COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Fourth report on progress by Kosovo* in fulfilling the requirements of the visa liberalisation roadmap
Date: 2016-05-04
Institutions: Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs, European Commission
Subjects: EU visa policy, Kosovo, freedom of movement, frontier, identity document, migration policy, national implementing measure, personal data, public order, return migration

*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. 

EN 

   EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 4.5.2016  SWD(2016) 160 final   COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Fourth report on progress by Kosovo* in fulfilling the requirements of the visa liberalisation roadmap  {COM(2016) 276 final}  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1. INTRODUCTION 

The European Commission launched a visa liberalisation dialogue with Kosovo on 19 January 
2012.  On  14  June  2012,  it  handed  over  to  Kosovo  a  roadmap,  which  identified  all  the 
legislation  and  other  measures  that  Kosovo  needed  to  adopt  and  implement  to  advance 
towards visa liberalisation.  

The Commission adopted three previous reports on Kosovo’s progress in the visa dialogue—
on  8  February  2013,1  24  July  20142  and  18  December  2015.3  These  reports  contained  an 
assessment  of  progress  made  by  Kosovo,  recommendations  to  the  Kosovo  authorities  and 
statistical data about the potential migratory and security impacts of visa liberalisation. 

This  is  the  Commission  staff  working  document  (SWD)  accompanying  the  Commission’s 
fourth report,4 setting out in greater detail the potential security and migratory impacts of visa 
liberalisation,  as  well  as  the  set  of  measures  that  Kosovo  has  implemented  since  December 
2015 to prevent an irregular migration crisis. 

This SWD draws upon reports submitted by Kosovo, reports drafted by EU Member States’ 
experts participating in an assessment mission to Kosovo on 17-18 March 2016, information 
provided by the EU Office in Kosovo, EUROPOL, FRONTEX, EASO and EULEX, as well 
as statistical data compiled by EUROSTAT and supplied by Member States.  

The visa dialogue is conducted without prejudice to EU Member States’ position on status. 

2. ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL SECURITY AND MIGRATORY IMPACTS OF 
VISA LIBERALISATION  

2.1. Security: Current situation and potential impact of visa liberalisation with Kosovo 

Kosovo  continues  to  face  challenges  in  effectively  preventing  and  combating  organised 
crime, corruption and terrorism. Criminal networks operating in Kosovo continue to pose a 
considerable threat to the internal security of the European Union.  

*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. 
1 COM (2013) 66 final 
2 COM(2014) 488 final. 
3 COM(2015)  906 final, accompanied by SWD(2015) 706 final 
4 COM(2016) 276 final. 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
  
                                                            
2.1.1. Current situation 

Geographical reach  

Albanian-speaking  organised  crime  groups  are  already  present  and  engaged  in  criminal 
activities  in  19  Member  States  and  Schengen  Associated  States.  Such  groups  can  be 
composed  of  persons  not  only  from  Kosovo,  but  also  of  Albania,  the  former  Yugoslav 
Republic of Macedonia and Serbia. Some also hold EU citizenship. They often have interests 
in their region of origin and maintain contacts with diaspora communities. 

Some members of these groups return to Kosovo to evade prosecution abroad, while others 
have been known to run operations in the EU from Kosovo. 

Criminal sectors 

These  groups  are  active  in  a  considerable  range  of  crime  areas,  and  there  are  indications 
that they could pose a threat in the following sectors: 

-  Drug trafficking, such as the production and trafficking of cannabis and trafficking of 

heroin and cocaine;  

-  Some groups have become active in facilitating irregular migration from Kosovo and, 

recently, third-country nationals in the European refugee crisis; 

-  Corruption, money-laundering and fraud, including excise and benefit fraud; 

-  Trafficking in human beings, notably for sexual exploitation; 

-  The illicit trafficking of small arms and light weapons; 

-  Foreign  terrorist  fighters  originating  from  Kosovo  who  have  returned  from  Syria  or 

Iraq. 

Counterfeit commodity smuggling undertaken by some of these groups remains a problem 
affecting the Western Balkans rather than the EU. 

Drug trafficking 

In  the  heroin  and  cocaine  trade  affecting  the  EU,  the  Western  Balkan  route,  including 
Kosovo, continues to play an important role. Kosovo is still used as a storage location and 
distribution centre for trafficked heroin.  

Despite a significant law enforcement effort in 2014-2015 to eradicate cannabis plantations, 
production continues in  Kosovo on  a smaller scale.  Cannabis is  produced  for the regional 
market,  and  large  seizures  in  2014  indicate  that  most  of  the  cannabis  is  trafficked  from 
Albania through Kosovo to EU Member States. 

Cannabis  grown  in  Albania  and  Kosovo  is  distributed  in  some  EU  Member  States  and 
Schengen Associated States. Some competition in the cannabis trade with organised crime 
groups active in the EU has also been detected. 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Kosovo is less exposed to the trafficking of synthetic drugs, although precursors have been 
detected in lorries. 

Between 2014 and 2015, the number of criminal investigations of drug trafficking increased from 
22  to  29.  In  2015,  Kosovo  confiscated  1  kg  of  heroin,  25  grammes  of  cocaine  and  83  kg  of 
cannabis. By volume, cannabis remains the type of drug most commonly trafficked in Kosovo. 

Most of these groups also engage in serious crimes other than drug trafficking. 

Facilitating irregular migration 

Some criminal groups involved in facilitating irregular migration have focused on Kosovo 
in particular. Some facilitators are members of the diaspora community; others are former 
migrants themselves.  

These groups often employ EU nationals as drivers or local smugglers and cooperate with 
document  forgers  who  facilitate  their  services.  In  the  past,  private  cars  were  most  often 
used; but the Kosovo migration crisis between September 2014 and April 2015 showed an 
increasing  reliance  on  bus  companies.  Corrupt  border  officials  have  been  known  to  be 
bribed to facilitate passenger movement.  

False  residence  permits  in  some  EU  Member  States  and  Schengen  Associate  States  have 
been  used  to  regularise  migrants’  stay  in  the  Schengen  area.  Some  travel  agencies  have 
offered  fraudulent  document  packages  to  persons  seeking  to  apply  for  Schengen  visas. 
Another  method  of  document  fraud  involves  applications for  Serbian biometric  passports, 
in circumvention of the residence requirement that is necessary in Serbia to qualify for such 
travel documents. Bribery is sometimes used to facilitate this process.  

Counterfeit  documents  have  often  been  used  by  these  groups  to  facilitate  irregular 
migration.  

Migrant smuggling remains a multinational business. Suspects originate from more than 100 
countries,  including   Bulgaria,  Hungary,  Iraq,  Kosovo,  Pakistan,  Poland,  Romania,  Serbia, 
Syria  and  Turkey.  There  have  been  some  indications  of  Kosovo-based  organised  crime 
groups collaborating with Russian-speaking groups in migrant smuggling. 

Corruption, money-laundering and fraud 

Kosovo has a legislative and institutional framework against corruption in place.  However, 
implementation  remains  a  challenge.  Transparency  International’s  2015  Corruption 
Perceptions Index5 ranked Kosovo 103th of 167 countries surveyed globally, with the worst 
ranking in the Western Balkans for a third consecutive year.   

Despite recent progress in modernising the legislative framework and the enforcement of a 
centralised  public  procurement  system,  public  procurement  remains  a  major  source  of 
corruption in Kosovo. 

5 http://www.transparency.org/cpi2015 

4 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
The  trafficking  of  counterfeit  medicine  and  cigarettes  remains  a  moderate  problem  in 
Kosovo. Fuel smuggling, particularly in the north of Kosovo, remains a problem. 

The  illicit  proceeds  of  serious  crime  are  increasingly  invested  in  legitimate  businesses  in 
EU  Member  States  and  Schengen  Associated  States.  The  most  common  form  of  money-
laundering  include  investing  in  real  estate,  use  of  tax  havens  and  investing  in  businesses, 
such  as  restaurants,  bars,  casinos,  travel  companies  and  construction  companies  in  the 
Western Balkans and some EU Member States. 

Trafficking in human beings 

Kosovo  continues  to  be  affected  by  trafficking  in  human  beings.  Earlier,  persons  were 
trafficked  to  Kosovo  for  sexual  exploitation;  today,  this  is  increasingly  becoming  a 
domestic problem. 

Workers  from  Kosovo  have  also  been  trafficked  to  EU  Member  States  for  labour 
exploitation, using fraudulent documents. 

Trafficking of small arms and light weapons 

The total number of registered and unregistered firearms currently in circulation in the Western 
Balkans  is  estimated  between  3.2  and  6.2  million.  Small  arms  and  light  weapons  are  typically 
smuggled into the EU along the Western Balkan route, including Kosovo. 

Reactivated small weapons are  sometimes converted in Kosovo before being trafficked to 
the EU. However, weapon tracing and law enforcement controls of arms have improved in 
Kosovo, not least owing to Kosovo’s participation in the EU-Western Balkan Action Plan 
on trafficking in firearms.   

Criminal methods 

Some groups have also been known to set up legal businesses, such as shops, restaurants, 
casinos and workshops, across the Western Balkan to facilitate their criminal enterprises. 

Corruption and bribery of public officials both in  the Western Balkans and sometimes also 
in the EU are used when necessary to facilitate criminal enterprises. 

Some  of  these  groups  have  also  established  criminal  partnerships  in  the  Western  Balkans 
and Member States. In the EU, such partnerships have been observed with Italian organised 
crime groups and Nigerian and Moroccan groups active in Member States. In the Western 
Balkans,  Kosovo-based  groups  have  set  up  partnerships  with  Turkish,  Romanian  and 
Bulgarian organised crime groups. 

Violence is sometimes used to maintain discipline; several members possess firearms. 

Many of these groups are financially well off and are capable of laundering the proceeds of 
crime in other sectors or legitimate businesses. Poorer groups have sometimes resorted to 
extortion and loan sharking to boost profits. 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
Terrorism 

The  spread  of  Islamic  radicalism  and  extremism  remains  a  concern  in  Kosovo,  as  in  the 
broader  Western  Balkan  region.  Estimates  of  foreign  terrorist  fighters  from  Kosovo  who 
have operated in Syria or Iraq range from 150 to 300, which represents the highest number of 
foreign terrorist fighters per capita in Europe. Some have already returned to Kosovo.  

Kosovo authorities have taken a number of steps to combat violent extremism and the threat 
posed by foreign terrorist fighters, including through arrests and the prevention of departure 
via legislation. On 17 September 2014, its authorities arrested fifteen individuals on suspicion 
of terrorism, including 9 imams whose activities had been monitored for some time. In March 
2015, Kosovo adopted a law that prevents participation in foreign armed conflicts and started 
implementing  a  strategy  to  de-radicalise  returning  foreign  terrorist  fighters.  Kosovo  also 
actively participates in the EU’s Western Balkan Counter-Terrorism Initiative. It is difficult 
to assess the effectiveness of such measures on the flow of departures or Kosovo’s capacity 
to  detect  and  monitor  returns,  but  the  Commission  noted  in  its  2015  enlargement  package 
that  Kosovo’s  efforts  “need  to  be  enhanced  to  identify,  prevent  and  disrupt  the  flow  of 
foreign terrorist fighters traveling to conflict areas such as Iraq and Syria.”6 

The  resources,  including  Arabic  language  skills,  that  Kosovo  can  deploy  to  combat  violent 
extremism  remain  limited,  although  authorities  have  recently  strengthened  their  efforts  to 
monitor  terrorist  recruitment  online.  Kosovo  is  also  considering  the  establishment  of  a 
referral mechanism. This would be a multi-agency safeguarding process designed to identify 
persons vulnerable and therefore susceptible to radicalisation. Kosovo should pay particular 
attention to improving its capacity to prevent radicalisation. 

2.1.2. Potential security impact of visa liberalisation with Kosovo 

An  assessment  of  the  security  impact  of  visa  liberalisation  for  Kosovo  reveals  that  drug 
trafficking, the facilitation of irregular migration, corruption, money-laundering and fraud, 
trafficking  in  human  beings,  the  illicit  trafficking  of  small  arms  and  light  weapons  and 
returning  foreign  terrorist  fighters  pose  potential  threats  to  the  European  Union’s  internal 
security. As reflected in the Commission’s previous assessments, Kosovo has taken steps to 
address  these  matters,  but  monitoring  and  effectively  addressing  them  after  visa 
liberalisation remains essential. 

Albanian-speaking organised crime groups are capable of managing movement between the 
EU  and  Kosovo  and  are  often  connected  to  organised  crime  groups  in  their  diaspora.  It 
remains unclear to what extent visa-free travel might contribute to cross-border criminality. 
Nevertheless, the difference in living standards between the EU and Kosovo may facilitate 
an  increase  in  certain  crime  areas,  such  as  organised  property  crime  and  mobile  itinerant 
crime.  Visa  liberalisation  could  also  have  an  impact  on  undetected  entry  into  the  EU  of 
persons from Kosovo who return from war zones where they had joined terrorist networks. 
Continued  implementation  of  legislation  adopted  in  the  context  of  the  visa  dialogue  and 
enhanced  operational  cooperation  and  information  sharing  with  Member  States  will  be 
essential to mitigate these threats.  

6 SWD(2015) 215 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
2.2. Migration: current situation and potential impact of visa liberalisation for Kosovo 

2.2.1. Current situation 

Irregular  migration  numbers  from  Kosovo  to  the  EU  have  fluctuated  over  the  past  years  and 
have varied across Member States. While late 2014 and early 2015 saw an unprecedented rise in 
irregular  migration  and  a  corresponding  increase  in  asylum  applications  from  Kosovo,  these 
numbers have declined since May 2015 (Figure 2.1). 

Asylum  applications  in  the  first  quarter  of  2016  reached  their  lowest  quarterly  level  since  the 
visa dialogue was launched with Kosovo in January 2012 (Figure 4.5). 

As part of its European Agenda on Migration, the Commission proposed on 9 September 2015 
establishing  an  EU  common  list  of  safe  countries  of  origin  that  would  include  Kosovo.  It 
considered  that  the  legal  basis  for  protection  against  persecution  and  mistreatment  is 
adequately  provided  by  substantive  and  procedural  human  rights  and  anti-discrimination 
legislation  in  Kosovo.  There  are  no  indications  of  refoulement.  Discrimination  or  violence 
against  individuals  belonging  to  vulnerable  groups  of  persons  such  as  women,  LGBTI  and 
persons belonging to ethnic minorities, including ethnic Serbs, still occurs in individual cases. 
At least six Member States have designated Kosovo as a safe country of origin. On this basis, 
the Commission concluded that Kosovo was a safe country of origin within the meaning of 
the Asylum Procedures Directive.7  

Figure  4.6  shows  a  considerable  drop  in  the  asylum  recognition  rate  of  applicants  from 
Kosovo.  Across  the  EU  and  Schengen  Associated  States,  the  asylum  recognition  rate  fell 
from  7.3%  to  2.6%  between  2014  and  2015,  suggesting  that  hardly  any  applicant  from 
Kosovo merits international protection in the Schengen area. 

Kosovo migration crisis, September 2014 - April 2015 

Between September 2014 and April 2015, there was a large-scale irregular migration flow 
from  Kosovo,  via  Serbia  and  Hungary,  mainly  to  Germany  and  Austria.  According  to 
Eurostat,  87,595  persons  from  Kosovo  sought asylum  in  the  EU  and Schengen  Associated 
States between September 2014 and April 2015 (Figure 2.1). 

Kosovo’s steps to contain the migration crisis 

Under  EU  facilitation  and  in  close  cooperation  with  Serbia,  Kosovo  took  a  number  of 
immediate  operational  steps  that  contributed  to  reducing  irregular  migration  flows  as  of 
April  2015.  Since  May  2015,  the  number  of  asylum  applications  have  continuously 
decreased.  

Kosovo took the following steps to reduce irregular migration flows: 

1)  Organised a targeted information campaign, including at its border/boundary-crossing 
points  with  Serbia.  This  included  the  distribution  of  leaflets  in  the  official  languages  of 

7 Directive 2013/32/EU 

7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
Kosovo and senior politicians informing the public of the consequences of irregular entry 
to, or overstay in the, Schengen area, as well as the consequences of receiving a Schengen 
entry ban. Kosovo should continue organising such campaigns to inform the public of the 
rights and obligations of entry to the Schengen area; 

Figure  2.1.  Kosovo  asylum  applications  in  Member  States  and  Schengen  Associated 
States during Kosovo migration crisis, 2014-2015 

25.000

20.000

15.000

10.000

5.000

0

4
1
-
.
v
n
a

j

4
1
-
.
r
v
é
f

4
1
-
s
r
a
m

4
1
-
.
r
v
a

4
1
-
i
a
m

Source: Eurostat 

4
1
-
n
u

i

j

23.745 

14.920 

13.995 

13.415 

8.110 

3.990 

3.510 

5.910 

4
1
-
t
û
o
a

4
1
-
.
t
p
e
s

4
1
-
.
t
c
o

4
1
-
.
v
o
n

4
1
-
.
c
é
d

5
1
-
.
v
n
a

j

5
1
-
.
r
v
é
f

5
1
-
s
r
a
m

5
1
-
.
r
v
a

5
1
-
i
a
m

5
1
-
n
u

i

j

4
1
-
.
l
i

u

j

5
1
-
.
l
i

u

j

5
1
-
t
û
o
a

5
1
-
.
t
p
e
s

5
1
-
.
t
c
o

5
1
-
.
v
o
n

5
1
-
.
c
é
d

6
1
-
.
v
n
a

j

6
1
-
.
r
v
é
f

6
1
-
s
r
a
m

2)  Enhanced  border/boundary  controls,  including  first  and  second-line  checks  and 
surveillance,  along  its  border/boundary-crossing  points  with  Serbia,  by  thoroughly 
checking ID cards, the administrative licences of buses and explaining  the conditions of 
entry  to  the  Schengen  area.  Kosovo  was  reminded  that  its  practice  of  “dissuading” 
travellers from leaving Kosovo must be in line with travellers’ fundamental rights;    

3)  Stepped  up  investigations  of  travel  companies  facilitating  transfers  to  Serbia,  with  a 
focus  on  newly  established  companies.  This  included  revoking  the  licences  of  bus 
companies that did not meet the conditions of transport and domestic legislation; 

4)  Ensured  the  reception  of  returnees  to  Kosovo  from  all  EU  Member  States  and 
Schengen  Associated  States,  finding  practical  arrangements  for  their  identification, 
registering  them  in  the  reintegration  database,  providing  comprehensive  information  on 
the benefits they might be eligible for and ensuring their transfer to home municipalities; 

5)  Took steps to enhance information exchange, via EULEX, with Europol on the criminal 
aspects  of  irregular  migration,  with  FRONTEX  on  migration-related  risk  analysis  and 
with EASO on asylum trends; 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
6)  Adopted  a  resolution  on  5  February  2015  to  address  the  push  factors  of  irregular 
migration. Among other measures, this resolution grants customs, tax, and administrative 
benefits for individuals who employ more than ten persons. A decision on 4 March 2015 
pardoned utility bill arrears and created a seasonal work programme for 900 beneficiaries 
of social welfare.   

Kosovo is committed to implementing the above measures to prevent abuse of the visa-free 
scheme. 

3.2.2. Potential migratory impact of visa liberalisation for Kosovo 

As  of  May  2015,  the  Kosovo  authorities  introduced  several  mitigating  measures  that  have 
contributed to reducing irregular migration flows and informing the public about their rights 
and obligations to enter the Schengen area. 

These  measures  should  remain  in  place  and  must  continue  to  prevent  abuse  of  the  visa-free 
scheme. 

The Commission has added Kosovo to its proposal for an EU list of safe countries of origin.  

3.3. Migratory performance indicators 

The Commission has continued to monitor the five performance indicators set out in the visa 
roadmap.8 A substantial decrease in these performance indicators, over the course of the 
visa dialogue, has been used as an indicative reference in the Commission’s assessments of 
the potential migratory impact of visa liberalisation for Kosovo.  

Last year, the following trends could be observed:  

- 

- 

- 

- 

the  visa  refusal  rate  for  Kosovo,  calculated  as  an  average  for  13  Member  States  and 
Schengen Associated States, fell by 1.2% from 21.1% to 19.9% between 2014 and 2015 
(Figure 4.1); 

the number of refused entries at Schengen external borders fell by 30% from 1,315 to 
925 between 2014 and 2015 (Figure 4.2); 

the  number  of  illegal  stays  in  EU  Member  States  or  Schengen  Associated  States 
increased by 73% from 13,545 to 23,500 between 2014 and 2015 as a direct consequence 
of the Kosovo migration crisis (Figure 4.3);  

the  number  of  asylum  applications  lodged  in  EU  Member  States  or  Schengen 
Associates States increased by 90% from 38,450 to 73,215 between 2014 and 2015 as a 
consequence  of  the  Kosovo  migration  crisis  (Figure  4.4).  However,  a  comparison  of 
asylum applications between the first quarters of 2015 and 2016 reveals a dramatic drop 
of  96%.  The  first  quarter  of  2016  also  yielded  the  lowest  quarterly  total  of  asylum 

8  They  are  as  follows:  the  visa  refusal  rate  for  applicants  from  Kosovo,  the  rate  of  refused  entry  into  the 
Schengen area, the number of illegal stays in the territory of one of the Member States, the total number of asylum 
applications and the number of rejected readmission application submitted by a Member State to Kosovo. 

9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
applications—2,015—that Kosovo has recorded since the beginning of the visa dialogue 
(Figure 4.5); 

- 

the  number of  rejected readmission  applications  increased  by  121%  from  208  to  459 
between  2014  and  2015,  while  the  rejection  rate  of  readmission  applications  fell  from 
8.2% to 3.8% in the same period (Figure 4.7). The return rate also increased from 50.1% 
to  85.6%  between  2014  and  2015  (Figure  4.8),  suggesting  that  Kosovo  responded 
efficiently to the migration crisis by swiftly readmitting returnees. 

3. CONCLUSION 

An  assessment  of  the  security  impact  of  visa  liberalisation  for  Kosovo  reveals  that  drug 
trafficking, the facilitation of irregular migration, corruption, money-laundering and fraud, 
trafficking  in  human  beings,  the  illicit  trafficking  of  small  arms  and  light  weapons  and 
returning  foreign  terrorist  fighters  pose  potential  threats  to  the  European  Union’s  internal 
security. As reflected in the Commission’s previous assessments, Kosovo has taken steps to 
address  these  matters,  but  monitoring  and  effectively  addressing  them  after  visa 
liberalisation remains essential. 

Albanian-speaking organised crime groups are capable of managing movement between the 
EU  and  Kosovo  and  are  often  connected  to  organised  crime  groups  in  their  diaspora.  It 
remains unclear to what extent visa-free travel might contribute to cross-border criminality. 
Nevertheless , the difference in living standards between the EU and Kosovo may facilitate 
an  increase  in  certain  crime  areas,  such  as  organised  property  crime  and  mobile  itinerant 
crime.  Visa  liberalisation  could  also  have  an  impact  on  undetected  entry  into  the  EU  of 
persons from Kosovo who return from war zones where they had joined terrorist networks. 
Continued  implementation  of  legislation  adopted  in  the  context  of  the  visa  dialogue  and 
enhanced  operational  cooperation  and  information  sharing  with  Member  States  will  be 
essential to mitigate these threats.  

An overview of the migratory performance indicators that the Commission uses to monitor the 
potential migratory impact of visa liberalisation suggests the following: 

-  The  visa  refusal  rate  and  the  number  of  refusals  of  entry  fell  in  the  reporting  period,  as 

required by the visa liberalisation roadmap, but the former remains high; 

-  The  number  of  illegal  stays  and  asylum  applications  increased  as  a  result  of  the  Kosovo 

migration crisis in late 2014-early 2015;  

-  The number of rejected readmission application also increased in absolute terms, but a drop 
in  the  rejection  rate  of  readmission  applications  and  a  considerable  increase  in  the  return 
rate  suggests  that  Kosovo  was  able  to  address  effectively  the  aftermath  of  the  migration 
crisis. 

The above data illustrate the main trends in the security and migration fields, showing that the 
EU  remains  an  attractive  destination  for  persons  from  Kosovo  with  potential  migratory  and 
security  challenges  to  be  monitored.  The  reinforced  visa  liberalisation  suspension  clause 
proposed by the Commission will help in this respect to mitigate the associated risks. 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
4. STATISTICS 

Figure 4.1. Applications for short-term Schengen visas in Kosovo, 2012-2015 

Year  Visa category 

Belgium/Netherlands/ 
Luxembourg9 

Germany  Greece  Finland  Hungary  Slovenia 

Switzerland/Austria/ 
France/Liechtenstein 

Norway 

Total 

Total A, C visa applications 

2015 

Total A, C visas delivered 

Total A, C visas refused 

Refusal rate for A, C visas 

Total A, C visa applications 

2014 

Total A, C visas delivered 

Total A, C visas refused 

Refusal rate for A, C visas 

Total A, C visa applications 

2013 

Total A, C visas delivered 

Total A, C visas refused 

Refusal rate for A, C visas 

Total A, C visa applications 

2012 

Total A, C visas delivered 

Total A, C visas refused 

160 

137 

23 

31.263 

24.680 

6.396 

5.697 

5.047 

646 

1.412 

1.194 

218 

3.048 

2.658 

371 

3.999 

2.920 

1.079 

24.663 

2.164 

72.406 

19.232 

1.922 

57.790 

5.449 

231 

14.413 

14,4% 

20,5% 

11,3% 

15,4% 

12,2% 

27,0% 

22,1% 

10,7% 

19,9% 

2.967 

1.943 

868 

28.924 

23.531 

5.393 

6.937 

5.995 

942 

1.360 

1.181 

172 

2.468 

1.788 

641 

3.734 

2.798 

936 

29,3% 

18,6% 

13,6% 

12,6% 

26,0% 

25,1% 

4.556 

4.275 

281 

1.314 

1.144 

170 

2.819 

2.067 

753 

4.415 

3.281 

1.134 

22.531 

16.709 

5.822 

25,8% 

23.917 

17.993 

5.924 

1.549 

70.470 

1.419 

55.364 

130 

14.904 

8,4% 

21,1% 

1.496 

67.411 

1.279 

53.803 

217 

13.570 

6,2% 

12,9% 

26,7% 

25,7% 

24,8% 

14,5% 

20,1% 

485 

441 

44 

1.282 

989 

293 

2.289 

1.618 

671 

4.631 

3.295 

1.336 

22.131 

17.553 

4.578 

759 

532 

227 

60.084 

42.857 

13.479 

2.823 

1.915 

869 

30,8% 

2.774 

1.829 

926 

26.071 

21.849 

4.222 

16,2% 

25.733 

16.600 

5.404 

Refusal rate for A, C visas 

33,4% 

21,0% 

9,1% 

22,9% 

29,3% 

28,8% 

20,7% 

29,9% 

22,4% 

Source: EU Office, Local Schengen Cooperation group data (These figures could not be verified by the Commission) 

9 The 2015 data for Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg only cover the months of November and December 2015.  

11 

 
 
                                                            
Figure 4.2. Refused entry at Schengen external borders for Kosovo, 2012-2015 

Member State/Schengen Associated State 

2012 

2013 

2014 

2015 

35 
65 
0 
0 
85 
0 
5 
40 
0 
235 
0 
30 
0 
0 
0 
0 
80 
0 
0 
10 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
40 
0 
0 
0 
45 

670 

25 
60 
0 
0 
90 
0 
10 
15 
0 
110 
720 
50 
0 
0 
0 
0 
140 
0 
0 
5 
0 
0 
0 
150 
0 
0 
0 
40 
0 
5 
0 
45 

15 
160 
0 
0 
55 
0 
5 
40 
0 
65 
560 
35 
0 
0 
0 
0 
150 
0 
0 
5 
0 
0 
5 
115 
0 
0 
5 
55 
0 
0 
0 
45 

1.465 

1.315 

10 
75 
0 
0 
60 
0 
5 
N/A  
N/A  
120 
520 
20 
0 
0 
0 
0 
N/A  
0 
0 
5 
0 
N/A  
10 
N/A  
0 
0 
0 
55 
0 
N/A  
0 
45 

925 

Belgium 
Bulgaria 
Czech Republic 
Denmark 
Germany 
Estonia 
Ireland 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Croatia 
Italy 
Cyprus 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Luxembourg 
Hungary 
Malta 
Netherlands 
Austria 
Poland 
Portugal 
Romania 
Slovenia 
Slovakia 
Finland 
Sweden 
United Kingdom 
Iceland 
Liechtenstein 
Norway 
Switzerland 

Total (EU + SAC) 

Source: Eurostat, DG HOME calculations 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure  4.3.  Illegal  stays  in  EU  Member  States  and  Schengen  Associated  States  for 
Kosovo, 2012-2015 

Member State/Schengen Associated State 

Belgium 
Bulgaria 
Czech Republic 
Denmark 
Germany 
Estonia 
Ireland 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Croatia 
Italy 
Cyprus 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Luxembourg 
Hungary 
Malta 
Netherlands 
Austria 
Poland 
Portugal 
Romania 
Slovenia 
Slovakia 
Finland 
Sweden 
United Kingdom 
Iceland 
Liechtenstein 
Norway 
Switzerland 

2012 

250 
5 
15 
10 
2.645 
0 
25 
95 
0 
610 
0 
180 
0 
0 
0 
20 
190 
0 
0 
495 
10 
0 
0 
0 
5 
50 
525 
70 
0 
0 
45 
1.280 

2013 

290 
5 
45 
0 
3.070 
0 
5 
60 
0 
845 
275 
180 
0 
0 
0 
25 
965 
0 
0 
1.175 
10 
0 
0 
100 
15 
40 
725 
100 
0 
0 
65 
1.790 

2014 

295 
5 
185 
10 
4.110 
0 
0 
35 
0 
1.270 
230 
130 
0 
0 
0 
35 
2.075 
0 
0 
1.780 
5 
0 
0 
100 
75 
40 
1.370 
90 
0 
0 
90 
1.615 

2015 

N/A  
10 
265 
20 
18.965 
N/A  
20 
N/A  
0 
1.415 
150 
150 
0 
0 
0 
10 
N/A  
0 
N/A  
1.995 
10 
N/A  
0 
N/A  
105 
70 
45 
115 
N/A 
5 
150 
 N/A 

Total (EU + SAC) 

6.525 

9.785 

13.545 

23.500 

Source: Eurostat, DG HOME calculations 

13 

 
 
 
4.4. Asylum applications lodged in EU Member States and Schengen Associated States 
for Kosovo, 2012-2015 

Member State/Schengen Associated State 

Belgium 
Bulgaria 
Czech Republic 
Denmark 
Germany 
Estonia 
Ireland 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Croatia 
Italy 
Cyprus 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Luxembourg 
Hungary 
Malta 
Netherlands 
Austria 
Poland 
Portugal 
Romania 
Slovenia 
Slovakia 
Finland 
Sweden 
United Kingdom 
Iceland 
Liechtenstein 
Norway 
Switzerland 

2012 

1.740 
0 
10 
130 
2.535 
0 
5 
0 
0 
3.715 
0 
100 
0 
0 
0 
210 
225 
0 
40 
310 
0 
0 
0 
20 
0 
80 
1.045 
40 
0 
0 
130 
585 

2013 

1.270 
0 
10 
80 
4.425 
0 
5 
0 
0 
5.550 
5 
100 
0 
0 
0 
160 
6.210 
0 
50 
935 
0 
0 
0 
35 
0 
70 
1.270 
40 
0 
5 
255 
700 

2014 

840 
0 
15 
80 
8.920 
0 
5 
0 
0 
2.770 
5 
105 
0 
0 
0 
140 
21.455 
0 
60 
1.905 
0 
0 
0 
20 
0 
65 
1.480 
30 
0 
5 
145 
405 

Total (EU + SAC) 

10.920 

21.175 

38.450 

Source: Eurostat, DG HOME calculations 

2015 

735 
0 
15 
115 
37.095 
0 
15 
0 
0 
4.275 
10 
350 
0 
0 
0 
235 
24.455 
0 
690 
2.470 
0 
5 
0 
30 
0 
165 
1.775 
30 
0 
10 
175 
565 

73.215 

14 

 
 
 
4.5.  Asylum  applications  in  EU  Member  States  and  Schengen  Associated  States  for 
Kosovo, First Quarter results, 2012-2016 

Member State/Schengen Associated State 

2012 Q1 

2013 Q1 

2014 Q1 

2015 Q1 

2016 Q1 

415 
0 
0 
15 
690 
0 
0 
0 
0 
1.390 
5 
25 
0 
0 
0 
25 
400 
0 
5 
90 
0 
0 
0 
20 
0 
5 
245 
5 
0 
0 
60 
145 

3.540 

220 
0 
0 
10 
1.380 
0 
0 
0 
0 
830 
0 
25 
0 
0 
0 
35 
165 
0 
15 
135 
0 
0 
0 
10 
0 
30 
260 
5 
0 
0 
35 
85 

320 
0 
5 
45 
23.170 
0 
5 
0 
0 
1.660 
0 
80 
0 
0 
0 
75 
23.255 
0 
30 
2.125 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
55 
880 
5 
0 
0 
95 
265 

3.240 

52.070 

85 
0 
0 
10 
1.055 
0 
0 
0 
0 
335 
0 
70 
0 
0 
0 
10 
45 
0 
140 
50 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
5 
115 
0 
0 
0 
10 
85 

2.015 

Belgium 
Bulgaria 
Czech Republic 
Denmark 
Germany 
Estonia 
Ireland 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Croatia 
Italy 
Cyprus 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Luxembourg 
Hungary 
Malta 
Netherlands 
Austria 
Poland 
Portugal 
Romania 
Slovenia 
Slovakia 
Finland 
Sweden 
United Kingdom 
Iceland 
Liechtenstein 
Norway 
Switzerland 

440 
0 
0 
30 
470 
0 
0 
0 
0 
580 
0 
25 
0 
0 
0 
70 
35 
0 
0 
65 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
15 
240 
10 
0 
0 
45 
130 

Total (EU + SAC) 

2.155 

Source: Eurostat, DG HOME calculations 

15 

 
 
4.6. Recognition rate at first instance of asylum applications in Member States and Schengen Associated States for Kosovo, 2012-2015 

Total Decisions 

2012 

2013 

2014 

2015   Positive Decisions 

2012 

2013 

2014 

2015   Recognition rate 

2012 

2013 

2014 

2015 

Belgium 
Bulgaria 
Czech Republic 
Denmark 
Germany 
Estonia 
Ireland 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Croatia 
Italy 
Cyprus 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Luxembourg 
Hungary 
Malta 
Netherlands 
Austria 
Poland 
Portugal 
Romania 
Slovenia 
Slovakia 
Finland 
Sweden 
United Kingdom 
Iceland 
Liechtenstein 
Norway 
Switzerland 

1.240 
0 
10 
135 
2.655 
0 
5 
0 
0 
2.500 
0 
85 
0 
0 
0 
175 
45 
0 
25 
265 
0 
0 
0 
20 
0 
75 
725 
15 
0 
0 
125 
355 

535 
0 
15 
80 
2.860 
0 
0 
5 
0 
4.415 
0 
110 
0 
0 
0 
230 
1.010 
0 
45 
775 
0 
0 
0 
15 
0 
85 
1.050 
20 
0 
5 
220 
435 

550 
0 
10 
100 
2.320 
5 
5 
0 
0 
5.510 
5 
110 
0 
0 
0 
100 
3.575 
0 
40 
N/A 
0 
0 
0 
5 
0 
105 
655 
55 
0 
0 
100 
405 

650  Belgium 
0  Bulgaria 
20  Czech Republic 
125  Denmark 
27.370  Germany 

0  Estonia 
5 
Ireland 
0  Greece 
0  Spain 
4.775  France 
10  Croatia 
135 

Italy 
0  Cyprus 
0  Latvia 
0  Lithuania 
150  Luxembourg 

1.220  Hungary 
0  Malta 
55  Netherlands 

1.540  Austria 
0  Poland 
0  Portugal 
0  Romania 
25  Slovenia 
0  Slovakia 
105  Finland 
1.385  Sweden 

40  United Kingdom 
Iceland 
0 
0  Liechtenstein 

160  Norway 
450  Switzerland 

Total (EU + SAC) 

8.455 

11.905 

13.655 

38.220  Total (EU + SAC) 

Source: Eurostat, DG Home calculations 

95 
0 
0 
10 
55 
0 
0 
0 
0 
210 
0 
45 
0 
0 
0 
0 
5 
0 
0 
35 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
10 
40 
5 
0 
0 
5 
50 

565 

16 

30 
0 
0 
0 
35 
0 
0 
0 
0 
205 
0 
60 
0 
0 
0 
5 
0 
0 
0 
30 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
35 
30 
5 
0 
0 
10 
85 

530 

55 
0 
0 
15 
40 
5 
0 
0 
0 
530 
0 
55 
0 
0 
0 
5 
10 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
45 
65 
5 
0 
0 
0 
165 

995 

45  Belgium 
0  Bulgaria 
0  Czech Republic 
0  Denmark 
130  Germany 
0  Estonia 
0 
Ireland 
0  Greece 
0  Spain 
530  France 
0  Croatia 
55 
Italy 
0  Cyprus 
0  Latvia 
0  Lithuania 
5  Luxembourg 
0  Hungary 
0  Malta 
0  Netherlands 
60  Austria 
0  Poland 
0  Portugal 
0  Romania 
0  Slovenia 
0  Slovakia 
0  Finland 
55  Sweden 
0  United Kingdom 
Iceland 
0 
0  Liechtenstein 
10  Norway 
115  Switzerland 

7,7% 
10,0% 
5,6% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
7,4% 
15,0% 
0,0% 
2,1% 
1,2% 
1,7% 
0,0% 
0,0%  100,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
9,6% 
8,4% 
4,6% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
50,0% 
52,9%  54,5% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
5,0% 
2,2% 
0,0% 
0,3% 
0,0% 
11,1% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
3,9% 
13,2% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
42,9% 
13,3%  41,2% 
9,9% 
5,5% 
2,9% 
9,1% 
33,3%  25,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
4,0% 
4,5% 
40,7% 
14,1%  19,5% 

6,9% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,5% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
11,1% 
0,0% 
40,7% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
3,3% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
3,9% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
4,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
6,3% 
25,6% 

1.005  Total (EU + SAC) 

6,7% 

4,5% 

7,3% 

2,6% 

 
 
4.7. Readmission applications processed by Kosovo, 2013-2015 

Category/Year 

Readmission requests from EU MS + SAC 

Requests accepted by Kosovo 
Rejected requests by Kosovo 
Pending requests 

Effective returns 
Refusal rate for readmission requests 
Source: Kosovo, 2016 (These figures could not be verified by the Commission) 

2013 

3.778 

3.095 
404 
279 
5.115 
10.1% 

2014 

2.535 

2.164 
208 
163 
4.610 
8.2% 

2015 

12.370 

11.818 
465 
87 
16.546 
3.8% 

17 

 
 
 
4.8. Return rate from Member States and Schengen Associated States for Kosovo, 2012-2015 

Orders to leave 

2012 

2013 

2014 

2015  Effective returns 

2012 

2013 

2014 

2015  Return rate 

2012 

2013 

2014 

2015 

Belgium 
Bulgaria 
Czech Republic 
Denmark 
Germany 
Estonia 
Ireland 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Croatia 
Italy 
Cyprus 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Luxembourg 
Hungary 
Malta 
Netherlands 
Austria 
Poland 
Portugal 
Romania 
Slovenia 
Slovakia 
Finland 
Sweden 
United Kingdom 
Iceland 
Liechtenstein 
Norway 
Switzerland 

2.345 
5 
10 
180 
1.180 
0 
10 
0 
0 
2.070 
N/A 
180 
0 
0 
0 
260 
1.610 
0 
35 
330 
0 
0 
0 
0 
5 
110 
865 
70 
N/A 
0 
260 
405 

2.070 
5 
10 
100 
1.275 
0 
20 
0 
0 
2.205 
285 
180 
0 
0 
0 
200 
1.785 
0 
105 
720 
5 
0 
0 
100 
0 
90 
665 
100 
N/A 
0 
315 
450 

1.035 
5 
30 
50 

860  Belgium 
10  Bulgaria 
105  Czech Republic 
120  Denmark 
1.505  10.625  Germany 

0 
5 
35 
0 
2.700 
270 
130 
0 
0 
0 
85 
1.910 
0 
125 
0 
5 
0 
0 
100 
20 
N/A 
755 
90 
N/A 
5 
330 
520 

0  Estonia 
5 
Ireland 
25  Greece 
0  Spain 
2.900  France 
170  Croatia 
150 

Italy 
0  Cyprus 
0  Latvia 
0  Lithuania 
120  Luxembourg 

1.075  Hungary 
0  Malta 

510  Netherlands 

2.560  Austria 
0  Poland 
0  Portugal 
0  Romania 
105  Slovenia 
90  Slovakia 
180  Finland 
1.595  Sweden 

115  United Kingdom 
N/A 

Iceland 
0  Liechtenstein 

330  Norway 
585  Switzerland 

445 
5 
0 
45 
855 
0 
5 
0 
0 
465 
N/A 
65 
0 
0 
0 
45 
1.300 
0 
30 
365 
0 
0 
0 
0 
5 
80 
795 
85 
N/A 
0 
85 
N/A 

420 
5 
5 
75 

270  Belgium 
5  Bulgaria 
60  Czech Republic 
60  Denmark 
1.005  1.095  13.965  Germany 

250 
5 
10 
70 

0 
5 
0 
0 
390 
275 
50 
0 
0 
0 
100 

0 
0 
0 
0 
490 
245 
35 
0 
0 
0 
170 
1.440  1.270 
0 
35 
440 
5 
0 
0 
90 
15 
: 
390 
95 
N/A 
5 
150 
N/A 

0 
45 
790 
5 
0 
0 
90 
0 
80 
920 
100 
N/A 
0 
205 
N/A 

0  Estonia 
0 
Ireland 
0  Greece 
0  Spain 
565  France 
130  Croatia 
35 
Italy 
0  Cyprus 
0  Latvia 
0  Lithuania 
120  Luxembourg 
650  Hungary 
0  Malta 

220  Netherlands 

1.455  Austria 
0  Poland 
0  Portugal 
0  Romania 
90  Slovenia 
70  Slovakia 
90  Finland 
975  Sweden 
105  United Kingdom 
N/A 

Iceland 
0  Liechtenstein 

175  Norway 

0  Switzerland 

19,0% 
100,0% 
0,0% 
25,0% 
72,5% 
0,0% 
50,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
22,5% 
N/A 
36,1% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
17,3% 
80,7% 
0,0% 
85,7% 
110,6% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
100,0% 
72,7% 
91,9% 
121,4% 
N/A 
0,0% 
32,7% 
N/A 

24,2% 
20,3% 
100,0%  100,0% 
50,0% 
33,3% 
75,0%  140,0% 
72,8% 
78,8% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
25,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
18,1% 
17,7% 
90,7% 
96,5% 
26,9% 
27,8% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
50,0%  200,0% 
66,5% 
80,7% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
28,0% 
42,9% 
0,0% 
109,7% 
100,0%  100,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
90,0% 
90,0% 
75,0% 
0,0% 
N/A 
88,9% 
138,3% 
51,7% 
100,0%  105,6% 
N/A 
N/A 
0,0%  100,0% 
45,5% 
65,1% 
N/A 
N/A 

31,4% 
50,0% 
57,1% 
50,0% 
131,4% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
19,5% 
76,5% 
23,3% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
100,0% 
60,5% 
0,0% 
43,1% 
56,8% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
0,0% 
85,7% 
77,8% 
50,0% 
61,1% 
91,3% 
N/A 
0,0% 
53,0% 
0,0% 

Total (EU + SAC) 

9.930  10.685 

9.710  22.235  Total (EU + SAC) 

4.675 

6.005  4.865  19.040  Total (EU + SAC) 

47,1% 

56,2% 

50,1% 

85,6% 

Source: Eurostat, DG Home calculations 

18