REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Fourth Report on the Post-Visa Liberalisation Monitoring for the Western Balkan Countries in accordance with the Commission Statement of 8 November 2010
Date: 2013-11-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, EU visa policy, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Roma, Schengen Agreement, Serbia, corruption, external border of the EU, illegal migration, organised crime













EUR-Lex - 52013DC0836 - EN











|



52013DC0836

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Fourth Report on the Post-Visa Liberalisation Monitoring for the Western Balkan Countries in accordance with the Commission Statement of 8 November 2010 /* COM/2013/0836 final */









REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL
Fourth Report on the Post-Visa
Liberalisation Monitoring for the Western Balkan Countries in accordance with
the Commission Statement of 8 November 2010
(Text with EEA relevance)
1.           Introduction
Since 19 December 2009, citizens of the
former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia have been able,
with biometric passports, to travel visa-free to the Member States of the
European Union, in accordance with Regulation 539/2001[1].
Citizens of Albania and Bosnia and Herzegovina have enjoyed the same visa-free
travel status since 15 December 2010.
The decision to lift the visa obligation
was based on a thorough assessment of these countries’ progress in fulfilling
the requirements of their visa liberalisation roadmaps in areas including
document security, border and migration management, asylum, the fight against
organised crime and corruption, and fundamental rights related to freedom of
movement. Visa-free travel remains one of the core achievements of these
countries’ European integration efforts to date.
In a statement made to the Justice and Home
Affairs Council on 8 November 2010, the Commission underlined that the
integrity of the visa-free travel regime depended on each Western Balkan
country continuing to implement the measures set out in its visa roadmap. The
Commission established a post-visa liberalisation monitoring mechanism, covering
all the policy areas set out in the visa roadmaps, to evaluate the
sustainability of reforms seeking to uphold the integrity of the visa-free
travel regime.
This is the fourth post-visa liberalisation
monitoring report to be published since the Commission’s 2010 statement[2]. It provides an overview of the development of the post-visa
liberalisation monitoring mechanism, gives the Commission’s assessment of
measures implemented by the Western Balkan countries on the basis of their visa
roadmaps, reviews the functioning of the visa-free travel regime, and makes
recommendations for reforms to prevent the recurrence of problems that have
beset the visa-free travel regime since 2010.
2.           Reinforced post-visa
liberalisation monitoring mechanism
The Commission issued its third report on
the post-visa liberalisation monitoring mechanism on 28 August 2012[3]. It analysed each
visa-free country’s progress in implementing the reforms set out in its visa
liberalisation roadmap, reviewed the functioning of the visa-free travel regime
and assessed these countries’ efforts to address the abuse of asylum procedures
in EU Member States.
The dialogue between the
Commission and the Western Balkan countries concerning the visa-free travel
regime takes place via the Stabilisation and Association Process. Commission
officials visited Montenegro in January 2013, Serbia in May 2013 and Bosnia and
Herzegovina in June 2013. With the help of Member State experts, they were able
to verify the quality of reforms implemented by those visa-free states.
The 10th EU-Western Balkans
Ministerial Forum on Justice and Home Affairs was held in Tirana on 5 November
2012 amidst an unprecedented seasonal influx into the EU of asylum-seekers from
the Western Balkans. The Western Balkan countries adopted a joint declaration
on visa-free travel that confirmed their resolute commitment to implementing
the reforms necessary to maintain the integrity of the visa-free travel regime.
The Commission convened a senior officials’ meeting on 12 November 2012 to put
these commitments into practice. The participants decided to reinforce the
reporting mechanism on migration flows, drawing upon Frontex’s monthly alerts
and input from Europol and the European Asylum Support Office (EASO).
In December 2012, each visa-free Western
Balkan country began submitting to the Commission monthly statistics on
migration flows to the EU. The Commission took stock of this reporting scheme
at a senior officials’ meeting in Brussels on 22 February 2013.
In response to a series of country-specific
surges in asylum applications in 2012 and 2013, the EU Member States and Schengen
Associated States concerned took immediate action along with their Western
Balkan counterparts. A surge of Albanian asylum applications in the UK in early
2013 spurred the British authorities to despatch an immigration liaison officer
to Tirana. In August 2012, the German asylum authorities responded to the
latest surge in asylum applications from Serbia and the former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia by re-establishing a Western Balkans support unit that
cut processing times for first-instance decisions. In July 2012, the Swiss
federal migration authority introduced a fast-track procedure for all
applicants from European visa-free states. Following a sudden increase in
Albanian applications in Sweden in April and May 2012, the Swedish authorities
despatched liaison officers to Serbia and Montenegro and persuaded their
Albanian counterparts to strengthen controls at all Albanian border-crossing
points (BCPs). The Albanian border police stepped up monitoring of flights
destined for Sweden from Greece, Kosovo* and the former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia, as most Albanian passengers boarded their flights in these
countries.
Assisted by its Western Balkans Risk
Analysis Network, Frontex has issued 34 alert reports to date. Its 2013 Western
Balkans Annual Risk Analysis, presented to participants from the Western
Balkans at a conference in Skopje in May 2013, summarises the latest trends in
border controls at the EU’s external border and irregular migration from the
region. These reports and the annual risk analysis provide sophisticated
assessments of migration trends from the region and the operational steps taken
by EU Member States and the visa-free states concerned to prevent asylum abuse.
The Commission relies on Frontex’s monthly alerts to provide briefings to the
Council and, if necessary, to organise senior officials’ meetings.
3.           Assessment of the
continued implementation of measures by the Western Balkan countries to comply
with visa roadmap requirements
This assessment is based on the following
sources: monthly alert reports and the 2013 Western Balkans Annual Risk
Analysis issued by Frontex; monthly statistics on migration trends submitted by
the Western Balkan countries; narrative reports by the visa-free states
analysing the causes of the asylum abuse phenomenon; additional information
submitted by EASO and other EU Agencies; the outcome of the relevant
sub-committees and high-level dialogue meetings organised with each country in
the framework of the Stabilisation and Association Process; and the outcome of targeted
assessment missions undertaken by Commission officials. It follows the block
structure of each country’s visa liberalisation roadmap.
3.1.        Albania
Biometric passports and identity cards
continue to be produced and distributed. Albanian authorities have issued 2 590 000
biometric passports since they were first introduced in May 2009. Albania has
amended its legislation to tighten the conditions under which citizens may
request name changes to evade border controls. The law on civil registry has
been amended to limit and control changes in the civil registry. Under a new
decree issued by the ministry of interior, citizens must obtain a certificate
from the border police proving that they are not on the Schengen entry ban list
before they may apply for a name change. Between June 2012 and March 2013, some
34 per cent of the 6 763 applicants for name changes were rejected on such
grounds. Document fraud, particularly the use of fake stamps at EU external
borders and the use of counterfeit passports by Albanian nationals, remains a
considerable problem.
Albania has made progress
in the area of border management. It has stepped up operational cooperation
with Greece, Italy and Kosovo, implemented the agreement establishing a joint centre
for police cooperation with the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and
carried out a number of joint patrols with Kosovo, the former Yugoslav Republic
of Macedonia and Montenegro. Albania has also linked its border police IT
system with the civil registry database at BCPs, which constitutes a second
layer of control against fraudulent name changes. Risk analysis and threat
assessment capacities need to be reinforced.
In the area of asylum, the institutional
and legal framework is in place. However, only a very small number of
applicants are granted international protection in Albania. Efforts in this
area need to be stepped up. No personal identification document has yet been
provided to refugees and persons who are granted subsidiary protection. The
Albanian visa regime is not yet fully in line with EU standards.
Albania has made some progress in the area
of migration. It continues to implement the EU-Albania readmission agreement.
The number of Albanian nationals returning voluntarily increased in 2012
compared to 2011. However, institutional capacity for implementing the strategy
and action plan for returnees should be reinforced.
In the field of police cooperation and the
fight against organised crime, some progress can be reported. The Albanian
police force is currently reviewing its procedures to improve reporting
capacities of front-line officers and proactive investigations. There is an
urgent need for key institutions to step up coordination and maximise their
capacity to investigate serious and organised crimes. Albania is about to
conclude an operational agreement with Europol.
There has been progress in the area of the fight
against drugs. In the first quarter of 2013, the number of criminal cases
related to drug trafficking increased by nearly 40 per cent, while the number
of those detained on drug-related charges rose by 11.5 per cent. While seizures
of marijuana and cocaine have increased, there has been a decrease in seizures
of heroin.
Albania has made some progress in combating
trafficking in human beings, even though internal trafficking remains a
concern. Standard operating procedures for the identification and referral of
victims and potential victims are in place, while the capacity of law
enforcement agencies and international cooperation need to be reinforced. A
joint working group involving the ministry of interior, the prosecutor’s office
and the ministry of justice was established in November 2012 to discuss
concrete cases of trafficking in human beings. The results of this initiative
need to be monitored.
There has been some progress in the field
of money laundering. The police have developed risk assessments, sharing them
with other agencies. Based on Moneyval recommendations, the criminal code was
amended to establish the autonomy of the crime of money laundering from its
predicate offence and to introduce the notion of self-laundering. The number of
convictions in cases involving money laundering has increased from a low base, and
so has the number of suspicious transaction reports.
Albania has made some progress in the fight
against corruption. The legal and institutional framework is largely in place,
although obstacles to proper investigation of public officials and members of
the judiciary still need to be removed. A solid track record of investigations,
prosecutions and convictions at all levels needs to be established, but efforts
have started to pay off. Between 2012 and 2013, the number of referred
corruption-related cases increased from 22 to 45; proactive investigations rose
from 19 to 32; and police operations related to corruption and white-collar
crimes went up from 5 to 11.
Progress in the field of fundamental rights
has been uneven, with some advances in respect of women’s rights and
anti-discrimination, but limited progress as regards Roma inclusion. Policy
tools targeting vulnerable groups need to be implemented more effectively. The
strategy on improving Roma living conditions is inconsistent. Measures have
been taken to tackle the issue of unregistered Roma children. The implementation
of measures set out in the national Roma decade action plan needs to be stepped
up. Overall, the Roma still face difficult living conditions and frequent
discrimination as regards access to education, employment, health care and
housing.
3.2.        Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bosnia and Herzegovina has made progress in
the field of document security. Authorities have issued 1 791 444 biometric
passports, but there are still 62 565 old passports in circulation. Bosnia and
Herzegovina has adopted a new law on passports and made preparations to issue
third-generation biometric passport. A new generation of electronic identity
cards have been issued since March 2013, with 258 077 personalised to date. Proposed
amendments to the law on residence have not yet been adopted.
The revised IBM (integrated border
management) strategy and action plan are being implemented, and monitoring
mechanisms are in place. Operational cooperation and information sharing with
Frontex have continued. The border police have benefited from further training.
A joint risk analysis centre is producing strategic analyses for the relevant
authorities. Surveillance facilities at BCPs have improved. Cooperation with
neighbouring countries has continued, and frequent joint border patrols have
improved the detection of irregular migrants and smuggled goods. Bosnia and
Herzegovina has closed 44 locations identified as unauthorised BCPs with
Montenegro. The closure of unauthorised BCPs with Serbia remains pending.
In the area of asylum, amendments to the
law on the movement and stay of aliens and asylum-seekers were adopted,
aligning the law more closely with EU and international standards. Further work
remains necessary to align the provisions on detention with the EU acquis.
A new migration and asylum strategy and an action plan have been adopted. The
authorities have constructed a permanent asylum centre in Trnovo. The capacity
of the asylum system seems sufficient to cope with the current number of asylum
applications. Asylum officers have received further training.
Bosnia and Herzegovina has made progress in
the area of migration. The centre for the temporary detention of irregular
immigrants is operational. The readmission agreement between the EU and Bosnia
and Herzegovina is being implemented. The reintegration strategy for returnees
should be fully implemented.
Bosnia and Herzegovina has made
preparations to draft a new strategy in the fight against organised crime based
on the Europol Serious and Organised Crime Threat Assessment model. The previous
strategy ran until 2012. The system of electronic data exchange between law
enforcement agencies and prosecutors has become operational although the
directorate for police coordination has no access to the underlying databases.
The lack of systemic criminal information and intelligence sharing and the
absence of effective coordination hamper the fight against organised crime. A
draft law on witness protection is about to be adopted. There is no effective
system in place to address the confiscation of assets.
In 2012, a number of successful large-scale
joint police operations with third countries took place in the area of
trafficking in human beings, drugs and arms. The roadmap between Europol and
the ministry of security needs to be fully implemented. Europol’s data
protection assessment, necessary for concluding an operational agreement, has
been completed and submitted to Europol's joint supervisory body for its
opinion.
In the fight against drug trafficking, the
institutional capacity to coordinate and implement the policy framework remains
weak. Law enforcement capacities should be enhanced. The implementation of the previous
national drug strategy and its action plan between proved inadequate. Draft
amendments to the law on the prevention and suppression of the abuse of drugs,
including the establishment of an office for drugs, have yet to be adopted.
Cooperation with the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction
has continued.
A new strategy and action plan in the fight against trafficking in human beings has been adopted. Provisions
on trafficking in human beings have been integrated into the criminal codes of
Republika Srpska and the Brčko District. Similar amendments to the criminal
code at state and federation level remain to be adopted. The number of
identified victims has increased. Educational campaigns targeting social
workers, teachers, work inspectors and prosecutors are continuing. The
department for combating trafficking in human beings within the national
coordinator’s office and the database on trafficking victims are not yet fully
operational.
There is still a lack of effective measures
for the prevention of money laundering and the financing of terrorist
activities. Better legislation and implementation of the strategy and action
plan for the prevention of money laundering and the financing of terrorism are
required. A new law on money laundering and the financing of terrorism and amendments
to the criminal code, based on Moneyval recommendations, should be adopted. The
action plan to fulfil Moneyval recommendation needs to be implemented. Information
sharing through the Egmont Group, a network of Financial Intelligence Units
(FIU), has continued. 
The implementation of the new
anti-corruption strategy and action plan has been delayed. The agency for the
prevention of corruption and coordination of the fight against corruption has
hired some staff, but needs to become fully operational. Corruption remains
widespread in both the public and private sectors. More decisive action on the
part of law enforcement agencies and prosecutors is urgently needed. There is a
poor track record of investigation, prosecution and conviction related to corruption
cases. A new law on financing political parties has been adopted, but
legislation in this area remains fragmented. Amendments to the law on conflicts
of interest require further work. There is no legislation guaranteeing
protection for whistle-blowers.
As regards fundamental rights related to
freedom of movement, the situation of the Roma has improved slightly. A Roma
committee has been established within the government to monitor the
implementation of the Roma strategy and to review the decade of Roma inclusion between
2005 and 2015. It consists of 22 members — half from the Roma community; the
other half from relevant institutions. This committee has met twice and
earmarked funding for projects to address Roma employment, housing and health care.
However, very little has been done to improve the situation of Roma women and
children. A large number of Roma children are not registered at birth and
cannot attend school or qualify for health insurance. Organised child begging
remains an issue of concern.
3.3.        The former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia
The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
has made progress with document security. The authorities issued 1 603 993
biometric passports between April 2007 and December 2012. The process of document
issuance is running smoothly. Only biometric passports may be used as from February
2012.
In the area of border management,
operational cooperation and data sharing with Frontex have continued. In the
first quarter of 2013, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia conducted 87
mixed patrols with Bulgaria, Albania, Serbia and Kosovo. Work on rolling out
the TETRA radio communication system has continued. The border police have received
further training. The institutional and functional capacity of the national coordination
centre for border management remains weak.
In the area of asylum, a national programme
for integration was adopted. The construction of 20 accommodation facilities
has begun with a grant from UNHCR. In 2012, 527 asylum applications were lodged
— 213 fewer than in 2011. The majority of applications were submitted by
Afghani and Pakistani nationals. Information campaigns for asylum-seekers are continuing.
The capacity of the asylum unit in the ministry of interior has improved, with further
training offered to employees. The legislative and institutional framework is
satisfactory; however, implementation needs to improve. Some progress has been
made in speeding up the process of providing asylum-seekers with identity
documents. There are still problems concerning the provision of interpretation
for interviews with asylum-seekers.
As regards migration, the law on foreigners
was amended to simplify the procedures for granting temporary stay permits. 682
irregular migrants were detected in 2012; 111 came to light in the first two
months of 2013. The capacity to cope with and manage migration flows is
insufficient, bearing in mind the increasing number of migrants transiting
through the country. The readmission agreement with the EU continues to be
implemented.
In the area of the fight against organised
crime, the centre for the suppression of organised and serious crime in the
ministry of interior has faced problems in recruiting new staff. The national
criminal intelligence database for intelligence-gathering is not yet
operational. The national coordination centre for the fight against organised
crime has not yet been established. Cooperation in fighting organised crime
between the relevant law enforcement bodies — the ministry of interior, the
public prosecutor’s office, the customs administration and the financial police
— needs to improve. Training for the implementation of the new law on criminal
procedure has continued.
Prosecutors’ effectiveness is hampered by not
having direct access to law enforcement databases. The police lack an independent
and robust external oversight mechanism. Police and customs cooperation on drug
seizures has improved, and several successful international police operations
against drug trafficking networks have been carried out. The human resource
capacity of the illicit drugs department of the ministry of interior should be
strengthened. International and regional cooperation in the area of
cross-border organised crime has continued. The former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia has ratified an operational agreement, but has not yet posted a
liaison officer to Europol.
A new strategy and action plan against
trafficking in human beings has been adopted, with an emphasis on victim
identification, prevention and improving victims’ reintegration. A state fund
for compensating trafficking victims is due to be set up. Six mobile teams for
the early identification of potential victims were established at the local
level in partnership with NGOs. Training for the police, including the border
police, prosecutors, judges and civil servants, has continued. In four cases
relating to trafficking in human beings, 24 persons were convicted in 2012. A
comprehensive, multi-disciplinary and victim-oriented approach to trafficking
still needs to be developed. Capacities for the identification and
reintegration of victims and the prosecution of perpetrators need to improve.
As regards the fight against corruption,
the legislative framework was strengthened in 2012 to enable the systemic verification
of conflict of interest declarations by the state commission for the prevention
of corruption. In total, 483 declarations submitted by members of government,
members of parliament and public officials were verified in 2012, with 9
conflicts of interest identified. 123 persons failed to submit such
declarations, with misdemeanour proceedings initiated in 26 cases. A detailed
plan for the verification of declarations from the judiciary and local
self-government was adopted in the first quarter of 2013.
Judges, prosecutors, law enforcement agents
and civil servants received further training. The system of controlling
political party funding and the financing of electoral campaigns was
strengthened with amendments to the law on political party financing adopted in
November 2012. An overview of investigations, indictments, convictions and
sentences, including for high-level corruption cases, is being compiled. The
capacity of the prosecution office for organised crime and corruption has been
strengthened via the recruitment of three prosecutors, increasing their number
to 13. Inter-agency cooperation should improve, and prosecutors should obtain
access to the relevant law enforcement databases.
In the field of fundamental rights, the
action plan on Roma inclusion is being implemented. It includes measures for
further improving access to employment, education, housing and personal
documents. So far, 11 Roma information centres have been opened with a view to
providing assistance in accessing social and educational services. A project on
legal aid for the Roma community has continued. A regional project on best
practices for the integration of the Roma in the Western Balkans is being
implemented. The commission for protection against discrimination is also planning
to appoint a representative of the Roma community.
3.4.        Montenegro
Montenegrin authorities issued 344 004
biometric passports between May 2008 and March 2013.
In the field of integrated border
management, the government has adopted a new strategy and action plan, which is
not yet consistent with the EU IBM concept. Surveillance of the blue border and
especially the green border needs to be strengthened, with further investment
in surveillance equipment. A national coordination centre should be established.
Cross-border cooperation with neighbouring countries continued, with 709 joint
patrols carried out in 2012. The closure of unauthorised BCPs with Bosnia and
Herzegovina remains outstanding.
In the field of asylum, the legislation is
only partially aligned with the acquis. Asylum statistics for the first
half of 2013 indicate that 876 persons submitted asylum applications. The
majority of applicants abscond before their applications can be processed. The
majority of asylum applications were lodged by Algerian nationals, followed by
Tunisian and Afghani citizens. The opening of a new asylum centre in Spuz has
been delayed. The temporary reception facility, in
Konik, must meet minimum reception conditions, particularly as concerns health
care. The accommodation of asylum-seekers needs further
attention.
In the area of migration, the government
has adopted a new action plan to implement the strategy for migration
management. Montenegro continues to implement the EU-Montenegro readmission
agreement. Further efforts are needed to address irregular migration, the integration
of migrants and the protection of vulnerable persons. The reception centre for
irregular migrants is not yet operational.
In the fight against organised crime, a new
action plan has been drafted. New amendments to the
criminal code include provisions on cybercrime, money laundering and terrorism
financing and trafficking in human beings Inter-agency
cooperation is affected by the lack of a secure communication system and insufficient
access by all relevant institutions to the underlying data. Financial investigations are not yet used systematically — the
number of such investigations and the volume of assets recovered remains low. There is a lack of specialist legislation regulating provisional,
permanent and extended confiscation. The limit of six-month pre-trial detention
should be extended, as it hampers the effectiveness of investigations. The
duration of the use of special investigative measures should be extended. The
intelligence-led policing model is being implemented, and relevant training
should continue. The police’s specialised units for the fight against organised
crime, including cybercrime and trafficking in human beings, remain
understaffed, including at a regional level.
As regards trafficking in human beings,
Montenegro is considered a transit, source and destination country. A new national strategy and an action plan to combating trafficking
in human beings have been adopted. The criminal code has been amended to
improve the identification of victims and introduce offences such as
trafficking in human body parts. The code also includes slavery and forced
marriage as criminal offences resulting from trafficking in human beings. 
Close cooperation with Europol, Interpol,
Member State police forces and those of neighbouring countries has continued,
especially in the field of drug trafficking. A new anti-drug strategy and an
action plan have been drafted by the ministry of health, in cooperation with
the ministry of interior. They include measures related to prevention,
rehabilitation, medical treatment and supply management.
As regards the fight against corruption, the
legal framework needs to be further strengthened and implemented. The
protection of whistle-blowers has been strengthened through new labour law
provisions; however, the number of reports on corruption from citizens remains
low. A new action plan implementing the strategy for fighting corruption and
organised crime has been drawn up. The mechanisms for controlling conflicts of
interest, the funding of political parties and electoral campaigns, and the
enforcement of sanctions and control mechanisms in public procurement still
need to be strengthened. The professional capacity and independence of the
supervisory institutions, in particular the state election commission, the
state audit institution and the commission for the prevention of conflicts of
interest, need to be enhanced. The commission for the prevention of conflicts
of interest should obtain access to all relevant databases held by other state
entities. Assets have not yet been recovered in corruption cases.
Awareness-raising campaigns for reporting corruption have continued. The
directorate for anti-corruption initiatives was transferred to the ministry of
justice. However, it lacks the necessary tools to ensure effective coordination
of corruption prevention activities. Data on convictions in corruption cases
show a very high number of acquittals both at first instance and upon appeal.
In the area of fundamental rights related
to freedom of movement, the latest action plan implementing the strategy on
displaced and internally displaced persons was adopted in January 2013. It
includes measures aiming at status, socio-economic integration, including in
employment, education, health care, social insurance and housing, but
implementation remains weak. Awareness-raising activities have continued. Legalisation
regulating the status of displaced persons has advanced. In January 2013, the
government submitted to parliament an amendment to the law on foreigners, which
extended until December 2013 the deadline for applications for permanent
resident status. Visits to Kosovo are being organised to allow displaced
persons to gather the documents necessary to regulate their status in
Montenegro. A strategy to improve the situation of the Roma, Ashkali and
Egyptian communities, adopted in April 2012, remains to be implemented. Further
efforts are needed to improve living conditions in the Konik camp.
In October 2013, Montenegro adopted
comprehensive action plans for enlargement negotiation chapters 23 and 24 to
implement reforms in the field of the judiciary, fundamental rights, justice,
freedom and security.
3.5.        Serbia
Biometric passports and secure ID cards
continue to be produced and distributed: Serbia issued 584 668 biometric
passports in 2012. The operation of and reporting by the special coordination directorate,
charged with issuing travel documents to persons residing in Kosovo, should be
improved.
In the area of border management, Serbia
has continued to implement its IBM strategy and action plan. It has continued
cross-border cooperation with Bosnia and Herzegovina and Montenegro, upgraded
video surveillance facilities and carried out joint operations with
neighbouring countries. The closure of unauthorised border crossing points on
the border with Bosnia and Herzegovina remains outstanding. The early warning
system for detecting false travel documents is running smoothly. Serbia has
also strengthened border controls at certain BCPs in an effort to prevent
asylum abuse in Member States. A combination of risk analysis, inspection of
travel companies and investigative techniques has enabled the police and the
ministry of transport to forestall asylum abuse in a number of cases. Serbia has
also amended its criminal code to incorporate therein the criminal offence of
facilitating asylum abuse in foreign countries and has stepped up
investigations of transport companies and travel agencies suspected of
facilitating irregular migration to the EU. Authorities have filed 7 criminal
charges against 8 persons on the basis of this new criminal provision.
In 2012, the dialogue between Belgrade and
Pristina yielded considerable results in the field of IBM implementation. By
the end of December 2012, four gates, including the two gates in northern
Kosovo, had become operational; since February 2013, all six gates between
Serbia and Kosovo have become operational. The two sides also agreed to start
customs collection. Regarding free movement, the ID card travel regime has
become operational. The agreement on customs stamps continues to be implemented
by both sides. There was also progress on civil registry, and Serbia’s
cooperation with EULEX continued to improve. Direct high-level contacts and
contacts at operational level continue to facilitate cooperation, including in
the fight against organised crime. Serbia should show continuing commitment to
normalising relations with Kosovo.
In the field of asylum, there has been no
significant progress. The legislative framework largely meets EU standards, but
has to be effectively implemented. The lack of adequate asylum procedures tends
to encourage asylum applicants to view Serbia as a transit country for onward
(irregular) migration to the EU. Serbia has two asylum reception centres, with
insufficient capacity to provide services for all asylum-seekers. Access to
asylum procedures depends on obtaining accommodation at an asylum centre. Serbia
should improve its asylum regime by establishing a third centre, developing a
system to process asylum-seekers’ biometric data and providing better conditions
for integrating asylum-seekers. It should take further steps to align its
legislation with the EU acquis on legal migration, notably on the right
to family reunification, long-term residence and the conditions of admission of
third-country nationals for study purposes. Initial steps have been taken to
establish a national database for verifying the personal data and fingerprints
of asylum-seekers.
In the area of migration, Serbia has taken
several measures. The commissariat for refugees and migration, in cooperation
with the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), implemented a set of
capacity-building measures for municipal offices dealing with migration and
reintegration, aimed at improving education and social services for returnees
and their families. The authorities and the IOM also organised a series of
roundtable meetings for Serbian civil society on migration, reintegration and
readmission. Serbia continues to implement the EU-Serbia readmission agreement,
reportedly accepting some 95 per cent of readmission requests from EU Member
States.
In the fight against organised crime,
Serbia has made some progress. Its new strategy on intelligence-led policing is
being implemented. The special prosecutor for organised crime initiated a
number of high-profile cases in the reporting period, but an information
exchange system involving the police and prosecutors has yet to be established.
Serbia is about to conclude an operational agreement with Europol. Asset
seizures increased in 2012, but the temporary confiscation and freezing of
assets proved difficult under Serbia’s new criminal code. The capacity to carry
out complex financial investigations remains limited, although the FIU has
become more proactive in launching financial investigations, and the criminal
police has continued to work with Interpol and the CARIN asset recovery
inter-agency network in cross-border cases involving money-laundering. Asset
recovery has increased moderately, but remains low.
Serbia remains a country of origin, transit
and destination for victims of trafficking in human beings. The number of
Serbian victims of such trafficking fell in 2012, but the high number of
Serbian criminals involved in this activity remained among the top ten recorded
in the EU. Austria, Slovenia, Greece and Croatia reported the highest number of
Serbian victims in 2012. Serbia is stepping up cooperation in the fight against
trafficking in human beings with Italy, Romania and Bulgaria, France and
Belgium. Serbian authorities have launched a number of investigations and
conducted awareness campaigns and trainings for stakeholders. A new centre for protecting
victims of trafficking has been established, but is not yet operational. A
comprehensive, victim-oriented approach to human trafficking remains to be
developed, with a focus on victim identification and access to assistance and
protection.
Serbia has made some progress in the fight
against corruption. It has put in place an appropriate legal and institutional
framework, including an anti-corruption agency and a new law on funding of
political parties in line with European standards. The 2012 general elections
had already been conducted under this law, and the authorities will soon review
political parties’ compliance with this law’s provisions. There is still a need
for a proactive, intelligence-led approach to fighting corruption and organised
crime. A new anti-corruption strategy and an action plan have been adopted. The
anti-corruption agency has yet to establish a track record of effective control
of party funding and to improve cooperation with relevant stakeholders in order
to investigate declarations of assets. Legislation on whistle-blowers is not
being implemented effectively.
In the area of fundamental rights related
to freedom of movement, Serbia has made some progress. The commissariat for
refugees and migration, in cooperation with the IOM, has carried out a set of
projects at local level to build capacity in reintegration. These projects
involved municipalities and NGOs. The government has also adopted a national
strategy and an action plan to improve the status of the Roma, supported by EU
funds. The 2013 national employment plan identifies Roma employment as a
priority in job creation schemes. Elementary education, enrolment in schools,
civil registration (including regularising the status of 'legally invisible
persons') and access to health care for returnees have slightly improved, yet the
overall situation of the Roma remains precarious. The Serbian government should
continue implementing short and medium-term measures aiming to improve the
socio-economic situation of the Roma, particularly as concerns their access to
education, the labour market, vocational training, social services and health
care.
4.           Functioning of the
visa-free travel regime in 2012 and the first six months of 2013
4.1.        Overview of developments
In 2012, asylum abuse continued to
affect the functioning of the visa-free travel regime between the Western
Balkans and the EU. According to Eurostat, the total number of asylum
applications lodged by citizens of the five visa-free Western Balkan states in
the EU Member States and Schengen Associated States rose to 47 025 in 2012,
which represented a 63 per cent increase over 2011 (Figure 6.1). Last year’s
total was the highest since the visa obligation had been lifted for Western
Balkan citizens. In the first nine months of 2013, total asylum applications
from the five visa-free states were only 5.6 per cent lower than in the first nine
months of 2012[4].
Asylum inflows in 2013 have shown a remarkably similar trend to 2012.
According to Eurostat, nationals of the
five visa-free Western Balkan states represented some 13 per cent of all
asylum-seekers in EU Member States and Schengen Associated States in 2012[5]. Nearly 92 per cent of
these applications were lodged in the six most-affected Member States and
Schengen Associated States — Germany, Sweden, France, Switzerland, Belgium
and Luxembourg. The intra-Schengen share of these states as recipients of
Western Balkan asylum applicants rose from 64 to 92 per cent between 2009 and
2012 (Figure 6.2).
Last year’s considerable increase in asylum
applications from the Western Balkans had a variable impact on the EU Member
States and Schengen Associated States concerned (Figure 6.3):
–                        
Asylum applications in Germany rose by 143 per cent
to 22 715;
–                        
Applications in Sweden rose by 31 per cent to 6 410;
–                        
Applications in France rose by 133 per cent to 5 505;
–                        
Applications in Switzerland rose by 31 per cent
to 3 670;
–                        
Applications in Belgium fell by 36 per cent to 3 315;
–                        
Applications in Luxembourg fell by 9 per cent to
1 435.
The asylum recognition rate[6] in these Member States and Schengen Associated States fell from 2.8
to 2.3 per cent between 2011 and 2012 (Figure 6.4). Yet, even this low figure
disguised considerable variation among Western Balkan applicants: only some 1.3
per cent of Montenegrin applicants, 0.7 per cent of applicants from the former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and 1.7 per cent of Serbian applicants received
international protection in the above six Member States and Schengen Associated
States. At the same time, 9.1 per cent of Albanian applicants[7] and 3.2 per cent of
applicants from Bosnia and Herzegovina received asylum in these states in 2012.
Asylum applications from each Western
Balkan visa-free state increased in 2012. Citizens of Serbia and the former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia lodged the highest number of asylum applications,
while Albanians overtook citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina as the third
largest group of asylum-seekers from the Western Balkans. Montenegrins also
registered a large increase in 2012, albeit from a lower base (Figures 6.5 to
6.9):
–                        
Serbian asylum applications increased by 35 per cent
to 20 935;
–                        
Applications by citizens of the former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia increased by 64 per cent to 10 740;
–                        
Albanian applications increased by 143 per cent
to 7 705;
–                        
Applications by citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina
increased by 117 per cent to 6 335;
–                        
Montenegrin applications increased by 96 per cent
to 1 310.
Previous years were characterised by dual
seasonality: a smaller ‘spring surge’ around March and a larger ‘autumn
surge’ with the onset of cold weather. 2012 did not see a pronounced
‘spring surge,’ but was characterised by a linear rise of asylum applications
from April onwards, culminating in a sudden burst of applications in October.
In October 2012 alone, 8 605 asylum applications were lodged by Western Balkan
nationals in the six most-affected EU Member States and Schengen Associated
States—the highest monthly figure since the visa obligation was lifted for
Western Balkan citizens. By the end of 2012, the number of asylum applications
had fallen to its ‘off-peak’ plateau. 2013 has shown a remarkably similar
overall pattern in asylum applications, with a linearly rising trend since May 2013.
In 2012, asylum flows showed an even
greater displacement towards Germany than in previous years, with
more than 48 per cent of all Western Balkan asylum applications — 22 715
in total — being lodged in Germany (Figure 6.4). In the extraordinary month of
October 2012, Germany received nearly four fifths (6 615 of 8 605) of
the applications lodged by Western Balkan nationals in the six most-affected EU
Member States and Schengen Associated States. The displacement towards Germany
was particularly pronounced among citizens of Serbia, the former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia and, to a lesser extent, Bosnia and Herzegovina (Figures
6.6, 6.7 and 6.9).
A stronger correlation between individual
countries in the Western Balkans and the Schengen area also became evident in
2012. The bulk of the October 2012 surge in Germany was made up of applications
lodged by citizens of Serbia and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and,
to a smaller extent, Bosnia and Herzegovina. Montenegrin nationals also
submitted the bulk of their asylum claims in Germany. Sweden, on the other
hand, faced a spike in Albanian applications in April-May 2012 and a separate
surge of applications by citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina in June 2012. Apart
from Sweden, Albanian citizens also targeted the UK and Greece as destinations
of choice for their asylum claims.
The unfounded asylum-to-return ratio
stayed close to parity until August 2012[8].
The explosion of asylum applications in October 2012 boosted it to 8:1, with
nearly 8 000 Western Balkan citizens lodging applications against a return
of roughly 1 000 nationals[9].
During the final two months of 2012, falling application rates and a particular
effort by the most-affected Member States and Schengen Associated States to
return citizens to the Western Balkans reduced the asylum-to-return ratio to
1:1. In the first four months of 2013, the unfounded asylum-to-return ratio
stayed close to parity, but widened again to 4:1 by September 2013. This
indicates that EU Member States and the Schengen Associated States are only
capable during the ‘off-peak’ season of matching the number of new applicants with
effective returns. ‘Autumn surges’ put enormous strain on the asylum systems of
the most-affected Member States and Schengen Associated States, diverting
resources from genuine applications for international protection.
An analysis of the method of return
also reveals interesting variations between Member States and Schengen
Associated States. In the first three months of 2013, Germany returned
practically all Western Balkan applicants through forced return procedures;
Luxembourg proceeded almost entirely via the voluntary return track; Sweden and
Belgium used mainly the voluntary track; while Switzerland used the two methods
in almost equal measure.
In its 2013 Western Balkans Annual Risk
Analysis, Frontex noted two migratory risks as regards movement from the
Western Balkans to the European Union: 1) the secondary movement of irregular
migrants entering the EU at the Greek-Turkish border and transiting through the
Western Balkans; and 2) the abuse of the EU visa-free travel regime by Western
Balkan nationals. The first risk manifested itself through illegal
border-crossing at Western Balkan green borders and clandestine entries at
BCPs; the second came via asylum abuse, illegal stay in Member States and
document fraud by Western Balkan nationals.
As regards the secondary movement of
irregular migrants through the Western Balkans, Frontex detected an increase in
2012 in illegal border-crossing at and between BCPs in the Western
Balkans. A 33 per cent increase in detections of illegal border-crossing at
green borders[10]
and a 68 per cent increase at BCPs[11]
was linked mainly to non-European migrants seeking to re-enter the EU via the
Western Balkans having first entered at the Greek-Turkish border. Citizens of
Afghanistan, Albania, Pakistan, Algeria, Somalia, Syria, Morocco, Kosovo,
Serbia and the Palestinian Authority were among those most frequently detected
as illegally seeking to cross Western Balkan green borders (Figure 6.10). Of
the region, Kosovo citizens registered the largest increase in illegal
border-crossing in 2012.
Illegal stays in the EU by Western Balkan citizens rose to 31 522 in 2012,
which represented some 10 per cent of all detections in the Union last year. In
2011, the share of Western Balkan citizens among third-country nationals
detected as illegally staying in the EU had been 8.7 per cent. More illegal
stayers from each visa-free Western Balkan state were detected in 2012, with
the largest groups comprising Albanian (12 003) and Serbian (8 006)
nationals. More than half of all illegal stayers from the Western Balkans were
detected in Germany, Greece, Slovenia and Italy.
Frontex also detected a large increase in document
fraud perpetrated by Albanian and Kosovo citizens in 2012. Last year,
Albanian citizens became the largest group of third-country nationals seeking
to enter the Schengen area by using counterfeit documents, followed by Syrian,
Moroccan, Ukrainian and Nigerian citizens. Such document fraud took the form
mainly of counterfeit Greek entry stamps manufactured to disguise the length of
stay. Albanian citizens were also increasingly detected by Irish and British
authorities when trying to enter from the Schengen area by using counterfeit
Italian identity cards. While counterfeit stamps accounted for the largest
increase among all forms of document fraud detected in 2012, counterfeit
passports remained the most common form of document fraud in 2012. Fake
passports purportedly issued by Albania, Bulgaria and the former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia were the most commonly detected at Western Balkan BCPs,
with Kosovo, Turkish and Albanian citizens most often presenting such
documents.
4.2.        The push factors of asylum
abuse and measures to address it
In a recent analysis, EASO set out the most
common ‘push factors’ driving asylum abuse originating from the Western
Balkans. Citizens of the visa-free states most often cited deprivation,
unemployment, a lack of access to health care, social benefits and education,
institutionalised discrimination and, in the case of Kosovo and Albania, blood
feud as the grounds upon which they claimed international protection in Member
States. In the EASO survey, Member States identified the marginalisation of the
Roma and other minorities, deprivation and poverty, harsh conditions during
winter and the absence of basic infrastructure and medical care as the most
common drivers of asylum abuse.
In its 2013 Western Balkans Annual Risk
Analysis, Frontex found that Roma continued to make up the overwhelming
majority of asylum-seekers from the visa-free states. In Germany, more than 80
per cent of applicants were Roma. In Sweden, Roma applicants made up at least
four fifths of asylum-seekers from the Western Balkans, but a subsequent study
revealed that perhaps an even higher proportion might have been Roma. In
Sweden, where an applicant’s mother tongue is used to determine his or her
ethnic background, many people registered languages other than Romani. This
might have led the Swedish authorities to underestimate the number of asylum
applicants from a Roma background.
The five visa-free states stepped up operational
cooperation with neighbouring states and those Member States that were
affected the most by asylum abuse in 2012:
–                        
Albania stepped up operational cooperation with
Greece and Italy, the two Member States most affected by Albanian overstay and
document fraud, and with Sweden to monitor the flight routes used by Albanian
asylum-seekers arriving in Sweden;
–                        
Bosnia and Herzegovina improved border
cooperation with neighbouring states and information exchange with Sweden to
monitor the routes most often used by asylum-seekers arriving in Sweden;
–                        
Serbia and the former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia improved operational cooperation with German authorities, also via
Frontex intermediation, to help deal with the extraordinary surge in asylum
applications in October 2012;
–                        
Montenegro stepped up its verification of
travellers’ conditions of entry to the Schengen area, including travel
documents, means of subsistence and health insurance, in an effort to prevent
asylum abuse in the Schengen area.
The Western Balkan countries have reported
measures to investigate the facilitators of asylum abuse, such as travel
agencies and transport companies potentially involved in misinforming citizens
about asylum benefits. Bosnia and Herzegovina, the former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia and Serbia continued to coordinate activities of their law
enforcement agencies and ministries of transport in investigating possible
irregularities. The five visa-free states carried out the following measures in
2012:
–                        
Albania launched a number of criminal
investigations concerning individuals suspected of having facilitated illegal
border-crossing or forged documents;
–                        
Bosnia and Herzegovina launched several
investigations into transport companies whose members were suspected of having facilitated
the movement of citizens for the express purpose of seeking asylum in Sweden;
–                        
Law enforcement agencies in the former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia brought a number of criminal charges against individuals,
on the basis of the amended criminal code, for misusing the visa-free arrangement
with EU Member States;
–                        
Montenegro did not detect an organised crime
link in the facilitation of irregular migration for purposes of asylum abuse in
EU Member States, but filed criminal charges against an organised crime group
suspected of having forged documents to facilitate human smuggling through
Montenegro;
–                        
Serbia amended its criminal code to incorporate
therein the criminal offence of facilitating asylum abuse in foreign countries
and stepped up investigations of transport companies and travel agencies
suspected of facilitating irregular migration to the EU.
The five visa-free states have also sought
to strengthen border control, including through joint operations and
joint patrols along borders and at BCPs with heavy traffic:
–                        
Albania amended its legislation to tighten the
conditions under which citizens may request name changes[12] to evade border
controls, linked its border control database with the national civil registry
and stepped up the verification of entry stamps at BCPs with Greece;
–                        
Bosnia and Herzegovina, the former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia and Montenegro upgraded their border management systems so
that travellers’ identities could be verified against a set of domestic
databases and Interpol’s Lost and Stolen Passports database, which has improved
the detection of document fraud at BCPs;
–                        
Serbia also reports that border controls have
been stepped up at BCPs in line with citizens’ fundamental rights[13].
The visa-free states also took steps to
improve the socio-economic integration of the Roma, particularly in the fields of employment generation, vocational
training, housing support and civil registration:
–                        
Albania continued implementing its reintegration
strategy for returnees in the areas of employment generation and vocational
training;
–                        
Bosnia and Herzegovina allocated further
resources to the reintegration of returnees in the fields of employment,
housing and health care;
–                        
the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia opened
11 Roma information centres and implemented projects in the fields of
education, social inclusion, employment generation, housing support, legal aid
and civil registration for the Roma;
–                        
Montenegro sought to improve civil registration,
education, employment, social services, health care and housing for the Roma;
–                        
Serbia sought, with IOM assistance, to build
capacity at the central and municipal levels to manage reintegration and
organised a series of roundtable meetings on best practices in migration
management and reintegration.
The authorities of these five Western
Balkan countries took new measures in 2012 to counter asylum abuse in the
Schengen area. Each country reported that it had carried out information
campaigns to inform citizens of their rights and obligations under the
visa-free regime, with increasing involvement of local NGOs and EU delegations:
–                        
Albania began distributing leaflets at airports;
–                        
Bosnia and Herzegovina published in the printed
and electronic media a set of articles and advice for travellers;
–                        
the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
launched an information campaign in municipalities in close collaboration with
migration centres and a Roma information centre, with brochures translated into
the Romani language;
–                        
Montenegro carried out a number of information
campaigns in municipalities;
–                        
Serbia launched a number of electronic
information campaigns against asylum abuse and improved the handling of return
cases through its diplomatic missions abroad.
4.3.        The pull factors of asylum
abuse and measures to address it
EASO has found that a number of ‘pull
factors’ have also been driving asylum abuse originating from the Western
Balkans, such as the presence of a diaspora community in the recipient states,
the duration of an asylum procedure, the magnitude of cash benefits received
during the asylum procedure, access to begging or the illegal labour market and
knowledge of past asylum recognition rates in cases involving blood feud,
homosexuality, domestic violence or human trafficking.
2012 afforded several examples of how
changes in particular pull factors in the recipient states might influence
migratory movements from the Western Balkans:
–                        
A German Constitutional Court decision in
July 2012[14]
ruled that the relevant provisions of the asylum-seekers’ benefit act were
incompatible with the fundamental right to a minimum standard of living. Under
this act, asylum-seekers had been eligible for EUR 225 a month, with EUR 40
disbursed in cash. Following this ruling, the monetary benefit for
asylum-seekers was raised to EUR 336 per month, with  EUR 130 disbursed in
cash. As a result, the inflow of asylum-seekers increased mainly from Serbia
and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, culminating in the submission of
6 615 applications from the region in the month of October 2012 alone. The
German authorities responded by re-establishing a Western Balkans support unit,
manned by seconded staff from several federal authorities who focused
exclusively on applications from these countries, reducing asylum processing
times from 40 to 10 days and stepping up returns. Despite these operational
steps, the large-scale displacement of asylum applications towards Germany
appears to have become a permanent feature of the EU visa-free travel regime
since October 2012;
–                        
Sweden faced a dramatic
surge in asylum applications lodged by Albanian citizens in April-May 2012 and
a separate surge in applications from Bosnia and Herzegovina in June 2012. The
Albanian surge reportedly stemmed from rumours in northern Albania that Sweden
would grant international protection to applicants on economic grounds[15]. Swedish consular
authorities responded by issuing a strong public statement making it clear that
applications on economic grounds would be swiftly rejected. Such applicants
would also be given a five-year Schengen re-entry ban. With Frontex assistance,
the Swedish border guards also despatched liaison officers to Podgorica and
Belgrade airports to step up controls in respect of Turkish Airlines flights
via Istanbul to Stockholm. These measures had the effect of reducing the
Albanian inflow after May 2012;
–                        
Sweden also faced a surge in asylum applications
lodged by citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina in June 2012. Swedish authorities
found that most of the applicants had arrived from a single municipality in the
north-eastern part of the country, and many had sold their homes, used various
means of transport to avoid detection at BCPs, arrived with family members and
claimed to have lost their biometric passports before applying for asylum in
Sweden. These elements indicated a longer-term strategy to stay in Sweden.
Sweden stepped up cooperation with authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which
enabled the two sides to reduce migration flows from this particular
municipality within a month of the summer surge. Today, Sweden remains the
second most-favoured EU destination for asylum-seekers from the Western Balkan
visa-free states;
–                        
Last year, Switzerland put in place
several measures that had the combined effect of reducing migration inflows
from the visa-free Western Balkan states. First, the Swiss authorities
introduced a fast-track procedure for all European visa-free states, allowing
decisions to be made on merit within 48 hours. This was complemented by a
number of additional measures, such as a preliminary interview to advise applicants
on the potentially adverse consequences of submitting an unfounded asylum
application; the cancellation of all forms of return assistance for rejected
asylum-seekers from European visa-free states; and a five-year re-entry ban for
rejected applicants who do not cooperate with Swiss authorities or make
multiple unfounded applications. These measures appear to have permanently
reduced the asylum inflow from the visa-free states to Switzerland. Switzerland
also joined the Frontex post-visa liberalisation task force in January 2012.
EASO has summarised the operational steps
that EU Member States have taken to address the asylum inflow from the Western
Balkans in recent years:
–                        
Targeted high-level visits to the countries concerned
and information campaigns, in cooperation with local NGOs and municipalities,
to inform citizens about the rights and obligations of visa-free travel, using
the printed and electronic media;
–                        
Continued operational cooperation with the
authorities of the countries concerned;
–                        
Reducing medical benefits for asylum-seekers
while providing emergency care;
–                        
Reducing cash benefits, such as pocket money and
financial return assistance, to reduce the financial incentives of asylum
abuse;
–                        
Shortening asylum procedures by having more
staff assess asylum cases in peak periods or establishing an
accelerated—fast-track—procedure that enables the swift processing of
applications at peak times or for citizens of particular countries.
4.4.        Other developments related
to the EU visa-free regime
The European Parliament and the Council
have recently adopted a revised Asylum Procedures Directive (originally Directive
2005/85/EC). The revised Directive, which Member States will have to
start applying by June 2015, creates new tools to prevent abuse of the asylum
system through repetitive unfounded applications. Applicants’ right to remain
may be limited if they submit a second asylum application that does not contain
new elements compared to a previous one or if a second application is submitted
to prevent an applicant’s imminent removal. Limits to the right to remain can
be applied also to applicants who have submitted a third or further asylum
applications. These rules do not constitute an exception to the principle of non-refoulement,
which must always be respected.
The
co-legislators are very close to adopting the Commission proposal for an
amendment of the Visa Regulation (originally Regulation 539/2001)[16]. In May 2011, the
Commission proposed creating a visa suspension mechanism for temporarily
suspending third-country nationals’ visa-free status under exceptional
circumstances. This mechanism would be applied only as a temporary measure and
could be triggered only in an emergency situation. On 12 September, the
European Parliament supported the compromise text agreed with the Council. The
amended Regulation is expected to be formally adopted before the end of this
year and will enter into force 20 days after its publication in the Official
Journal.
5.           Next steps
The post-visa liberalisation monitoring
mechanism has enabled the sharing of up-to-date information on the
operation of the EU visa-free regime between the Western Balkan states and EU Member
States and Schengen Associated States. Frontex’s monthly alert service
constitutes the foundation of this mechanism and should be continued. France
should be added to the list of countries monitored monthly by FRONTEX.
The overwhelming majority of citizens from
the visa-free Western Balkan states remain bona fide travellers with a
legitimate purpose of travel to the EU. The visa-free travel regime has
fulfilled its purpose: it has strengthened people-to-people contacts
between the Western Balkans and the EU, including with diaspora communities in
Member States; enhanced business opportunities and cultural exchanges;
and enabled the visa-free states’ citizens to get to know the EU better. Each
Western Balkan state has expressed its desire to continue implementing the
reforms necessary to maintain their citizens’ visa-free travel status.
Yet, asylum abuse worsened in 2012, and the
first nine months of 2013 have shown a trend remarkably similar to 2012. Asylum
applications from the region began to rise in May 2013, with the overall number
of applications between January and September 2013 running only 5.6 per cent
lower than in the first three quarters of 2012. Each visa-free state’s citizens
submitted a higher number of applications in 2012 than in 2011, putting
particular pressure on the asylum systems of Germany, Sweden and Switzerland. While
the migratory pressure from the region subsided after October 2012, the
irregular migration trend from the five visa-free states in the first three
quarters of 2013 has been remarkably similar to 2012. This situation remains
untenable.
The Commission urges each Western Balkan
state to back up its political commitment to visa-free travel with concrete,
effective policies on the ground. It is necessary to establish a sustainable
downward trend in terms of the overall asylum intake from each visa-free state.
The Commission recommends that each visa-free state continue taking action in
the following areas:
(1)                   
Increase targeted assistance to minority
populations, in particular the Roma, aiming to enhance their long-term
socio-economic integration via educational, employment and vocational training
programmes, including by implementing national strategies and using domestic
assistance, supported by available EU assistance and bilateral assistance
offered by EU Member States;
(2)                   
Enhance operational cooperation and information
exchange with neighbouring states, EU Member States and Schengen Associated
States, the European Commission and, as appropriate, Frontex, Europol and EASO,
in the fields of border management, migration, asylum and readmission, in
accordance with EU and national legislation;
(3)                   
Continue efforts to investigate facilitators of
irregular migration and prosecute those who enable the abuse of the visa-free
regime, in close cooperation with the law enforcement authorities of EU Member
States, Schengen Associated States and Europol;
(4)                   
In strict compliance with citizens’ fundamental
rights, enhance border controls and develop closer cooperation with EU Member
States that have a direct responsibility for managing EU external borders;
(5)                   
Enhance targeted information and awareness
campaigns aimed at further clarifying to citizens the rights and obligations of
visa-free travel, including information on liability for any abuse of rights
under the visa-free regime.
Finally, the Commission also recommends
that those EU Member States and Schengen Associated States that have faced the
largest inflows of unfounded asylum applications from the Western Balkans
consider taking additional action in the following areas:
–                        
Where appropriate, streamline asylum procedures
for the citizens of the five visa-free Western Balkan states;
–                        
Further enhance operational cooperation,
including through liaison officers, with the visa-free states;
–                        
Assist the visa-free states in developing more
effective public communication campaigns to inform citizens of their rights and
obligations under the visa-free regime.
The Commission will continue to assess the
implementation of these measures through the present post-visa liberalisation
monitoring mechanism and will report to the European Parliament and the Council
in 2014.
6.           ANNEX
6.1.        Asylum applications lodged
by citizens of the five Western Balkan states in EU Member States and Schengen
Associated States (SAC)
                   Source: Eurostat
6.2.        Asylum applications lodged
by citizens of the five Western Balkan states in EU Member States and Schengen
Associated States (%)
                   Source: Eurostat
6.3.        Asylum applications lodged
by Western Balkan citizens in the most-affected EU Member States and Schengen
Associated States
                   Source: Eurostat
6.4.        Recognition rate of asylum
applications at first instance in the most-affected EU Member States and
Schengen Associated States
 Citizen || MS/SAC || First instance total decisions || First instance positive decisions || Recognition rate ||   
 2009 || 2010 || 2011 || 2012 || 2009 || 2010 || 2011 || 2012 || 2009 || 2010 || 2011 || 2012 
 MNE || BE || 20 || 20 || 15 || 125 || 5 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 25.0 % || 0.0 % || 0.0 % || 0.0 % || 1.3 % 
 MNE || DE || 80 || 110 || 90 || 355 || 5 || 0 || 0 || 5 || 6.3 % || 0.0 % || 0.0 % || 1.4 % 
 MNE || FR || 55 || 50 || 75 || 395 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 5 || 0.0 % || 0.0 % || 0.0 % || 1.3 % 
 MNE || LU || 5 || 0 || 35 || 195 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0.0 % || 0.0 % || 0.0 % || 0.0 % 
 MNE || SE || 45 || 40 || 85 || 95 || 0 || 5 || 5 || 0 || 0.0 % || 12.5 % || 5.9 % || 0.0 % 
 MNE || CH || 15 || 0 || 15 || 20 || 5 || 0 || 5 || 5 || 33.3 % || 0.0 % || 33.3 % || 25.0 % 
 MK || BE || 180 || 390 || 905 || 625 || 0 || 25 || 15 || 15 || 0.0 % || 6.4 % || 1.7 % || 2.4 % || 0.7 % 
 MK || DE || 75 || 2.480 || 1.740 || 6.240 || 5 || 5 || 5 || 10 || 6.7 % || 0.2 % || 0.3 % || 0.2 % 
 MK || FR || 50 || 340 || 495 || 720 || 5 || 15 || 5 || 15 || 10.0 % || 4.4 % || 1.0 % || 2.1 % 
 MK || LU || 0 || 0 || 180 || 230 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0.0 % || 0.0 % || 0.0 % || 0.0 % 
 MK || SE || 45 || 630 || 720 || 430 || 0 || 5 || 0 || 0 || 0.0 % || 0.8 % || 0.0 % || 0.0 % 
 MK || CH || 30 || 135 || 325 || 755 || 15 || 15 || 5 || 20 || 50.0 % || 11.1 % || 1.5 % || 2.6 % 
 SRB || BE || 605 || 960 || 1.415 || 945 || 15 || 115 || 100 || 55 || 2.5 % || 12.0 % || 7.1 % || 5.8 % || 1.7 % 
 SRB || DE || 675 || 4.830 || 6.105 || 13.095 || 15 || 30 || 25 || 25 || 2.2 % || 0.6 % || 0.4 % || 0.2 % 
 SRB || FR || 620 || 630 || 380 || 810 || 30 || 45 || 25 || 155 || 4.8 % || 7.1 % || 6.6 % || 19.1 % 
 SRB || LU || 10 || 85 || 440 || 530 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0.0 % || 0.0 % || 0.0 % || 0.0 % 
 SRB || SE || 560 || 4.760 || 2.175 || 2.455 || 20 || 25 || 20 || 20 || 3.6 % || 0.5 % || 0.9 % || 0.8 % 
 SRB || CH || 440 || 450 || 400 || 1.295 || 210 || 115 || 120 || 70 || 47.7 % || 25.6 % || 30.0 % || 5.4 % 
 ALB || BE || 215 || 125 || 445 || 1.630 || 40 || 10 || 30 || 225 || 18.6 % || 8.0 % || 6.7 % || 13.8 % || 9.1 % 
 ALB || DE || 60 || 35 || 65 || 115 || 5 || 5 || 15 || 15 || 8.3 % || 14.3 % || 23.1 % || 13.0 % 
 ALB || FR || 315 || 435 || 465 || 680 || 15 || 15 || 40 || 40 || 4.8 % || 3.4 % || 8.6 % || 5.9 % 
 ALB || LU || 30 || 5 || 15 || 130 || 10 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 33.3 % || 0.0 % || 0.0 % || 0.0 % 
 ALB || SE || 105 || 65 || 185 || 985 || 10 || 5 || 20 || 45 || 9.5 % || 7.7 % || 10.8 % || 4.6 % 
 ALB || CH || 10 || 5 || 25 || 35 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0.0 % || 0.0 % || 0.0 % || 0.0 % 
 BiH || BE || 95 || 75 || 295 || 350 || 5 || 0 || 0 || 5 || 5.3 % || 0.0 % || 0.0 % || 1.4 % || 3.2 % 
 BiH || DE || 205 || 340 || 350 || 2.030 || 15 || 10 || 15 || 25 || 7.3 % || 2.9 % || 4.3 % || 1.2 % 
 BiH || FR || 240 || 370 || 110 || 710 || 15 || 25 || 15 || 100 || 6.3 % || 6.8 % || 13.6 % || 14.1 % 
 BiH || LU || 30 || 25 || 20 || 195 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0.0 % || 0.0 % || 0.0 % || 0.0 % 
 BiH || SE || 95 || 105 || 365 || 1.335 || 10 || 10 || 5 || 5 || 10.5 % || 9.5 % || 1.4 % || 0.4 % 
 BiH || CH || 95 || 165 || 70 || 225 || 55 || 70 || 30 || 20 || 57.9 % || 42.4 % || 42.9 % || 8.9 % 
 WB Total || Total || 5.005 || 17.660 || 18.005 || 37.735 || 510 || 550 || 500 || 880 || 10.2 % || 3.1 % || 2.8 % || 2.3 % 
Source: Eurostat
6.5.        Asylum applications lodged
by citizens of Albania in EU Member States and Schengen Associated States
                   Source: Eurostat
6.6.        Asylum applications lodged
by citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina in EU Member States and Schengen
Associated States
                   Source: Eurostat
6.7.        Asylum applications lodged
by citizens of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in EU Member and
Schengen Associated States
                   Source: Eurostat
6.8.        Asylum applications lodged
by citizens of Montenegro in EU Member States and Schengen Associated States
                   Source: Eurostat
6.9.        Asylum applications lodged
by citizens of Serbia in EU Member States and Schengen Associated States
                   Source: Eurostat
6.10.      Detection of citizens
illegally crossing the EU’s external borders (at green borders)
                   Source: Eurostat
[1]               Council Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 of 15 March 2001
listing the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas when
crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are exempt from that
requirement (OJ, L 81, 21.3.2001, p. 1).
[2]               The previous reports are as follows: SEC(2011) 695,
SEC(2011) 1570, COM(2012) 472.
[3]               COM(2012) 472.
*               This designation is without prejudice to positions on
status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244/1999 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo
declaration of independence.
[4]               In the first nine months of 2013, Frontex calculated
16 940 Western Balkan asylum applications in the top five recipient
states, which was 5.6 per cent lower than in the first nine months of 2012.
Germany received 70 per cent more applications in the first three quarters of
2013 than in the corresponding period of 2012—meanwhile, the number of asylum
applications fell in Sweden, Switzerland, Belgium and Luxembourg.
[5]               Of a total of 360 880 asylum applications lodged
in the EU and Schengen Associated States in 2012, 47 025 were submitted by
nationals of the Western Balkan visa-free states. 
[6]               The recognition rate is calculated as a share of
positive decisions (concerning refugee status, subsidiary protection or
humanitarian status) in the total number of first-instance decisions. 
[7]               This particularly high figure for Albanian nationals
was likely influenced by the decision of the French Conseil d’État in
March 2012 to remove Albania from the list of safe countries of origin.
[8]               There is some discrepancy between the figures
reported by FRONTEX and those collected by Eurostat. The unfounded asylum-to-return
ratio is calculated on the basis of monthly figures reported by FRONTEX.
[9]               According to Eurostat, nationals of the five
visa-free states submitted 7 865 applications in Germany, Sweden,
Switzerland, Belgium and Luxembourg in October 2012. According to FRONTEX,
these five Member States and Schengen Associated States returned slightly more
than 1 000 Western Balkan nationals that month.
[10]             Detections of illegal border-crossing at the green
borders (between BCPs) rose from 26 244 to 34 839 between 2011 and
2012.
[11]             Detections of illegal border-crossing at BCPs rose from
1 421 to 2 387 between 2011 and 2012.
[12]             Under a new decree issued by the Albanian Ministry of
Interior, citizens must obtain a certificate from the border police proving
that they are not on the Schengen entry ban list before they may apply for a
name change in Albania.
[13]             A citizen of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
filed a complaint against the Serbian Ministry of Interior alleging ethnic
discrimination as the grounds for his entry ban to Serbia. A local court
dismissed his case in 2012.
[14]             Judgment of the German Federal Constitutional Court in
proceeding 1 BvL 10/10, 18 July 2012.
[15]             A similar surge of Albanian applications in Belgium
occurred in October-November 2011, driven by rumours of successful asylum
applications on economic grounds. That surge subsided as quickly as it emerged.
[16]             COM(2011) 290.