### (2) regulation (eu) 2016/399 of the european parliament and of the council of 9 march 2016 (“schengen borders code”)42 lays down rules governing the movement of persons to and from the area without controls at internal borders (the “schengen area”) as well as between the member states that participate in the schengen area. ### (2) regulation (eu) 2016/399 of the european parliament and of the council of 9 march 2016 (“schengen borders code”)42 provides for the absence of border control of persons crossing the internal borders between the member states of the union. it lays down rules governing border control of persons crossing the external borders of the member states of the union.


### (3) in recent years , the schengen area has been subject to unprecedented challenges , which by their nature were not confined to the territory of any single member state. such challenges underscored the fact that the preservation of public order and security in the schengen area is a shared responsibility requiring joined and coordinated action between member states and at union level. they also highlighted gaps in the existing rules governing the functioning of the schengen area both at external and internal borders and the need to create a stronger and more robust framework allowing for a more effective response to challenges faced by the schengen area. ### (3) in recent years , several member states have , in various occasions , reintroduced border controls at the internal borders , often in an uncoordinated manner , undermining the essence of the schengen area. such circumstance underscored the need to provide a more robust framework allowing to enforce the rules governing the functioning of the schengen area.


### (4) border control at external borders is in the interest not only of the member state at whose external borders it is carried out but of all member states which have abolished internal border control and the union as a whole. member states are required to ensure high standards in management of their external borders , including through enhanced cooperation between border guards , police , customs and other relevant authorities. the union provides active support through the provision of financing support by the agencies , the european border and coast guard in particular and management of the schengen evaluation mechanism. the rules applicable to external borders need to be reinforced in order to better respond to new challenges that have recently emerged at the external borders. ### (4) border control at external borders is in the interest not only of the member state at whose external borders it is carried out but of the union as a whole and of all its all member states , and in particular those which have abolished internal border control. member states are required to ensure high standards in management of their external borders , including through enhanced cooperation between border guards , police , customs and other relevant authorities. the union provides active support in accomplishing this goal.


### (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 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 to the covid-19 pandemic , 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. 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


### (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 mechanism should provide for the adoption by the council , upon a proposal by the commission , and after having consulted the european parliament , 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 , and after having consulted the european parliament.


### (7) importantly , in line with the applicable obligations under union and international law , union citizens and third-country nationals who , under agreements between the union and its member states , on the one hand , and those third countries , on the other hand , enjoy rights of free movement equivalent to those of union citizens , as well as their respective family members should always be permitted to enter the union. residents in the union should also always be permitted to return to the union. the act should contain all necessary elements to ensure that restrictions on travel are effective , targeted , non-discriminatory and proportionate to the evolving epidemiological situation. it should specify , where relevant , any categories of travellers whose travel should be exempted from restrictions on entry. in addition , or alternatively , the act should specify any geographical areas or third countries from which travel may be subject to specific measures , based on an objective methodology and criteria applicable thereto that should include , in particular , the epidemiological situation. the act could specify the conditions under which travel may be permitted such as testing , quarantine , self-isolation or any other appropriate measures , such as the need to fill in a passenger locator form or other contact tracing tool and having regard , in particular , to any union systems developed to facilitate travel under safe conditions , such as digital certification systems. where appropriate , the instrument could also set up a mechanism allowing to take additional measures in case the epidemiological situation dramatically worsens in one or more geographical areas. ### (7) importantly , in line with the applicable obligations under union and international law , union citizens and third-country nationals who , under agreements between the union and its member states , on the one hand , and those third countries , on the other hand , enjoy rights of free movement equivalent to those of union citizens , as well as their respective family members should always be permitted to enter the union. residents in the union should also always be permitted to return to the union as well as refugees , persons with subsidiary or temporary protection and persons requesting international protection. the act should contain all necessary elements to ensure that restrictions on travel are effective , targeted , non-discriminatory and proportionate to the evolving epidemiological situation. it should specify , where relevant , any categories of travellers whose travel should be exempted from restrictions on entry. in addition , or alternatively , the act should specify any geographical areas or third countries from which travel may be subject to specific measures , based on an objective methodology and criteria applicable thereto taking into account , in particular , the epidemiological situation. the act could specify the conditions under which travel may be permitted such as testing , quarantine , self-isolation or any other appropriate measures , such as the need to fill in a passenger locator form or other contact tracing tool and having regard , in particular , to any union systems developed to facilitate travel under safe conditions , such as digital certification systems.


### (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. ### deleted


### (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. ### deleted


### (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. ### deleted


### (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. ### deleted


### (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. ### deleted


### (13) the european border and coast guard agency assists member states with implementing the operational aspects of external border management , including information exchange , the provision of equipment , capacity building and training to national border guards , targeted information and risk analysis , as well as the deployment of the standing corps. the agency’s new mandate offers considerable opportunities to support border control activities , including screening and return operations and a launch of rapid border intervention and/or return intervention at the request and on the territory of the host member state concerned. ### (13) the european border and coast guard agency assists member states with implementing the operational aspects of external border management , including information exchange , the provision of equipment , capacity building and training to national border guards , targeted information and risk analysis , the deployment of the standing corps as well as assistance in search and rescue operations for persons in distress at sea. the agency should implement all the tools offered by the new mandate to ensure that these activities are conducted in full compliance with the union acquis on fundamental rights and the relevant international obligations.


### (14) by virtue of article 41(1) of regulation (eu) 2019/1896 , the executive director of the european border and coast guard agency is required to recommend to a member state that it request the agency to initiate , carry out or adjust the agency’s support , in order to address identified threats and challenges at the external borders , where the conditions laid down in that provision are met. in particular , the need for agency support may become apparent in situations where the european border and coast guard agency has carried out a dedicated vulnerability assessment in connection with the instrumentalisation of migrants. on the basis of the results of such a vulnerability assessment or where a critical impact level is attributed to one or more external border sections and taking into account the relevant elements in the member state's contingency plans , the agency's risk analysis and the analysis layer of the european situational picture , the executive director should recommend to the member state concerned to request that the agency initiate , carry out or adjust the agency’s support in accordance with article 41(1) of regulation (eu) 2019/1896. this competence of the executive director is without prejudice to the general support that the agency may be providing to the member states. ### (14) by virtue of article 41(1) of regulation (eu) 2019/1896 , on the basis of the results of the vulnerability assessment or where a critical impact level is attributed to one or more external border sections and taking into account the relevant elements in the member state's contingency plans , the agency's risk analysis and the analysis layer of the european situational picture , the executive director should recommend to the member state concerned to request that the agency initiate , carry out or adjust the agency’s support. this competence of the executive director is without prejudice to the general support that the agency may be providing to the member states.


### (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. ### deleted


### (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 commission should be empowered to specify , in delegated acts adopted under this regulation , appropriate standards for border surveillance , concerning in particular the 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 , in full compliance with the union acquis on data protection and the regulatory framework related to the use of artificial intelligence.


### (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) 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 health or law enforcement authorities , remain , in principle , entitled to carry out checks in the exercise of public powers provided for under national law , provided that the effect of those powers is not equivalent to internal border control and that the exercise of these powers does not lead , directly or indirectly , to any form of discrimination.


### (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 law enforcement 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 specific and substantiated police information and experience of these authorities regarding possible threats to public security , 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) migration and the crossing of external borders by a large number of third-country nationals should not , per se , be considered to be a threat to public policy or internal security.


### (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. ### deleted


### (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 prohibition of internal border controls should not be understood as preventing the lawful exercise of police 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 , such as technologies used to monitor the traffic flows , 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.


### (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. ### deleted


### (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. ### deleted


### (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. ### deleted


### (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. ### deleted


### (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) in exceptional cases , addressing identified 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. however , considering the impact that the reintroduction of border controls at internal borders might have on freedom of movement and other fundamental rights , it shall represent an exceptional measure of last resort to be duly assessed in advance. any decision to reintroduce such control should be taken in accordance with commonly agreed criteria and should be duly notified to the commission or be recommended by a union institution.


### (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. ### deleted


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


### (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) the new schengen area safeguard mechanism should allow the council to adopt , upon a proposal by the commission , and after having consulted the european parliament , 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. 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 , and after having consulted the european parliament.


### (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) in determining whether a reintroduction or prolongation of internal border controls by the member states is justified , the commission should first assess whether the measure is appropriate , necessary and proportionate to address the identified threat. 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 , as well as the immediate lifting of those controls.


### (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 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 , up to a maximum period of two years in exceptional cases. 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 should 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 , the european parliament and the member states of the reintroduction of internal border controls in accordance with the decision of the council.


### (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) 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.


### (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 serious implications for the functioning of the schengen area as well as for the rights of individuals. in order to ensure that any decision to reintroduce border controls is only taken where necessary , as a measure of last resort , the decision on temporary reintroduction or prolongation of border controls should be based on common criteria and on a thorough assessment , 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.


### (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) in order to ensure that internal border controls are truly a last resort measure , member states should assess the appropriateness of internal border controls having regard to the nature of the serious threat identified and the ability of such measure to adequately remedy the identified threat. member state should also assess the proportionality of internal border controls and evaluate whether alterative measures could be more appropriate to remedy the threat. in this context , the member states should pay particular attention to the likely impact of internal border controls on the movement of persons within the area without internal border controls , on the right to seek asylum and the principle of non-refoulement , on the principle of non-discrimination and the functioning of the cross-border regions. this assessment should be part of the notification that member states are required to transmit to the commission , the european parliament and the other member states. in case of prolongation of internal border controls for foreseeable events beyond an initial period of three months , the member state should make a further risk assessment , reassessing the appropriateness , necessity and proportionality of this measure , and 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.


### (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 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. member states should also take into account the impact of the measures on families and the right to family life as protected under eu law.


### (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 and the preliminary assessment 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. 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 and without prejudice to the information being made available by the commission to the european parliament.


### (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. ### deleted


### (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 level of supervision , transparency and accountability with regards to the actions taken by member states affecting travel without internal border controls , the member states should provide detailed information to the european parliament and the council 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 list all the decisions to reintroduce border control at internal borders and assess the necessity and proportionality of the reintroductions of border controls in the period covered by that report. the report should also include all the decisions and actions taken by the commission with regard to the reintroduction or prolongation of border controls. the state of schengen report shall also cover the reporting obligations resulting from article 25 of regulation (eu) 2022/922.


### (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 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. the european parliament and 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 , the appropriateness , necessity and proportionality of internal border controls and their impact 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.


### (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 six months , it should be a requirement for the commission to issue an opinion assessing the necessity and proportionality of such internal border controls. such an opinion is without prejudice to the enforcement measures , including infringement actions , which the commission is required to take at any time against any member state for failure to comply with its obligations under union law.


### (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. ### (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 prolonged , such a report should also be submitted after any prolongation. the report should outline , in particular , the initial and follow-up assessment of the necessity and proportionality 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.


### (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 not categorise people based on racial , ethnic , national or religious characteristics , and not discriminate against persons on grounds of sex , racial or ethnic origin , religion or belief , disability , age or sexual orientation. in line with the european union’s commitments under the eu anti-racism action plan , member states should adopt national action plans against racism which include concrete provisions aimed at countering discrimination by law enforcement authorities , including by providing for effective remedies for victims of racial profiling.


### (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 authorities referred to in this regulation shall fully respect the rules on data protection under union law in all their activities. 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.


### (56) regulation (eu) no 2016/399 and directive 2008/115/ec should therefore be amended accordingly , ### (56) regulation (eu) no 2016/399 should therefore be amended accordingly ,


### proposal for a regulation of the european parliament and of the council amending regulation (eu) 2019/816 establishing a centralised system for the identification of member states holding conviction information on third-country nationals and stateless persons (ecris-tcn) to supplement the european criminal records information system and regulation (eu) 2019/818 on establishing a framework for interoperability between eu information systems in the field of police and judicial cooperation , asylum and migration and amending regulations (eu) 2018/1726 , (eu) 2018/1862 and (eu) 2019/816 for the purpose of introducing a screening of third country nationals at the external borders ### proposal for a regulation of the european parliament and of the council amending regulation (eu) 2019/818 on establishing a framework for interoperability between eu information systems in the field of police and judicial cooperation , asylum and migration and amending regulations (eu) 2018/1726 , (eu) 2018/1862 and (eu) 2019/816 for the purpose of introducing a screening of third country nationals at the external borders


### (1) regulation (eu) …/… [regulation on screening]15 provides for identity , security and health checks of third country nationals who are at the external border without fulfilling the entry conditions or who are apprehended within the territory , and where there are no indications that they have been subject to controls at external borders. regulation (eu) …/… [regulation on screening]16 addresses the challenges of managing mixed flows of migrants and creates uniform rules allowing for a quick identification of third country nationals and referral to the applicable procedures. ### (1) regulation (eu) …/… [regulation on screening] provides for identity , security and health and vulnerability checks of third country nationals who have crossed the external border in an irregular manner , of those who have applied for international protection during border checks without fulfilling entry conditions , as well as of those disembarked after a search and rescue operation.


### (2) the regulation (eu) …/… [regulation on screening]17 provides that verifications for security purposes in the framework of the screening should be carried out against the same systems as for applicants for visas or for travel authorisations under the european travel information and authorisation system. in particular , regulation (eu) …/… [regulation on screening]18 provides that the personal data of the persons submitted to the screening should be checked against europol data , interpol stolen and lost travel documents database (sltd) and interpol travel documents associated with notices database (tdawn) , as well as the european criminal records information system for third country nationals (ecris-tcn) as regards persons convicted in relation to terrorist offences and other forms of serious criminal offences. ### deleted


### (3) access to the ecris-tcn is necessary for the authorities designated to carry out the screening provided for in regulation (eu) …/… [regulation on screening]19 in order to establish whether a person could pose a threat to internal security or to public policy. ### deleted


### (4) regulation (eu) …/… [regulation on screening]20 , which constitutes a development of the schengen acquis regarding borders , amends regulations (ec) no 767/200821 , (eu) 2017/222622 , (eu) 2018/124023 and (eu) 2019/81724 , which likewise constitute developments of the schengen acquis regarding borders , to grant access rights for the purposes of the screening to the data contained in the visa information system (vis) , to the entry-exit system (ees) and to european travel information and authorisation system (etias) respectively. however , the parallel amendment of regulation (eu) no 2019/816 to grant access rights for the purposes of the screening to ecris-tcn could not be part of the same regulation for reasons of variable geometry , as the regulation establishing ecris-tcn does not constitute a development of the schengen acquis. regulation 2019/816 should therefore be amended by a distinct legal instrument. ### deleted


### (5) since the objective of this regulation , namely to enable access to the ecris-tcn for the purposes of the security checks established by regulation (eu) …/… [regulation on screening]25 , which in turn aims at the strengthening of the control of persons who are about to enter the schengen area and their referral to the appropriate procedures , cannot be sufficiently achieved by the member states , but can only be achieved at union level , 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 to achieve that objective. ### deleted


### (6) regulation (eu) …/… [regulation on screening]26 provides for specific rules concerning the identification of third-country nationals by means of consulting the common identity repository (cir) established by regulations (eu) 2019/817 and (eu) 2019/818 of the european parliament and of the council in order to facilitate and assist in the correct identification of persons registered in ees , vis , etias , eurodac and ecris-tcn , including of unknown persons who are unable to identify themselves. ### (6) regulation (eu) …/… [regulation on screening]26 provides for specific rules concerning the identification of third-country nationals by means of consulting the common identity repository (cir) established by regulations (eu) 2019/817 and (eu) 2019/818 of the european parliament and of the council.


### 1. in article 1 , the following point (e) is added: ### deleted


### 2. article 2 is replaced by the following: ### deleted


### 3. in article 3 , point 6 is replaced by the following: ### deleted


### 4. article 5 is amended as follows: ### deleted


### 5. in article 7 , paragraph 7 is replaced by the following: ### deleted


### 6. the following article 7a is inserted after article 7: ### deleted


### 7. in article 24 , paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: ### deleted


### 1. queries of the cir shall be carried out by the designated competent authority as referred to in article 6(7) of regulation (eu) …/… [regulation on screening] , solely for the purpose of verifying or establishing the identity of a person according to article 10 of that regulation , provided that the procedure was initiated in the presence of that person. ### 1. queries of the cir shall be carried out by the designated competent authority as referred to in article 6(7) of regulation (eu) …/… [regulation on screening] , solely for the purpose of verifying the identity of a person according to article 10 of that regulation , provided that the procedure was initiated in the presence of that person.


### 1. welcomes the fact that the court of auditors (the ‘court’) has declared the transactions underlying the annual accounts of the fundamental rights agency (‘fra’) for the financial year 2019 to be legal and regular in all material respects; welcomes the fact that the budget of fra increased from eur 29 million in 2019 to eur 30 million in 2020 returning to the state of 2018; regrets the staff decrease from 114 to 105 (-7.9%) during the same time; ### 1. welcomes the fact that the court of auditors (the ‘court’) has declared the transactions underlying the annual accounts of the fundamental rights agency (‘fra’) for the financial year 2020 to be legal and regular in all material respects; welcomes the fact that the budget of fra increased from eur 29 million in 2019 to eur 30 million in 2020 but deplores that this amount is just a return to the state of 2018; deeply regrets the staff decrease from 114 to 105 (-7.9%) during the same time; repeats its concern that fra continues to suffer from financial and staff resources constraints; highlights that without adequate financial and staff resources , fra will not be able to carry out all the tasks assigned to it and fully implement its new mandate; reminds that this can affect the quality of work that fra provides which has proved to be extremely valuable for union policy;


### 4. notes with satisfaction that fra responded to the covid-19 pandemic by publishing six bulletins , which provided a timely and comprehensive overview of the fundamental rights implications of national measures adopted across the union to safeguard citizens from the covid-19; ### 4. notes with satisfaction that fra responded to the covid-19 pandemic by publishing six bulletins , which provided a timely and comprehensive overview of the fundamental rights implications of national measures adopted across the union to safeguard citizens from the covid-19; recalls , however , that this additional task was not accompanied with additional resources and that , by then , fra was already suffering from human and financial resources constraints from previous years;


### 5. welcomes the extension of fra’s fundamental rights advice to other union agencies , especially in assisting the european border and coast guard agency (‘frontex’) with the deployment of 40 fundamental rights monitors across its operations. ### 5. welcomes the extension of fra’s fundamental rights advice to other union agencies , especially in assisting the european border and coast guard agency (‘frontex’) with completing the recruitment of the 40 fundamental rights monitors across its operations and with preparing the legal and operational framework for their deployment to the field; considers that other agencies whose competences are being extended , such as europol , could be usefully assisted by the fra; points out that missions of assistance require extra-resources;


### 2. welcomes the downward trend in the number of interim workers compared to the total number of staff; highlights that one of the reasons underlying the dependency on interim staff was also the delay of the adoption and entry into force of the regulation establishing a european union agency for asylum (the ‘regulation’); welcomes that an agreement has been reached in this regard and that the new legal framework will allow the new agency to employ remunerated experts; underlines that in order to decrease this dependency , the office carried out an active dialogue with the commission; regrets that only short term solutions could be identified and that the office was allowed to employ 58 contractual agents in 2020 only for a period of one year , until the envisaged adoption of the regulation; notes however , that due to the delay in the adoption of the regulation , the office found itself in a difficult situation , as the agreement did not allow it to extend these contracts until the entry into force of the new legal framework; notes with regret a serious lack of foresight on behalf of the commission when designing and allocating these posts to the office; underlines that the situation created had a negative impact on the recruitment capabilities and activities of the office; ### 2. welcomes the downward trend in the number of interim workers compared to the total number of staff; highlights that some of the reasons underlying the dependency on interim staff was the lack of compliance by member states with their obligations concerning the number of national experts made available to the office , and also the delay of the adoption and entry into force of the regulation establishing a european union agency for asylum (the ‘regulation’); welcomes that an agreement has been reached in this regard and that the new legal framework will allow the new agency to employ remunerated experts; notes with regret the delay in entering into force the new provisions regarding the protection of fundamental rights in particular , including a new complaints mechanism , a new code of conduct , as well as a fundamental rights strategy; underlines that in order to decrease its dependency on interim staff , the office carried out an active dialogue with the commission; regrets that only short term solutions could be identified and that the office was allowed to employ 58 contractual agents in 2020 only for a period of one year , until the envisaged adoption of the regulation; notes however , that due to the delay in the adoption of the regulation , the office found itself in a difficult situation , as the agreement did not allow it to extend these contracts until the entry into force of the new legal framework; notes with regret a serious lack of foresight on behalf of the commission when designing and allocating these posts to the office; underlines that the situation created had a negative impact on the recruitment capabilities and the ability of the office to adequately support member states , ultimately to the detriment of asylum-seekers and refugees who faced prolonged procedures and inadequate reception conditions;


### 2. notes that budget monitoring efforts during the financial year 2020 resulted in a budget implementation rate of 95 ,14 % , at approximately the same level as 2019 (95 ,22 %); notes that the payment appropriations execution rate was at 80 ,91 % , representing a decrease of 8 ,95 % compared to the previous year (89 ,86 %); ### 2. notes that budget monitoring efforts during the financial year 2020 resulted in a budget implementation rate of 95 ,14 % , at approximately the same level as 2019 (95 ,22 %); notes with concern that the payment appropriations execution rate was at 80 ,91 % , which the court deems as low , representing a decrease of 8 ,95 % compared to the previous year (89 ,86 %); notes with concern the court’s conclusion that the carry-overs of committed appropriations for operating expenditure were high , at 33 ,8 % , and that the cancellation rate of budget appropriations carried over from 2019 to 2020 was also high , at 19 %; notes the court’s conclusion that this contradicts the budgetary principle of annuality; calls upon the office to follow up on the court’s recommendation to improve its budget planning and implementation cycles , and inform the discharge authority about the progress made;


### 3. recalls that in carrying out its operations , the office is relatively dependent on member states’ cooperation; calls on member states to comply with their obligations as regards national experts in order to avoid the need for the office to rely on external contractors; ### 3. recalls that in carrying out its operations , the office is relatively dependent on member states’ cooperation , e.g. in terms of the number of national experts being made available as part of the asylum intervention pool referred to in article 15 of regulation (eu) no 439/2010 establishing the office; stresses that , according to the court , due to the limited number of such national experts made available , the office further relied on contracted temporary agency workers to perform operational support tasks on the ground; calls on member states to comply with their obligations as regards national experts in order to avoid the need for the office to rely on external contractors;


### 3. notes that the court declared payments made in 2020 of a total amount of eur 1 177 848 irregular because they were related to procurement errors in procedures carried out in 2016 and 2017 for rented premises in rome and procurement procedures declared irregular by the court in previous years (i.e. procurement for rented premises in lesbos , for interim workers in italy and for external experts); ### 3. notes with concern that the court declared payments made in 2020 of a total amount of eur 1 177 848 irregular because they were related to procurement errors in procedures carried out in 2016 and 2017 for rented premises in rome and procurement procedures declared irregular by the court in previous years (i.e. procurement for rented premises in lesbos , for interim workers in italy and for external experts);


### 4. recalls the important role that easo fulfils in the eu asylum policy framework , assisting requesting member states with valuable expertise and resources on the matter; welcomes the signature of a new operational support plan with spain in 2020 , bringing the total number of countries assisted by the office to eight; ### 4. recalls the important role that the office fulfils in the eu asylum policy framework , assisting requesting member states with valuable expertise and resources on the matter; welcomes the signature of a new operational support plan with spain in 2020 , bringing the total number of countries assisted by the office to eight; stresses that the activation of this support measure marks the office becoming fully operational in its fifth member state operation , the others being in cyprus , greece , italy and malta , which means that the office is now supporting all main countries of first arrival to manage their asylum and/or reception procedures;


### 7. welcomes the progressively increasing occupancy rate of the office , which the office expects to reach 90 % at the end of 2021 , and the reported decrease in the staff turnover rate , from 6 ,58 % in 2019 to 5 ,73 % in 2020; ### 7. notes with concern that despite the court’s conclusion that progress is made in the attraction of new staff , the execution rate of 78 ,96 % means that for a fourth consecutive year in a row the office did not manage to achieve the targets of its establishment plan; welcomes the progressively increasing occupancy rate of the office , which the office expects to reach a 90 % execution rate of its establishment plan at the end of 2021; and welcomes the reported decrease in the staff turnover rate , from 6 ,58 % in 2019 to 5 ,73 % in 2020;


### 9. notes that the office has 10 men (83 ,3 %) and 2 women (16 ,7 %) in its senior management , that the total staff is composed of 186 men (38 ,0 %) and 304 women (62 ,0 %) and that the management board is composed of 21 men (67 ,7 %) and 10 women (32 ,3 %); ### 9. notes with concern the office’s gender balance in its management board and senior management , with 21 men (67 ,7 %) and 10 women (32 ,3 %) in the management board , and 10 men (83 ,3 %) and 2 women (16 ,7 %) in its senior management; notes that the total staff is composed of 186 men (38 ,0 %) and 304 women (62 ,0 %);


### 12. welcomes the revision of the control strategies for the main control activities in place by the office , which followed a risk-based approach and took into consideration the cost-effectiveness of controls; welcomes the general improving situation as regards internal control , including procurement , in the office , which can be deduced from the court’s report; notes , in that regard , the observation of the court that the 2018 governance action plan was discontinued in 2020 and integrated into the quarterly monitoring report to the management board and the internal control self-assessment , but that some actions are still deemed relevant by the court , and calls on the office to continue the implementation of those actions , noting , in particular , the number of interim workers replacing staff members , the level of vacant management posts and the update of the conflict of interest policy; ### 12. welcomes the revision of the control strategies for the main control activities in place by the office , which followed a risk-based approach and took into consideration the cost-effectiveness of controls; welcomes the general improving situation as regards internal control , including procurement , in the office , which can be deduced from the court’s report; notes , in that regard , the observation of the court that the 2018 governance action plan was discontinued in 2020 and integrated into the quarterly monitoring report to the management board and the internal control self-assessment , but that some actions are still deemed relevant by the court , and need to be addressed thoroughly , and calls on the office to continue the implementation of those actions , noting , in particular , the number of interim workers replacing staff members , the level of vacant management posts and the update of the conflict of interest policy , and keep the discharge authority informed about the progress made;


### 14. notes the creation of a covid-19 response team in the office by decision of the executive director on 11 march 2020 and the coordinated response in the office to the covid-19 pandemic; further notes the observation of the court that the office had not finalised and adopted its business continuity plan and that the office’s size and complexity of operations and recent events such as the covid-19 pandemic underline the importance of such a formalised , up-to-date plan; notes that the office adopted its business continuity plan on 31 march 2021; ### 14. notes the creation of a covid-19 response team in the office by decision of the executive director on 11 march 2020 and the coordinated response in the office to the covid-19 pandemic; further notes with concern the observation of the court that the office had not finalised and adopted its business continuity plan and that the office’s size and complexity of operations and recent events such as the covid-19 pandemic underline the importance of such a formalised , up-to-date plan; notes that the office adopted its business continuity plan on 31 march 2021;


### 15. notes that the office reports that some of the measures taken in response to the covid-19 pandemic have had a positive impact on the environmental performance of the office , in particular a reduction in electricity consumption , a reduction of the office’s contribution to global co2 emissions from travel due to the cancellation of missions and travel for participants attending meetings of the office and training sessions , and the end of the requirement for candidates participating in staff selection procedures and sitting for written assessments to be physically present , relying instead on remotely managed alternatives (videoconferencing and monitored online assessment); ### 15. welcomes that the office reports that some of the measures taken in response to the covid-19 pandemic have had a positive impact on the environmental performance of the office , in particular a reduction in electricity consumption , a reduction of the office’s contribution to global co2 emissions from travel due to the cancellation of missions and travel for participants attending meetings of the office and training sessions , and the end of the requirement for candidates participating in staff selection procedures and sitting for written assessments to be physically present , relying instead on remotely managed alternatives (videoconferencing and monitored online assessment);


### 16. notes that the office has been looking into maintaining environmental measures and complementing them with longer-lasting initiatives to reduce its carbon footprint and address the areas of green building and sustainable mobility with regard to staff-related travel , greener commuting to and from work and travel related to meetings and training activities; ### 16. welcomes that the office has been looking into maintaining environmental measures and complementing them with longer-lasting initiatives to reduce its carbon footprint and address the areas of green building and sustainable mobility with regard to staff-related travel , greener commuting to and from work and travel related to meetings and training activities; encourages the office to share its lessons learned with other members of the eu agencies network;


### (3) the detailed arrangements governing the exercise of the right to vote and to stand as a candidate in elections to the european parliament are set out in council directive 93/109/ec. ### (3) the detailed arrangements governing the exercise of the right to vote and to stand as a candidate in elections to the european parliament are set out in council directive 93/109/ec. such arrangements do not affect each member state's provisions concerning the right to vote or to stand as a candidate of its nationals who reside outside its electoral territory and of certain persons who have close links to this member state , other than its own nationals or union citizens residing in this member state.


### (3) in the interest of clarity , the references contained in decision 2005/671/jha to the legal instruments governing the operation of the european union agency for law enforcement cooperation (europol) should be updated. ### (3) in the interest of clarity , the references contained in decision 2005/671/jha to the legal instruments governing the operation of the european union agency for law enforcement cooperation (europol) ) and of the european union agency for criminal justice cooperation (eurojust) should be updated.


### (6) the european data protection supervisor was consulted in accordance with article 42 of regulation (eu) 2018/1725 of the european parliament and of the council11 and delivered an opinion on xx/xx 20xx , ### (6) the european data protection supervisor was consulted in accordance with article 42 of regulation (eu) 2018/1725 of the european parliament and of the council11 and delivered an opinion on 25 january 2022 ,


### (1) in article 1 , point (b) is deleted; ### (1) in article 1 , point (b) is replaced by the following:


### (1) regulation (eu) 2021/953 of the european parliament and of the council1 lays down a framework for the issuance , verification and acceptance of interoperable covid-19 vaccination , test and recovery certificates (eu digital covid certificate) for the purpose of facilitating the holders’ exercise of their right to free movement during the covid-19 pandemic. it is also to contribute to facilitating the gradual lifting of restrictions to free movement put in place by the member states , in accordance with union law , to limit the spread of sars-cov-2 , in a coordinated manner. ### (1) regulation (eu) 2021/953 of the european parliament and of the council1 lays down a framework for the issuance , verification and acceptance of interoperable covid-19 vaccination , test and recovery certificates (eu digital covid certificate) for the purpose of facilitating the holders’ exercise of their right to free movement during the covid-19 pandemic. regulation (eu) 2021/953 has never represented and will never constitute legal basis to introduce additional requirements for the exercise of the right to free movement and to derogate from the provisions of directive 2004/38/ec of the european parliament and of the council1a. rather , it aims to facilitate the lifting of restrictions to free movement put in place by the member states , in accordance with union law , to limit the spread of sars-cov-2 , in a coordinated manner.


### (2) according to regulation (eu) 2021/953 , test certificates are to be issued based on two types of tests for sars-cov-2 infection , namely molecular nucleic acid amplification tests (‘naat’) , including those using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (‘rt-pcr’) , and rapid antigen tests , which rely on detection of viral proteins (antigens) using a lateral flow immunoassay that gives results in less than 30 minutes , provided they are carried out by health professionals or by skilled testing personnel. however , regulation (eu) 2021/953 does not cover antigenic assays , such as enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays or automated immunoassays , which test for antigens in a laboratory setting. as of july 2021 , the technical working group on covid-19 diagnostic tests2 , responsible for preparing updates to the common list of covid-19 rapid antigen tests3 agreed by the health security committee established by article 17 of decision no 1082/2013/eu of the european parliament and of the council4 , also reviews proposals put forward by member states and manufacturers for covid-19 laboratory-based antigenic assays. those proposals are assessed against the same criteria as those used for rapid antigen tests , and the health security committee has established a list of the laboratory-based antigenic assays that meet those criteria. as a result , and in an effort to enlarge the scope of the different types of diagnostic tests that may be used as the basis for the issuance of an eu digital covid certificate , the definition for rapid antigen tests should be adapted to include laboratory-based antigenic assays. it should thus be possible for member states to issue test certificates on the basis of the antigen tests included in the eu common list agreed , and regularly updated , by the health security committee as meeting the established quality criteria. ### (2) according to regulation (eu) 2021/953 , test certificates are to be issued based on two types of tests for sars-cov-2 infection , namely molecular nucleic acid amplification tests (‘naat’) , including those using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (‘rt-pcr’) , and rapid antigen tests , which rely on detection of viral proteins (antigens) using a lateral flow immunoassay that gives results in less than 30 minutes , provided they are carried out by health professionals or by skilled testing personnel. however , regulation (eu) 2021/953 does not cover antigenic assays , such as enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays or automated immunoassays , which test for antigens in a laboratory setting. as of july 2021 , the technical working group on covid-19 diagnostic tests2 , responsible for preparing updates to the common list of covid-19 rapid antigen tests3 agreed by the health security committee established by article 17 of decision no 1082/2013/eu of the european parliament and of the council4 , also reviews proposals put forward by member states and manufacturers for covid-19 laboratory-based antigenic assays. those proposals are assessed against the same criteria as those used for rapid antigen tests , and the health security committee has established a list of the laboratory-based antigenic assays that meet those criteria. as a result , and in an effort to enlarge the scope of the different types of diagnostic tests that may be used as the basis for the issuance of an eu digital covid certificate , the definition for rapid antigen tests should be adapted to include laboratory-based antigenic assays. it should thus be possible for member states to issue test certificates on the basis of the antigen tests included in the eu common list agreed , and regularly updated , by the health security committee as meeting the established quality criteria. the use of antigen tests for the issuance of recovery certificates pursuant to commission delegated regulation (eu) 2022/2564a entails an increased risk for the issuance of recovery certificates for false positive tests. the possibility for member states to use antigen tests for the issuance of recovery certificates should hence be understood as a possibility when the availability of naat tests is scarce due to a high number of infections in the area concerned or another reason.


### (4) in particular in light of the emergence of new sars-cov-2 variants of concern , the continued development and study of covid-19 vaccines is a crucial aspect in the fight against the covid-19 pandemic. in this context , it is important to facilitate the participation of volunteers in clinical trials , that is , studies performed to investigate the safety or efficacy of a medicine , such as a covid-19 vaccine. clinical research plays a fundamental role in the development of vaccines , and voluntary participation in clinical trials should therefore be encouraged. depriving volunteers from access to eu digital covid certificates could constitute a major disincentive to participate , delaying the conclusion of clinical trials and negatively impacting public health more generally. in addition , the integrity of clinical trials , including in terms of data blinding and confidentiality , should be preserved to ensure the validity of their results. it should thus be clarified that member states may issue eu digital covid certificates to participants in clinical trials that have been approved by member states’ ethical committees and competent authorities , regardless whether they have received the covid-19 vaccine candidate or , to avoid undermining the studies , the dose administered to the control group. in addition , it should be clarified that other member states may accept vaccination certificates for covid-19 vaccines undergoing clinical trials in order to waive restrictions to free movement put in place , in accordance with union law , in response to the covid-19 pandemic. if a covid-19 vaccine undergoing clinical trials is subsequently granted a marketing authorisation pursuant to regulation (ec) no 726/20045 , vaccination certificates for that vaccine fall , as of that moment , within the scope of the first subparagraph of article 5(5) of regulation (eu) 2021/953. to ensure a coherent approach , the commission should be empowered to ask the health security committee , the european centre for disease prevention and control (ecdc) or the european medicines agency (ema) to issue guidance with regards to the acceptance of certificates issued for a covid-19 vaccine undergoing clinical trials that has not yet received a marketing authorisation , which should take into account the ethical and scientific criteria necessary for carrying out clinical trials. ### (4) in particular in light of the emergence of new sars-cov-2 variants of concern , the continued development and study of covid-19 vaccines is a crucial aspect in the fight against the covid-19 pandemic. in this context , it is important to facilitate the participation of volunteers in clinical trials , that is , studies performed to investigate the safety or efficacy of a medicine , such as a covid-19 vaccine. clinical research plays a fundamental role in the development of vaccines , and voluntary participation in clinical trials should therefore be encouraged. depriving volunteers from access to eu digital covid certificates could constitute a major disincentive to participate , delaying the conclusion of clinical trials and negatively impacting public health more generally. in addition , the integrity of clinical trials , including in terms of data blinding and confidentiality , should be preserved to ensure the validity of their results. it should thus be clarified that member states may issue eu digital covid certificates to participants in clinical trials that have been approved by member states’ ethical committees and competent authorities , regardless whether they have received the covid-19 vaccine candidate or , to avoid undermining the studies , the dose administered to the control group. in addition , it should be clarified that other member states may accept vaccination certificates for covid-19 vaccines undergoing clinical trials in order to waive restrictions to free movement put in place , in accordance with union law , in response to the covid-19 pandemic. the validity of such vaccination certificate should not be longer than that of the certificate issued based on european medicines agency (ema)-approved products. in this regard , the issuance of vaccination certificates to participants in clinical trials for covid-19 vaccines and acceptance of those certificates is a member states’ competence. if a covid-19 vaccine undergoing clinical trials is subsequently granted a marketing authorisation pursuant to regulation (ec) no 726/20045 , vaccination certificates for that vaccine fall , as of that moment , within the scope of the first subparagraph of article 5(5) of regulation (eu) 2021/953. to ensure a coherent approach , the commission should be empowered to ask the health security committee , the european centre for disease prevention and control (ecdc) or the european medicines agency (ema) to issue guidance with regards to the acceptance of certificates issued for a covid-19 vaccine undergoing clinical trials that has not yet received a marketing authorisation , which should take into account the ethical and scientific criteria necessary for carrying out clinical trials. in case of a negative evaluation of marketing authorisation application , or in case the pharmaceutical company in question states that it does not intend to apply for marketing authorisation pursuant to regulation (ec) no 726/2004 , the validity of the certificate should be discontinued.


### (8) as a result , it cannot be excluded that member states continue to require union citizens exercising their right to free movement to present proof of covid-19 vaccination , test or recovery beyond 30 june 2022 , the date when regulation (eu) 2021/953 is set to expire. it is thus important to avoid that , in the event that certain restrictions to free movement based on public health are still in place after 30 june 2022 , union citizens and their family members are deprived of the possibility to make use of their eu digital covid certificates , which are an effective , secure and privacy-preserving way of proving one’s covid-19 status. at the same time , given that any restrictions to the free movement of persons within the union put in place to limit the spread of sars-cov-2 , including the requirement to present eu digital covid certificates , should be lifted as soon as the epidemiological situation allows , the extension of the application of regulation (eu) 2021/953 should be limited to 12 months. in addition , the extension of that regulation should not be understood as requiring member states , in particular those that lift domestic public health measures , to maintain or impose free movement restrictions. the power to adopt acts in accordance with article 290 of the treaty on the functioning of the european union delegated to the commission pursuant to regulation (eu) 2021/953 should be equally extended. it is necessary to ensure that the eu digital covid certificate system can adapt to scientific progress in containing the covid-19 pandemic. ### (8) as a result , it cannot be excluded that member states continue to require union citizens exercising their right to free movement to present proof of covid-19 vaccination , test or recovery beyond 30 june 2022 , the date when regulation (eu) 2021/953 is set to expire. it is thus important to avoid that , in the event that certain restrictions to free movement based on public health are still in place after 30 june 2022 , union citizens and their family members are deprived of the possibility to make use of their eu digital covid certificates , where required by member states to exercise their right to free movement , which are an effective , secure and privacy-preserving way of proving one’s covid-19 status. the use of eu digital covid certificates should be strictly necessary and proportionate to the epidemiological situation and associated public health risk. given that any restrictions to the free movement of persons within the union put in place to limit the spread of sars-cov-2 , including the requirement to present eu digital covid certificates , should be lifted as soon as the epidemiological situation allows , the extension of the application of regulation (eu) 2021/953 should be limited to a maximum period of 12 months and subject to a mid-term evaluation after six months , accompanied by an opinion and recommendation of the ecdc and of the health security committee regarding the necessity and proportionality of maintaining the application of the eu digital covid certificates. the mid-term evaluation might be accompanied by a legislative proposal to shorten the period of application of regulation (eu) 2021/953 or to repeal that regulation. as general rule , member states should not introduce any free movement restriction if not warranted by the epidemiological situation with regard to the covid-19 pandemic and where strictly necessary and proportionate for public health reasons based on the latest available scientific evidence. in this regard , the extension of that regulation should not be understood nor be a justification as requiring member states , in particular those that lift domestic public health measures , to maintain or impose free movement restrictions or request additional formalities to exercise the right to free movement , including the requirement to present the eu digital covid certificates. the power to adopt acts in accordance with article 290 of the treaty on the functioning of the european union delegated to the commission pursuant to regulation (eu) 2021/953 should be equally extended. it is necessary to ensure that the eu digital covid certificate system can adapt to new evidence on the efficacy of covid-19 technologies and scientific progress in containing the covid-19 pandemic.


### member states may also issue vaccination certificates referred to in point (a) of article 3(1) to persons participating in clinical trials that concern a covid-19 vaccine and that have been approved by member states’ ethical committees and competent authorities , regardless whether they have been administered the vaccine candidate or the dose administered to the control group. the information about the covid-19 vaccine to be included in the vaccination certificate in accordance with the specific data fields set out in point 1 of the annex shall not undermine the integrity of the clinical trial. member states may accept vaccination certificates issued by other member states in accordance with this paragraph in order to waive restrictions to free movement put in place , in accordance with union law , to limit the spread of sars-cov-2.; ### member states may also issue vaccination certificates referred to in point (a) of article 3(1) to persons participating in clinical trials that concern a covid-19 vaccine and that have been approved by member states’ ethical committees and competent authorities , regardless whether they have been administered the vaccine candidate or the dose administered to the control group. the information about the covid-19 vaccine to be included in the vaccination certificate in accordance with the specific data fields set out in point 1 of the annex shall not undermine the integrity of the clinical trial. validity of such vaccination certificate issued by a member state shall not be longer than that of the vaccination certificates issued pursuant to the second subparagraph of this paragraph. a certificate provided according to this criteria , shall include information regarding the phase of the clinical trial and the status of the clinical trial. member states may accept vaccination certificates issued by other member states in accordance with this paragraph in order to waive restrictions to free movement put in place , in accordance with union law , to limit the spread of sars-cov-2. if a covid-19 vaccine undergoing clinical trials is subsequently granted a marketing authorisation pursuant to regulation (ec) no 726/2004 , vaccination certificates for that vaccine fall , as of that moment , within the scope of the first subparagraph of this paragraph. in the case of a negative evaluation of marketing authorisation application for the specific product , or in case the incumbent pharmaceutical company states it does not intend to apply for marketing authorisation , validity of the certificate shall be discontinued.;