### reason for unauthorised arrival , entry , and , where appropriate illegal stay or residence , including information on whether the person made an application for international protection; ### circumstances of arrival , entry , including information on whether the person made an application for international protection;


### information on assistance provided by a person or a criminal organisation in relation to unauthorised crossing of the border , and any related information in cases of suspected smuggling. ### deleted


### — have not applied for international protection and ### — have not expressed their wish to apply for international protection and


### in cases not related to search and rescue operations , entry may be refused in accordance with article 14 of regulation 2016/399. ### in cases not related to search and rescue operations , entry may be refused in accordance with the full procedure laid down in article 14 of regulation 2016/399.


### 2. third-country nationals who made an application for international protection shall be referred to the authorities referred to in article xy of regulation (eu) no xxx/xxx [asylum procedure regulation] , together with the form referred to in article 13 of this regulation. on that occasion , the authorities conducting the screening shall point in the de-briefing form to any elements which seem at first sight to be relevant to refer the third-country nationals concerned into the accelerated examination procedure or the border procedure. ### 2. third-country nationals who made an application for international protection shall be referred to the asylum authorities referred to in article xy of regulation (eu) xxx/xxx [asylum procedure regulation] , together with the form referred to in article 13 of this regulation.


### 4. the third-country nationals referred to in article 5 , who ### deleted


### 5. where third-country nationals submitted to the screening in accordance with article 5 make an application for international protection as referred to in article 25 of regulation (eu) no xxx/xxx (asylum procedures regulation) , paragraph 2 of this article shall apply accordingly. ### deleted


### 7. where the third country nationals referred to in article(s) 3(1) and article 5 are referred to an appropriate procedure regarding asylum or return , the screening ends. where not all the checks have been completed within the deadlines referred to in article 6(3) and (5) , the screening shall nevertheless end with regard to that person , who shall be referred to a relevant procedure. ### 7. where the third country nationals referred to in article(s) 3(1) are referred to an appropriate procedure regarding asylum , return or refusal of entry , the screening ends. where not all the checks have been completed within the deadlines referred to in article 6(3) and (5) , the screening shall nevertheless end with regard to that person , who shall then automatically be referred to the ordinary asylum procedure laid down in regulation (eu) xxx/202x (asylum procedures regulation).


### [three years after entry into force , the commission shall report on the implementation of the measures set out in this regulation.] ### [18 months after entry into force , the commission shall report on the implementation of the measures set out in this regulation.]


### no sooner than [five] years after the date of application of this regulation , and every five years thereafter , the commission shall carry out an evaluation of this regulation. the commission shall present a report on the main findings to the european parliament , the council and the european economic and social committee. member states shall provide the commission all information necessary for the preparation of that report , at the latest six months before the [five] years’ time limit expires. ### no sooner than [three] years after the date of application of this regulation , and every five years thereafter , the commission shall carry out an evaluation of this regulation. the commission shall present a report on the main findings to the european parliament , the council and the european economic and social committee. member states shall provide the commission all information necessary for the preparation of that report , at the latest six months before the [five] years’ time limit expires.


### e. whereas there are barriers to access justice for victims of racial discrimination; whereas equality bodies in the member states lack the human and financial resources and/or political will and independence to bridge this gap; ### e. whereas there are barriers to access justice for victims of racial discrimination; whereas equality bodies in the member states lack the human and financial resources and/or political will and independence to bridge this gap; whereas the eu’s anti-discrimination framework is unevenly transposed into member state legislation limiting the efficacy of equality bodies;


### 1. emphasises the urgent need for the union to develop a robust and comprehensive agenda for effectively combating racism and discrimination on all grounds and in all areas in the eu; insists that the union and its institutions must lead by example in the fight against structural and institutional racism and anti-discrimination; ### 1. emphasises the urgent need for the union to develop a robust and multifaceted approach for effectively combating racism and discrimination on all grounds and in all areas in the eu; insists that the union and its institutions must lead by example in the fight against structural and institutional racism and anti-discrimination; calls for more and continued political leadership at the highest political level , including by firm and speedy reactions against hate speech and crime , and for in-person attendance at anti-racism summits;


### 3. calls on the council to set up a council gender equality and equality group in order to allow high-level discussions on these issues in a regular and permanent forum; ### 3. calls on the council to establish a council configuration on gender equality and equality to allow high-level discussions on these issues in a regular and permanent forum and to ensure anti-racism and gender mainstreaming into all policies;


### 4. calls on the member states to ensure the full implementation of the racial equality directive; condemns the fact that racial , ethnic , linguistic and religious minorities face structural racism , discrimination , hate crime and hate speech , a lack of access to justice , and sustained socioeconomic inequalities in areas such as housing , healthcare , employment and education , which need to be acknowledged as major barriers to full enjoyment of fundamental rights and key barriers to inclusion and equality; ### 4. calls on the member states to ensure the full implementation of the racial equality directive; condemns the fact that racial , ethnic , linguistic and religious minorities face structural racism , discrimination , hate crime and hate speech , a lack of access to justice , and sustained socioeconomic inequalities in areas such as but not limited to housing , healthcare , employment and education , which need to be acknowledged as major barriers to full enjoyment of fundamental rights and key barriers to inclusion and equality;


### 5. regrets that 14 years after the adoption of the framework decision on racism and xenophobia , several member states have not yet fully and correctly transposed its provisions into national law; calls on the member states to put measures in place that encourage victims and witnesses to come forward and report hate crime , and strengthen the ability of national law enforcement systems to correctly identify and record it; ### 5. regrets that 14 years after the adoption of the framework decision on racism and xenophobia , several member states have not yet fully and correctly transposed its provisions into national law; calls on the member states to put measures in place that encourage victims and witnesses to come forward and report hate crime , for example through safe spaces or confidential hotlines , to exchange best practices on measures that have proven to be effective in this regard and strengthen the ability of national law enforcement systems to correctly identify and record it; underlines in this regard the importance of specialised hate crime training for state and local law enforcement and criminal justice authorities;


### 9. emphasises the need to ensure meaningful participation of all groups affected by intersectional discrimination in policymaking at eu , national and local levels , especially racialised groups; ### 9. emphasises the need to ensure meaningful participation of all groups affected by intersectional discrimination in policymaking at eu , national and local levels , especially racialised groups; underlines furthermore the importance of regular and structured dialogue with civil society organisations working on racial justice and equality on european , national and local levels;


### 10. stresses the importance of collecting comparable and robust disaggregated equality data to document discrimination and to tackle inequality holistically , based on voluntary participation , self-identification and informed consent , while protecting anonymity and confidentiality , respecting the key principles of eu data protection legislation and fundamental rights and complying with national legislation; calls on the commission to continue developing a common methodology on this with member states in order to ensure the comparability , accuracy and reliability of the data collected; supports the fra’s work on analysing this data and welcomes further developments in this field , in line with its new mandate; ### 10. calls on all eu member states to collect comparable and robust disaggregated equality data in order to fully understand and to document discrimination and to tackle inequality holistically , based on voluntary participation , self-identification and informed consent , while protecting anonymity and confidentiality , respecting the key principles of eu data protection legislation and fundamental rights and complying with national legislation; calls on the commission to continue developing a common methodology on this with member states in order to ensure the comparability , accuracy and reliability of the data collected; supports the fra’s work on analysing this data and welcomes further developments in this field , in line with its new mandate and through cooperation with affected groups;


### 11. calls on all member states to adopt national action plans against racism and discrimination by the end of 2022 , as provided for in the eu anti-racism action plan; highlights the need to continue this eu action plan beyond 2025 and encourages the commission to begin this work before the end of its current mandate; ### 11. urges all member states to adopt national action plans against racism and discrimination by the end of 2022 , as provided for in the eu anti-racism action plan; highlights the need to continue this eu action plan beyond 2025 and encourages the commission to begin this work before the end of its current mandate;


### 12. underlines the importance of representation and diversity as a tool for the development of inclusive societies; recalls that the media have a responsibility to reflect societies in all their diversity , and regrets the current lack of diversity at all levels; ### 12. underlines the importance of representation and diversity as a tool for the development of inclusive societies; recalls that the media have a responsibility to reflect societies in all their diversity , and regrets the current lack of diversity at all levels; stresses furthermore the importance to encourage the participation of racialized people in television programmes and other media , in order to adequately address their lack of representation , as well as the lack of role models for children of racialized groups;


### 13. calls on the commission to adopt concrete legislative measures to strengthen the role and independence of equality bodies in member states; ### 13. welcomes the commission's initiative on minimum standards for equality bodies , which has the aim to ensure equal protection against discrimination across the eu; calls on the commission to adopt concrete legislative measures to strengthen the role and independence of equality bodies in member states;


### 15. welcomes the commission’s appointment of the first anti-racism coordinator in 2021 and the continuous re-appointment since 2015 of the coordinator on combating anti-semitism and fostering jewish life; but deplores that the position of anti-muslim hatred coordinator has been left vacant since july 2021; ### 15. welcomes the commission’s appointment of the first anti-racism coordinator in 2021 and the continuous re-appointment since 2015 of the coordinator on combating anti-semitism and fostering jewish life; but deplores that the position of anti-muslim hatred coordinator has been left vacant since july 2021; reminds that these positions should be permanent and therefore coordinators should be sustained and supported; underlines the central role of the anti-racism coordinator and eu high-level working group on combating racism , xenophobia and intolerance in mainstreaming racial equality across all eu policies;


### 5. observes that in 2021 the office’s budget increased meaningfully in respect of 2020 (eur 11.6 million) as a consequence of a correction of the underestimation of the caseload provided in 2017 when adopting regulation (eu) 2017/1939; ### 5. observes that in 2021 the office’s budget increased meaningfully in respect of 2020 (eur 11.6 million) as a consequence of a correction of the underestimation of the caseload provided in 2017 when adopting regulation (eu) 2017/1939; stresses the importance to adapt human and financial resources to the growing workload and to increase the eppo's budget accordingly.


### 28. understands that the application of the general staff regulation’s implementing rules to prosecutors represents a risk in some respect to the judicial independence , but the status of the eppo does not allow adopting alternative implementing rules for prosecutors , out of the procedure set under article 110 of the staff regulation and without a priori validation by the commission; believes that this situation brings additional considerations in favour of a revision of regulation (eu) 2017/1939 and the eppo status; ### 28. understands that the application of the general staff regulation’s implementing rules to prosecutors represents a risk in some respect to the judicial independence , but the status of the eppo does not allow adopting alternative implementing rules for prosecutors , out of the procedure set under article 110 of the staff regulation and without a priori validation by the commission; reminds that the eppo is the only eu institution employing prosecutors and that their independence is paramount for the good functioning of the prosecution office; calls on the commission to address this issue and to ensure the necessary flexibility within the legal framework in order to fully accomodate the special status of prosecutors as eppo staff; believes that this situation brings additional considerations in favour of a revision of regulation (eu) 2017/1939 and the eppo status;


### 29. understands that the eppo management has adopted any possible viable action , within its prerogatives , to address the matter , deploying the available resources to increase the occupation rate and to speed up the recruitment process , even in spite of the post-pandemic issues; is aware of the post-pandemic limitations and of the peculiarities of the very competitive luxembourgish labour market , and observes that the unattractiveness of the employment place , mainly because of the high cost of living , has resulted in limiting also the geographical variety of the candidatures for statutory staff; remarks that , in terms of the financial package combined with the career perspective , the eppo is less competitive than the four union’s institutions with employees in luxembourg (parliament , commission , court of justice and court of auditors) , as it cannot offer a path towards becoming an eu official and that the only one eu agency in luxembourg has been merged and moved to brussels under the current mff; ### 29. commends the eppo management for having adopted all possible viable actions , within its prerogatives , to address the matter , deploying the available resources to increase the occupation rate and to speed up the recruitment process , even in spite of the post-pandemic issues; is aware of the post-pandemic limitations and of the peculiarities of the very competitive luxembourgish labour market , and observes that the unattractiveness of the employment place , mainly because of the high cost of living , has resulted in limiting also the geographical variety of the candidatures for statutory staff; remarks that , in terms of the financial package combined with the career perspective , the eppo is less competitive than the four union’s institutions with employees in luxembourg (parliament , commission , court of justice and court of auditors) , as it cannot offer a path towards becoming an eu official and that the only one eu agency in luxembourg has been merged and moved to brussels under the current mff;


### 30. is concerned by the significant recourse to third-party commercial services and to temporary worker mechanisms in most areas where staffing by eu public agents was not cleared , and created at times sub-optimal working conditions resulting from prolonged high workloads for a significant number of eppo staff; ### 30. is concerned by the significant recourse to third-party commercial services and to temporary worker mechanisms in most areas where staffing by eu public agents was not cleared , and created at times sub-optimal working conditions resulting from prolonged high workloads for a significant number of eppo staff; calls on the commission to address , without further delay , the understaffing of the eppo when proposing its future establishment plans;


### 36. notes that the eppo is in the process of developing the essential features of its ethical framework; observes that it has adopted an anti-fraud strategy as a component of its risk-based management , that all staff provides a conflict of interest declaration , all staff deployed in operations is subject to a personal security clearance requirement and that declarations of interests are requested and screened for all prosecution roles and for the administrative director; ### 36. notes that the eppo is in the process of developing the essential features of its ethical framework; welcomes that it has adopted an anti-fraud strategy as a component of its risk-based management , that all staff provides a conflict of interest declaration , all staff deployed in operations is subject to a personal security clearance requirement and that declarations of interests are requested and screened for all prosecution roles and for the administrative director;


### (14) unannounced visits , being one of the most effective tools to verify member states practices should , depending on their purpose , take place without prior notification to the member state concerned or with only short prior notification. unannounced visits without prior notification should take place for ‘investigative’ purposes in order to verify compliance with obligations under the schengen acquis , including , in response to indications as regards the emergence of systemic problems that could potentially have a significant impact on the functioning of the schengen area or to fundamental rights violations , in particular allegations of serious violations of fundamental rights at the external borders. in such cases , the provision of advance notice would defeat the objective of the visit. unannounced visits with a 24-hour advance notice should take place if the main purpose of the visit is to carry out a random check of the member state’s implementation of the schengen acquis. ### (14) unannounced visits , being one of the most effective tools to verify member states practices should , take place without prior notification to the member state concerned. unannounced visits without prior notification should take place for ‘investigative’ purposes in order to verify compliance with obligations under the schengen acquis , including , in response to indications as regards the emergence of systemic problems that could potentially have a significant impact on the functioning of the schengen area or to fundamental rights violations , in particular allegations of serious violations of fundamental rights at the external borders.


### (16) evaluation and monitoring activities should be carried out by teams consisting of commission representatives and experts designated by member states. these representatives and experts should have appropriate qualifications , including a solid theoretical knowledge and practical experience. in order to ensure the participation of sufficient number of experienced experts in a faster and less burdensome way , a pool of experts should be established and maintained by the commission in close cooperation with the member states. the pool should be the primary source of experts for evaluation and monitoring activities. ### (16) evaluation and monitoring activities should be carried out by teams consisting of commission representatives , parliament representatives , experts designated by member states and union observers. these representatives and experts should have appropriate qualifications , including a solid theoretical knowledge and practical experience. in order to ensure the participation of sufficient number of experienced experts in a faster and less burdensome way , a pool of experts should be established and maintained by the commission in close cooperation with the member states. the pool should be the primary source of experts for evaluation and monitoring activities.


### (19) evaluation reports should be concise and succinct. they should focus on deficiencies with significant impact and highlight areas where important improvements could be made. minor findings should not form part of the reports. the team should nevertheless communicate these findings to the evaluated member state at the end of the evaluation activity , including to the authorities responsible for the relevant national quality control mechanism. the team should actively seek to identify best practices which should be added to the reports. in particular , new and innovative measures that significantly improve the implementation of the common rules and that could be put in practice by other member states should be highlighted as a best practice for the purposes of the report. ### (19) evaluation reports should be concise and succinct. they should focus on deficiencies with significant impact and highlight areas where important improvements should be made. minor findings should not form part of the reports. the team should nevertheless communicate these findings to the evaluated member state at the end of the evaluation activity , including to the authorities responsible for the relevant national quality control mechanism. the team should actively seek to identify best practices which should be added to the reports. in particular , new and innovative measures that significantly improve the implementation of the common rules and that could be put in practice by other member states should be highlighted as a best practice for the purposes of the report.


### (20) evaluation reports should , as a rule , contain recommendations on how to remedy deficiencies identified (including fundamental rights violations) and be adopted in a single act by the commission by means of implementing acts through the examination procedure in accordance with article 5 of regulation (eu) no 182/201136 . the consolidation of the report and recommendations within a single document and subject to a single adoption procedure reinforces the intrinsic connection between the evaluation findings and recommendations. in addition , the accelerated publication of the recommendations should enable member states to address the deficiencies faster and more efficiently. at the same time , the use of the examination procedure should ensure member state’s engagement in the decision-making process leading to the adoption of the recommendations. ### (20) evaluation reports should , as a rule , contain recommendations on how to remedy deficiencies identified and be adopted in a single act by the commission by means of implementing acts through the examination procedure in accordance with article 5 of regulation (eu) no 182/201136 and without undue delay. particular attention should be paid to identifying and remedying fundamental rights violations. the consolidation of the report and recommendations within a single document and subject to a single adoption procedure reinforces the intrinsic connection between the evaluation findings and recommendations. in addition , the accelerated publication of the recommendations should enable member states to address the deficiencies faster and more efficiently. at the same time , the use of the examination procedure should ensure member state’s engagement in the decision-making process leading to the adoption of the recommendations.


### (24) the evaluation and monitoring mechanism should comprise a robust follow-up and monitoring component which should be ensured by the commission , in close cooperation with the council and the european parliament , without creating a disproportionate burden for the actors involved. evaluations should be followed up by action plans. while drawing up the action plans , the evaluated member states should fully take into consideration the funding possibilities provided by the union and make the best use of these resources. to speed up the process , the commission should provide observations on the adequacy of the action plans for example in the form of a letter. in order to ensure a timely follow up , if the commission services do not consider the action plan adequate , the member state concerned should be required to submit a revised action plan within one month from the receipt of the observations. the frequency of the follow-up reporting by the member state to the commission and the council on the implementation of the action plans should , as a rule , be six months. ### (24) the evaluation and monitoring mechanism should comprise a robust follow-up and monitoring component which should be ensured by the commission , in close cooperation with the council and the european parliament , without creating a disproportionate burden for the actors involved. evaluations should be followed up by action plans. while drawing up the action plans , the evaluated member states should fully take into consideration the funding possibilities provided by the union and make the best use of these resources. to speed up the process , the commission should provide observations on the adequacy of the action plans for example in the form of a letter. in order to ensure a timely follow up , if the commission services do not consider the action plan adequate , the member state concerned should be required to submit a revised action plan within one month from the receipt of the observations. the frequency of the follow-up reporting by the member state to the commission and the council on the implementation of the action plans should , as a rule , be three months.


### (29) in view of the particular role entrusted to the european parliament and to the national parliaments under the last sentence of article 70 of the treaty on the functioning of the european union (tfeu) , as underlined in article 12 , point (c) , of the treaty on european union (teu) as regards the national parliaments , the council and the commission should fully inform the european parliament and the national parliaments of the content and results of the evaluations. in addition , should the commission submit a proposal to amend this regulation , the council would , in accordance with article 19(7) , point (h) , of its rules of procedure39 , consult the european parliament in order to take into consideration its opinion , to the fullest extent possible , before adopting a final text. ### (29) in view of the particular role entrusted to the european parliament and to the national parliaments under the last sentence of article 70 of the treaty on the functioning of the european union (tfeu) , as underlined in article 12 , point (c) , of the treaty on european union (teu) as regards the national parliaments , the council and the commission should fully inform the european parliament and the national parliaments of the content and results of the evaluations no later than two weeks after the procedure is concluded. in addition , should the commission submit a proposal to amend this regulation , the council would , in accordance with article 19(7) , point (h) , of its rules of procedure39 , consult the european parliament in order to take into consideration its opinion , to the fullest extent possible , before adopting a final text.


### ‘serious deficiency’ means one or more deficiencies which concern the effective application of key elements of the schengen acquis and which individually or in combination , have , or risk to have over time , a significant negative impact on the rights of individuals or on the functioning of the schengen area; ### ‘serious deficiency’ means one or more deficiencies which concern the effective application of the schengen acquis and which individually or in combination , have , or risk to have over time , a significant negative impact on the rights of individuals or on the functioning of the schengen area;


### ‘team’ means a group comprising experts designated by member states and commission representatives who carry out evaluations and monitoring activities. ### ‘team’ means a group comprising experts designated by member states , commission as well as parliament representatives who carry out evaluations and monitoring activities.


### when it has grounds to consider that a member state is seriously neglecting its obligations under the schengen acquis including allegations of serious fundamental rights violations at the external borders. ### when it has grounds to consider that a member state is neglecting its obligations under the schengen acquis including allegations of serious fundamental rights violations at the external borders.


### the commission may enter into arrangements with the union bodies , offices and agencies to facilitate the cooperation. ### the commission shall enter into arrangements with the union bodies , offices and agencies to facilitate the cooperation and invite at least one member of the union bodies , offices or agencies to participate in the teams carrying out evaluation and monitoring activities.


### 4. unannounced visits shall take place without prior notification to the member state concerned. by way of exception , the commission may notify the member state concerned at least 24 hours before such visit is to take place when the main purpose of the unannounced visit is a random verification of the implementation of the schengen acquis. ### 4. unannounced visits shall take place without prior notification to the member state concerned.


### the commission shall establish the detailed programme for unannounced visits. where member states have been notified , the commission may consult the timetable and detailed programme with the member state concerned. ### the commission shall establish the detailed programme for unannounced visits.


### 5. the commission , in close cooperation with the member states , may establish and update guidelines for conducting unannounced visits. ### 5. the commission may establish and update guidelines for conducting unannounced visits and may consult with member states.


### the commission , in cooperation with the member states , may establish guidelines for conducting evaluation and monitoring activities by questionnaire or other remote methods. ### the commission , in cooperation with the member states , may establish guidelines for conducting evaluation and monitoring activities by questionnaire or other remote methods , if in person meetings cannot take place.


### the commission shall transmit the evaluation report to the national parliaments , the european parliament and the council. ### the commission shall transmit the evaluation report to the national parliaments , the european parliament and the council no later than two weeks after the report is adopted.


### 5. the evaluation report shall contain recommendations for remedial actions aimed at addressing the deficiencies and areas for improvement identified during the evaluation and give an indication of the priorities for implementing them. the evaluation report may set deadlines for the implementation of recommendations. where the evaluation identifies a serious deficiency , the specific provisions set out in article 23 shall apply. ### 5. the evaluation report shall contain recommendations for remedial actions aimed at addressing the deficiencies and areas for improvement identified during the evaluation and give an indication of the priorities for implementing them. the evaluation report shall set deadlines for the implementation of recommendations. where the evaluation identifies a serious deficiency , the specific provisions set out in article 23 shall apply.


### 2. after consulting the team , which has carried out the evaluation activity , the commission shall provide observations on the adequacy of the action plan and , within one month from its submission , shall inform the evaluated member state about its observations. the council may invite member states to provide comments on the action plan. ### 2. after consulting the team , which has carried out the evaluation activity , the commission shall provide observations on the adequacy of the action plan and , within one month from its submission , shall inform the evaluated member state about its observations. the council may invite other member states to provide comments on the action plan.


### 5. the council shall adopt recommendations within two weeks of receipt of the proposal. ### 5. the council shall adopt recommendations within ten days of receipt of the proposal.


### the council shall set time limits for the implementation of the recommendations related to a serious deficiency and specify the frequency of the reporting by the evaluated member state to the commission and the council on the implementation of its action plan. ### the council shall set short time limits for the implementation of the recommendations related to a serious deficiency and specify the frequency of the reporting by the evaluated member state to the commission and the council on the implementation of its action plan.


### 6. the evaluated member state shall submit to the commission and the council its action plan within one month of the adoption of the recommendations. the commission shall transmit that action plan to the european parliament. ### 6. the evaluated member state shall submit to the commission and the council its action plan within two weeks of the adoption of the recommendations. the commission shall transmit that action plan to the european parliament.


### 7. to verify the progress made in the implementation of the recommendations related to the serious deficiency , the commission shall organise a revisit that is to take place no later than one year from the date of the evaluation activity. ### 7. to verify the progress made in the implementation of the recommendations related to the serious deficiency , the commission shall organise a revisit that is to take place no later than 6 months from the date of the evaluation activity. the commission shall also invite the european parliament and the council to each send a representative to participate in a revisit.


### 8. the council shall express its position on the report. ### 8. the council and the european parliament may express its position on the report.


### in deciding whether to close the action plan , the commission shall take into account that position. ### in deciding whether to close the action plan , the commission may take into account that position.


### (3) the union aquis provides for two legal frameworks to set up jits with the participation of at least two member states: council framework decision 2002/465/jha19 and article 13 of the convention established by the council in accordance with article 34 of the treaty on european union on mutual assistance in criminal matters between the member states of the european union20 . third countries can be involved in jits as parties where there is a legal basis for such involvement , such as article 20 of the second additional protocol of the 1959 council of europe convention21 and article 5 of the agreement on mutual legal assistance between the european union and the united states of america22 . ### (3) the union aquis provides for two legal frameworks to set up jits with the participation of at least two member states: council framework decision 2002/465/jha19 and article 13 of the convention established by the council in accordance with article 34 of the treaty on european union on mutual assistance in criminal matters between the member states of the european union20. the convention drawn up on the basis of article k.3 of the treaty on european union , on mutual assistance and cooperation between customs administrations20a (naples ii convention) is also covered by this regulation. third countries can be involved in jits as parties where there is a legal basis for such involvement , such as article 20 of the second additional protocol of the 1959 council of europe convention21 and article 5 of the agreement on mutual legal assistance between the european union and the united states of america22 .


### (4) the existing legal frameworks at union level do not set out how the entities participating in jits exchange information and communicate. those entities reach an agreement on such exchange and communication on the basis of the needs and available means. however , there is a lack of dedicated secure and effective channel to which all participants could have recourse and through which they could promptly exchange large volumes of information and evidence or allow for secure and effective communication. furthermore , there is no system that would support daily management of jits , including the traceability of evidence exchanged among the participants. ### (4) the existing legal frameworks at union level do not set out how the entities participating in jits exchange information and communicate. those entities reach an agreement on such exchange and communication on the basis of the needs and available means. to fight the increasingly complex and time-sensitive cross-border crime , speed , cooperation and efficiency are crucial. however , there is a lack of dedicated secure and effective channel to which all participants could have recourse and through which they could promptly exchange large volumes of information and evidence or allow for secure and effective communication. furthermore , there is no system that would support daily management of jits , including the traceability of evidence exchanged among the participants.


### (5) in light of the increasing possibilities of crime infiltrating information technology (it) systems , the current state of play could hamper the effectiveness and efficiency of cross-border investigations , as well as jeopardise and slow down such investigations and prosecutions , making them more costly. the judiciary and law enforcement in particular need to ensure that their systems are as safe as possible and that all jit members can connect and interact easily , independently of their national systems. ### (5) in light of the increasing possibilities of crime infiltrating information technology (it) systems , the current state of play could hamper the effectiveness and efficiency of cross-border investigations , as well as jeopardise and slow down such investigations and prosecutions , making them more costly. the judiciary and law enforcement in particular need to ensure that their systems are as modern and safe as possible and that all jit members can connect and interact easily , independently of their national systems.


### (13) from a technical perspective , the jits collaboration platform should be accessible via a secure connection over the internet and should be composed of a centralised information system , accessible through a web portal , communication software for mobile and desktop devices , and a connection between the centralised information system and relevant it tools , supporting the functioning of jits and managed by the jit secretariat. ### (13) from a technical perspective , the jits collaboration platform should be accessible via a secure connection over the internet and should be composed of a centralised information system , accessible through a web portal , communication software for mobile and desktop devices that includes a machine translation functionality for the working languages of the institutions of the union , and a connection between the centralised information system and relevant it tools , supporting the functioning of jits and managed by the jit secretariat.


### (13) from a technical perspective , the jits collaboration platform should be accessible via a secure connection over the internet and should be composed of a centralised information system , accessible through a web portal , communication software for mobile and desktop devices , and a connection between the centralised information system and relevant it tools , supporting the functioning of jits and managed by the jit secretariat. ### (13) from a technical perspective , the jits collaboration platform should be accessible via a secure connection over the internet and should be composed of a centralised information system , accessible through a secure web portal , communication software for mobile and desktop devices , advanced logging and tracking mechanism , and a connection between the centralised information system and relevant it tools , supporting the functioning of jits and managed by the jit secretariat.


### (16) communication-related functionalities of the jits collaboration platform should be provided by a software allowing for non-traceable communication stored locally at the devices of the users. ### (16) communication-related functionalities of the jits collaboration platform should be provided by a modern software allowing for non-traceable communication stored locally at the devices of the users.


### (17) a proper functionality allowing to exchange operational information and evidence , including large files , should be ensured through an upload/download mechanism designed to store the data centrally only for the limited period of time necessary for the technical transfer of the data. as soon as the data is downloaded by all addresses , it should be automatically deleted from the jits collaboration platform. ### (17) a proper functionality allowing to exchange operational information and evidence , including large files , should be ensured through an upload/download mechanism designed to store the data centrally only for the limited period of time necessary for the technical transfer of the data. as soon as the data is downloaded by all addresses , it should be automatically and permanently deleted from the jits collaboration platform.


### (19) when designing the jits collaboration platform , eu-lisa should ensure technical interoperability with siena. ### (19) in order to ensure the widest possible participation of the relevant actors in the union and to avoid duplication of the use of data in different systems , eu-lisa should establish the necessary technical standards when designing the jits collaboration platform , for which europol should ensure that siena complies with those technical standards and is able to establish secure channels to interact with the envisaged platform. this interaction should respect the foreseen access rights and data classification rules established for the two systems. the commission should ensure that the legislative financial statement annexed to the proposal for this regulation reflects the budgetary impact of this requirement on both agencies.


### (20) since the establishment of the network of national experts on joint investigation teams (the ‘jits network’) in accordance with council document 11037/0524 , the jit secretariat supports the work of the jits network by organising annual meetings , trainings , collecting and analysing the jit evaluation reports and managing the eurojust’s jit funding programme. since 2011 , the jit secretariat is hosted by eurojust as a separate unit. to allow the jit secretariat to support users in the practical application of the jits collaboration platform , as well as to provide technical and administrative support to jit space administrators , eurojust should be provided with appropriate staff allocated to the jit secretariat. ### (20) since the establishment of the network of national experts on joint investigation teams (the ‘jits network’) in accordance with council document 11037/0524 , the jit secretariat supports the work of the jits network by organising annual meetings , trainings , collecting and analysing the jit evaluation reports and managing the eurojust’s jit funding programme. since 2011 , the jit secretariat is hosted by eurojust as a separate unit. to allow the jit secretariat to support users in the practical application of the jits collaboration platform , as well as to provide technical and administrative support to jit space administrators , eurojust should be provided with appropriate budget , staff and technical support allocated to the jit secretariat.


### (31) where a jit has multiple jit space administrators , those jit space administrators should agree among themselves , as soon as the jit collaboration space including third countries is established , about one of them to be controller of the data uploaded by those third countries. ### (31) where a jit has multiple jit space administrators , those jit space administrators should agree among themselves , as soon as the jit collaboration space including third countries is established , and nominate one of them to be controller of the data uploaded by those third countries.


### (36) the commission should determine the date of the start of operations of the jits collaboration platform once the relevant implementing acts necessary for the technical development of the jits collaboration platform have been adopted and eu-lisa has carried out a comprehensive test of the jits collaboration platform , in cooperation with the member states. ### (36) the commission should determine the date of the start of operations of the jits collaboration platform once it is satisfied that the technical requirements as adopted in the relevant implementing acts necessary for the technical development of the jits collaboration platform have been implemented and eu-lisa has carried out a comprehensive trial period of the jits collaboration platform , in cooperation with the member states. upon the adoption of this regulation , eu-lisa shall immediately start its activities regarding the design and implementation of the jits collaboration platform with a view to render the project operational as soon as possible , and not later than 1 january 2025 , including by making use of tailored and customised off-the-shelf products. acknowledging that this puts a strain on eu-lisa’s operations , the commission should ensure that the budgetary impact related to a shorter implementation period than foreseen in the impact assessment requested from eu-lisa is assessed in close cooperation with eu-lisa both from budgetary and human resources point of view and reflected in the legislative financial statement of the proposal for this regulation prior to the adoption of this regulation. furthermore , the legislative financial statement of the proposal for this regulation should allow eu-lisa to recruit technical staff necessary for the preparation of necessary contracts , organisation of the project , and the technical design of the platform as soon as soon as possible.


### (36) the commission should determine the date of the start of operations of the jits collaboration platform once the relevant implementing acts necessary for the technical development of the jits collaboration platform have been adopted and eu-lisa has carried out a comprehensive test of the jits collaboration platform , in cooperation with the member states. ### (36) the commission should determine the date of the start of operations of the jits collaboration platform once the relevant implementing acts necessary for the technical development of the jits collaboration platform have been adopted and eu-lisa has carried out a comprehensive test of the jits collaboration platform , in cooperation with the member states. in order for eu-lisa to meet the deadline for the design and development of the jits collaboration platform , appropriate funding , staff and technical support should be provided.


### establishes an it platform (the ‘jits collaboration platform’) , to be used on a voluntary basis , to facilitate the cooperation of competent authorities participating in joint investigation teams (‘jits’) set up on the basis of article 13 of the convention established by the council in accordance with article 34 of the treaty on european union , on mutual assistance in criminal matters between the member states of the european union or on framework decision 2002/465/jha; ### establishes an it platform (the ‘jits collaboration platform’) , to be used on a voluntary basis , to facilitate the cooperation of competent authorities participating in joint investigation teams (‘jits’) set up on the basis of article 13 of the convention established by the council in accordance with article 34 of the treaty on european union , on mutual assistance in criminal matters between the member states of the european union or on framework decision 2002/465/jha and , for cases in which specialised customs jits are created , on the basis of article 24 of the naples ii convention;


### (5) ‘jits collaboration platform users’ means jit members , eurojust , europol , olaf and other competent union bodies , offices and agencies; ### (5) ‘jits collaboration platform users’ means jit members , eurojust , europol , olaf , eppo and other competent union bodies , offices and agencies or international judicial authorities with which there is a jit agreement;


### a centralised information system , which allows for temporary central data storage; ### a modern and secure centralised information system , which allows for temporary central data storage;


### a communication software , which allows for local storage of communication data; ### a communication software , which allows for local storage of communication data and instant machine translation in all working languages of the institutions of the union for communication purposes;


### a connection between the centralised information system and relevant it tools , supporting the functioning of jits and managed by the jit secretariat. ### a secure connection between the centralised information system and relevant it tools , supporting the functioning of jits and managed by the jit secretariat.


### the exchange and temporary storage of operational information and evidence , including large files , through an upload and download functionality; ### the rapid and secure exchange and temporary storage of operational information and evidence , including large files , through an upload and download functionality;


### evidence traceability through a business logging mechanism allowing to keep track of all evidence exchanged through the jits collaboration platform; ### evidence traceability through an advanced logging and tracking mechanism allowing to keep track of all evidence exchanged through the jits collaboration platform;


### 3. eu-lisa shall make the communication software available to the jits collaboration platform users. ### 3. eu-lisa shall make the communication software available to the jits collaboration platform users and assist them with technical matters.


### 1. eurojust , europol , the european public prosecutor’s office , olaf and other competent union bodies , offices and agencies shall make the necessary technical arrangements to enable them to access the jits collaboration platform. ### 1. eurojust , europol , the european public prosecutor’s office , olaf and other competent union bodies , offices and agencies and international judicial authorities with which there is a jit agreement shall make the necessary technical arrangements to enable them to access the jits collaboration platform.


### 1. eu-lisa shall establish an advisory group in order to obtain expertise related to the jits collaboration platform , in particular in the context of preparation of its annual work programme and its annual activity report. ### 1. eu-lisa shall establish an advisory group in order to obtain expertise related to the jits collaboration platform , in particular in the context of preparation of its annual work programme , its annual activity report and improvements to be made to the system.


### 3. the jit space administrator or administrators shall establish the access rights of the jits collaboration platform users to the jit collaboration space , on the basis of the jit agreement. ### 3. the jit space administrator or administrators shall establish the access rights of the jits collaboration platform users to the jit collaboration space , and distribute the tasks and responsibilities on the basis of the jit agreement.


### 1. where a member state , eurojust , europol , the european public prosecutor’s office , olaf or any other competent union body , office or agency , as a consequence of a failure on their part to comply with their obligations under this regulation , cause damage to the jits collaboration platform , that member state , eurojust , europol , the european public prosecutor’s office , olaf or other competent union body , office or agency respectively , shall be held liable for such damage , insofar as eu-lisa fails to take reasonable measures to prevent the damage from occurring or to minimise its impact. ### 1. where a member state , eurojust , europol , the european public prosecutor’s office , olaf , any other competent union body , office or agency , or international judicial authority as a consequence of a failure on their part to comply with their obligations under this regulation , cause damage to the jits collaboration platform , that member state , eurojust , europol , the european public prosecutor’s office , olaf or other competent union body , office or agency , or international judicial authority respectively , shall be held liable for such damage , insofar as eu-lisa fails to take reasonable measures to prevent the damage from occurring or to minimise its impact.


### 2. upon expiry of the retention period referred to in paragraph 1 , the data record shall be automatically erased from the centralised system. ### 2. once the downloading by all intended jit collaboration platform users is complete or upon expiry of the retention period referred to in paragraph 1 , the data record shall be automatically erased from the centralised system.


### 1. each competent national authority of a member state , and where appropriate , eurojust , europol , the european public prosecutor’s office , olaf or any other competent union body , office or agency shall be considered to be data controllers in accordance with applicable union data protection rules for the processing of personal data under this regulation. ### 1. each competent national authority of a member state , and where appropriate , eurojust , europol , the european public prosecutor’s office , olaf , any other competent union body , office or agency or international judicial authority shall be considered to be data controllers in accordance with applicable union data protection rules for the processing of personal data under this regulation.


### 2. with regard to data uploaded to the jits collaboration platform by the competent authorities of third countries , one of the jit space administrators is to be considered data controller as regards the personal data exchanged through , and stored in the jits collaboration platform. ### 2. with regard to data uploaded to the jits collaboration platform by the competent authorities of third countries , one of the jit space administrators is to be nominated data controller as regards the personal data exchanged through , and stored in the jits collaboration platform.


### 2. access to the jits collaboration platform shall be limited to duly authorised staff of the competent member states’ and third country authorities , eurojust , europol , the european public prosecutor’s office , olaf and other competent union bodies , offices or agencies , to the extent needed for the performance of their tasks in accordance with the purposes referred to in paragraph 1 , and to what is necessary and proportionate to the objectives pursued. ### 2. access to the jits collaboration platform shall be limited to duly authorised staff of the competent member states’ and third country authorities , eurojust , europol , the european public prosecutor’s office , olaf , other competent union bodies , offices or agencies , or international judicial authorities , to the extent needed for the performance of their tasks in accordance with the purposes referred to in paragraph 1 , and to what is necessary and proportionate to the objectives pursued.


### 1. eu-lisa shall establish procedures to monitor the development of the jits collaboration platform as regards the objectives relating to planning and costs and to monitor the functioning of the jits collaboration platform as regards the objectives relating to the technical output , cost-effectiveness , security and quality of service. ### 1. eu-lisa shall establish procedures to monitor the development of the jits collaboration platform as regards the objectives relating to planning and costs and to monitor and evaluate the usage and the functioning of the jits collaboration platform as regards the objectives relating to the technical output , cost-effectiveness , security and quality of service.


### 8. the member states’ competent authorities , eurojust , europol , the european public prosecutor’s office , olaf and other competent union bodies , offices and agencies shall provide eu-lisa and the commission with the information necessary to draft the reports referred to in paragraphs 4 and 7. that information shall not jeopardise working methods or include information that reveals sources , names of staff members or investigations. ### 8. the member states’ competent authorities , eurojust , europol , the european public prosecutor’s office , olaf , other competent union bodies , offices and agencies or international judicial authorities shall provide eu-lisa and the commission with the information necessary to draft the reports referred to in paragraphs 4 and 7. that information shall not jeopardise working methods or include information that reveals sources , names of staff members or investigations.


### 2. notes that the agency uses key performance indicators to measure its training activities and their impact , in particular the satisfaction level of the participants , in order to assess the added value provided by those activities , and uses performance indicators to improve its budget management; ### 2. welcomes the fact that the agency uses key performance indicators to measure its training activities and their impact , in particular the satisfaction level of the participants , in order to assess the added value provided by those activities , and uses performance indicators to improve its budget management;


### 8. observes that , following its relocation from the united kingdom to hungary and the resulting lower correction coefficient applied to staff salaries , the staff turnover has been high and geographical balance has not always been maintained as applications from member states other than the host country have decreased; notes that in 2019 , the agency continued to receive a significant number of applications from hungarian citizens and host member state nationals continued to be overrepresented in the total number of staff; notes that in 2019 , in order to reduce the high staff turnover , the agency continued to implement staff retention and business continuity measures , for example , the agency engaged a number of interim staff and seconded national experts , awaiting the completion of the recruitment of statutory staff , continued the reclassification of staff and functions and maintained social arrangements (e.g. schooling for staff’s children) , teleworking and flexitime arrangements; ### 8. observes that , following its relocation from the united kingdom to hungary and the resulting lower correction coefficient applied to staff salaries , the staff turnover has been high and geographical balance has not always been maintained as applications from member states other than the host country have decreased; notes that in 2019 , the agency continued to receive a significant number of applications from hungarian citizens and host member state nationals continued to be overrepresented in the total number of staff; notes with appreciation that in 2019 , in order to reduce the high staff turnover , the agency continued to implement staff retention and business continuity measures , for example , the agency engaged a number of interim staff and seconded national experts , awaiting the completion of the recruitment of statutory staff , continued the reclassification of staff and functions and maintained social arrangements (e.g. schooling for staff’s children) , teleworking and flexitime arrangements;


### 10. recalls from the court’s report 2018 that the agency had not yet introduced all the tools launched by the commission aiming to introduce a single solution for the electronic exchange of information with third parties participating in public procurement procedures (e-procurement); notes that the agency introduced e-invoicing and e-tendering in 2018 and introduced e-submission in 2019 , thus fully implementing e-procurement; ### 10. recalls from the court’s report 2018 that the agency had not yet introduced all the tools launched by the commission aiming to introduce a single solution for the electronic exchange of information with third parties participating in public procurement procedures (e-procurement); notes with satisfaction that the agency introduced e-invoicing and e-tendering in 2018 and introduced e-submission in 2019 , thus fully implementing e-procurement;


### prevention and management of conflicts of interest and transparency ### prevention and management of conflicts of interest , ethics and transparency;


### 12. notes the agency’s existing measures and ongoing efforts to secure transparency and prevention and management of conflicts of interest; expresses satisfaction that the agency has set up and implemented a code of administrative behaviour in 2019 and that declarations of interest and the cv’s of management board members and senior management are published on the website; ### 12. notes the agency’s existing measures and ongoing efforts to secure transparency and prevention and management of conflicts of interest; expresses satisfaction that the agency has set up and implemented a code of administrative behaviour in 2019 and that declarations of interest and the cv’s of management board members and senior management are published on the website; notes with appreciation that in 2019 the management board has approved implementing decisions on whistleblowing as well as on the setting up of a staff committee;


### 12. notes the agency’s existing measures and ongoing efforts to secure transparency and prevention and management of conflicts of interest; expresses satisfaction that the agency has set up and implemented a code of administrative behaviour in 2019 and that declarations of interest and the cv’s of management board members and senior management are published on the website; ### 12. notes the agency’s existing measures and ongoing efforts to secure transparency and prevention and management of conflicts of interest; expresses satisfaction that the agency has set up and implemented a code of administrative behaviour in 2019 and appreciates the fact that declarations of interest and the cv’s of management board members and senior management are published on the website;


### 14. notes that , according to the court’s report , on one occasion , a budgetary commitment of eur 180 000 was approved in accrual based accounting system (abac) by an inappropriately authorised staff member and thus the agency should ensure consistency between abac authorisation rights and the written decision signed by the executive director; notes from the agency’s reply that the identified non-compliance was documented in the register of exceptions and non-compliance events , together with actions for improvement , in order to strengthen the controls over abac rights; ### 14. notes that , according to the court’s report , on one occasion , a budgetary commitment of eur 180 000 was approved in accrual based accounting system (abac) by an inappropriately authorised staff member and thus the agency should ensure consistency between abac authorisation rights and the written decision signed by the executive director; notes from the agency’s reply that the identified non-compliance was documented in the register of exceptions and non-compliance events , together with actions for improvement , in order to strengthen the controls over abac rights; calls on the agency to report to the discharge authority about the actions for improvement it implemented and to avoid any future situations where budgetary commitments are approved by inappropriately authorised staff members , and to ensure full compliance with all principles of sound budgetary execution;


### 15. notes that , according to the court’s report , on one occasion , a framework contract with a value of eur 100 000 was signed by an authorising officer whose authorisation limit for legal commitments was eur 60 000 and the executive director did not provide specific sub-delegations during his absence in order to ensure the continuity of agency's operations; notes from the agency’s reply that , following the audit finding , an amended decision on sub-delegations was adopted , where allocated ceilings for authorised officers were increased to better enable continuity of operations; ### 15. regrets that , according to the court’s report , on one occasion , a framework contract with a value of eur 100 000 was signed by an authorising officer whose authorisation limit for legal commitments was eur 60 000 and the executive director did not provide specific sub-delegations during his absence in order to ensure the continuity of agency's operations; notes from the agency’s reply that , following the audit finding , an amended decision on sub-delegations was adopted , where allocated ceilings for authorised officers were increased to better enable continuity of operations; calls on the executive director to ensure the business and operation continuity at all times , including during temporary absences;


### 21. notes that the agency does not have a policy regarding cyber security and protection of digital records in its possession which in current times is very important; acknowledges that in 2020 the agency initiated the process to implement the advanced records management system (ares) as a document management system together with the partner agency eit; calls on the agency to report to the discharge authority regarding the progress of implementation; ### 21. deplores the fact that the agency does not have a policy regarding cyber security and protection of digital records in its possession which in current times is very important; acknowledges that in 2020 the agency initiated the process to implement the advanced records management system (ares) as a document management system together with the partner agency eit; calls on the agency to cooperate with other union bodies , offices and agencies in developing and implementing a strong and reliable cybersecurity policy; calls on the agency to report to the discharge authority regarding the progress of implementation;


### 23. notes the agency’s efforts to ensure a cost-effective and environment-friendly work-place; points out that the agency does not have a carbon off-setting scheme in place but acknowledges on the basis of the agency’s reply to the standard questionnaire that the cost of participating in such a scheme cannot be covered from its limited financial resources , and acknowledges that the agency encourages its staff to make use of public transportation to reduce emissions and considers reimbursing the costs for public transport for employees; ### 23. notes the agency’s efforts to ensure a cost-effective and environment-friendly work-place; regrets the fact that the agency does not have a carbon off-setting scheme in place but acknowledges on the basis of the agency’s reply to the standard questionnaire that the cost of participating in such a scheme cannot be covered from its limited financial resources , and acknowledges that the agency encourages its staff to make use of public transportation to reduce emissions and considers reimbursing the costs for public transport for employees;


### (31a) in order to increase the efficiency of procedures and to reduce the risk of absconding and the likelihood of unauthorised movements , there should be no procedural gaps between the issuance of a negative decision on an application for international protection and of a return decision. a return decision should immediately be issued to applicants whose applications are rejected. without prejudice to the right to an effective remedy , the return decision should either be part of the negative decision on an application for international protection or , if it is a separate act , be issued at the same time and together with the negative decision. ### (31a) in order to increase the efficiency of procedures and to reduce the risk of absconding and the likelihood of unauthorised movements , there should be no procedural gaps between the issuance of a negative decision on an application for international protection and of a return decision. a return decision should immediately be issued to applicants whose applications are rejected. where more than one authority is involved in the issuance of negative decisions on applications for international protection and of return decisions , those authorities should coordinate with one another in order to ensure that negative decisions and return decisions are issued at the same time. without prejudice to the right to an effective remedy , the return decision should either be part of the negative decision on an application for international protection or , if it is a separate act , be issued at the same time and together with the negative decision.


### (39a) in the interest of swift and fair procedures for all applicants , whilst also ensuring that the stay of applicants who do not qualify for international protection in the union is not unduly prolonged , including those who are nationals of third countries exempt from the requirement to be in a possession of a visa pursuant to regulation (eu) no 2018/1806 , member states should accelerate the examination of applications of applicants who are nationals or , in the case of stateless persons , formerly habitual residents of a third country for which the share of decisions granting international protection is lower than 20% of the total number of decisions for that third country. where a significant change has occurred in the third country concerned since the publication of the relevant eurostat data and taking into account the guidance note pursuant to article 10 of regulation xx/xx on the european asylum agency , or where the applicant belongs to a specific category of persons for whom the low recognition rate cannot be considered as representative of their protection needs due to a specific persecution ground , examination of the application should not be accelerated. cases where a third country may be considered as a safe country of origin or a safe third country for the applicant within the meaning of this regulation should remain applicable as a separate ground for respectively the accelerated examination procedure or the inadmissible procedure. ### (39a) in the interest of swift and fair procedures for all applicants , whilst also ensuring that the stay of applicants who do not qualify for international protection in the union is not unduly prolonged , including those who are nationals of third countries exempt from the requirement to be in a possession of a visa pursuant to regulation (eu) no 2018/1806 , member states should accelerate the examination of applications of applicants who are nationals or , in the case of stateless persons , formerly habitual residents of a third country for which the share of decisions granting international protection is lower than 20% of the total number of decisions for that third country. a 20% threshold should apply in all circumstances , including in times of crisis or force majeure. by way of exception , the examination procedure should not be accelerated when the commission determines by means of an implementing act that a significant change has occurred in the third country concerned since the publication of the relevant eurostat data on the basis of the guidance note pursuant to article 11 of regulation xx/xx on the european asylum agency. an applicant who belongs to a specific category of persons for whom the low recognition rate cannot be considered as representative of their protection needs due to a specific persecution ground , should also be exempt from the accelerated examination procedure , including after it has begun , where the competent authorities find that the grounds for such a procedure do not apply. competent authorities should conduct appropriate vulnerability checks throughout the border procedure. cases where a third country may be considered as a safe country of origin or a safe third country for the applicant within the meaning of this regulation should remain applicable as a separate ground for respectively the accelerated examination procedure or the inadmissible procedure.


### 1. following the screening procedure carried out in accordance with regulation (eu) no xxx/xxx [screening regulation] , and provided that the applicant has not yet been authorised to enter member states’ territory , a member state may examine an application in a border procedure where that application has been made by a third-country national or stateless person who does not fulfil the conditions for entry in the territory of a member state as set out in article 6 of regulation (eu) 2016/399. the border procedure may take place: ### 1. following the screening procedure carried out in accordance with regulation (eu) no xxx/xxx [screening regulation] , where applicable , and provided that the applicant has not yet been authorised to enter member states’ territory , a member state may examine an application in a border procedure where that application has been made by a third-country national or stateless person who does not fulfil the conditions for entry in the territory of a member state as set out in article 6 of regulation (eu) 2016/399. the border procedure may take place:


### following apprehension in connection with an unauthorised crossing of the external border; ### following the apprehension of that third-country national or stateless person by the competent authorities in a member state after he or she crossed the external border without authorisation;


### 4. a member state may decide not to apply paragraph 3 to nationals or stateless persons who are habitual residents of third countries for which that member state has submitted a notification to the commission in accordance with article 25a(3) of regulation (ec) no 810/2009. ### deleted


### 5. the border procedure may only be applied to unaccompanied minors and to minors below the age of 12 and their family members in the cases referred to in article 40(5) (b). ### 5. the border procedure may only be applied to unaccompanied minors and to minors below the age of 12 and their family members in the cases referred to in article 40(5) (b). the best interests of the child and the safeguards provided for in directive xxx/xxx/eu [reception conditions directive recast] , in particular articles 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 20 , 21 , 22 and 23 , shall be a primary consideration for the competent authorities in the application of this paragraph.


### 6. applicants subject to the border procedure shall not be authorised to enter the territory of the member state , without prejudice to paragraphs 9 and 11. ### 6. applicants subject to the border procedure shall not be authorised to enter the territory of the member state , without prejudice to paragraphs 9 and 11. in accordance with directive xxx/xxx/eu [reception conditions directive recast] , a member state shall not decide to hold an applicant in detention until it has individually assessed that applicant’s case and effectively considered alternatives to detention or less coercive measures.


### (17) applicants who are identified as being in need of special procedural guarantees should be provided with adequate support , including sufficient time , in order to create the conditions necessary for their effective access to procedures and for presenting the elements needed to substantiate their application for international protection. where it is not possible to provide adequate support in the framework of an accelerated examination procedure or a border procedure , an applicant in need of special procedural guarantees should be exempted from those procedures. the need for special procedural guarantees of a nature that could prevent the application of accelerated or border procedures should also mean that the applicant is provided with additional guarantees in cases where his or her appeal does not have automatic suspensive effect , with a view to making the remedy effective in his or her particular circumstances. ### (17) applicants who are identified as being in need of specific procedural guarantees should be provided with adequate support , including sufficient time , in order to create the conditions necessary for their effective access to procedures and for presenting the elements needed to substantiate their application for international protection. where it is not possible to provide adequate support in the framework of an accelerated examination procedure or a border procedure , an applicant in need of specific procedural guarantees should be exempted from those procedures. the responsible authorities should provide for alternatives to detention in border procedures , in particular for unaccompanied minors and applicants with specific vulnerabilities.


### (40) many applications for international protection are made at the external border or in a transit zone of a member state , often by persons apprehended in connection with unauthorised crossings of the external border or disembarked following a search and rescue operation. in order to conduct identification , security and health screening at the external border and direct the third-country nationals and stateless persons concerned to the relevant procedures , a screening is necessary. there should be seamless and efficient links between all stages of the relevant procedures for all irregular arrivals. after the screening , third-country nationals and stateless persons should be channelled to the appropriate asylum or return procedure , or refused entry. a pre-entry phase consisting of screening and border procedures for asylum and return should therefore be established. ### (40) many applications for international protection are made at the external border or in a transit zone of a member state , often by persons apprehended in connection with unauthorised crossings of the external border or disembarked following a search and rescue operation. in order to conduct identification , security and health screening at the external border and direct the third-country nationals and stateless persons concerned to the relevant procedures , a screening is necessary. there should be seamless and efficient links between all stages of the relevant procedures for all irregular arrivals. third-country nationals and stateless persons should , where applicable after screening , be channelled to the appropriate asylum or return procedure , or refused entry. a pre-entry phase consisting of screening and border procedures for asylum and return should therefore be established.


### (40a) the purpose of the border procedure for asylum and return should be to quickly assess at the external borders whether applications are unfounded or inadmissible and to swiftly return those with no right to stay , while ensuring that those with well-founded claims are channelled into the regular procedure and provided quick access to international protection. member states should therefore be able to require applicants for international protection to stay at the external border or in a transit zone in order to assess the admissibility of applications. in well-defined circumstances , member states should be able to provide for the examination of the merits of an application and , in the event of rejection of the application , for the return of the third-country nationals and stateless persons concerned at the external borders. ### (40a) 'the purpose of the border procedure for asylum and return should be to quickly assess whether applications are unfounded or inadmissible and to swiftly return those with no right to stay , while ensuring that those with well-founded claims are channelled into the regular procedure and provided quick access to international protection. member states should therefore be able to require applicants for international protection to stay at the locations , designated at their discretion , for the completion of the border procedure , such as at the external border or in a transit zone in order to assess the admissibility of applications. in well-defined circumstances , member states should be able to provide for the examination of the merits of an application and , in the event of rejection of the application , for the return of the third-country nationals and stateless persons concerned in a border procedure.


### (40b) member state should assess applications in a border procedure where the applicant is a danger to national security or public order , where the applicant has misled the authorities by presenting false information or documents or by withholding relevant information or documents with respect to his or her identity or nationality that could have had a negative impact on the decision and where it is likely that the application is unfounded because the applicant is of a nationality for whom decisions granting international protection is lower than 20% of the total number of decisions for that third country. in other cases , such as when the applicant is from a safe country of origin or a safe third country , the use of the border procedure should be optional for the member states. ### (40b) member state should assess applications in a border procedure where the applicant is a danger to national security or public order , where the applicant has misled the authorities by presenting false information or documents or by withholding relevant information or documents with respect to his or her identity or nationality that could have had a negative impact on the decision and where it is likely that the application is unfounded because the applicant is of a nationality for whom decisions granting international protection is lower than 20% of the total number of decisions for that third country , unless more recent data from the european asylum agency indicate a significant change. in other cases , such as when the applicant is from a safe country of origin or a safe third country , the use of the border procedure should be optional for the member states.


### (40c) when applying the border procedure for the examination of an application for international protection , member states should ensure that the necessary arrangements are made to accommodate the applicants at or close to the external border or transit zones , in accordance with directive xxx/xxx/eu [reception conditions directive]. member states may process the applications at a different location at the external border than that where the asylum application is made by transferring applicants to a specific location at or in the proximity of the external border of that member states where appropriate facilities exist. member states should retain discretion in deciding at which specific locations at the external borders such facilities should be set up. however , member states should seek to limit the need for transferring applicants for this purpose , and therefore aim at setting up such facilities with sufficient capacity at border crossing points , or sections of the external border , where the majority of the number of applications for international protection are made , also taking into account the length of the external border and the number of border crossing points or transit zones. they should notify the commission of the specific locations at the external border , transit zones or proximity of the external border where the border procedures will be carried out. in cases where the border procedure is applied and the capacity of the locations at or in proximity of the external border as notified by a member state is temporarily exceeded , member states may process those applications at another location within its territory , for the shortest time possible. ### (40c) when applying the border procedure for the examination of an application for international protection , member states should ensure that the necessary arrangements are made to accommodate the applicants in accordance with directive xxx/xxx/eu [reception conditions directive]. asylum staff , legal representatives , non-governmental organisations , union and international institutions , or socio-medical staff should always be allowed to access border procedure facilities. member states should retain discretion in deciding at which specific locations such facilities should be set up , but should ensure that the requirements for border procedures continue to apply. such facilities may be situated at or close to the external border or transit zones , provided that they guarantee appropriate reception conditions , access for staff and essential services. member states should notify the commission of the specific locations where the border procedures will be carried out. where the border procedure is applied and the capacity of the locations as notified by a member state is temporarily exceeded , the capacity of staff is insufficient or the reception conditions are not met , member states may process those applications at another location within its territory , for the shortest time possible.


### (40d) in case where the use of the border procedure is an obligation , member states should by way of exception not be required to apply it for the examination of applications for international protection from nationals of a third country that does not cooperate sufficiently on readmission , since a swift return of the persons concerned , following rejection of their applications , would be unlikely in that case. the determination of whether a third country is cooperating sufficiently on readmission should be based on the procedures set out in article 25a of regulation (ec) no 810/2009. ### (40d) where the use of the border procedure is an obligation , member states should by way of exception , not be required to subject nationals of a third country that does not cooperate sufficiently on readmission to the border procedure for carrying out return , since it would be unlikely in that case that the persons concerned could be swiftly returned following the rejection of their applications during the border procedure for the examination of applications for international protection.. the determination of whether a third country is cooperating sufficiently on readmission should be based on the procedures set out in article 25a of regulation (ec) no 810/2009. where the border procedure for carrying out return is exceptionally not applied in those circumstances , the return procedure established by the return directive should apply and the third-country national concerned should be authorised to enter the territory of the member state concerned.


### (40e) the duration of the border procedure for examination of applications for international protection should be as short as possible while at the same time guaranteeing a complete and fair examination of the claims. it should in any event not exceed 12 weeks. this deadline should be understood as a stand-alone deadline for the asylum border procedure , encompassing both the decision on the examination of the application as well as the decision of the first level of appeal , if applicable. within this period , member states are entitled to set the deadline in national law both for the administrative and for the appeal stage , but should set them in a way so as to ensure that the examination procedure is concluded and that subsequently , if relevant , the decision on the first level of appeal is issued within this maximum 12 week. after that period , if the member state nevertheless failed to take the relevant decisions , the applicant should in principle be authorised to enter the territory of the member state. entry into the territory should however not be authorised where the applicant has no right to remain , where he or she has not requested to be allowed to remain for the purpose of an appeal procedure , or where a court or tribunal has decided that he or she should not be allowed to remain pending the outcome of an appeal procedure. in such cases , to ensure continuity between the asylum procedure and the return procedure , the return procedure should also be carried out in the context of a border procedure for a period not exceeding 12 weeks. this period should be counted starting from the moment in which the applicant , third-country national or stateless person no longer has a right to remain or is no longer allowed to remain. ### (40e) the duration of the border procedure for examination of applications for international protection should be as short as possible while at the same time guaranteeing a complete and fair examination of the claims. it should in any event not exceed 12 weeks. this deadline should be understood as a stand-alone deadline for the asylum border procedure , encompassing both the decision on the examination of the application as well as the decision of the appeal , if applicable. within this period , member states are entitled to set the deadline in national law both for the administrative and for the appeal stage , but should set them in a way so as to ensure that the examination procedure is concluded and that subsequently , if relevant , the decision on the appeal is issued within this maximum 12 week. after that period , if the member state nevertheless failed to take the relevant decisions , the applicant should be authorised to enter the territory of the member state. entry into the territory should however not be authorised where the applicant has no right to remain , where he or she has not requested to be allowed to remain for the purpose of an appeal procedure , or where a court or tribunal has decided that he or she should not be allowed to remain pending the outcome of an appeal procedure. in such cases , to ensure continuity between the asylum procedure and the return procedure , the return procedure should also be carried out in the context of a border procedure for a period not exceeding 12 weeks. this period should be counted starting from the moment in which the applicant , third-country national or stateless person no longer has a right to remain or is no longer allowed to remain. to complete the border procedure within the set deadlines , the competent authorities and all actors involved in the border procedure should seek to enhance the engagement and cooperation of third-country nationals at all stages of the procedure.


### (40f) while the border procedure for the examination of an application for international protection can be applied without recourse to detention , member states should nevertheless be able to apply the grounds for detention during the border procedure in accordance with the provisions of the [reception conditions] directive (eu) xxx/xxx in order to decide on the right of the applicant to enter the territory. if detention is used during such procedure , the provisions on detention of the [reception conditions] directive (eu) xxx/xxx should apply , including the guarantees for detained applicants and the fact that an individual assessment of each case is necessary , judicial control and conditions of detention. ### (40f) while the border procedure for the examination of an application for international protection can be applied without recourse to detention , member states should nevertheless be able to apply the grounds for detention during the border procedure in accordance with the provisions of the [reception conditions] directive (eu) xxx/xxx , including the right of the applicant to enter the territory and reception conditions and guarantees for detained applicants. a decision to detain an applicant during a border procedure should never be automatic. such decisions should always be based on an individual assessment of each case that shows that detention is necessary and proportionate and that it is not possible to effectively apply less coercive measures. such decisions should be subject to judicial oversight.


### (40h) when applying the border procedure for carrying out return , certain provisions of the [recast return directive] should apply as these regulate elements of the return procedure that are not determined by this regulation , notably those on definitions , more favourable provisions , non-refoulement , best interests of the child , family life and state of health , risk of absconding , obligation to cooperate , period for voluntary departure , return decision , removal , postponement of removal , return and removal of unaccompanied minors , entry bans , safeguards pending return , detention , conditions of detention , detention of minors and families and emergency situations. to reduce the risk of unauthorised entry and movement of illegally staying third-country nationals subject to the border procedure for carrying out return , a period for voluntary departure not exceeding 15 days may be granted to illegally staying third-country nationals , without prejudice for the possibility to voluntarily comply with the obligation to return at any moment. ### (40h) when applying the border procedure for carrying out return , certain provisions of the [recast return directive] should apply as these regulate elements of the return procedure that are not determined by this regulation , notably those on definitions , more favourable provisions , non-refoulement , best interests of the child , family life and state of health , risk of absconding , obligation to cooperate , period for voluntary departure , return decision , removal , postponement of removal , return and removal of unaccompanied minors , entry bans , safeguards pending return , detention , conditions of detention , detention of minors and families and emergency situations.


### (66c) to ensure the consistency of the legal review carried out by a court or tribunal on a decision rejecting an application for international protection and the accompanying return decision , and with a view to accelerating the examination of the case and reducing the burden on the competent judicial authorities , such decisions should be subject to common proceedings before the same court or tribunal. ### (66c) to ensure the consistency of the legal review carried out by a court or tribunal on a decision rejecting an application for international protection and the accompanying return decision , and with a view to accelerating the examination of the case and reducing the burden on the competent judicial authorities , it should be possible to subjet such decisions to common proceedings before the same court or tribunal , where this is possible under the national legal system concerned.


### where an application is rejected as inadmissible , unfounded or manifestly unfounded with regard to both refugee status and subsidiary protection status , or as implicitly or explicitly withdrawn , member states shall issue a return decision that respects directive xxx/xxx/eu [return directive]. the return decision shall be issued as part of the decision rejecting the application for international protection or , in a separate act. where the return decision is issued as a separate act , it shall be issued at the same time and together with the decision rejecting the application for international protection. ### where an application is rejected as inadmissible , unfounded or manifestly unfounded with regard to both refugee status and subsidiary protection status , or as implicitly or explicitly withdrawn , member states shall issue a return decision that respects directive xxx/xxx/eu [return directive] , in particular the best interests of the child , the family life and state of health of the third-country national concerned , and the principle of non-refoulement. the return decision shall be issued as part of the decision rejecting the application for international protection or , in a separate act. where the return decision is issued as a separate act , it shall be issued at the same time and together with the decision rejecting the application for international protection.