# C_2021116EN.01022601.xml

| 31.3.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 116/226 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 116/226

---

P8_TA(2019)0356

Temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders ***I

European Parliament legislative resolution of 4 April 2019 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2016/399 as regards the rules applicable to the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders (COM(2017)0571 — C8-0326/2017 — 2017/0245(COD))

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

(2021/C 116/28)

The European Parliament,

| — | having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2017)0571), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2017)0571),

| — | having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 77(2)(e) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8-0326/2017), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 77(2)(e) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8-0326/2017),

| — | having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

| — | having regard to the contributions submitted by the Czech Chamber of Deputies, the Czech Senate, the Greek Parliament, the Spanish Parliament, the French Senate and the Portuguese Parliament on the draft legislative act, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the contributions submitted by the Czech Chamber of Deputies, the Czech Senate, the Greek Parliament, the Spanish Parliament, the French Senate and the Portuguese Parliament on the draft legislative act,

| — | having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0356/2018), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0356/2018),

| 1. | Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out (1); |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal; |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments. |
| --- | --- |

3.

---

(1)  This position corresponds to the amendments adopted on 29 November 2018 (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2018)0472).

---

P8_TC1-COD(2017)0245

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 4 April 2019 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) .../... of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2016/399 as regards the rules applicable to the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular point (e) of Article 77(2) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments,

Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure (1),

Whereas:

| (-1) | The creation of an area in which the free movement of persons across internal borders is ensured is one of the main achievements of the Union. The normal functioning and strengthening of such an area, which is based on trust and solidarity, should be a common objective of the Union and the Member States which have agreed to take part in it. At the same time, it is necessary to have a common response to situations seriously affecting the public policy or internal security of that area, or parts thereof, by allowing for the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders in exceptional circumstances and as a last resort, while strengthening cooperation between the Member States concerned. [Am. 1] |
| --- | --- |

(-1)

The creation of an area in which the free movement of persons across internal borders is ensured is one of the main achievements of the Union. The normal functioning and strengthening of such an area, which is based on trust and solidarity, should be a common objective of the Union and the Member States which have agreed to take part in it. At the same time, it is necessary to have a common response to situations seriously affecting the public policy or internal security of that area, or parts thereof, by allowing for the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders in exceptional circumstances and as a last resort, while strengthening cooperation between the Member States concerned. [Am. 1]

| (1) | In an area where persons may move freely, the reintroduction of border control at internal borders should remain an exception. The

  As the free movement of persons is affected by the temporary
  reintroduction of internal border control
  , it
  should be decided

  reintroduced
  only as a measure of last resort, for a limited period of time and to the extent that controls are necessary and proportionate to the identified serious threats to public policy or internal security.
  Any such measure should be withdrawn as soon as the underlying grounds for it cease to exist. [Am. 2] |
| --- | --- |

(1)

In an area where persons may move freely, the reintroduction of border control at internal borders should remain an exception. The

  As the free movement of persons is affected by the temporary
  reintroduction of internal border control
  , it
  should be decided

  reintroduced
  only as a measure of last resort, for a limited period of time and to the extent that controls are necessary and proportionate to the identified serious threats to public policy or internal security.
  Any such measure should be withdrawn as soon as the underlying grounds for it cease to exist. [Am. 2]

| (1a) | Migration and the crossing of external borders by a large number of third-country nationals should not, per se, be considered to be a threat to public policy or internal security. [Am. 3] |
| --- | --- |

(1a)

Migration and the crossing of external borders by a large number of third-country nationals should not, per se, be considered to be a threat to public policy or internal security. [Am. 3]

| (2) | The identified serious threats can be addressed by different measures, depending on their nature and scale.
  While it remains clear that police powers are different in their nature and purpose from border control,
  the Member States have at their disposal also

  those
  police powers, as referred to in Article 23 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code) (2), which, subject to some conditions, can be used in the border areas. The Commission Recommendation on proportionate police checks and police cooperation in the Schengen area (3) provides guidelines to the Member States to that end. [Am. 4] |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The identified serious threats can be addressed by different measures, depending on their nature and scale.
  While it remains clear that police powers are different in their nature and purpose from border control,
  the Member States have at their disposal also

  those
  police powers, as referred to in Article 23 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code) (2), which, subject to some conditions, can be used in the border areas. The Commission Recommendation on proportionate police checks and police cooperation in the Schengen area (3) provides guidelines to the Member States to that end. [Am. 4]

| (2a) | Before resorting to the reintroduction of border control at internal borders, Member States should give precedence to alternative measures. In particular, the Member State concerned should, where necessary and justified, consider using more effectively or intensifying police checks within its territory, including in border areas and main transport routes, on the basis of a risk assessment, while ensuring that those police checks do not have border control as an objective. Modern technologies are instrumental in addressing threats to public policy or internal security. Member States should assess whether the situation could be adequately addressed by way of increased cross-border cooperation, both from an operational point of view and from that of information exchange between police and intelligence services. [Am. 5] |
| --- | --- |

(2a)

Before resorting to the reintroduction of border control at internal borders, Member States should give precedence to alternative measures. In particular, the Member State concerned should, where necessary and justified, consider using more effectively or intensifying police checks within its territory, including in border areas and main transport routes, on the basis of a risk assessment, while ensuring that those police checks do not have border control as an objective. Modern technologies are instrumental in addressing threats to public policy or internal security. Member States should assess whether the situation could be adequately addressed by way of increased cross-border cooperation, both from an operational point of view and from that of information exchange between police and intelligence services. [Am. 5]

| (3) | In accordance with the provisions of Title III, Chapter II of the Schengen Borders Code, internal border control can be temporarily reintroduced as a last resort measure in case of a serious threat to public policy or internal security for a limited period of up to six months — for foreseeable events (Article 25), and for a limited period of up to two months — for cases requiring immediate action (Article 28). These time frames proved to be sufficient to tackle the serious threats related to the most frequent foreseeable events such as international sport or high level political events. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

In accordance with the provisions of Title III, Chapter II of the Schengen Borders Code, internal border control can be temporarily reintroduced as a last resort measure in case of a serious threat to public policy or internal security for a limited period of up to six months — for foreseeable events (Article 25), and for a limited period of up to two months — for cases requiring immediate action (Article 28). These time frames proved to be sufficient to tackle the serious threats related to the most frequent foreseeable events such as international sport or high level political events.

| (4) | However, experience has shown that
  there is rarely a need to reintroduce border control at internal borders for periods of longer than two months. In exceptional circumstances only,
  certain serious threats to public policy or internal security, such as cross-border terrorist threats or specific cases of secondary movements of irregular migrants within the Union that justified

  might persist beyond the maximum periods of six months currently authorised for
  the reintroduction of border controls, may persist well beyond the above periods

  control at internal borders
  . It is therefore needed and justified

  necessary
  to adjust the time limits applicable to the temporary reintroduction of border control to the current needs, while ensuring that this measure is not abused and remains an exception, to be used only as a last resort. To that end, the general deadline applicable under Article 25 of the Schengen Borders Code should be extended to one year.
  [Am. 6] |
| --- | --- |

(4)

However, experience has shown that
  there is rarely a need to reintroduce border control at internal borders for periods of longer than two months. In exceptional circumstances only,
  certain serious threats to public policy or internal security, such as cross-border terrorist threats or specific cases of secondary movements of irregular migrants within the Union that justified

  might persist beyond the maximum periods of six months currently authorised for
  the reintroduction of border controls, may persist well beyond the above periods

  control at internal borders
  . It is therefore needed and justified

  necessary
  to adjust the time limits applicable to the temporary reintroduction of border control to the current needs, while ensuring that this measure is not abused and remains an exception, to be used only as a last resort. To that end, the general deadline applicable under Article 25 of the Schengen Borders Code should be extended to one year.
  [Am. 6]

| (4a) | Any derogation from the fundamental principle of free movement of persons should be interpreted strictly and the concept of public policy presupposes the existence of a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society. [Am. 7] |
| --- | --- |

(4a)

Any derogation from the fundamental principle of free movement of persons should be interpreted strictly and the concept of public policy presupposes the existence of a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society. [Am. 7]

| (5) | In order to guarantee that these internal border controls
  are a measure of last resort and
  remain an exception, Member States should submit a risk assessment concerning the intended reintroduction

  prolongation
  of border control or prolongation thereof

  beyond two months
  . The risk assessment should, in particular, assess for how long the identified threat is expected to persist and which sections of the internal borders are affected, demonstrate that the prolongation of border controls is a 
  measure of
  last resort measure

  , in particular by showing that any alternative measures have proven or are deemed insufficient,
  and explain how border control would help in addressing the identified threat. In case of internal border control going beyond six months, The risk assessment should also demonstrate retrospectively the efficiency
  and effectiveness
  of the reintroduced border control in addressing the identified threat and explain in detail how each neighbouring Member State affected by such prolongation was consulted and involved in determining the least burdensome operational arrangements.
  The Member States should retain the possibility to classify, where necessary, all or parts of the information provided. [Am. 8] |
| --- | --- |

(5)

In order to guarantee that these internal border controls
  are a measure of last resort and
  remain an exception, Member States should submit a risk assessment concerning the intended reintroduction

  prolongation
  of border control or prolongation thereof

  beyond two months
  . The risk assessment should, in particular, assess for how long the identified threat is expected to persist and which sections of the internal borders are affected, demonstrate that the prolongation of border controls is a 
  measure of
  last resort measure

  , in particular by showing that any alternative measures have proven or are deemed insufficient,
  and explain how border control would help in addressing the identified threat. In case of internal border control going beyond six months, The risk assessment should also demonstrate retrospectively the efficiency
  and effectiveness
  of the reintroduced border control in addressing the identified threat and explain in detail how each neighbouring Member State affected by such prolongation was consulted and involved in determining the least burdensome operational arrangements.
  The Member States should retain the possibility to classify, where necessary, all or parts of the information provided. [Am. 8]

| (5a) | Whenever the reintroduction of internal border control is proposed for specific planned events of an exceptional nature and duration, such as sporting activities, the duration of such control should be very precise, circumscribed and linked to the actual duration of the event. [Am. 9] |
| --- | --- |

(5a)

Whenever the reintroduction of internal border control is proposed for specific planned events of an exceptional nature and duration, such as sporting activities, the duration of such control should be very precise, circumscribed and linked to the actual duration of the event. [Am. 9]

| (6) | The quality of the risk assessment submitted by the Member State will be very important for the assessment of the necessity and proportionality of the intended reintroduction or prolongation of border control. The European Border and Coast Guard Agency and, Europol
  , the European Asylum Support Office, the European Agency for the Operational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice and the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights
  should be involved in that assessment. [Am. 10] |
| --- | --- |

(6)

The quality of the risk assessment submitted by the Member State will be very important for the assessment of the necessity and proportionality of the intended reintroduction or prolongation of border control. The European Border and Coast Guard Agency and, Europol
  , the European Asylum Support Office, the European Agency for the Operational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice and the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights
  should be involved in that assessment. [Am. 10]

| (7) | The power of the Commission to issue an opinion under Article 27(4) of the Schengen Borders Code should be modified to reflect the new obligations on the Member States related to the risk assessment, including the cooperation with Member States concerned. When border control at internal borders is carried out for more than six months, the Commission should be obliged to issue an opinion. Also The consultation procedure as provided for in Article 27(5) of the Schengen Borders Code should be modified in order to reflect the role of the
  Union
  Agencies (European Border and Coast Guard Agency and Europol) and focus on the practical implementation of different aspects of cooperation between the Member States, including the coordination, where appropriate, of different measures on both sides of the border. [Am. 11] |
| --- | --- |

(7)

The power of the Commission to issue an opinion under Article 27(4) of the Schengen Borders Code should be modified to reflect the new obligations on the Member States related to the risk assessment, including the cooperation with Member States concerned. When border control at internal borders is carried out for more than six months, the Commission should be obliged to issue an opinion. Also The consultation procedure as provided for in Article 27(5) of the Schengen Borders Code should be modified in order to reflect the role of the
  Union
  Agencies (European Border and Coast Guard Agency and Europol) and focus on the practical implementation of different aspects of cooperation between the Member States, including the coordination, where appropriate, of different measures on both sides of the border. [Am. 11]

| (8) | In order to make the revised rules better adapted to the challenges related to persistent serious threats to public policy or internal security, a specific possibility should be provided to prolong internal border controls beyond one year

  six months on an exceptional basis
  . Such prolongation should accompany commensurate exceptional national measures also taken within the territory to address the threat, such as a state of emergency. In any case, such a possibility should not lead to the further prolongation of temporary internal border controls beyond two years

  one year
  . [Am. 12] |
| --- | --- |

(8)

In order to make the revised rules better adapted to the challenges related to persistent serious threats to public policy or internal security, a specific possibility should be provided to prolong internal border controls beyond one year

  six months on an exceptional basis
  . Such prolongation should accompany commensurate exceptional national measures also taken within the territory to address the threat, such as a state of emergency. In any case, such a possibility should not lead to the further prolongation of temporary internal border controls beyond two years

  one year
  . [Am. 12]

| (8a) | The necessity and proportionality of reintroducing internal border control should be balanced against the threat to public policy or internal security triggering the need for such reintroduction, as should alternative measures which could be taken at national or Union level, or both, and the impact of such control on the free movement of persons within the area without internal border control. [Am. 13] |
| --- | --- |

(8a)

The necessity and proportionality of reintroducing internal border control should be balanced against the threat to public policy or internal security triggering the need for such reintroduction, as should alternative measures which could be taken at national or Union level, or both, and the impact of such control on the free movement of persons within the area without internal border control. [Am. 13]

| (9) | The reference to Article 29 in Article 25(4) should be modified with a view of clarifying the relation between the time periods applicable under Article 29 and Article 25 of the Schengen Borders Code.
  [Am. 14] |
| --- | --- |

(9)

The reference to Article 29 in Article 25(4) should be modified with a view of clarifying the relation between the time periods applicable under Article 29 and Article 25 of the Schengen Borders Code.
  [Am. 14]

| (10) | The possibility to carry out temporary internal border controls in response to a specific threat to public policy or internal security which persists beyond a year

  six months
  should be subject to a specific procedure
  requiring a Council recommendation
  . [Am. 15] |
| --- | --- |

(10)

The possibility to carry out temporary internal border controls in response to a specific threat to public policy or internal security which persists beyond a year

  six months
  should be subject to a specific procedure
  requiring a Council recommendation
  . [Am. 15]

| (11) | To that end, the Commission should issue an opinion on the necessity and proportionality of such prolongation and, where appropriate, on the cooperation with the neighbouring

  . The European Parliament should immediately be informed about the proposed prolongation. The
  Member States
  affected should have the possibility to make observations to the Commission before it issues its opinion
  . [Am. 16] |
| --- | --- |

(11)

To that end, the Commission should issue an opinion on the necessity and proportionality of such prolongation and, where appropriate, on the cooperation with the neighbouring

  . The European Parliament should immediately be informed about the proposed prolongation. The
  Member States
  affected should have the possibility to make observations to the Commission before it issues its opinion
  . [Am. 16]

| (12) | In view of the nature of such measures, which touch on national executive and enforcement powers regarding serious threats to public policy or internal security, implementing powers to adopt recommendations under this specific procedure should exceptionally be conferred on the Council. |
| --- | --- |

(12)

In view of the nature of such measures, which touch on national executive and enforcement powers regarding serious threats to public policy or internal security, implementing powers to adopt recommendations under this specific procedure should exceptionally be conferred on the Council.

| (13) | The Council, taking account of the Commission's opinion, may recommend such extraordinary further prolongation and where appropriate determine

  lay down
  the conditions for cooperation between the Member States concerned, with a view to ensuring that it is an exceptional measure, in place only for as long as necessary and justified, and consistent with the measures also taken at the national level within the territory to address the same specific threat to public policy or internal security. The Council recommendation should be a prerequisite for any further prolongation beyond the period of one year and hence be of the same nature as the one already provided for in Article 29

  six months. The Council recommendation should be immediately forwarded to the European Parliament
  . [Am. 17] |
| --- | --- |

(13)

The Council, taking account of the Commission's opinion, may recommend such extraordinary further prolongation and where appropriate determine

  lay down
  the conditions for cooperation between the Member States concerned, with a view to ensuring that it is an exceptional measure, in place only for as long as necessary and justified, and consistent with the measures also taken at the national level within the territory to address the same specific threat to public policy or internal security. The Council recommendation should be a prerequisite for any further prolongation beyond the period of one year and hence be of the same nature as the one already provided for in Article 29

  six months. The Council recommendation should be immediately forwarded to the European Parliament
  . [Am. 17]

| (13a) | Measures taken under the specific procedure where exceptional circumstances put the overall functioning of the area without internal border control at risk should not be prolonged by virtue of, or combined with, measures taken under another procedure for the reintroduction or prolongation of internal border control as provided for in Regulation (EU) 2016/399. [Am. 18] |
| --- | --- |

(13a)

Measures taken under the specific procedure where exceptional circumstances put the overall functioning of the area without internal border control at risk should not be prolonged by virtue of, or combined with, measures taken under another procedure for the reintroduction or prolongation of internal border control as provided for in Regulation (EU) 2016/399. [Am. 18]

| (13b) | Where it considers that a Member State has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Treaties, the Commission should, as the guardian of the Treaties that oversees the application of Union law, take appropriate measures in accordance with Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, including by bringing the matter before the Court of Justice of the European Union. [Am. 19] |
| --- | --- |

(13b)

Where it considers that a Member State has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Treaties, the Commission should, as the guardian of the Treaties that oversees the application of Union law, take appropriate measures in accordance with Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, including by bringing the matter before the Court of Justice of the European Union. [Am. 19]

| (14) | Since the objective of this Regulation, namely allowing the prolongation in exceptional cases of reintroduced border controls at specific section(s) of the internal borders for the time period necessary for a Member State to adequately respond to a persistent threat of a cross-border nature, is to complement the current rules on temporary reintroduction of border controls at internal borders, it cannot be achieved by Member States acting alone; an amendment of the common rules established at Union level is necessary. Thus, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives. |
| --- | --- |

(14)

Since the objective of this Regulation, namely allowing the prolongation in exceptional cases of reintroduced border controls at specific section(s) of the internal borders for the time period necessary for a Member State to adequately respond to a persistent threat of a cross-border nature, is to complement the current rules on temporary reintroduction of border controls at internal borders, it cannot be achieved by Member States acting alone; an amendment of the common rules established at Union level is necessary. Thus, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.

| (15) | In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, as annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application. Given that this Regulation builds upon the Schengen acquis, Denmark shall, in accordance with Article 4 of that Protocol, decide within a period of six months after the Council has decided on this Regulation whether it will implement it in its national law. |
| --- | --- |

(15)

In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, as annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application. Given that this Regulation builds upon the Schengen acquis, Denmark shall, in accordance with Article 4 of that Protocol, decide within a period of six months after the Council has decided on this Regulation whether it will implement it in its national law.

| (16) | This Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis, in which the United Kingdom does not take part, in accordance with Council Decision 2000/365/EC (4); the United Kingdom is therefore not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application. |
| --- | --- |

(16)

This Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis, in which the United Kingdom does not take part, in accordance with Council Decision 2000/365/EC (4); the United Kingdom is therefore not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application.

| (17) | This Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis, in which Ireland does not take part, in accordance with Council Decision 2002/192/EC (5); Ireland is therefore not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application. |
| --- | --- |

(17)

This Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis, in which Ireland does not take part, in accordance with Council Decision 2002/192/EC (5); Ireland is therefore not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application.

| (18) | As regards Iceland and Norway, this Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Agreement concluded by the Council of the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the latter's association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis (6), which fall within the area referred to in point A of Article 1 of Council Decision 1999/437/EC (7). |
| --- | --- |

(18)

As regards Iceland and Norway, this Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Agreement concluded by the Council of the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the latter's association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis (6), which fall within the area referred to in point A of Article 1 of Council Decision 1999/437/EC (7).

| (19) | As regards Switzerland, this Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation's association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis (8) which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A of Decision 1999/437/EC (9) read in conjunction with Article 3 of Council Decision 2008/146/EC (10). |
| --- | --- |

(19)

As regards Switzerland, this Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation's association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis (8) which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A of Decision 1999/437/EC (9) read in conjunction with Article 3 of Council Decision 2008/146/EC (10).

| (20) | As regards Liechtenstein, this Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Protocol between the European Union, the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis (11) which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A of Decision 1999/437/EC read in conjunction with Article 3 of Council Decision 2011/350/EU (12). |
| --- | --- |

(20)

As regards Liechtenstein, this Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Protocol between the European Union, the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis (11) which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A of Decision 1999/437/EC read in conjunction with Article 3 of Council Decision 2011/350/EU (12).

| (21) | This Regulation respects fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

(21)

This Regulation respects fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

| (22) | Regulation (EU) 2016/399 should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(22)

Regulation (EU) 2016/399 should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Regulation (EU) 2016/399 is amended as follows:

| (1) | Article 25 is replaced by the following:

  ‘1.   Where, in the area without internal border control, there is a serious threat to public policy or internal security in a Member State, that Member State may exceptionally reintroduce border control at all or specific parts of its internal borders for a limited period of up to 30 days, or for the foreseeable duration of the serious threat if its duration exceeds 30 days, but not exceeding six months

  as a measure of last resort
  . The scope and duration of the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders shall not exceed what is strictly necessary to respond to the serious threat."; [Am. 20]




  2.   Border control at internal borders shall only be reintroduced as a last resort, and in accordance with Articles 27, 27a, 28 and 29. The criteria referred to, respectively, in Articles 26 and 30 shall be taken into account in each case where a decision on reintroduction of border control at internal borders is considered pursuant, respectively, to Article 27, 27a, 28 or 29.
  [Am. 21]




  3.   If the serious threat to public policy or internal security in the Member State concerned persists beyond the period provided for in paragraph 1 of this Article, that Member State may prolong border control at its internal borders, taking account of the criteria referred to in Article 26 and in accordance with Article 27, on the same grounds as those referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and, taking into account any new elements, for renewable periods corresponding to the foreseeable duration of the serious threat and not exceeding six months.
  [Ams. 22 and 52]




  4.   The total period during which border control is reintroduced at internal borders, including any prolongation provided for under paragraph 3 of this Article, shall not exceed one year.


  In the exceptional cases referred to in Article 27a, the total period may be further extended by a maximum length of two years in accordance with that Article.


  Where there are exceptional circumstances as referred to in Article 29, the total period may be extended by a maximum length of two years, in accordance with paragraph 1 of that Article.’
  [Am. 23] |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Article 25 is replaced by the following:

‘1.   Where, in the area without internal border control, there is a serious threat to public policy or internal security in a Member State, that Member State may exceptionally reintroduce border control at all or specific parts of its internal borders for a limited period of up to 30 days, or for the foreseeable duration of the serious threat if its duration exceeds 30 days, but not exceeding six months

  as a measure of last resort
  . The scope and duration of the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders shall not exceed what is strictly necessary to respond to the serious threat."; [Am. 20]

2.   Border control at internal borders shall only be reintroduced as a last resort, and in accordance with Articles 27, 27a, 28 and 29. The criteria referred to, respectively, in Articles 26 and 30 shall be taken into account in each case where a decision on reintroduction of border control at internal borders is considered pursuant, respectively, to Article 27, 27a, 28 or 29.
  [Am. 21]

3.   If the serious threat to public policy or internal security in the Member State concerned persists beyond the period provided for in paragraph 1 of this Article, that Member State may prolong border control at its internal borders, taking account of the criteria referred to in Article 26 and in accordance with Article 27, on the same grounds as those referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and, taking into account any new elements, for renewable periods corresponding to the foreseeable duration of the serious threat and not exceeding six months.
  [Ams. 22 and 52]

4.   The total period during which border control is reintroduced at internal borders, including any prolongation provided for under paragraph 3 of this Article, shall not exceed one year.

In the exceptional cases referred to in Article 27a, the total period may be further extended by a maximum length of two years in accordance with that Article.

Where there are exceptional circumstances as referred to in Article 29, the total period may be extended by a maximum length of two years, in accordance with paragraph 1 of that Article.’
  [Am. 23]

| (1a) | Article 26 is replaced by the following:





  ‘Article 26




  Criteria for the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders




  Before a Member State decides, as a measure of last resort, on the temporary reintroduction of border control at one or more of its internal borders or at parts thereof, or decides to prolong such a temporary reintroduction, it shall assess:










  (a) | whether the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders can be considered likely to sufficiently remedy the threat to public policy or internal security; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(1a)

(1a)

Article 26 is replaced by the following:

Article 26 is replaced by the following:

‘Article 26

Criteria for the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders

Before a Member State decides, as a measure of last resort, on the temporary reintroduction of border control at one or more of its internal borders or at parts thereof, or decides to prolong such a temporary reintroduction, it shall assess:

(a)

whether the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders can be considered likely to sufficiently remedy the threat to public policy or internal security;

| (b) | whether measures other than the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders, such as enhanced cross-border police cooperation or intensified police checks, are likely to sufficiently remedy the threat to public policy or internal security; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

whether measures other than the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders, such as enhanced cross-border police cooperation or intensified police checks, are likely to sufficiently remedy the threat to public policy or internal security;

| (c) | the proportionality of the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders in relation to the threat to public policy or internal security, in particular by taking into account:










  (i) | the likely impact of any threats to its public policy or internal security, including following terrorist incidents or threats and including those posed by organised crime; and |
| --- | --- | --- |

(c)

the proportionality of the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders in relation to the threat to public policy or internal security, in particular by taking into account:

(i)

the likely impact of any threats to its public policy or internal security, including following terrorist incidents or threats and including those posed by organised crime; and

| (ii) | the likely impact of the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders on the free movement of persons within the area without internal border control. |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

the likely impact of the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders on the free movement of persons within the area without internal border control.

Where a Member State assesses under point (a) of the first subparagraph that the temporary reintroduction of internal border control is not likely to sufficiently remedy the threat to public policy or internal security, it shall not reintroduce internal border control.

Where a Member State assesses under point (b) of the first subparagraph that measures other than the temporary reintroduction of internal border control are likely to sufficiently remedy the threat to public policy or internal security, it shall not reintroduce or prolong internal border control and shall take those other measures.

Where a Member State assesses under point (c) of the first subparagraph that the proposed reintroduction of internal border control is not proportionate to the threat, it shall not reintroduce or prolong internal border control.’; [Am. 24]

| (2) | Article 27 is amended as follows:








  (-i) | the title is replaced by the following:




  ‘Procedure for the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders in the event of a foreseeable serious threat to public policy or internal security’; [Am. 25] |
| --- | --- | --- |

(2)

Article 27 is amended as follows:

(-i)

(-i)

the title is replaced by the following:

the title is replaced by the following:

‘Procedure for the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders in the event of a foreseeable serious threat to public policy or internal security’; [Am. 25]

‘Procedure for the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders in the event of a foreseeable serious threat to public policy or internal security’;

| (-ia) | the following paragraph is inserted before paragraph 1:





  ‘-1.
     
  Where, in the area without internal border control, there is a serious threat to public policy or internal security in a Member State, that Member State may, as a measure of last resort and in accordance with the criteria laid down in Article 26, reintroduce border control at all or specific parts of its internal borders for a limited period of up to 30 days or, if the serious threat persists beyond 30 days, for the foreseeable duration of the serious threat but, in any event, for no longer than two months.’; [Am. 26] |
| --- | --- |

(-ia)

(-ia)

the following paragraph is inserted before paragraph 1:

the following paragraph is inserted before paragraph 1:

‘-1.
     
  Where, in the area without internal border control, there is a serious threat to public policy or internal security in a Member State, that Member State may, as a measure of last resort and in accordance with the criteria laid down in Article 26, reintroduce border control at all or specific parts of its internal borders for a limited period of up to 30 days or, if the serious threat persists beyond 30 days, for the foreseeable duration of the serious threat but, in any event, for no longer than two months.’; [Am. 26]

| (-ib) | in paragraph 1, the introductory part is replaced by the following:





  ‘1.
     
  For the purposes of paragraph - 1, the Member State concerned shall notify the other Member States and the Commission at the latest four weeks before the planned reintroduction, or within a shorter period where the circumstances giving rise to the need to reintroduce border control at internal borders become known less than four weeks before the planned reintroduction. To that end, the Member State shall supply the following information:’; [Am. 27] |
| --- | --- |

(-ib)

(-ib)

in paragraph 1, the introductory part is replaced by the following:

in paragraph 1, the introductory part is replaced by the following:

‘1.
     
  For the purposes of paragraph - 1, the Member State concerned shall notify the other Member States and the Commission at the latest four weeks before the planned reintroduction, or within a shorter period where the circumstances giving rise to the need to reintroduce border control at internal borders become known less than four weeks before the planned reintroduction. To that end, the Member State shall supply the following information:’; [Am. 27]

| (i) | In paragraph 1, a new letter (aa) is added as follows:








  ‘(aa) | a risk assessment assessing how long the identified threat is expected to persist and which sections of the internal borders are affected, demonstrating that the prolongation of border control is a last resort measure and explaining how border control would help address the identified threat. Where border control has already been reintroduced for more than six months, the risk assessment shall also explain how the previous reintroduction of border control has contributed to remedying the identified threat.

  The risk assessment shall also contain a detailed report of the coordination which took place between the Member State concerned and the Member State or Member States with which it shares internal borders at which border control has been performed.
  The Commission shall share the risk assessment with the European Border and Coast Guard Agency and Europol, as appropriate.’
  [Ams. 28 and 57] |
| --- | --- | --- |

(i)

(i)

In paragraph 1, a new letter (aa) is added as follows:

In paragraph 1, a new letter (aa) is added as follows:

‘(aa)

‘(aa)

a risk assessment assessing how long the identified threat is expected to persist and which sections of the internal borders are affected, demonstrating that the prolongation of border control is a last resort measure and explaining how border control would help address the identified threat. Where border control has already been reintroduced for more than six months, the risk assessment shall also explain how the previous reintroduction of border control has contributed to remedying the identified threat.

a risk assessment assessing how long the identified threat is expected to persist and which sections of the internal borders are affected, demonstrating that the prolongation of border control is a last resort measure and explaining how border control would help address the identified threat. Where border control has already been reintroduced for more than six months, the risk assessment shall also explain how the previous reintroduction of border control has contributed to remedying the identified threat.

The risk assessment shall also contain a detailed report of the coordination which took place between the Member State concerned and the Member State or Member States with which it shares internal borders at which border control has been performed.

The Commission shall share the risk assessment with the European Border and Coast Guard Agency and Europol, as appropriate.’

[Ams. 28 and 57]

| (ia) | in paragraph 1, the following point is inserted:










  ‘(ab) | any measures other than the proposed reintroduction, taken or envisaged by the Member State, to address the threat to public policy or internal security as well as the evidence-based reason as to why alternative measures, such as enhanced cross-border police cooperation and police checks, were deemed insufficient;’; [Am. 29] |
| --- | --- | --- |

(ia)

(ia)

in paragraph 1, the following point is inserted:

in paragraph 1, the following point is inserted:

‘(ab)

‘(ab)

any measures other than the proposed reintroduction, taken or envisaged by the Member State, to address the threat to public policy or internal security as well as the evidence-based reason as to why alternative measures, such as enhanced cross-border police cooperation and police checks, were deemed insufficient;’; [Am. 29]

any measures other than the proposed reintroduction, taken or envisaged by the Member State, to address the threat to public policy or internal security as well as the evidence-based reason as to why alternative measures, such as enhanced cross-border police cooperation and police checks, were deemed insufficient;’;

| (ii) | in paragraph 1, letter (e) is replaced as follows:






  ‘(e) | where appropriate, the measures to be taken by the other Member States as agreed prior to the temporary reintroduction of border control at
  the relevant
  internal borders concerned.’; [Am. 30] |
| --- | --- | --- |

(ii)

in paragraph 1, letter (e) is replaced as follows:

‘(e)

where appropriate, the measures to be taken by the other Member States as agreed prior to the temporary reintroduction of border control at
  the relevant
  internal borders concerned.’; [Am. 30]

the relevant

concerned

; [Am. 30]

| (iii) | the last sentence in paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:
  ‘Where

  If
  necessary, the Commission may request additional information from the Member State(s) concerned, including on the cooperation with the Member States affected by the planned
  reintroduction or
  prolongation of border control at internal borders as well as additional

  further
  information needed to assess whether this is a last resort measure.’; [Am. 31] |
| --- | --- |

(iii)

the last sentence in paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

‘Where

  If
  necessary, the Commission may request additional information from the Member State(s) concerned, including on the cooperation with the Member States affected by the planned
  reintroduction or
  prolongation of border control at internal borders as well as additional

  further
  information needed to assess whether this is a last resort measure.’; [Am. 31]

Where

If

reintroduction or

additional

further

; [Am. 31]

| (iiia) | the following paragraph is inserted:





  ‘1a.
     
  If the serious threat to public policy or internal security in the Member State concerned persists beyond two months, that Member State may prolong border control at its internal borders, taking into account the criteria laid down in Article 26, on the same grounds as those referred to in paragraph - 1 of this Article and, taking into account any new elements, for a period which shall correspond to the foreseeable duration of the serious threat and shall not, in any event, exceed four months. The Member State concerned shall notify the other Member States and the Commission within the time period referred to in paragraph 1.’; [Am. 32] |
| --- | --- |

(iiia)

(iiia)

the following paragraph is inserted:

the following paragraph is inserted:

‘1a.
     
  If the serious threat to public policy or internal security in the Member State concerned persists beyond two months, that Member State may prolong border control at its internal borders, taking into account the criteria laid down in Article 26, on the same grounds as those referred to in paragraph - 1 of this Article and, taking into account any new elements, for a period which shall correspond to the foreseeable duration of the serious threat and shall not, in any event, exceed four months. The Member State concerned shall notify the other Member States and the Commission within the time period referred to in paragraph 1.’; [Am. 32]

| (iiib) | the following paragraph is inserted:





  ‘1b.
     
  For the purposes of paragraph 1a, in addition to the information provided under paragraph 1, the Member State concerned shall provide a risk assessment which shall:










  (i) | assess how long the identified threat is expected to persist and which section of its internal borders is affected; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(iiib)

(iiib)

the following paragraph is inserted:

the following paragraph is inserted:

‘1b.
     
  For the purposes of paragraph 1a, in addition to the information provided under paragraph 1, the Member State concerned shall provide a risk assessment which shall:

(i)

assess how long the identified threat is expected to persist and which section of its internal borders is affected;

| (ii) | outline the alternative actions or measures previously introduced to address the identified threat; |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

outline the alternative actions or measures previously introduced to address the identified threat;

| (iii) | explain why the alternative actions or measures referred to in point (ii) did not sufficiently remedy the identified threat; |
| --- | --- |

(iii)

explain why the alternative actions or measures referred to in point (ii) did not sufficiently remedy the identified threat;

| (iv) | demonstrate that the prolongation of border control is a last resort; and |
| --- | --- |

(iv)

demonstrate that the prolongation of border control is a last resort; and

| (v) | explain how border control would better help address the identified threat. |
| --- | --- |

(v)

explain how border control would better help address the identified threat.

The risk assessment referred to in the first subparagraph shall also contain a detailed report of the cooperation which took place between the Member State concerned and the Member State or Member States directly affected by the reintroduction of border control, including those Member States with which the Member State concerned shares internal borders at which border control is performed.

The Commission shall share the risk assessment with the Agency and Europol and may request, where appropriate, their views thereon.

The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 37 supplementing this Regulation by adopting the methodology for the risk assessment.’; [Am. 33]

| (iiic) | paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:





  ‘2.
     
  The information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 1b shall be submitted to the European Parliament and to the Council at the same time as it is notified to the other Member States and to the Commission pursuant to those paragraphs.’; [Am. 34] |
| --- | --- |

(iiic)

(iiic)

paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:

paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:

‘2.
     
  The information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 1b shall be submitted to the European Parliament and to the Council at the same time as it is notified to the other Member States and to the Commission pursuant to those paragraphs.’; [Am. 34]

| (iiid) | paragraph 3 is replaced by the following:





  ‘3.
     
  Member States submitting a notification may classify, where necessary and in accordance with national law, all or parts of the information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 1b. Such classification shall not preclude access to information, through appropriate and secure police cooperation channels, by the other Member States affected by the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders and shall not preclude information from being made available by the Commission to the European Parliament. The transmission and handling of information and documents transmitted to the European Parliament under this Article shall comply with rules concerning the forwarding and handling of classified information which are applicable between the European Parliament and the Commission.’; [Am. 35] |
| --- | --- |

(iiid)

(iiid)

paragraph 3 is replaced by the following:

paragraph 3 is replaced by the following:

‘3.
     
  Member States submitting a notification may classify, where necessary and in accordance with national law, all or parts of the information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 1b. Such classification shall not preclude access to information, through appropriate and secure police cooperation channels, by the other Member States affected by the temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders and shall not preclude information from being made available by the Commission to the European Parliament. The transmission and handling of information and documents transmitted to the European Parliament under this Article shall comply with rules concerning the forwarding and handling of classified information which are applicable between the European Parliament and the Commission.’; [Am. 35]

| (iv) | paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

  ‘4.   Following notification by a Member State under paragraph 1

  paragraphs 1 and 1a
  and with a view to consultation provided for in paragraph 5, the Commission or any other Member State may, without prejudice to Article 72 TFEU, issue an opinion. [Am. 36]

  Where
  , based on the information contained in the notification or on any additional information it has received,
  the Commission has concerns as regards the necessity or proportionality of the planned reintroduction of border control at internal borders or where it considers that a consultation on some aspects

  aspect
  of the notification would be appropriate, it shall issue an opinion to that effect
  without delay
  ."; [Am. 37]


  Where border control at internal borders has already been reintroduced for six months, the Commission shall issue an opinion.’
  [Am. 38] |
| --- | --- |

(iv)

paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

‘4.   Following notification by a Member State under paragraph 1

  paragraphs 1 and 1a
  and with a view to consultation provided for in paragraph 5, the Commission or any other Member State may, without prejudice to Article 72 TFEU, issue an opinion. [Am. 36]

Where
  , based on the information contained in the notification or on any additional information it has received,
  the Commission has concerns as regards the necessity or proportionality of the planned reintroduction of border control at internal borders or where it considers that a consultation on some aspects

  aspect
  of the notification would be appropriate, it shall issue an opinion to that effect
  without delay
  ."; [Am. 37]

Where border control at internal borders has already been reintroduced for six months, the Commission shall issue an opinion.’
  [Am. 38]

| (v) | paragraph 5 is replaced by the following:
  ‘The information referred to in paragraph 1

  paragraphs 1 and 1b
  and any Commission or Member State opinion referred to in paragraph 4 shall be the subject of a consultation led by the Commission. Where appropriate, The consultation shall include:








  (i) | joint meetings between the Member State planning to reintroduce border control at internal borders, the other Member States, especially those directly affected by such measures, and the relevant Agencies. The proportionality of the intended measures, the identified threat to public policy or internal security as well as the ways of ensuring implementation of the

  Commission, which shall be held with a view to organising, where appropriate,
  mutual cooperation between the Member States shall be examined. The Member State planning to reintroduce or prolong

  and to examining the proportionality of the measures to the events giving rise to the reintroduction of
  border control at

  , including any possible alternative measures, and the threat to public policy or internal security; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(v)

paragraph 5 is replaced by the following:

‘The information referred to in paragraph 1

  paragraphs 1 and 1b
  and any Commission or Member State opinion referred to in paragraph 4 shall be the subject of a consultation led by the Commission. Where appropriate, The consultation shall include:

paragraph 1

paragraphs 1 and 1b

led by the Commission

Where appropriate,

(i)

(i)

joint meetings between the Member State planning to reintroduce border control at internal borders, the other Member States, especially those directly affected by such measures, and the relevant Agencies. The proportionality of the intended measures, the identified threat to public policy or internal security as well as the ways of ensuring implementation of the

  Commission, which shall be held with a view to organising, where appropriate,
  mutual cooperation between the Member States shall be examined. The Member State planning to reintroduce or prolong

  and to examining the proportionality of the measures to the events giving rise to the reintroduction of
  border control at

  , including any possible alternative measures, and the threat to public policy or internal security;

relevant Agencies. The proportionality of the intended measures, the identified threat to public policy or internal security as well as the ways of ensuring implementation of the

Commission, which shall be held with a view to organising, where appropriate,

shall be examined. The Member State planning to reintroduce or prolong

and to examining the proportionality of the measures to the events giving rise to the reintroduction of

at

, including any possible alternative measures, and the threat to public policy or internal security;

| (ii) | where appropriate, unannounced on-site visits by the Commission to the relevant
  internal borders shall take the utmost account of the results of such consultation when carrying out

  and, where appropriate, with the support of experts from Member States and from the Agency, Europol or any other relevant Union body, office or agency, to assess the effectiveness of
  border controls
  at those internal borders and the compliance with this Regulation; the reports of such unannounced on-site visits shall be transmitted to the European Parliament
  .’; [Am. 39] |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

(ii)

where appropriate, unannounced on-site visits by the Commission to the relevant
  internal borders shall take the utmost account of the results of such consultation when carrying out

  and, where appropriate, with the support of experts from Member States and from the Agency, Europol or any other relevant Union body, office or agency, to assess the effectiveness of
  border controls
  at those internal borders and the compliance with this Regulation; the reports of such unannounced on-site visits shall be transmitted to the European Parliament
  .’; [Am. 39]

where appropriate, unannounced on-site visits by the Commission to the relevant

shall take the utmost account of the results of such consultation when carrying out

and, where appropriate, with the support of experts from Member States and from the Agency, Europol or any other relevant Union body, office or agency, to assess the effectiveness of

at those internal borders and the compliance with this Regulation; the reports of such unannounced on-site visits shall be transmitted to the European Parliament

’; [Am. 39]

| (3) | a new Article 27a is added:
  Specific procedure where the serious threat to public policy or internal security exceeds one year
  six months [Am. 40]

  ‘1.   In exceptional cases

  circumstances
  , where the Member State is confronted with the same serious threat to public policy or internal security beyond the period referred to in Article 25(4) first sentence

  27(1a)
  , and where commensurate exceptional national measures are also taken within the territory to address this threat, the border control as temporarily reintroduced to respond to that threat may be further prolonged in accordance with this Article. [Am. 41]



  2.   At the latest six

  three
  weeks before the expiry of the period referred to in Article 25(4) first sentence

  27(1a)
  , the Member State shall notify the other Member States and the Commission that it seeks a further prolongation in accordance with the specific procedure laid down in this Article. The

  This
  notification shall contain
  all
  the information required in

  under
  Article 27(1)(a) to (e)

  27(1) and (1b)
  . Article 27 paragraphs 2 and 3

  27(2) and (3)
  shall apply. [Am. 42]



  3.   The Commission shall issue an opinion
  on whether the proposed prolongation fulfils the requirements set out in paragraphs 1 and 2 and on the necessity and the proportionality of the proposed prolongation
  .
  The Member States affected may make observations to the Commission before it issues that opinion
  . [Am. 43]



  4.   The Council, taking due account of

  Once it has taken
  the opinion of the Commission, may

  into account
  ,
  the Council may, as a last resort,
  recommend that the Member State decide to

  concerned
  further prolong border control at
  its
  internal borders for a period of up to six months. That period may be prolonged, no more than three times, for a further period of up to six months. In its recommendation, the Council shall at least indicate the information referred to in Article 27(1) (a) to (e). Where appropriate,

  and (1b) and
  it shall determine

  lay down
  the conditions for cooperation between the Member States concerned.’; [Am. 44] |
| --- | --- |

(3)

a new Article 27a is added:

Specific procedure where the serious threat to public policy or internal security exceeds one year

six months

‘1.   In exceptional cases

  circumstances
  , where the Member State is confronted with the same serious threat to public policy or internal security beyond the period referred to in Article 25(4) first sentence

  27(1a)
  , and where commensurate exceptional national measures are also taken within the territory to address this threat, the border control as temporarily reintroduced to respond to that threat may be further prolonged in accordance with this Article. [Am. 41]

2.   At the latest six

  three
  weeks before the expiry of the period referred to in Article 25(4) first sentence

  27(1a)
  , the Member State shall notify the other Member States and the Commission that it seeks a further prolongation in accordance with the specific procedure laid down in this Article. The

  This
  notification shall contain
  all
  the information required in

  under
  Article 27(1)(a) to (e)

  27(1) and (1b)
  . Article 27 paragraphs 2 and 3

  27(2) and (3)
  shall apply. [Am. 42]

3.   The Commission shall issue an opinion
  on whether the proposed prolongation fulfils the requirements set out in paragraphs 1 and 2 and on the necessity and the proportionality of the proposed prolongation
  .
  The Member States affected may make observations to the Commission before it issues that opinion
  . [Am. 43]

4.   The Council, taking due account of

  Once it has taken
  the opinion of the Commission, may

  into account
  ,
  the Council may, as a last resort,
  recommend that the Member State decide to

  concerned
  further prolong border control at
  its
  internal borders for a period of up to six months. That period may be prolonged, no more than three times, for a further period of up to six months. In its recommendation, the Council shall at least indicate the information referred to in Article 27(1) (a) to (e). Where appropriate,

  and (1b) and
  it shall determine

  lay down
  the conditions for cooperation between the Member States concerned.’; [Am. 44]

| (3a) | in Article 28, paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:





  ‘4.
     
  The total period during which border control is reintroduced at internal borders, on the basis of the initial period under paragraph 1 of this Article and any prolongations under paragraph 3 of this Article, shall not exceed two months.’;

  [Ams. 45 and 66] |
| --- | --- |

(3a)

(3a)

in Article 28, paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

in Article 28, paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

‘4.
     
  The total period during which border control is reintroduced at internal borders, on the basis of the initial period under paragraph 1 of this Article and any prolongations under paragraph 3 of this Article, shall not exceed two months.’;

  [Ams. 45 and 66]

| (3b) | a new Article is inserted:





  ‘Article 28a




  Calculation of the period during which border control is reintroduced or prolonged due to a foreseen threat to public policy or internal security, where the serious threat to public policy or internal security exceeds six months and in cases requiring immediate action




  Any reintroduction or prolongation of border controls at internal borders made before ... [the date of entry into force of this Regulation] shall be included in the calculation of the periods referred to in Articles 27, 27a and 28.’; [Am. 46] |
| --- | --- |

(3b)

(3b)

a new Article is inserted:

a new Article is inserted:

‘Article 28a

Calculation of the period during which border control is reintroduced or prolonged due to a foreseen threat to public policy or internal security, where the serious threat to public policy or internal security exceeds six months and in cases requiring immediate action

Any reintroduction or prolongation of border controls at internal borders made before ... [the date of entry into force of this Regulation] shall be included in the calculation of the periods referred to in Articles 27, 27a and 28.’; [Am. 46]

| (3c) | in Article 29(1), the following subparagraph is added:




  ‘The criteria referred to in Article 30 shall be taken into account in each case where a decision on the temporary reintroduction or prolongation of border control at internal borders is considered pursuant to this Article.’; [Am. 67] |
| --- | --- |

(3c)

(3c)

in Article 29(1), the following subparagraph is added:

in Article 29(1), the following subparagraph is added:

‘The criteria referred to in Article 30 shall be taken into account in each case where a decision on the temporary reintroduction or prolongation of border control at internal borders is considered pursuant to this Article.’; [Am. 67]

‘The criteria referred to in Article 30 shall be taken into account in each case where a decision on the temporary reintroduction or prolongation of border control at internal borders is considered pursuant to this Article.’;

| (3d) | in Article 29, paragraph 5 is replaced by the following:





  ‘5.
     
  This Article shall be without prejudice to measures that may be adopted by the Member States in the event of a serious threat to public policy or internal security under Articles 27, 27a and 28. However, the total period during which border control at internal borders is reintroduced or prolonged under this Article shall not be prolonged by virtue of, or combined with, measures taken under Article 27, 27a or 28.’. [Am. 47] |
| --- | --- |

(3d)

(3d)

in Article 29, paragraph 5 is replaced by the following:

in Article 29, paragraph 5 is replaced by the following:

‘5.
     
  This Article shall be without prejudice to measures that may be adopted by the Member States in the event of a serious threat to public policy or internal security under Articles 27, 27a and 28. However, the total period during which border control at internal borders is reintroduced or prolonged under this Article shall not be prolonged by virtue of, or combined with, measures taken under Article 27, 27a or 28.’. [Am. 47]

Article 1a

This Regulation shall apply to notifications made by Member States pursuant to Article 27 of the Schengen Borders Code from ... [the date of entry into force of this Regulation].

Any period of ongoing notification for reintroduction or prolongation of border control at internal borders which will have passed before ... [the entry into force of this Regulation] shall be taken into account in the calculation of the periods referred to in Articles 25(4) and 28(4). [Am. 69]

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in the Member States in accordance with the Treaties.

Done at ...,

For the European Parliament

The President

For the Council

The President

---

(1)  Position of the European Parliament of 4 April 2019.

1

(2)  OJ L 77, 23.3.2016, p. 1.

2

(3)  C(2017)3349 final of 12.05.2017.

3

(4)  Council Decision 2000/365/EC of 29 May 2000 concerning the request of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to take part in some of the provisions of the Schengen acquis (OJ L 131, 1.6.2000, p. 43).

4

(5)  Council Decision 2002/192/EC of 28 February 2002 concerning Ireland's request to take part in some of the provisions of the Schengen acquis (OJ L 64, 7.3.2002, p. 20).

5

(6)  OJ L 176, 10.7.1999, p. 36.

6

(7)  Council Decision 1999/437/EC of 17 May 1999 on certain arrangements for the application of the Agreement concluded by the Council of the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the association of those two States with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis (OJ L 176, 10.7.1999, p. 31).

7

(8)  OJ L 53, 27.2.2008, p. 52.

8

(9)  Council Decision 1999/437/EC of 17 May 1999 on certain arrangements for the application of the Agreement concluded by the Council of the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the association of those two States with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis (OJ L 176, 10.7.1999, p. 31).

9

(10)  Council Decision 2008/146/EC of 28 January 2008 on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Community, of the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation's association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis (OJ L 53, 27.2.2008, p. 1).

10

(11)  OJ L 160, 18.6.2011, p. 21.

11

(12)  Council Decision 2011/350/EU of 7 March 2011 on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Protocol between the European Union, the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis, relating to the abolition of checks at internal borders and movement of persons (OJ L 160, 18.6.2011, p. 19).

12

---