politically exposed persons , criminals , public officials and celebrities , are assisted by intermediaries , such as banks , accountants and law firms , in designing complex corporate structures registered in secrecy jurisdictions or tax havens in close cooperation with offshore professional service providers in order to shield income and assets from taxation and possibly launder money; ### b. whereas the pandora papers revealed how high-net-worth individuals , including criminals , public officials , celebrities and – something particularly shocking and scandalous – politically exposed persons , are assisted by intermediaries , such as banks , accountants and law firms , in designing complex corporate structures registered in secrecy jurisdictions or tax havens in close cooperation with offshore professional service providers in order to shield income and assets from taxation and possibly launder money;


### 27. ‘instrumentalisation of migrants’ refers to a situation where a third country instigates irregular migratory flows into the union by actively encouraging or facilitating the movement of third country nationals to the external borders , onto or from within its territory and then onwards to those external borders , where such actions are indicative of an intention of a third country to destabilise the union or a member state , where the nature of such actions is liable to put at risk essential state functions , including its territorial integrity , the maintenance of law and order or the safeguard of its national security; ### 27. ‘instrumentalisation of migrants’ refers to a situation where a third country instigates , assists , enables , encourages or facilitates flows of migrants entering into the territory of member states illegally by actively encouraging or facilitating the movement of third country nationals to the external borders , onto or from within its territory and then onwards to those external borders , where such actions are indicative of an intention of a third country to destabilise one or more member states or the union;


### 4. in a situation of instrumentalisation of migrants , member states may limit the number of border crossing points as notified pursuant to paragraph 1 or their opening hours where the circumstances so require. ### 4. in a situation of instrumentalisation of migrants , member states may reduce the number of border crossing points to zero if circumstances so require.


### any limitations adopted pursuant to the first subparagraph shall be implemented in a manner that is proportionate and that takes full account of the rights of: ### deleted


### 2. the border guards shall use stationary or mobile units to carry out border surveillance. ### 2. the border guards shall use any means required to carry out border surveillance.


### those technical means may include modern technologies including drones and motion sensors , as well as mobile units to prevent unauthorised border crossings into the union. ### those technical means may include modern technologies including drones and motion sensors , as well as mobile units or physical barriers erected to prevent unauthorised border crossings into the union.


### 7. the commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with article 37 concerning additional measures governing surveillance , including the development of standards for border surveillance , in particular the use of surveillance and monitoring technologies at the external borders , taking into account the type of borders , the impact levels attributed to each external border section in accordance with article 34 of the regulation (eu) 2019/1896 and other relevant factors. ### 7. the member states retain the right to adopt provisions and implement measures in accordance with applicable national law concerning additional measures governing surveillance , in particular the use of surveillance and monitoring technologies at the external borders , taking into account the type of borders , the impact levels and other relevant factors.


### 1. this article shall apply to situations where the european centre for disease prevention and control or the commission identify the existence in one or more third countries of an infectious disease with epidemic potential as defined by the relevant instruments of the world health organization. ### 1. this article shall apply to situations where relevant authorities have identified the existence of one or more third countries of an infectious disease with epidemic potential as defined by member states by way of unanimous decision in the council.


### 2. the council , on the basis of a proposal by the commission , may adopt an implementing regulation , providing for temporary restrictions on travel to the member states. ### 2. the council may adopt an implementing regulation , providing for temporary restrictions on travel to the member states.


### 3. the following categories of persons shall be exempted from the restrictions on entry , independent of the purpose of their travel: ### deleted


### 4. the implementing regulation referred to in paragraph 1 shall , where appropriate: ### deleted


### d) there are clear indications that the third country national has arrived directly from another member state , on the basis of information immediately available to the apprehending authorities , including statements from the person concerned , identity , travel or other documents found on that person or the results of searches carried out in relevant national and union databases. ### d) there are indications that the third country national has arrived from another member state , on the basis of information available to the apprehending authorities , including statements from the person concerned , identity , travel or other documents found on that person or the results of searches carried out in relevant national and union databases.


### (7) at the end of the first paragraph of article 24 , the first paragraph is replaced by the following: ### deleted


### article 25 ### article 25


### 1. where , in the area without internal border controls , there is a serious threat to public policy or internal security in a member state , that member state may exceptionally reintroduce border controls at all or specific parts of its internal borders. ### 1. member state retain the right to reintroduce border controls at all or specific parts of its internal and external borders.


### a serious threat to public policy or internal security may be considered to arise from , in particular: ### a threat to public policy or internal security may be considered to arise from , in particular:


### 2. border controls may only be introduced pursuant to articles 25a and 28 where a member state has established that such a measure is necessary and proportionate , taking into account the criteria referred to in article 26(1) , and , in case such controls are prolonged , also the criteria referred to in article 26(2). border controls may also be reintroduced in accordance with article 29 , taking into account the criteria referred to in article 30. ### 2. border controls may be introduced if a member state has determined that such a measure is necessary and proportionate , taking into account national legal and constitutional provisions.


### 3. where the same threat continues to persist , border controls at internal borders may be prolonged in accordance with articles 25a , 28 or 29. ### 3. where a member state deems it necessary and proportionate , border controls at internal borders may be prolonged indefinitely.


### 1. where a serious threat to public policy or internal security in a member state is unforeseeable and requires immediate action , the member state may , on an exceptional basis , immediately reintroduce border control at internal borders. ### 1. where a threat to public policy , internal security or safety of citizens in a member state is unforeseeable and requires immediate action , the member state may immediately reintroduce border control at internal borders.


### 2. the member state shall , at the same time as reintroducing border control under paragraph 1 , notify the commission and the other member states of the reintroduction of border controls , in accordance with article 27(1). ### 2. the member state is welcome to , at the same time as reintroducing border control under paragraph 1 , notify the commission and the other member states of the reintroduction of border controls , in accordance with article 27(1).


### 3. for the purposes of paragraph 1 , border control at internal borders may be immediately reintroduced for a limited period of up to one month. if the serious threat to public policy or internal security persists beyond that period , the member state may prolong the border control at internal borders for further periods , leading to a maximum duration not exceeding three months. ### 3. for the purposes of paragraph 1 , border control at internal borders may be immediately reintroduced for an unlimited period of time.


### 3. for the purposes of paragraph 1 , border control at internal borders may be immediately reintroduced for a limited period of up to one month. if the serious threat to public policy or internal security persists beyond that period , the member state may prolong the border control at internal borders for further periods , leading to a maximum duration not exceeding three months. ### 3. for the purposes of paragraph 1 , border control at internal borders may be immediately reintroduced for a period of up to 36 months. if the serious threat to public policy or internal security persists beyond that period , the member state may prolong the border control at internal borders for further periods , leading to a maximum duration not exceeding six years.


### 4. where a serious threat to public policy or internal security is foreseeable in a member state , the member state shall notify the commission and the other member states and the commission in accordance with article 27(1) , at the latest four weeks before the planned reintroduction of border controls , or within a shorter period where the circumstances giving rise to the need to reintroduce border controls at internal borders become known less than four weeks before the planned reintroduction. ### 4. where a serious threat to public policy or internal security is foreseeable in a member state , the member state is welcome to notify the commission and the other member states before the planned reintroduction of border controls.


### 5. for the purposes of paragraph 4 , and without prejudice to article 27a(4) , border control at internal borders may be reintroduced for a period of up to six months. where the serious threat to public policy or internal security persists beyond that period , the member state may prolong the border control at internal borders for renewable periods of up to six months. ### 5. for the purposes of paragraph 4 , and without prejudice to article 27a(4) , border control at internal borders may be reintroduced for a period of up to 36 months. where the threat to public policy or internal security or safety persists beyond that period , the member state may prolong the border control at internal borders.


### 5. for the purposes of paragraph 4 , and without prejudice to article 27a(4) , border control at internal borders may be reintroduced for a period of up to six months. where the serious threat to public policy or internal security persists beyond that period , the member state may prolong the border control at internal borders for renewable periods of up to six months. ### 5. for the purposes of paragraph 4 , and without prejudice to article 27a(4) , border control at internal borders may be reintroduced for an unlimited period of time.


### article 26 ### article 26


### 1. to establish whether the reintroduction of border control at internal borders is necessary and proportionate in accordance with article 25 , a member state shall in particular consider: ### 1. member states retain the right to determine whether establishing or reintroducing border controls is necessary and proportionate. in their assessment they may consider:


### the appropriateness of the measure of reintroducing border controls at internal border , having regard to the nature of the serious threat identified and in particular , whether the reintroduction of border controls at internal borders is likely to adequately remedy the threat to public policy or internal security; ### the appropriateness of the measure of reintroducing border controls at internal border , having regard to the security and safety situation and the nature of any threat identified and in particular , whether the reintroduction of border controls at internal borders is likely to adequately remedy the threat to public policy and internal or public security;


### the likely impact of such a measure on: ### the possible impact of such a measure on:


### — the functioning of the cross-border regions , taking into account the strong social and economic ties between them. ### — the functioning of the cross-border regions , taking into account the strong social and economic ties between them , especially in regions where free movement of people's and goods pre-dates the single market and the european union.


### article 27 ### article 27


### 1. notifications by member states of the reintroduction or prolongation of internal border controls shall contain the following information: ### 1. notifications by member states of the reintroduction or prolongation of internal border controls could contain the following information:


### the notification shall be provided in accordance with a template to be established by the commission by an implementing act and to be made available online. that implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in article 38(2).” ### the notification can be provided in accordance with a template to be established by the council by an implementing decision to be made available online.


### 2. where border controls have been in place for six months in accordance with article 25a(4) , any subsequent notification for the prolongation of such controls shall include a risk assessment. the risk assessment shall present the scale and anticipated evolution of the identified serious threat , in particular how long the identified serious threat is expected to persist and which sections of the internal borders may be affected , as well as information regarding coordination measures with the other member states impacted or likely to be impacted by such measures. ### 2. where border controls have been in place for 36 months in accordance with article 25a(4) , any subsequent notification for the prolongation of such controls shall include a assessment. the assessment shall present the scale and anticipated evolution of the identified threat , in particular how long the identified threat is expected to persist and which , or all , sections of the internal borders may be affected , as well as information regarding coordination measures with the other member states impacted or likely to be impacted by such measures.


### 3. where the reintroduction of border controls or its prolongation refers to large scale unauthorised movements referred to in article 25(1) point (b) , the risk assessment shall also provide information on the scale and trends of such unauthorised movements , including any information obtained from the relevant eu agencies in line with their respective mandates and data analysis from relevant information systems. ### 3. where the reintroduction of border controls or its prolongation refers to large scale unauthorised movements referred to in article 25(1) point (b) , the assessment shall also provide information on the scale and trends of such unauthorised movements , including any information obtained from the relevant national , regional , local or international agencies in line with their respective mandates and data analysis from relevant information systems.


### 4. the member state concerned shall upon request by the commission , provide any further information , including on the coordination measures with the member states affected by the planned prolongation of border control at internal borders as well as further information needed to assess the possible use of measures referred to in article 23 and 23a . ### 4. the member state concerned shall upon request by the council , provide further information , including on the coordination measures with the member states affected by the planned prolongation of border control at internal borders as well as further information needed to assess the possible use of measures referred to in article 23 and 23a .


### 5. member states submitting a notification under paragraphs 1 or 2 may , where necessary and in accordance with national law , decide to classify all or parts of the notified information. ### 5. member states submitting a notification under paragraphs 1 or 2 may , where necessary and in accordance with national law , decide to classify all or parts of the notified information.


### 3. following receipt of notifications submitted in relation to a prolongation of border control at the internal border under article 25a(4) which leads to the continuation of border controls at internal borders for eighteen months in total , the commission shall issue an opinion on necessity and proportionality of such internal border controls. ### 3. following receipt of notifications submitted in relation to a prolongation of border control at the internal border under article 25a(4) which leads to the continuation of border controls at internal borders for thirty six months in total , the council shall issue an opinion on necessity and proportionality of such internal border controls.


### 5. where a member state considers that there are exceptional situations justifying the continued need for internal border controls in excess of the maximum period referred to in article 25(5) , it shall notify the commission in accordance with article 27(2). the new notification from the member state shall substantiate the continued threat to public policy or internal security , taking into account the opinion of the commission given pursuant to paragraph 3. the commission shall issue a follow up opinion. ### 5. where a member state considers that there is a need for internal border controls in excess of the maximum period referred to in article 25(5) , it shall notify the commission in accordance with article 27(2). the new notification from the member state shall substantiate the threat to public policy or internal security , taking into account the opinion of the commission given pursuant to paragraph 3. the commission shall issue a follow up opinion.


### article 28 ### article 28


### 1. where the commission , establishes that the same serious threat to internal security or public policy affects a majority of member states , putting at risk the overall functioning of the area without internal border , it may , make a proposal to the council to adopt an implementing decision authorising the reintroduction of border controls by member states where the available measures referred to in articles 23 and 23a are not sufficient to address the threat. ### 1. a member state does not have to prove that a serious threat to internal security , public policy or safety exists to reintroduce border controls for an unlimited period of time.


### 2. the decision shall cover a period of up to six months and may be renewed , upon proposal from the commission , for further periods of up to six months as long as the threat persists , taking into account the review referred to in paragraph 5. ### deleted


### 2. the decision shall cover a period of up to six months and may be renewed , upon proposal from the commission , for further periods of up to six months as long as the threat persists , taking into account the review referred to in paragraph 5. ### 2. the decision shall cover a period of up to thirty six months and may be renewed , upon proposal from the council , for further periods of up to six years.


### 5. the commission shall review the evolution of the identified threat as well as the impact of the measures adopted in accordance with the council decision referred to in paragraph 1 , with a view to assess whether the measures remain justified. ### 5. the council shall review the evolution of the identified threat as well as the impact of the measures adopted in accordance with the council decision referred to in paragraph 1.


### 6. member states shall immediately notify the commission and the other member states in the council of a reintroduction of border controls in accordance with the decision referred to in paragraph 1. ### 6. member states are welcome to immediately notify the commission and the other member states in the council of a reintroduction of border controls in accordance with the decision referred to in paragraph 1.


### 7. the commission may issue a recommendation indicating other measures as referred to in articles 23 and 23a that could complement internal border controls or be more suitable to address the identified threat to internal security or public policy as referred to in paragraph 1. ### 7. the commission may issue a non-binding recommendation indicating other measures as referred to in articles 23 and 23a that could complement internal border controls in addressing the identified threat to internal security or public policy referred to in paragraph 1.


### 2. where a member state notifies the commission and the other member states of the reintroduction of border controls in accordance with article 27(1) , it shall at the same time inform the european parliament and the council of the following: ### 2. where a member state notifies the commission and the other member states of the reintroduction of border controls in accordance with article 27(1) , it is welcome to at the same time inform the council of the following:


### the classification of information shall not preclude information from being made available by the commission to the european parliament. the transmission and handling of information and documents transmitted to the european parliament under this article shall comply with rules concerning the forwarding and handling of classified information which are applicable between the european parliament and the commission. ### the classification of information can preclude information from being made available to the commission and to the european parliament if the member state deems such action to be necessary and proportionate. the transmission and handling of information and documents transmitted to the european parliament under this article shall comply with rules concerning the forwarding and handling of classified information which are applicable between the european parliament and the commission.


### 1. within four weeks of the lifting of border control at internal borders , member states which have carried out border controls at internal borders shall present a report to the european parliament , the council and the commission on the reintroduction and , where applicable , the prolongation of border control at internal borders. ### 1. when it deems appropriate member states which have carried out border controls at internal borders are welcome to present a report to the council and the commission on the reintroduction and , where applicable , the prolongation of border control at internal borders.


### 2. without prejudice to the first paragraph 1 , where border controls are prolonged as referred to in article 25a(5) , the member state concerned shall submit a report at the expiry of twelve months and every twelve months thereafter if border control is exceptionally maintained. ### 2. without prejudice to the first paragraph 1 , where border controls are prolonged as referred to in article 25a(5) , the member state concerned is welcome to submit a report at the expiry of twelve months and every twelve months thereafter if border control is maintained.


### 3. the report shall outline , in particular , the initial and follow-up assessment of the necessity of border controls and the respect of the criteria referred to in articles 26 , the operation of the checks , the practical cooperation with neighbouring member states , the resulting impact on the movement of persons in particular in the cross-border regions , the effectiveness of the reintroduction of border control at internal borders , including an ex-post assessment of the proportionality of the reintroduction of border control. ### deleted


### 4. the commission shall adopt a uniform format for such report and make it available online. ### 4. the council can adopt a uniform format to be used for such reports and make it available online.


### 5. the commission may issue an opinion on that ex-post assessment of the temporary reintroduction of border control at one or more internal borders or at parts thereof. ### 5. the commission may issue an opinion on that ex-post assessment of the reintroduction of border control at one or more internal borders or at parts thereof. this opinion shall include an estimate of the effect on cross border crime of reintroduced internal border controls.


### 6. the commission shall present to the european parliament and to the council , at least annually , a report on the functioning of the area without internal border control entitled (‘state of schengen report’). the report shall include a list of all decisions to reintroduce border control at internal borders taken during the relevant year. it shall also include information on the trends within the schengen area as regards the unauthorised movements of third country nationals , taking into account available information from the relevant union agencies , data analysis from relevant information systems and an assessment of the necessity and proportionality of the reintroductions of border controls in the period covered by that report. ### 6. the commission shall present to the european parliament and to the council , at least annually , a report on the functioning of the schengen area (‘state of schengen report’). the report shall include a list of all decisions to reintroduce border control at internal borders taken during the relevant year. it shall also include information on the trends within the schengen area as regards the illegal movements of third country nationals , taking into account available information from the relevant national , regional , local or international agencies , data analysis from relevant information systems and an assessment of the effect on cross border crime operations of the reintroductions of border controls in the period covered by that report.


### h) member states shall notify to the commission the local administrative areas considered as the cross-border regions and any relevant changes thereto. ### h) member states are welcome to notify to the commission the local administrative areas considered as the cross-border regions and any relevant changes thereto.


### viii. persons in need of international protection or for other humanitarian reasons. ### deleted


### 1. decisions shall state the grounds for finding that a person has no right to stay. they shall take effect immediately. ### 1. decisions must not state the grounds for finding that a person has no right to stay. they shall take effect immediately.


### f) the member states to which the third country national was sent back. ### f) the member states , country of origin or third country partner state reception centre to which the third country national was sent back.


### d) the member state(s) to which persons were sent back; ### d) the member state(s) , countries of origin or transit or third country partner state reception centres to which persons were sent;


### 5. persons refused entry or the right to stay shall have the right to appeal. appeals shall be conducted in accordance with national law. a written indication of contact points able to provide information on representatives competent to act on behalf of the third-country national in accordance with national law shall also be given to the third-country national in a language that they understand or are reasonably supposed to understand. lodging such an appeal shall not have suspensive effect. ### 5. persons refused entry or the right to stay shall have a limited right to appeal. appeals shall only take into consideration and shall be conducted in accordance with national law.


### 3. member states may refrain from issuing a return decision to a third-country national staying illegally on their territory if the third-country national concerned is taken back by another member state in accordance with the procedure provided for in article 23a of the regulation (eu) 2016/399 of the european parliament and of the council* or under bilateral agreements or arrangements. ### 3. member states may refrain from issuing a return decision to a third-country national staying illegally on their territory if the third-country national concerned is taken back by another member state in accordance with the procedure provided for in article 23a of the regulation (eu) 2016/399 of the european parliament and of the council* or under bilateral agreements or arrangements with other member states or third country partner states hosting asylum processing and reception centres.


### member states shall without delay notify any existing , amended or new bilateral agreements or arrangements to the commission.” ### member states are welcome to without delay notify any existing , amended or new bilateral agreements or arrangements to the commission.”


### (5) the covid-19 pandemic has reinforced the need for the union to be better prepared to respond to crisis situations at the external borders related to situations of diseases with an epidemic potential that are a threat to public health. the covid-19 pandemic has shown that threats to public health can require uniform rules concerning travel restrictions for travel into the european union by third country nationals. the adoption of inconsistent and divergent measures at the external borders to address such threats negatively affects the functioning of the entire schengen area , reduces predictability for third-country travellers and people-to-people contacts with third countries. to prepare the schengen area for future challenges of a comparable scale related to threats to public health , it is necessary to establish a new mechanism which should allow for a timely adoption and lifting of coordinated measures at union level. the new procedure at the external border should be applied in a situation of an infectious disease with epidemic potential as identified by the european centre for disease prevention and control or the commission. this mechanism should complement the procedures proposed to be established in the proposal for a regulation of the european parliament and of the council on serious cross-border threats to health43 , notably in case of the recognition of a public health emergency , and the revised mandate of the european centre for disease control.44 ### (5) the covid-19 pandemic and migratory pressure facing europe has reinforced the need for member states to take unilateral action to improve checks and controls of persons entering or exiting their territory. to prepare the schengen area for future challenges of a comparable scale related to threats to public health or safety , it is necessary to enable member states to implement additional border control measures regardless of decisions taken at eu level. a new provision should enable border control measures deemed necessary by member states to safeguard public order and guarantee security for citizens.


### (6) the mechanism should provide for the adoption by the council , upon a proposal by the commission , of a regulation setting out restrictions on travel , including restrictions on entry and any other necessary measures for travel into the european union , and the conditions for lifting them. in view of the politically sensitive nature of such measures which concern the right to enter the territory of member states , implementing powers should be conferred on the council to adopt such a regulation , acting on a proposal from the commission. ### (6) the new provision should enable border control measures deemed necessary by member states to safeguard public order and guarantee security for citizens. the provision should enable the adoption by member states , acting alone or jointly , of measures setting out restrictions on travel , including restrictions on entry and any other necessary measures for travel into the member state or member states concerned and the conditions for lifting them. in view of the politically sensitive nature of such measures which concern the right to enter the territory of member states , the commission should be limited to a consultative role.


### (8) it is also necessary to reinforce the rules and safeguards in union law in order to allow member states to act swiftly to counter instances of instrumentalisation of migrants. such instrumentalisation should be understood as referring to a situation where a third country instigates irregular migratory flows to the union by actively encouraging or facilitating the arrival of third country nationals to the external borders of the member states , where such actions indicate an intention to destabilise the union as a whole or a member state and where the nature of such actions is liable to put at risk essential state functions , including its territorial integrity , the maintenance of law and order or the safeguard of its national security. ### (8) it is also necessary to reinforce the rules and safeguards in union law in order to allow member states to act swiftly to counter instances of instrumentalisation of migrants. such instrumentalisation should be understood as referring to a situation where a third country instigates , assists , enables , actively encourages or facilitates flows of migrants entering the territory of the member states of the union illegally.


### (9) instrumentalisation of migrants can refer to situations where irregular travel of third country nationals has been actively encouraged or facilitated by a third country onto its own territory to reach the external border of the member states but can equally refer to the active encouragement or facilitation of irregular travel of third country nationals already present in that third country. instrumentalisation of migrants may also entail the imposition of coercive measures , intended to prevent the third country nationals from leaving the border areas of the instrumentalising third country , in a direction other than through a member state. ### (9) instrumentalisation of migrants can refer to situations where irregular travel of third country nationals has been encouraged , facilitated , assisted or enabled by a third country onto its own territory to reach the external border of the member states but can equally refer to the active encouragement or facilitation of irregular travel of third country nationals already present in that third country. instrumentalisation of migrants may also entail the imposition of coercive measures , intended to prevent the third country nationals from leaving the border areas of the instrumentalising third country , in a direction other than through a member state.


### (10) the union should mobilise all tools from its toolbox of diplomatic , financial and operational measures to support the member states confronted with instrumentalisation. diplomatic efforts by the union or the member state concerned , should be given priority as the means of addressing the phenomenon of instrumentalisation. this may be supplemented , where appropriate , by the imposition of restrictive measures by the union. ### (10) the union should mobilise all tools from its toolbox of diplomatic , financial and operational measures to support the member states confronted with instrumentalisation. diplomatic efforts by the union or the member state concerned , should be given priority as the means of addressing the phenomenon of instrumentalisation , including the facilitation of asylum processing and reception for those granted international protection in third country partner state reception centres. this may be supplemented , where appropriate , by the imposition of restrictive measures by the union.


### (11) at the same time , in addition to these measures , it is equally necessary to further reinforce the current rules in relation to external border controls and border surveillance. to further assist the member state facing an instrumentalisation of migrants , regulation (eu) xxx/xxx complements the rules on border control by providing for specific measures in the area of asylum and return , while respecting the fundamental rights the individuals concerned and in particular by ensuring the respect of the right to asylum and providing the necessary assistance by the un agencies and other relevant organisations. ### (11) at the same time , in addition to these measures , it is equally necessary to further reinforce the current rules in relation to external border controls and border surveillance. to further assist the member state facing an instrumentalisation of migrants , regulation (eu) xxx/xxx complements the rules on border control by providing for specific measures in the area of asylum and return.


### (12) in particular , in a situation of instrumentalisation , it should , where necessary , be possible for the member state concerned , to limit border traffic to the minimum by closing some border crossing points , while guaranteeing genuine and effective access to international protection procedures. any such decision should take into account whether the european council has acknowledged that the union or one or more of its member states are facing a situation of instrumentalisation of migrants. furthermore , any such limitations should take full account of the rights of union citizens , third country nationals who are beneficiaries of the right of free movement pursuant an international agreement and third-country nationals who are long-term residents under national or union law or are holders of long-term visas , as well as their respective family members. such limitations should also be applied in a manner that ensures respect for obligations related to access to international protection , in particular the principle of non-refoulement. ### (12) in particular , in a situation of instrumentalisation , it should be possible for the member state concerned , to limit border traffic entirely by closing all border crossing points.


### (15) moreover , in the event of instrumentalisation of migrants , the member state concerned should reinforce border control , including , as appropriate , through additional measures preventing illegal crossings and the deployment of additional resources and technical means to prevent unauthorised crossing of the border. such technical means could include modern technologies including drones and motion sensors , as well as mobile units. the use of such technical means , in particular , any technologies capable of collecting personal data , needs to be based on and exercised in accordance with clearly defined provisions of national law. ### (15) moreover , in the event of instrumentalisation of migrants , the member state concerned should reinforce border control , including , as appropriate , through additional measures preventing illegal crossings such as erecting physical border barriers and the deployment of additional resources and technical means to prevent unauthorised crossing of the border. such technical means could include modern technologies including drones and motion sensors , as well as mobile units. the use of such technical means should be exercised in accordance with national law.


### (16) the commission should be empowered to specify , in delegated acts adopted under this regulation , appropriate standards for border surveillance , concerning in particular the new technologies that member states may use , while taking into account the type of borders (land , sea or air) , the impact levels attributed to each external border section in accordance with article 34 of regulation (eu) 2019/1896 and other relevant factors , as a specific response to situations of instrumentalisation of migrants. ### (16) the council should be empowered to specify best practices for border surveillance , concerning in particular the new technologies that member states may use , while taking into account the type of borders (land , sea or air) , the impact levels attributed to each external border section and other relevant factors , as a specific response to situations of instrumentalisation of migrants.


### (16) the commission should be empowered to specify , in delegated acts adopted under this regulation , appropriate standards for border surveillance , concerning in particular the new technologies that member states may use , while taking into account the type of borders (land , sea or air) , the impact levels attributed to each external border section in accordance with article 34 of regulation (eu) 2019/1896 and other relevant factors , as a specific response to situations of instrumentalisation of migrants. ### (16) the council could recommend appropriate standards for border surveillance , concerning in particular the new technologies that member states may use , while taking into account the type of borders (land , sea or air) , the impact levels attributed to each external border section in accordance with article 34 of regulation (eu) 2019/1896 and other relevant factors , as a specific response to situations of instrumentalisation of migrants.


### (17) in an area without internal border controls , persons should be able to move freely , and in security between member states. in this regard , it should be clarified that the prohibition of controls at internal borders does not affect the competence of member states to carry out checks on their territory , including at their internal borders , for purposes other than border control. it should , in particular , be clarified that national competent authorities , including health or law enforcement authorities , remain , in principle , free to carry out checks in the exercise of public powers provided for under national law. ### (17) there shall be no prohibition of controls at internal borders and member states have competence to carry out checks on their territory , including at their internal borders , for purposes other than border control. it should , in particular , be clarified that national competent authorities , including health or law enforcement authorities , remain free to carry out checks in the exercise of public powers provided for under national law.


### (18) while the prohibition of internal border controls also extends to checks having equivalent effects , checks by competent authorities should not be considered equivalent to the exercise of border checks where they do not have border control as an objective , where they are based on general information and experience of the competent authorities regarding possible threats to public security or public policy , including where they aim to combat irregular stay or residence and cross-border crimes linked to irregular migration , where they are devised and executed in a manner clearly distinct from systematic checks on persons at the external borders , and where they are conducted at transport hubs , such as ports , train or bus stations and airports or directly on board of passenger transport services , and where they are based on risk analysis. ### (18) while internal border controls increase security and safety of citizens , checks by competent authorities should not be considered equivalent to the exercise of border checks where they do not have border control as an objective , where they are based on general information and experience of the competent authorities regarding possible threats to public security or public policy , including where they aim to combat illegal stay or residence and cross-border crimes linked to illegal migration and where they are conducted at transport hubs , such as ports , train or bus stations and airports or directly on board of passenger transport services.


### (18) while the prohibition of internal border controls also extends to checks having equivalent effects , checks by competent authorities should not be considered equivalent to the exercise of border checks where they do not have border control as an objective , where they are based on general information and experience of the competent authorities regarding possible threats to public security or public policy , including where they aim to combat irregular stay or residence and cross-border crimes linked to irregular migration , where they are devised and executed in a manner clearly distinct from systematic checks on persons at the external borders , and where they are conducted at transport hubs , such as ports , train or bus stations and airports or directly on board of passenger transport services , and where they are based on risk analysis. ### (18) while the prohibition of internal border controls also extends to checks having equivalent effects , checks by competent authorities should not be considered equivalent to the exercise of border checks where they do not have border control as an objective , where they are based on general information and experience of the competent authorities regarding possible threats to public security or public policy , including where they aim to combat illegal stay or residence and cross-border crimes linked to illegal migration , where they are devised and executed in a manner clearly distinct from systematic checks on persons at the external borders , and where they are conducted at transport hubs , such as ports , train or bus stations and airports or directly on board of passenger transport services , and where they are based on risk analysis.


### (19) while irregular migratory flows should not , per se , be considered to be a threat to public policy or internal security , they may require additional measures to ensure the functioning of the schengen area. ### (19) while illegal entry and migratory flows constitute a threat to public policy and internal security , they require additional measures such as enhanced controls on the internal border and internal identity checks on foreigners in member states.


### (20) the combatting of illegal residence or stay and of cross-border crime linked to irregular migration such as human trafficking , migrant smuggling and document fraud and other forms of cross-border crime could in particular encompass measures allowing the verification of the identity , nationality and residence status of persons provided that such verifications are non-systematic and carried out on the basis of risk analysis. ### (20) the combatting of illegal residence or stay and of cross-border crime linked to illegal migration such as human trafficking , migrant smuggling and document fraud and other forms of cross-border crime could in particular encompass measures allowing the verification of the identity , nationality and residence status of persons.


### (21) the use of modern technologies to monitor traffic flows , notably on motorways and other important roads determined by the member states , can be instrumental in addressing threats to public policy or internal security. the prohibition of internal border controls should not be understood as preventing the lawful exercise of police or other public powers to carry out checks in the internal border areas. this includes checks that entail the use of monitoring and surveillance technologies which are generally used in the territory or that are based on a risk assessment for the purpose of protecting internal security. the use of such technologies for checks should therefore not be considered as equivalent to border controls. ### (21) the use of modern technologies to monitor traffic flows , notably on motorways and other important roads determined by the member states , can be instrumental in addressing threats to public policy or internal security. there shall be nothing to prevent the exercise of police or other public powers to carry out checks in and beyond the internal border areas. this includes checks that entail the use of monitoring and surveillance technologies which are generally used in the territory or that serve the purpose of enhancing internal security. the use of such technologies for checks should therefore not be considered as equivalent to border controls.


### (23) the prohibition of border controls at internal borders should not limit the carrying out of checks provided for in other instruments of union law. the rules provided for in this regulation , should not therefore , affect the applicable rules regarding the carrying out of checks on passenger data against relevant databases in advance of arrival. ### (23) there should not be any limit to the carrying out of checks of documents , identification or other information required to verify a persons identity or right to stay in the territory of a member state.


### (24) it is necessary to ensure that checks carried out by member states in exercise of national competences remain fully consistent with an area that is free of internal border controls. in accordance with the case law of the court of justice , the more extensive the indications are that checks conducted by member states at their border areas have an equivalent effect to border control , having regard to the objective of such checks , their territorial scope and possible differences compared to checks carried out in the remainder of the territory of the member state concerned , the greater the need for strict and detailed rules and limitations laying down the conditions for the exercise , by the member states , of their police powers in a border area. ### (24) it is necessary to ensure that checks carried out by member states at their border areas have an equivalent effect to border control.


### (25) measures need to be taken to address unauthorised movements of illegally staying third country nationals in an area without internal border controls. in order to strengthen the functioning of the schengen area , member states should be able to take additional measures to counter irregular movements between member states , and combat illegal stays. where national law enforcement authorities of a member state apprehend illegally staying third country nationals at the internal borders as part of cross-border police operational cooperation it should be possible for those authorities to refuse such persons the right to enter or remain in their territory and to transfer them to the member state from which they entered. the member state from where the person came directly should in turn be required to receive the apprehended third country nationals. ### (25) measures need to be taken to address unauthorised movements of illegally staying third country nationals. in order to strengthen security and safety , member states should be able to take additional measures to counter illegal movements between member states , and combat illegal stays. where national law enforcement authorities of a member state apprehend illegally staying third country nationals it should be possible for those authorities to refuse such persons the right to enter or remain in their territory and to transfer them to the member state from which they entered. the member state from where the person came directly should in turn be required to receive the apprehended third country nationals.


### (26) the procedure by which a member state may transfer apprehended illegally staying third country nationals to a member state from where the person came directly should take place swiftly but be subject to safeguards and carried out in full respect of fundamental rights and the principle of non-discrimination enshrined in article 21 of the charter , to prevent racial profiling. it should be possible for the authorities to carry out a verification of relevant information immediately available to the authorities concerning the movements of the persons concerned. such information may include objective elements that would allow the authorities to conclude that the person had recently travelled from another member states , such as the possession of documents , including receipts or invoices , evidencing recent travel from another member state. third country nationals subject to the transfer procedure should be provided with a reasoned decision in writing. while the decision should be immediately enforceable , the third country national should be afforded an effective remedy to appeal against or seek review of the transfer decision. this remedy should not have suspensive effect. ### (26) the procedure by which a member state may transfer apprehended illegally staying third country nationals to a member state from where the person came directly should take place swiftly. it should be possible for the authorities to carry out a verification of relevant information immediately available to the authorities concerning the movements of the persons concerned. such information may include objective elements that would allow the authorities to conclude that the person had recently travelled from another member states , such as the possession of documents , including receipts or invoices , evidencing recent travel from another member state.


### (27) the transfer procedure provided for under this regulation should not affect the existing possibility for member states to return irregular third country nationals in accordance with bilateral agreements or arrangements referred to in article 6(3) of directive 2008/115/ec (the “return directive”) , where such persons are detected outside of the vicinity of internal borders. in order to facilitate the application of such agreements , and to complement the objective of protecting the area without internal borders , the member states should be afforded the possibility to conclude new agreements or arrangements and update existing ones. the commission should be notified of any such modifications or updates of new agreements or arrangements. where a member state has taken back a third country national under the procedure provided for in this regulation or on the basis of a bilateral agreement or arrangement , the member state concerned should be required to issue a return decision in accordance with the return directive. in order to ensure consistency between the new procedures provided for in this regulation and existing rules on the return of third country nationals , a targeted modification of article 6(3) of the return directive is therefore necessary. ### (27) the transfer procedure provided for under this regulation should not affect the existing possibility for member states to return third country nationals illegally having entered their territory in accordance with bilateral agreements or arrangements referred to in article 6(3) of directive 2008/115/ec (the “return directive”) , where such persons are detected outside of the vicinity of internal borders. in order to facilitate the application of such agreements , the member states should be afforded the possibility to conclude new agreements or arrangements and update existing ones. the commission should be notified of any such modifications or updates of new agreements or arrangements. where a member state has taken back a third country national under the procedure provided for in this regulation or on the basis of a bilateral agreement or arrangement , the member state concerned should be required to issue a return decision in accordance with the return directive. in order to ensure consistency between the new procedures provided for in this regulation and existing rules on the return of third country nationals , a targeted modification of article 6(3) of the return directive is therefore necessary.


### (28) in exceptional cases , addressing threats to the schengen area may require the adoption , by the member states , of measures at the internal borders. member states remain competent to determine the need for the temporary reintroduction or prolongation of border controls. under the existing rules , the reintroduction of controls at internal borders is provided for in circumstances where a serious threat to internal security or public policy manifests itself in a single member state for a limited period of time. in particular , terrorism and organised crime , large scale public health emergencies or large scale or high profile international events such as sporting , trade or political events can amount to a serious threat to public policy or internal security. ### (28) upholding public safety and security may require the adoption , by the member states , of measures at the internal borders. member states remain competent to determine the need for reintroduction or prolongation of border controls. the reintroduction or prolongation of controls at internal borders is ultimately a decision of the member states and does not require there to be a threat to internal security or public policy manifested at the time. in particular , terrorism and organised crime , large scale public health emergencies or large scale or high profile international events such as sporting , trade or political events amount to threats to public policy or internal security which may require additional measures at the internal borders.


### (29) furthermore , a serious threat to public policy or internal security can also result from large scale unauthorised movements of irregular migrants between the member states where this creates a situation putting a strain on the overall resources and capacities of the responsible national services , where the other means provided for under this regulation are not sufficient to address these inflows and movements. in this context , member states should be able to rely on objective and quantified reports on unauthorised movements whenever available , in particular , when produced on a regular basis by the competent union agencies in line with their respective mandates. it should be possible for a member state to use the information provided by the agencies to demonstrate the exceptional character of the identified threat caused by unauthorised movement in the risk assessment , in order to justify the reintroduction of internal border controls on this ground. ### (29) furthermore , a serious threat to public policy or internal security can also result from large scale unauthorised movements of illegal migrants between the member states where this creates a situation putting a strain on the overall resources and capacities of the responsible national services , where the other means provided for under this regulation are not sufficient to address these inflows and movements. in this context , member states should be able to rely on objective and quantified reports on unauthorised movements whenever available , in particular , when produced on a regular basis by the competent agencies in line with their respective mandates. it should be possible for a member state to use the information provided by national , regional , local or international agencies to demonstrate the exceptional character of the identified threat caused by unauthorised movement in the risk assessment , in order to justify the reintroduction of internal border controls on this ground , though no such justification shall be required.


### (30) while action at union level is provided for in circumstances where the nature of a threat derives from persistent serious deficiencies at the external borders , there is no union-wide mechanism that would apply to situations where , within the schengen area , a serious threat to internal security or public policy area is affecting a majority of member states , putting at risk the well-functioning of the schengen area. the gap should be filled by putting in place a new schengen area safeguard mechanism permitting coordinated solutions to protect the interests of persons entitled to benefit from the area without controls at internal borders , by maximising the effectiveness of the measures taken while minimising their negative side-effects. ### deleted


### (31) the new schengen area safeguard mechanism should allow the council to adopt , upon a proposal by the commission , a decision authorising the reintroduction or prolongation of internal border controls , where this is justified by a particular threat , identified on the basis of notifications received from individual member states , or other available information , in particular a risk assessment , in case of prolongation of internal border controls beyond six months. given the politically sensitive nature of such a decision which regulates the possibility for member states to reintroduce or prolong internal border control in particular circumstances , implementing powers to adopt a decision should be conferred on the council , acting on a proposal from the commission. ### (31) no new schengen area safeguard mechanism is required for the member states to adopt a decision authorising the reintroduction or prolongation of internal border controls. no justification by a particular threat is required for member states to prolong internal border controls. given the politically sensitive nature of such a decision the commission shall refrain from comment on decisions to reintroduce or prolong internal border controls.


### (32) in determining whether a reintroduction or prolongation of internal border controls by the member states is justified , the council should take into account whether any other measures that could ensure a high level of security within the territory , such as reinforced checks in the internal border areas by the competent authorities , are available. in the event that a prolongation of the controls is not considered justified , the commission should , instead , recommend the use of other measures deemed more appropriate to address the identified threat. ### (32) the member states shall be responsible for determining whether a reintroduction or prolongation of internal border controls is warranted.


### (33) the establishment of the new schengen area safeguard mechanism should not affect the right of member states to have prior recourse to unilateral measures in accordance with the regulation , where the situation so requires. however , once adopted , the union measure should become the single basis for a coordinated response to the threat identified. ### (33) the establishment of any new mechanism or provision should not affect the right of member states to take unilateral measures.


### (34) in order to ensure compliance with the principle of proportionality , the decision of the council should be adopted for a limited period of time of up to six months that may be prolonged subject to regular review upon a proposal from the commission , as long as the threat is found to persist. the initial decision should include an assessment of the expected impact of the measures adopted , including its adverse side-effects , with a view to determining if controls at internal borders are justified or whether less restrictive measures could be applied in their place in an effective manner. subsequent decisions should take account of the evolution of the identified threat. the member states should immediately notify the commission and the member states of the reintroduction of internal border controls in accordance with the decision of the council. ### (34) in order to ensure compliance with the principle of member state sovereignty , the decision of the council should be adopted for an unlimited period of time. the member states can notify the commission and the member states of the reintroduction of internal border controls.


### (35) reintroduction of internal border controls should also remain possible where serious deficiencies in the management of the external borders persist , putting at risk the overall functioning of the area without internal border control. periods where the border controls were introduced by member states because the urgency of the situation required it or where the council takes a decision to recommend the reintroduction because a threat affects a significant number of member states , should not be included in the two years’ period applicable to reintroductions based on serious deficiencies at the external borders. ### (35) sovereign states have the right to reintroduce border controls if they deem such action necessary.


### (36) the reintroduction of border controls at internal borders , whether on the basis of unilateral decisions of the member states or at a union level , has serious implications for the functioning of the schengen area. in order to ensure that any decision to reintroduce border controls is only taken where necessary , as a measure of last resort , the decision on temporary reintroduction or prolongation of border controls should be based on common criteria , putting an emphasis on necessity and proportionality. the proportionality principle requires that the reintroduction of internal border controls be subject to safeguards that increase over time. ### (36) the reintroduction of border controls at internal borders , whether on the basis of unilateral decisions of the member states or at a union level , has implications for the free movement within the schengen area.


### (37) in the first instance , member states should assess the appropriateness of internal border controls having regard to the nature of the serious threat identified. in this context , the member states should pay particular attention to and assess the likely impact of internal border controls on the movement of persons within the area without internal border controls and the functioning of the cross-border regions. this assessment should be part of the notification that member states are required to transmit to the commission. in case of prolongation of internal border controls for foreseeable events beyond an initial period of six months , the member state should also assess the appropriateness of alternative measures to pursue the same objectives as internal border controls , such as proportionate checks as carried out in the exercise of police or other public powers or through forms of police cooperation as provided for under union law , and the possibility to use the transfer procedure. ### (37) member states should consider the effects of reintroduced internal border controls having regard to the nature of the serious threat identified.


### (38) in order to limit harmful consequences resulting from the reintroduction of internal border controls , any decision to reintroduce internal border controls should be accompanied by mitigating measures if needed. such measures should include measures to assure a smooth operation of transit of goods and transport personnel and seafarers by the establishment of ‘green lanes’. in addition , and to take account of the need to ensure the movement of persons whose activities may be essential for preserving the supply chain or the provision of essential services , member states should also apply the existing guidelines on cross-border workers45 . against this background , the rules for the reintroduction of border controls at internal borders should take account of the guidelines and recommendations adopted throughout the covid-19 pandemic as a solid safety net for the single market , for the purpose of assuring that they are applied by the member states , where appropriate , as mitigating measures during reintroduced internal border controls. measures should in particular be identified with a view to ensuring the uninterrupted functioning of the single market and safeguarding the interests of cross-border regions and of ‘twin cities’ including for instance authorisations or derogations for the inhabitants of cross-border regions. ### (38) in order to assess the effect of the reintroduction of internal border controls , any decision to reintroduce internal border controls should be accompanied by data collection and analysis which should be shared with the member states and the commission. such assessments should also include measurement of the positive effects in the fight against cross border crime.


### (39) the notification to be provided by the member states should be decisive when assessing compliance with the criteria and conditions for a temporary reintroduction of internal border controls. in order to ensure a comparable set of information , the commission should adopt a template for the notification of reintroduction of border controls at internal borders in an implementing act. member states should be entitled to classify all or parts of the information provided in the notification , without prejudice to the functioning of appropriate and secure police cooperation channels. ### (39) the notification member states can provide when reintroducing internal border controls should outline both expected positive and possible negative effects of the decision. in order to ensure a comparable set of information , the council can adopt a template for the notification of reintroduction of border controls at internal borders by way of a council implementing decision. member states should be entitled to classify all or parts of the information provided in the notification , without prejudice to the functioning of appropriate and secure police cooperation channels.


### (40) in order to ensure that internal border controls are truly a last resort measure applied only for as long as necessary and in order to allow for assessing the necessity and proportionality of internal border controls to address foreseeable threats , member states should prepare a risk assessment to be submitted to the commission when internal border controls are prolonged beyond an initial six months in response to foreseeable threats. the member states must in particular , explain , the scale and evolution of the identified serious threat , including how long the identified serious threat is expected to persist and which sections of the internal borders may be affected , as well as their coordination measures with the other member states that are impacted or likely to be impacted by such measures. ### (40) in order to ensure that internal border controls are treated as a proportional measure to address foreseeable threats , member states are welcome to share with the council and commission an assessment outlining why internal border controls are prolonged or reintroduced as well as the scale and evolution of any identified threat and whether all or only some sections of the borders may be affected , as well as their coordination measures with the other member states that are impacted or likely to be impacted by such measures.


### (41) the commission should be entitled to request additional information based on the notification received , including on the risk assessment or cooperation and coordination measures with the member states affected by the planned prolongation of border control at internal borders. where the notification does not comply with the minimum requirements , the commission should discuss the notification with the member state concerned and request additional information or a resubmission of the notification. ### (41) the commission can request additional information on cooperation and coordination measures with the member states affected by the prolongation or reintroduction of border control at internal borders.


### (42) in order to ensure a sufficient degree of transparency of the actions affecting travel without internal border controls , the member states should also inform the european parliament and the council about the main elements concerning the planned reintroduction of border controls. in justified cases , member states may also classify such information. every year , pursuant to article 33 of the schengen borders code , the commission should present to the european parliament and to the council a report on the functioning of the area without internal border control (‘state of schengen report’) which should pay particular attention to the situation as regards the unauthorised movements of third country nationals , building on the available information from the relevant agencies and data analysis from relevant information systems. it should also assess the necessity and proportionality of the reintroductions of border controls in the period covered by that report. the state of schengen report shall also cover the reporting obligations resulting from article 20 of the schengen evaluation mechanism46 . ### (42) in order to ensure a sufficient degree of transparency of measures affecting movement between member states the council should be informed about the main elements concerning the reintroduction or prolongation of border controls. in justified cases , member states may also classify such information. every year , pursuant to article 33 of the schengen borders code , the commission should present to the european parliament and to the council a report on the functioning of the area without internal border control (‘state of schengen report’) which should pay particular attention to secondary movements and the general situation as regards the unauthorised movements of third country nationals , building on the available information from the relevant national , regional , local or international agencies and data analysis from relevant information systems. it should not assess the necessity and proportionality of the reintroductions of border controls as these are decisions of sovereign member states. the state of schengen report shall also cover positive effects on the fight against cross border crime of reintroduced or prolonged border controls.


### (43) the mechanism for the temporary reintroduction of border controls at internal borders in urgent situations or to address foreseeable threats should provide for a possibility , for the commission , to organise consultations between member states , including at the request of any member state. relevant union agencies should be involved in this process in order to share their expertise , where appropriate. such consultations should look into the modalities of carrying out internal border controls and their time-line , possible mitigating measures as well as the possibilities of applying alternative measures instead. where the commission or a member state has issued an opinion expressing concerns regarding the reintroduction of border controls , such consultations should be mandatory. ### (43) the reintroduction of border controls at internal borders should be accompanied by consultations between member states and when appropriate , the commission. relevant agencies could be involved in this process in order to share their expertise , where appropriate.


### (44) the commission and member states should retain the possibility to express any concern as regards the necessity and proportionality of a decision of a member state to reintroduce internal border controls for reason of urgency or to address a foreseeable threat. in case controls at internal borders are reintroduced and prolonged for foreseeable threats for combined periods exceeding eighteen months , it should be a requirement for the commission to issue an opinion assessing the necessity and proportionality of such internal border controls. where a member state considers that there are exceptional situations justifying the continued need for internal border controls for a period exceeding two years , the commission should issue a follow-up opinion. such an opinion is without prejudice to the enforcement measures , including infringement actions , which the commission may take at any time against any member state for failure to comply with its obligations under union law. where an opinion is issued , the commission should launch consultations with the member states concerned. ### (44) member states should retain the possibility to express any concern as regards the necessity and proportionality of a decision of a member state to reintroduce or prolong internal border controls.


### (44) the commission and member states should retain the possibility to express any concern as regards the necessity and proportionality of a decision of a member state to reintroduce internal border controls for reason of urgency or to address a foreseeable threat. in case controls at internal borders are reintroduced and prolonged for foreseeable threats for combined periods exceeding eighteen months , it should be a requirement for the commission to issue an opinion assessing the necessity and proportionality of such internal border controls. where a member state considers that there are exceptional situations justifying the continued need for internal border controls for a period exceeding two years , the commission should issue a follow-up opinion. such an opinion is without prejudice to the enforcement measures , including infringement actions , which the commission may take at any time against any member state for failure to comply with its obligations under union law. where an opinion is issued , the commission should launch consultations with the member states concerned. ### (44) the commission and member states should retain the possibility to express any concern as regards the necessity and proportionality of a decision of a member state to reintroduce internal border controls for reason of urgency or to address a foreseeable threat. in case controls at internal borders are reintroduced and prolonged for foreseeable threats for combined periods exceeding 36 months , it should be a requirement for the commission to issue an opinion assessing the necessity and proportionality of such internal border controls. where a member state considers that there are exceptional situations justifying the continued need for internal border controls for a period exceeding six years , the commission should issue a follow-up opinion. such an opinion is without prejudice to the enforcement measures , which the commission may take at any time against any member state for failure to comply with its obligations under union law. where an opinion is issued , the commission should launch consultations with the member states concerned.


### (45) in order to enable the post factum analysis of the decision on the temporary reintroduction of border controls at the internal borders , member states should remain obliged to submit a report on the reintroduction of border control at internal borders to the european parliament , the council and the commission once they lift the controls. where the controls are kept in place for prolonged periods of time , such a report should also be submitted after twelve months , and every year thereafter if exceptionally controls are maintained and for as long as the controls are maintained. the report should outline , in particular , the initial and follow-up assessment of the necessity of internal border controls and the respect of the criteria for reintroduction of border controls at internal borders. the commission should adopt in an implementing act a template and make it available online. ### deleted


### (46) when implementing this regulation , member states shall not discriminate against persons on grounds of sex , racial or ethnic origin , religion or belief , disability , age or sexual orientation. ### (46) when implementing this regulation , member states shall be empowered to make decisions enhancing their security interests and safety of citizens.


### (47) the competent authorities shall use their powers to carry out checks within the territory and apply relevant procedures in full respect of the rules on data protection under union law. regulation (eu) 2016/679 of the european parliament and of the council or directive (eu) 2016/680 of the european parliament and of the council apply to the processing of personal data by competent national authorities for the purposes of this regulation , in their respective field of application. ### (47) the competent authorities shall use their powers to carry out checks within the territory and apply relevant national procedures in full respect of national rules on data protection in their respective field of application.


### (48) the objective of this regulation is to strengthen the functioning of the schengen area. this objective cannot be achieved by member states acting alone. therefore , an amendment of the common rules established at union level is necessary. thus , the union may adopt measures , in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in article 5 of the treaty on european union. in accordance with the principle of proportionality , as set out in that article , this regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives. ### (48) the objective of this regulation is to strengthen security and safety of citizens by enhancing the functioning of the schengen area. this objective can be achieved by member states acting alone , however , sincere cooperation and coordination has added value for all parties.


### (49) in accordance with articles 1 and 2 of the protocol no 22 on the position of denmark , as annexed to the treaty on european union and to the treaty on the functioning of the european union , denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application. given that this regulation builds upon the schengen acquis , denmark shall , in accordance with article 4 of that protocol , decide within a period of six months after the council has decided on this regulation whether it will implement it in its national law. ### (49) in accordance with articles 1 and 2 of the protocol no 22 on the position of denmark , as annexed to the treaty on european union and to the treaty on the functioning of the european union , denmark and any other member state with an opt-out from the justice and home affairs pillar is not taking part in the adoption of this regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application. given that this regulation builds upon the schengen acquis , denmark and any other member state with an opt-out from the justice and home affairs pillar shall decide within a period of six months after the council has decided on this regulation whether it will implement it in its national law.


### (54) this regulation is without prejudice to the application of directive 2004/38/ec55 . ### deleted