COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS State of Schengen Report 2022
Date: 2022-05-24
Institutions: Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs, European Commission
Subjects: EU migration policy, EU strategy, EU visa policy, Schengen Agreement, application of EU law, area of freedom, security and justice, border control, data protection, external border of the EU, internal border of the EU

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 24.5.2022  COM(2022) 301 final/2    CORRIGENDUM This document corrects COM(2022)301 of 24.5.2022. Concerns only the English language version.  Withdrawal of the marking. The text shall read as follows: COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS State of Schengen Report 2022                     
 
 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, 
THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND 
SOCIAL COMMITTEE, AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS  

State of Schengen Report 2022 

The  Schengen  area  without  controls  at  internal  borders  (‘the  Schengen  area’)  is  a  historic 
achievement of European integration. Since its foundations were laid in 1985, it has changed the 
daily reality of millions of people. The Schengen project has torn down barriers, brought people 
closer together and strengthened European economies. The speed with which people, goods and 
services  circulate  within  the  EU  helps  drive  European  competitiveness  and  generate  jobs  and 
growth.  

The creation of the Schengen area has also unified the continent by establishing an area without 
frontiers, emblematic for all Europeans. It enjoys overwhelming support1. For a whole generation 
of Europeans, the idea of being subject to border checks at internal borders of the EU is scarcely 
imaginable.  Thanks  to  Schengen,  citizens  can  travel  seamlessly  between  Member  States  to 
explore,  to  study  or  to  work.  In  addition,  the  cost  of  not  having  Schengen  would  be  extremely 
high2, as the COVID-19 pandemic most recently drastically demonstrated.  

Indeed, several crises in recent years have demonstrated that this achievement cannot be taken for 
granted.  The  Schengen  area  faced  a  first  major  test  in  2015  with  the  migration  crisis,  and  a 
number of serious threats to security. More recently, new challenges emerged with the pandemic 
as well as the large number of arrivals of people due to the war in Ukraine.  

Thanks to the resolve of the EU and Member States and the progress achieved in the past years, 
Schengen has proven its resilience and emerged from these challenges stronger. Whilst challenges 
continue  to  exist,  Schengen  is  overall  functioning  well.  This  is  confirmed  by  the  results  of  the 
regular Schengen evaluations, which show only few instances of systemic deficiencies as well as 
by other tools we have in place to assess the functioning of the  Schengen area and the national 
capabilities for border control in the Member States.  

In the last years, the Schengen system has been put to the test by various crises, which have led to 
ad  hoc  political  discussions  around  Schengen.  It  has  become  evident  more  than  ever  that  the 
achievements of Schengen should not be taken for granted. All recent challenges have placed the 
spotlight on the need to take decisive steps to improve the governance structure of the Schengen 
area so as to safeguard its well-functioning. The Commission established in November 2020 the 
annual Schengen Forum as the first step towards fostering an inclusive political debate dedicated 
to  building  a  stronger  Schengen  area  based  on  mutual  trust.  High-level  political  exchanges 
confirmed  the  need  for  a  stronger  governance  for  Schengen  that  was  reiterated  at  the  second 
Schengen Forum of May 2021.  

In this context, the Commission has developed a new governance model for the Schengen area in 
the  form  of  a  ‘Schengen  cycle’  ensuring  a  regular  ‘health-check’  on  the  state  of  Schengen. 
Following discussions at the JHA Council in Lille, these ideas have started to materialise with the 
first  Schengen  Council  taking  place  on  3  March  2022.  Schengen,  a  shared  project,  needs  a 
common  response  to  current  and  future  challenges  and  the  commitment  of  Member  States,  EU 
institutions  and  relevant  agencies.  The  new  regulation  reforming  the  Schengen  evaluation  and 
monitoring  mechanism  is  intended  to  further  contribute  to  this  objective  by  ensuring  prompt 
identification of shortcomings and efficient follow-up procedures.  

1 Winter 2021/2022 Eurobarometer. 
2 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2016/581383/EPRS_STU%282016%29581383_EN.pdf  

1 

 
 
 
                                                 
This  reinforced governance is  crucial to  follow-up on the ambitious agenda set  for  Schengen in 
the  Schengen  Strategy  presented  by  the  Commission  in  June  2021.  Urgent  adoption  of  the 
reinforced  legislative  framework  and  implementation  is  necessary  to  make  the  Schengen  area 
stronger and more resilient. 

This  State  of  Schengen  report  identifies  the  key  elements  of  the  new  governance  model  for  the 
Schengen area, takes stock of the implementation of the Schengen Strategy overall  as well as its 
individual  components  and  sets  out  the  priorities  for  the  Schengen  area  in  2022/2023.  It  also 
addresses the Commission’s legal obligations3 to report on the situation as regards the absence of 
internal border controls, the results of Schengen evaluations, and the state of implementation of 
recommendations.  This  report  serves  as  a  model  for  the  future:  as  the  first  step  of  the  annual 
Schengen cycle, each future State of Schengen Report should launch a yearly reporting exercise 
on presenting the state of Schengen, identifying priorities for the year ahead and aiming to ensure 
discussions on progress made at the end of a given year. The State of Schengen report should be 
the basis for increased political dialogue, monitoring, and enforcement of the Schengen acquis.  

1.  Reinforcing the governance of the Schengen area 

An  area  that  depends  on  mutual  trust  among  Member  States  and  ultimately  on  a  correct  and 
efficient  implementation  of  the  Schengen  legal  framework,  requires  a  strong  and  structured 
governance.  Following  discussions  at  the  first4  and  second5  Schengen  Forum6  and  to  truly 
reinforce  Schengen  for  the  long-term,  a  new  model  of  Schengen  governance  has  been  set  up. 
During  the  first  Schengen  Council  of  March  2022,  Member  States  reconfirmed  this  need  and 
endorsed  the  Schengen  cycle  presented  by  the  Commission.  This  cycle  provides  for  a  regular 
‘health-check’ on the state of Schengen, allowing to identify problems early on to ensure common 
responsibility and to promote the uptake of appropriate measures. 

The  starting  point  of  the  annual  Schengen  cycle  is  the  annual  State  of  Schengen  report, 
through  which  the  Commission  initiates  the  governance  process  by  identifying  the  main 
challenges for the Schengen area and priority actions that are to be addressed at both national and 
European  level.  As  part  of  the  Schengen  cycle,  to  provide  a  situational  update  on  the  state  of 
Schengen, the Commission will regularly present a Schengen barometer7. 

Interinstitutional  discussions  at  the  Schengen  Forum  and  political  deliberations  in  the  June 
Schengen  Council8  will  provide  the  needed  political  impetus  on  the  key  strategic  issues. 
Implementation  of  the  priority  actions  will  require  the  engagement  of  all.  The  Schengen 
governance model provides a framework to ensure a proper follow-up, with regular exchanges on 

3  This  report  addresses  Commission’s  legal  obligation  to  provide  reporting  pursuant  to  Article  20  of  Council 
Regulation 1053/2013 establishing an evaluation and monitoring mechanism to verify the application of the Schengen 
acquis  and  to  Article  33  of  the  Schengen  Borders  Code  (Regulation  (EU)  2016/399  on  a  Union  Code  on  the  rules 
governing the movement of persons across borders). It also aims to provide for the  link with other similar reporting, 
which  have  so  far  delivered  on  various  elements  related  to  the  state  of  Schengen,  the  Communication  Back  to 
Schengen, the regular reports on the implementation of the European Agenda on Migration, the reports on Migration 
and Asylum, the Systematic checks report, Interoperability report(s), the Security Union progress report. 
4 30 November 2020. 
5 17 May 2021. 
6 The Commission established the Schengen Forum to stimulate more concrete cooperation and mutual trust aiming to 
bring  political  momentum  by  taking  stock  of  the  achievements  accomplished  and  the  obstacles  experienced  and 
setting out the way forward for Schengen.  
7 The Commission presented a Schengen Barometer at the first Schengen Council in March 2022. 
8  The  Schengen  Council  is  an  initiative  of  the  French  Presidency  of  the  Council  of  the  EU  established  in  the 
framework of  the Justice and Home  Affairs  Council  in  Mixed Committee Format (i.e. involving also the Schengen 
Associated Countries Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Liechtenstein) and dedicated to discuss at high political level 
issue related to Schengen, bring all relevant actors to the discussion, in particular the Agencies. 

2 

 
 
 
                                                 
 
common challenges, coordinated solutions and sharing of good practices so as to pave the way for 
effective and timely implementation of the required actions. During the last phases at the end of 
the year, discussions will focus on monitoring how the main challenges for Schengen  have been 
addressed, including guidance for operations carried out by the European Border and Coast Guard 
Agency  (‘Frontex’).  This  will  help  ensure  a  stronger  political  commitment  to  the  common 
European  governance  of  the  Schengen  area  and  set  out  the  necessary  steps  for  the  following 
annual cycle.  

The new Schengen Evaluation and Monitoring Mechanism, which the Commission proposed in 
June 2021 and which has been recently adopted by the Council, will play a crucial role in this new 
Schengen governance model. It will be the key mechanism to identify the challenges that Member 
States  are  facing  and  to  ensure  swift  remedial  actions.  This  will  help  avoid  that  any 
implementation issues, in particular cases of serious deficiencies, produce spill-over effects across 
the  entire  Schengen  area.  The  prompt  implementation  of  this  reform  will  guarantee  that  the 
Schengen area is  equipped with  a more efficient,  strategic and flexible instrument  to  tackle new 
challenges, react to changed realities, and adapt to new circumstances. The Commission is already 
taking the necessary steps to ensure its timely and effective application.  

The  Commission’s  Schengen  coordinator  will  steer  and  coordinate  the  Schengen  cycle,  in 
coordination with the Member States. 

9 

9 As of 2023, the Schengen Cycle will be launched in February with the adoption of the State of Schengen Report. 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Box 1. First Schengen Cycle - Priorities for 2022/2023 

The main priority actions for the Schengen area are: 

1.  Strengthened management of the external borders. 
2.  Ensure internal border controls are measures of last resort maintained for a limited period and 

accompanied by mitigating measures, where necessary. 

3.  Strengthened internal security through reinforced police cooperation within the EU. 

To achieve these objectives, swift implementation on the following priority actions is indispensable: 

  Adopting  and implementing  the  multiannual  strategic  policy  for  European  Integrated Border 

Management; 

  Ensuring systematic checks at the external borders of all travellers; 
 

Implementing the new IT architecture and interoperability for border management on time 
by 2023; 

  Application of the new Schengen Evaluation and Monitoring Mechanism; 
  Ensuring full implementation of the Frontex and Europol mandates; 
  Enhancing the national return systems; 
  Full use of the available cross-border police cooperation tools; 
  Lifting all long-lasting internal border controls.  

Another  key  priority  for  improving  the  legislative  framework  is  to  quickly  adopt  the  proposals  put 
forward by the Commission, including: 

  Amendment to the Schengen Borders Code. 
  Police Cooperation proposals.  
  The screening proposal. 

2.  Progress under the Schengen Strategy  

With the Schengen Strategy, the Commission set out the measures for the well-functioning of the 
Schengen area. Since its adoption in June 2021, the Commission has lived up to its pledge and has 
ensured that the tools to underpin the Schengen area are rapidly brought forward. The three pillars 
on which the Schengen area is built upon: an effective external border management, measures 
compensating for the absence of controls at internal borders and a robust governance, have 
all been strengthened and equipped with updated tools to make them apt to  deal effectively with 
new circumstances. It is now time to deliver on the outstanding proposals and commitments, with 
the  engagement  of  Member  States  and  other  stakeholders  indispensable  to  ensure  common 
responsibility.  

Implementing  one  of  the  world’s  most  technologically  advanced  border  management  systems 
remains a key priority. During the last year, Member States, eu-LISA10 and the Commission have 
further  stepped-up  efforts  to  implement  the  new  IT  architecture  and  interoperability  in  line 
with the agreed timelines. Now it is of utmost importance to ensure that all stakeholders take the 
necessary steps within the scope of their responsibilities to avoid new delays which would put at 
risk the overall timeline11 to have the full new architecture and interoperability in place by the end 

10Eu-LISA is the European Union Agency managing the operations of large-scale information systems, administering 
to matters regarding freedom, justice, and security. 
11 The entry into operation of the renewed Schengen Information System (SIS) is planned for September 2022 and the 
Commission  will  adopt  a  decision  to  set  the  exact  date  for  the  full  application  of  the  new  Regulations,  once  the 
requirements are met (Article 66 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1861 and Article 79 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1862); The 
Entry/Exit System (EES)  entry into operation  was postponed to November 2022. The European Travel Information 
and Authorisation System (ETIAS) entry into operation is scheduled for May 2023. 

4 

 
 
 
                                                 
of 2023. Delays in deliveries, ill-equipped border crossing points and quality issues might cause a 
domino effect on other systems and functionalities.  

Important  steps  have  been  taken  to  modernise  and  make  the  lodging  and  processing  of  visa 
applications  more  efficient  while  reinforcing  the  security  of  the  Schengen  area.  Digital 
documentation is both more efficient and secure. On 27 April 2022, the Commission presented a 
Proposal on the digitalisation of visa procedures. 

In  December  2021,  the  Commission  adopted  a  set  of  proposals  on  Schengen  and  Police 
Cooperation.  The  proposal  for  a  revision  of  the  Schengen  Borders  Code12  is  intended  to  bring 
more clarity as regards the rules concerning the reintroduction of internal border controls and the 
use of alternative measures. It also proposes to establish common tools to manage external borders 
more efficiently in  crisis situations, such as in  the face of a public health crisis  or in  a situation 
where migrants are instrumentalised for political purposes.  

These measures are complemented by legislative proposals to bolster the internal security of the 
European  Union  in  line  with  the  Security  Union  Strategy.  The  police  cooperation  proposals13 
provide  for  a  coherent  EU  legal  framework  to  ensure  that  law  enforcement  authorities  have 
adequate access to information held by other Member States to fight crime and terrorism. Efficient 
and  smooth  police  cooperation  will  help  boost  the  prevention,  detection  and  investigation  of 
criminal  offences  in  the  EU,  fostering  security  for  everyone  living  and  moving  in  the  Schengen 
area.  The  common  standards  for  joint  patrols  will  facilitate  the  work  between  police  officers 
participating  and  acting  in  the  territory  of  other  EU  countries,  also  promoting  a  common  EU 
culture  of  policing.  Quick  progress  on  their  agreement  will  contribute  to  ensuring  the  well-
functioning of the Schengen area. It is expected that the negotiation process is finalised in 2023.  

Enhancing  security  in  an  area  without  internal  border  controls  requires  secure  external  borders. 
Since 2017, the Member States and Schengen Associated Countries  have  been  required  to  carry 
out  systematic  checks  against  relevant  databases  on  all  persons  crossing  the  EU’s  external 
borders 14, including persons enjoying the right to free movement. This measure was intended to 
strengthen  the  EU’s  internal  security  following  findings  that  EU  citizens  were  among  foreign 
terrorists  fighters  returning  to  the  EU.  The  report  to  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council 
analyses the implementation and impact of these systematic checks. It finds that the application of 
systematic  checks  against  relevant  databases  on  persons  enjoying  the  right  of  free  movement 
under EU law filled an important regulatory gap, despite challenges faced by Member States in the 
implementation of these rules. The Commission intends to  address  those challenges and support 
Member States using ‘soft law’, in particular the upcoming review of the Practical Handbook for 
Border Guards15, which is used by Member State competent authorities when carrying out border 
checks on persons. 

12 Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2016/399 on a 
Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders, COM(2021) 891, 14.12.2021. 
13  They  cover  a  Proposal  for  a  Council  Recommendation  on  operational  police  cooperation  (COM/2021/780  final), 
Proposal  for  a  Directive  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  information  exchange  between  law 
enforcement authorities of Member States (COM/2021/782 final), and the Proposal for a Regulation of the European 
Parliament and of the Council on automated data exchange for police cooperation (COM/2021/784 final). 
14 Regulation (EU) 2017/458 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 amending Regulation 
(EU)  2016/399  as  regards  the  reinforcement  of  checks  against  relevant  databases  at  external  borders,  OJ  L  74, 
18.3.2017, p. 1–7. 
15 C(2019) 7131 final, 8.10.2019. 

5 

 
 
 
                                                 
Box 2. European Border and Coast Guard – Main developments 

 

Important progress has been made to operationalise the 2019 European Border and Coast Guard 
Regulation16.  

  As  of  1  January  2021,  Frontex  supports  the  Member  States  in  the  protection  of  the  external 
borders  and  in  returns  through  the  European  Border  and  Coast  Guard  standing  corps.  The 
standing corps is now composed of more than 6000 officers, and it will reach its full capacity of 
10,000 officers by 2027. Currently, Frontex deploys each day, on average, 2000 officers at the 
land, sea and air external borders and in support of returns.  

  A new strategic policy cycle will aim to guarantee an effective and coherent use of the European 
Border  and  Coast  Guard,  bringing  together  more  than  120,000  border  and  coast  guards  and 
return  experts  of  the  Member  States  and  Frontex. This  framework  will  better  connect  various 
policies  and  tools  and  aim  to  close  loopholes  between  border  protection,  security,  return  and 
migration, while ensuring the protection of fundamental rights.  

  Following  the  consultation  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  that  is  launched 
today, the Commission plans to adopt by the end of 2022 the first multiannual strategic policy 
for  European  Integrated  Border  Management,  to  be  implemented  and  complemented  by  the 
strategies to be adopted by Frontex and national authorities. 

  Additional strategic steering will be provided at a high-level meeting of the Management Board 
of  the  Agency.  The  meetings  of  the  Schengen  Council  also  provide  for  the  opportunity  to 
discuss  once  a  year  at  political  level  matters  related  to  the  implementation  of  European 
Integrated Border Management by the European Border and Coast Guard, including Frontex. 
  On 21 December 2021, the Commission also adopted a model for working arrangements to  be 
used by Frontex when cooperating with third countries and a model status agreement to regulate 
the  deployment  of  teams  of  the  European  Border  and  Coast  Guard  standing  corps  in  third 
countries. 
In the area of return, Frontex has also made important progress  in developing its capacities to 
support Member States on return and reintegration. In particular, a Deputy Director-General for 
Returns and Operations took office in February 2022 and oversees a new Return Division. 
  Enhanced  support  is  provided  to  Member  States  in  the  area  of  voluntary  return  and  Frontex 
Joint Reintegration Services  was rolled-out  to provide reintegration support to Member States 
from April 2022.  

 

  Frontex is advancing on establishing its capacities to organise return operations at the Agency’s 

own initiative with a first successful flight organised to Albania in January 2022.  

  The Agency has undergone important structural changes with three Deputy Executive Directors 

taking office respectively in November 2021, January 2022 and February 2022. 

  All  the  main  building  blocks  of  a  fully  functioning  monitoring  system  were  put  in  place  to 
ensure  the  compliance  of  the  Frontex  activities  with  fundamental  rights.  In  particular,  a  new 
Fundamental  Rights  Officer  and  a  Deputy  Fundamental  Rights  Officer  took  up  duties 
respectively in June 2021 and March 2022. Their work is supported by 20 Fundamental Rights 
Monitors and their number will increase to 46 Monitors by the end of the summer.  

  Frontex  fulfils  a  critically  important  task  to  support  Member  States  in  managing  common 
European Union external borders. To ensure full continuity of the Agency, the Commission will 
proceed  quickly  with  the  recruitment  process  leading  to  the  appointment  of  a  new  Executive 
Director.  

  The  Frontex  Management  Board  will  continue  to  further  strengthen  the  oversight  of  the 
Agency’s internal management and its activities. At the same time, given the enhanced mandate 
and significantly reinforced resources, the Agency should ensure its full accountability towards 
the EU institutions. In the lead up to the upcoming evaluation of the functioning of the Agency, 
the  Commission  will  launch  a  dialogue  with  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  in 
relation to the governance of the Agency. 

16 Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2019 on the European 
Border and Coast Guard and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1052/2013 and (EU) 2016/1624, OJ L 295, 14.11.2019. 

6 

 
 
 
                                                 
3.  State of the Schengen area  

3.1. Situation at the external borders 

Hundreds of millions of people cross EU’s external borders every  year making the EU the most 
welcoming  destination  in  the  world.  Today,  around  1.3  billion  people  from  around  60  countries 
worldwide can benefit from visa-free travel to the European Union.  

Although  the  vast  majority  of  third-country  nationals  arrive  to  the  EU  in  an  authorised  manner, 
irregular migration continues to be a challenge. In 2021, Frontex reported 200 000 irregular border 
crossings. During that year, irregular arrivals in Lithuania, Poland and Latvia were more than ten 
times  higher  than  those  in  2020  due  to  the  instrumentalisation  of  migrants  for  political  ends 
organised by the Belarusian regime. However, because of the determined and decisive EU action 
the situation has now stabilised and the number of arrivals from Belarus has dropped significantly.  

In  terms  of  trends,  the  Central  Mediterranean  route,  with  Italy  as  the  main  destination 
country, was again the most-used migratory path for irregular migration to the EU in 2021 (34% 
of  the  reported  irregular  border-crossings).  This  trend  continued  in  2022:  as  of  8  May  2022, 
almost 11 800 arrivals were reported on this route, a 7.6% decrease compared to the same period 
last year. The total number of irregular border crossings in 2022, as of 8 May, is 11 797 to Italy 
and  only  1  to  Malta.  Arrivals  to  Spain  via  the  Western  Mediterranean  and  Western  African 
routes  also  continued  to  be  high:  as  of  8  May  2022,  10  475  irregular  border  crossings  were 
recorded, 32% more than in the same period of 2021. While arrivals to mainland Spain decreased 
in  2022 as compared to the same period of 2021, there has been a significant  increase (53%) in 
arrivals to the Canary Islands.  

While migratory pressure continued to decrease in Greece, arrivals to Cyprus markedly increased 
(by 123%) in 2021, compared to 2020. In 2022, as of 8 May, 3 031 arrivals to Greece (an increase 

7 

 
 
 
 
of 24% compared to the same period of 2021) and 6 755 to Cyprus (an increase of 142%) were 
reported.  

The  pressure  also  increased  on  the  Western  Balkan  route  where  19  029  irregular  border 
crossings  were reported  in  the first  three months of 2022, an increase of 125% compared to  the 
same period of the previous year. 

Irregular  arrivals  from  Afghanistan  to  the  EU  have  increased  since  the  Taliban  takeover  in 
August 2021 but remained at moderate levels.  
According to Europol17, more than 90% of the irregular migrants that reach the EU make use of 
smugglers, either during parts or all of their journey. Two thirds of them do not meet the criteria 
for being granted international protection at first instance and will eventually need to be returned. 

17 Facilitation of Illegal Immigration | Europol (europa.eu) 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Box 3. Russian aggression of Ukraine – the biggest European displacement  of people since World 
War II and the EU’s immediate response 

Since the  beginning  of  Russia’s  military  invasion  of Ukraine,  around 6 million people  have  entered the 
European  Union  from  Ukraine  and  Moldova,  out  of  whom  200  000  are  non-Ukrainian  third-country 
nationals.  Ukrainians  holding  a  biometric  passport  arrive  as  visa-free  travellers  and  often  join  their 
families and friends in different Member States.  

The  EU  has  managed  the  massive  consequences  effectively  by  relying  on  measures  both  within  and 
beyond the Schengen acquis:  

  Given  the  exceptional  situation  at  the  borders  of  the  Union  with  Ukraine,  the  Commission  put 
forward  operational  guidelines18  intended  to  help  Member  States’  border  guards  to  manage 
arrivals at the borders efficiently, while maintaining a high level of security. 

  On 4 March 2022, the Council, on a proposal by the Commission, unanimously adopted for the 
first time the implementing decision19 introducing temporary protection20 due to a mass influx of 
persons fleeing Ukraine as a consequence of the war.  

  The activity of the EU Migration Preparedness and Crisis Management Mechanism Network (the 
‘Blueprint  Network’)21  has  been  intensified  to  ensure  constant  exchange  of  information  and  a 
coordinated response to the challenges triggered by such events. 

  The  Commission  also  set  up  the  Solidarity  Platform,  bringing  together  Member  States  and 
Schengen Associated Countries, EU Agencies, international organisations, with the participation 
of  Ukraine and  Moldova, to  coordinate support  to  people  fleeing  the  war in  Ukraine and to  the 
countries receiving them.  

  At the Extraordinary Justice and Home Affairs Council of 28 March, the Commission presented a 
10-point action plan22, agreed in advance with the French Presidency of the Council of the EU, to 
facilitate stronger European coordination on welcoming people fleeing the war against Ukraine. 

  EU agencies swiftly provided concrete support: 

o  Frontex immediately deployed additional staff to the EU-Ukraine borders in the framework 
of  the  already  existing  Joint  Operation  Terra23  and  also  following  requests  from  Member 
States.  As  of  27  April  2022,  297  European  Border  and  Coast  Guard  Standing  Corps  are 
deployed  at  the  eastern  EU  external  borders  (including  Ukraine,  Moldova,  Russia  and 
Belarus). Frontex also helped 718 third-country nationals fleeing war to return safely to their 
countries of origin.  

o  Frontex is actively supporting  on the ground the efforts of the Moldovan authorities on the 
ground  to  address  the  twin  challenges  of  regulating  the  influx  and  subsequent  outflow  of 
hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing from the war in Ukraine. Following the conclusion 
in record time of a Status Agreement with Moldova, as of 27 April, 70 European Border and 
Coast Guard Standing Corps officers are deployed in Moldova. 

o  Europol’s  experts  and  guest  officers  deployed  at  the  EU  external  borders  are  supporting 
Member  States,  reinforcing  secondary  security  checks  as  well  as  analysing  criminal 
information  to  be  able  to  support  investigations  and  to  produce  a  full  criminal  intelligence 

18 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52022XC0304(10)&from=EN  
19  Council  Implementing  Decision  (EU)  2022/382  of  4  March  2022  establishing  the  existence  of  a  mass  influx  of 
displaced  persons  from  Ukraine  within  the  meaning  of  Article  5  of  Directive  2001/55/EC,  and  having  the  effect  of 
introducing temporary protection. 
20 Temporary  protection  provides  people  fleeing  from  the  war  with  a  right  to  a  residence  permit,  access  to  suitable 
accommodation, to labour market, medical care, social welfare, education and opportunities for families to reunite in 
certain circumstances, without prejudice to the right to access the asylum procedure.  
21 Commission Recommendation (EU) 2020/1366 of 23 September 2020 on an EU mechanism for preparedness and 
management of crises related to migration.  
22https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/10-point-plan-stronger-european-coordination-welcoming-people-fleeing-war-
ukraine_en  
23  Joint  operation  Terra  2022 organised  by  Frontex  takes  place  across  12  EU  Member  States  and  covers  62  border 
crossing points. In total, more than 450 standing corps officers from 28 EU and Schengen countries support national 
authorities with border management. The aim of the operation is to strengthen border control at the EU’s land borders, 
assist countries in fighting cross-border crime and strengthen the EU’s internal security. 

9 

 
 
 
                                                 
picture and consolidated data analysis. 

o  The  Fundamental  Rights  Agency  visited  all  Member  States  bordering  Ukraine  and 
Moldova, observing and analysing the fundamental rights situation at border crossing points 
and registration/reception centres. 

  Following  the  Commission’s  proposal,  the  Council  adopted  a  partial  suspension  of  the  EU-

Russia visa facilitation from 25 February 2022. 

Overall, the very existence of a border-free Schengen area has provided a unique opportunity for Europe 
to respond cohesively to the challenges, offering both an opportunity to those fleeing to enjoy protection 
in  the  country  most  suitable  to  them  and  facilitating  solidarity  offers  and  transfers  from  the  frontline 
Member States to others. 

3.2. Situation at the internal borders 

Since  September  2015,  border  checks  at  the  internal  borders  have  been  reintroduced  more  than 
280 times. There are three main justifications for which Member States notified the Commission 
of the temporary reintroduction of border controls in the Schengen area: 1. those reintroduced in 
conjunction  with  the  2015  refugee  crisis  on  grounds  of  secondary  movements,  2.  those 
reintroduced to counter terrorism, and 3. those introduced to limit the spread of COVID-19.  

Over the years, the Commission has maintained a close political and technical dialogue with those 
Member States having long-lasting controls at internal borders, with a view to understanding the 
situation,  and  exploring  options  for  specific  alternative  measures.  In  2017,  the  Commission 
proposed to modify the applicable rules, building on the Recommendations of the Commission24 
adopted in the same year with a view to paving the way to lifting the long-lasting internal border 
controls. However, that proposal did not receive sufficient support in the Council. Reflecting on 
those discussions and based on consultations with Member States and stakeholders25, in December 
2021  the  Commission  presented  new  amendments  to  the  Schengen  Borders  Code,  replacing  its 
previous  proposal.  The  proposed  targeted  amendments  draw  on  lessons  learnt  as  well  as  on  the 
experiences gathered during the COVID-19 pandemic, addressing concerns raised by the Member 
States  while  preserving  the  Schengen  area  where  any  internal  border  controls  should  remain  a 
measure of last resort.  
In the recent ruling in Joined Cases C-368/20 and C-369/2026 the Court of Justice stressed that as 
an exceptional measure, the possibility of reintroducing internal border control must be interpreted 
strictly27. The Commission and the Council have launched discussions with the Member States on 
the implications of the judgment. The Commission is in the meantime reassessing the most recent 
notifications of internal border controls in the light of the judgment.  

24  Commission  Recommendation  (EU)  2017/820  of  12  May  2017  on  proportionate  police  checks  and  police 
cooperation in the Schengen area, C(2017) 3349, OJ L 122, 13.5.2017, p. 79–83, and Commission Recommendation 
(EU)  2017/1804  of  3  October  2017  on  the  implementation  of  the  provisions  of  the  Schengen  Borders  Code  on 
temporary  reintroduction  of  border  control  at  internal  borders  in  the  Schengen  area,  C(2017)  6560,  OJ  L  259, 
7.10.2017, p. 25–27. 
25  As  outlined  in  Annex  2  to  the  Impact  Assessment  accompanying  the  proposal  COM(2021)  891,  a  stakeholders’ 
consultation  took  place  between  November  2020  and  February  2021  and  encompassed,  primarily,  targeted 
stakeholders by way of the Schengen Forum and thematic workshops divided according to the topic and stakeholders 
involved. It included Member States, European Parliament, carriers and NGOs. 
26 The judgment concerns the legality of prolongations of internal border controls beyond the time-limits set out in the 
Schengen Borders Code and brings important clarifications in this regard. 
27 See point 69 of the judgment C-368/20. 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Box 4. Impact of COVID-19 

The  COVID-19  pandemic  has  exposed  the  need  for  a  stable  framework  for  coordination  and  decision-
making  at  the  external  borders  and  within  the  Schengen  area  in  crisis  situations.  At  the  start  of  the 
pandemic,  the  majority  of  Member  States  reintroduced  internal  border  controls,  with  common 
coordination amongst themselves only following later, at times jeopardising the proper functioning of the 
Single Market. In response, the Commission called on the Council for a coordinated decision28 as regards 
travel  restrictions  on  non-essential  travel  from  third  countries  into  the  Schengen  area.  This  call  was 
followed by all EU Member States (with the exception of Ireland) and all Schengen Associated Countries 
and  was  later  included  in  a  Council  Recommendation.29  However,  Member  States  have  applied  this 
Recommendation in very different ways, thus putting at risk the overall functioning of the Schengen area. 
The  ad  hoc  coordination  measures  put  in  place  by  the  Commission  over  the  last  two  years  helped  to 
manage  the  crisis  in  a  more  orderly  manner.  The  Commission  has  also  worked  together  with  Member 
States to identify their needs to effectively address the  pandemic, in particular within the context of the 
Council’s  Integrated  Political  Crisis  Response  (IPCR).  However,  the  crisis  also  revealed  the  need  for  a 
specific legal framework for such actions at the external borders in case of any future similar situations 
and  this  forms  part  of  the  Commission’s  proposal  for  an  amendment  of  the  Schengen  Borders  Code, 
adopted  in  December  2021.  The  pandemic  circumstances  have  also  affected  the  planning  and 
implementation  of  the  Schengen  evaluation  and  monitoring  process,  in  particular  in  the  field  of  the 
common visa policy.  

3.3. Completion of the Schengen area 

Since 2011, the Commission has been actively advocating for the completion of Schengen, urging 
Member States to rapidly take the necessary steps to allow those EU Member States that are not 
yet fully part of the area without controls at internal borders to join. This will increase security in 
the EU as a whole. 

During the last months, important political steps have been taken. In December 2021, the Council 
recognised30 that Croatia had fulfilled the necessary conditions for the application of all parts of 
the Schengen acquis.  It is now up to the Council to table a draft Decision31 on the lifting of the 
controls at the internal borders and to consult the European Parliament.  

Furthermore,  Romania  and  Bulgaria  are  also  awaiting  the  Decision  of  the  Council,  whilst  they 
continue to actively apply the Schengen acquis, in particular in relation to the management of the 
external  borders  with  Ukraine.  The  Commission  has  since  2011  confirmed  that  Bulgaria  and 
Romania fulfil the necessary conditions to join Schengen. Both Member States, in the context of 
the reformed Schengen Evaluation and Monitoring Mechanism, made a joint declaration32 to the 
Council  stressing  their  commitment  to  correctly  apply  the  Schengen  acquis  and  to  contribute  to 
the proper functioning of the area without internal border controls. To substantiate this pledge and 
to strengthen mutual trust, they invited on a voluntary basis a team under the coordination of the 
Commission, to assess the application of the latest developments of the Schengen acquis since the 
evaluations  of  2011,  focusing  on  external  border  management  and  police  cooperation.  The 
Commission  stands  ready  to  coordinate  and  implement  these  voluntary  assessments.  The 
Commission  once  again  calls  upon  the  Council  to  take  the  necessary  steps  to  consolidate  the 

28 COM(2020) 115 final. 
29 Council Recommendation (EU) 2020/912 on the temporary restriction on non-essential travel into the EU and the 
possible lifting of such restriction, 30.06.2020. 
30 Council conclusions on the fulfilment of the necessary conditions for the full application of the Schengen acquis in 
Croatia. 
31 This Decision has to be adopted by unanimity of its members representing the Member States who already apply 
the relevant provisions as well as of the acceding Member State. 
32  SUMMARY  RECORD  PERMANENT  REPRESENTATIVES  COMMITTEE  28  February,  2  and  4  March  2022 
https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-7304-2022-INIT/en/pdf under point 26.  

11 

 
 
 
                                                 
Schengen area by  adopting  the decision for  enabling  Bulgaria, Croatia, and Romania to  become 
formally part of it33.  

The Schengen evaluation process to assess the readiness to join the Schengen area is ongoing for 
Cyprus  as  well.  On  3  May  2022,  the  European  Parliament  adopted,  based  on  the  Commission’s 
proposal, the report on the application of the provisions of the Schengen acquis in the area of the 
Schengen  Information  System  in  Cyprus  by  a  large  majority.  As  a  next  step,  the  Council  is 
expected in the second half of 2022 to adopt a Decision on the application of the provisions of the 
Schengen acquis in the area of the Schengen Information System in Cyprus, to be followed by an 
evaluation of the operation of the system.  

4.  Priorities resulting from the Schengen evaluations 

Along with a robust governance, a well-functioning Schengen area relies on the correct and timely 
implementation of the Schengen acquis. These rules ensure that all Member States apply uniform 
criteria on controls on entry and exit at the common external border, develop cooperation between 
border  guards,  national  police,  and  judicial  authorities,  use  adequate  information  exchange 
systems and implement a common return policy. They ensure harmonised entry conditions, and a 
common  visa  policy  to  maintain  a  high  level  of  internal  security  and  the  possibility  to  travel 
without being subject to internal border controls. Given the large amount of personal data that is 
processed,  the  respect  of  the  data  protection  requirements  plays  a  key  role. The  correct 
implementation of all these rules not only safeguards citizens’ security in an area without internal 
borders but it also creates synergies between national authorities.  

Financial  support  under  EU  funding  (Internal  Security  Fund,  Border  Management  and  Visa 
Instrument,  and  Asylum,  Migration  and  Integration  Fund)  also  facilitates 
the  correct 
implementation  of  the  Schengen  acquis.  The  Commission  seeks  to  ensure  that  Member  States 
have  sufficient  resources  to  implement  those  recommendations  with  financial  implications 
stemming from the Schengen evaluations. Taking into account the evaluations’ timeline, Member 
States are therefore encouraged to set aside necessary resources under their national programmes 
so  that  deficiencies  identified  in  the  evaluation  reports  are  prioritised,  especially  in  case  serious 
deficiencies have been identified. 

While Schengen evaluations during the last years have demonstrated that in general terms Member 
States  implement  adequately  the  Schengen  acquis,  there  are  still  certain  key  shortcomings  and 
actions that need to be addressed as priorities. Deficiencies should not be looked at in isolation but 
in  their  interplay  with  various  areas  covered  by  the  Schengen  Evaluation  and  Monitoring 
Mechanism and their potential to undermine the Schengen area. Some of these deficiencies are of 
a horizontal nature across different policy areas and, due to their manifold implications, may have 
a higher impact on the well-functioning of the Schengen area. 

During the first evaluation cycle of Schengen Evaluations (2015-2019), serious deficiencies were 
identified  in  ten  evaluations  in  three  fields34  and  for  the  period  2020-2021  –  another  case  in  a 
fourth policy area35. These serious deficiencies relate in some cases to deficiencies putting at risk 

33  As  required  by  the  respective  Acts  of  Accession,  the  Council  acting  with  unanimity  shall  take  its  decision,  after 
consulting the European Parliament.  
34  Report  on  the  Functioning  of  the  Schengen  Evaluation  and  Monitoring  Mechanism  pursuant  to  Article  22  of 
Council  Regulation  (EU)  No  1053/2013  First  Multiannual  Evaluation  Programme  (2015-2019)  (COM(2020)  779 
final) and the impact assessment carried out in the preparation of the Proposal reforming the Schengen evaluation and 
monitoring mechanism (SWD/2021/119 final). 
35In the first evaluation cycle, the Mechanism identified serious deficiencies in ten evaluations in three fields: external 
border  management  (Greece,  Iceland,  Spain  and  Sweden);  common  visa  policy  (Finland  and  the  Netherlands); 
Schengen  Information  System  (Belgium,  France,  Spain  and  UK).  For  the  period  2020-2021,  it  identified  serious 
deficiencies in the field of return for Greece. 

12 

 
 
 
                                                 
the  overall  functioning  of  the  Schengen  area  or  in  other  cases  represent  a  serious  risk  to 
fundamental  rights.  When  serious  deficiencies  have  been  identified,  Member  States  are  closely 
monitored  to  ensure  swift  implementation  of  remedial  actions,  including  by  conducting  revisits. 
The  reformed  Schengen  Evaluation  and  Monitoring  mechanism  will  bring  about  an  even  more 
robust monitoring system speeding up the entire process especially when serious deficiencies are 
identified, for which a specific fast-track procedure is provided for.  

4.1. External border management 

External  borders  must  be  protected  and  managed  efficiently,  ensuring  that  the  rights  of  people 
seeking protection are fully respected. Smooth crossings of the borders have to  go hand in hand 
with  ensuring  a  high  level  of  security.  Efficient  and  security  oriented  border  check  procedures 
based  on  comprehensive  pre-arrival  information  and  queries  of  relevant  databases  to  ensure 
systematic checks of all persons crossing the external borders are the rule. Member States are also 
obliged to  ensure a comprehensive mechanism for monitoring the external  borders and effective 
border  surveillance  to  ensure  complete  situational  awareness  and  to  provide  for  an  adequate 
response, including saving lives at sea.  

A  particular  challenge  is  the  instrumentalisation  of  migrants  for  political  ends,  for  which  the 
Commission has put forward dedicated proposals in December 2021, in response to the call from 
the European Council: the amendment of the Schengen Borders Code providing for a definition of 
instrumentalisation  of  migration36  and  a  new 
situations  of 
instrumentalisation  in  the  field  of  migration  and  asylum37.  The  adoption  of  these  proposals  is 
expected  to  provide  solid  framework  for  cases  of  instrumentalisation  in  the  future  and  render 
unnecessary the need to resort to ad hoc measures under Article 78(3) TFEU38. 

instrument  addressing 

European Integrated Border Management is a shared responsibility of all Member States and 
Schengen Associated Countries, of Union institutions and agencies. In this context, the European 
Border  and  Coast  Guard  plays  a  key  role,  bringing  together  relevant  national  authorities  and 
Frontex.  Deficiencies  in  the  external  border  of  one  country  can  affect  all  Member  States  and 
subsequently put the functioning of the Schengen area at risk. Therefore, Member States’ border 
management  needs  to  be  integrated  with  one  another  to  establish  effective,  efficient  and 
coordinated border management at the EU external borders.  

Schengen  evaluations  have  revealed  that  over  the  past  years  Member  States  invested 
significantly  to  better  protect  the  external  borders,  resulting  in  improvements  shown  during  the 
second  evaluation  cycle  (starting  as  of  2020)  and  in  an  adequate  level  of  external  border 
management in general. The evaluations identified, however, certain shortcomings, one of which 
is  that  there  is  generally  no  adequate  strategic  governance  and  planning  of  national 
capabilities  for  integrated  border  management.  This  results  in  reduced  inter-institutional 
cooperation,  overlapping  of  competences  between  different  external  border  authorities  and 
scattered  resource  allocation.  This  relates  in  particular  to  the  long  term  planning  of  human 
resources and training, as well as the systematic use of information systems for border control, 
including  low  level  of  connectivity  in  some  of  the  locations  to  ensure  systematic  checks  in  the 
relevant databases. Diverging execution and quality of risk analyses and vulnerability assessments 
in the Member States are a concern.  

36 COM(2021) 891. 
37 COM(2021) 890. 
38  On  1  December  2021,  the  Commission  adopted  a  proposal  for  a  Council  Decision  based  on  Article  78(3)  of  the 
Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union  (TFEU)  aimed  at  supporting  Latvia,  Lithuania  and  Poland  by 
providing for the measures and operational support needed to manage in an orderly and dignified manner the arrival of 
persons being instrumentalised by Belarus, in full respect of fundamental rights. 

13 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Regarding border control (border checks and border surveillance), the Schengen evaluations 
revealed that, in general, the application of the Schengen acquis by the Member States is adequate. 
The Schengen evaluation also pointed out good practices and innovative activities implemented by 
the  Member  States  to  implement  the  Schengen  criteria  efficiently.  Despite  the  overall  good 
progress,  there  are  recurrent  shortcomings  in  external  border  surveillance  and  deficient  border 
check procedures at some border crossing points. Border control is carried out in accordance with 
comprehensive risk analysis in most Member States; however, there are still deficiencies detected 
in  the  way  some  Member  States  implement  the  European  model  of  risk  analysis  for  border 
control39  resulting  in  insufficient  situational  awareness,  scattered  planning  of  resources  and 
inadequate operational actions.  

At  some  border  crossing  points,  border  checks  are  not  carried  out  systematically  and  not  up  to 
standard.  This  is  mainly  related  to  insufficient  human  resources,  lack  of  properly  trained  border 
guards  as  well  as  poor  connectivity  to  databases,  which  prevents  that  checks  against  relevant 
databases,  including  the  Schengen  Information  System  and  Interpol  Stolen  and  Lost  Travel 
Documents (SLTD) database, are uniformly and  systematically  carried out,  leading to  important 
security  gaps.  This  could  represent  a  threat  to  public  policy,  internal  security,  public  health  or 
international relations of any of the Member States and of the EU as a whole. 

This  is  further  aggravated  by  the  insufficient  implementation  and  application  of  the  Carrier’s 
Liability40  and  the  Advance  Passenger  Information  directives41  in  some  Member  States.  In 
order  to  combat  irregular  immigration  and  ensure  effective  border  controls,  air  carriers  need  to 
transmit at the request of the authorities responsible for carrying out checks on persons at external 
borders,  by  the  end  of  check-in,  information  concerning  the  passengers  they  will  carry  to  an 
authorised border crossing point through which these persons will enter the territory of a Member 
State. When this is not carried out, border guards do not have all the necessary information at their 
disposal  to  perform  adequate  border  controls.  A  revision  of  the  Advance  Passenger  Information 
Directive  is  envisaged  by  end  of  202242  to  close  gaps  that  became  apparent  also  from  the  2020 
evaluation and ensure the conditions for adequate implementation.  

Several  Member  States  have  a  fragmented  national  situational  picture,  reduced  detection 
capabilities and limited response capacities especially at sea and land borders, due to the lack of 
integrated  border  surveillance  systems,  insufficient  coordination  and  cooperation  between  their 
national border control authorities, as well as scattered implementation of the European Border 
Surveillance  system  (EUROSUR)43  affecting  the  quality  of  border  control.  These  deficiencies 
could  decrease  operational  efficiency  in  external  border  management  and  response  capacity 
therefore putting the Schengen area at risk. This is especially valid at sea and land borders, due to 
limited  capabilities  and  integrated  border  surveillance  systems,  affecting  the  quality  of  border 
control. These deficiencies could  decrease operational efficiency in  external  border management 
and response capacity therefore putting the Schengen area at risk. 

The  respect  of  fundamental  rights  and  in  particular  the  principle  of  non-refoulement  is  a  key 
principle in the management of EU external borders. In 2020, observers from the European Union 
Agency for Fundamental Rights started to participate in the Schengen evaluations in the field of 

39  The  Common  Integrated  Risk  Analysis  Model  https://frontex.europa.eu/we-know/situational-awareness-and-
monitoring/ciram/  
40  Council  Directive  2001/51/EC  of  28  June  2001  supplementing  the  provisions  of  Article  26  of  the  Convention 
implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985. 
41 Council Directive 2004/82/EC of 29 April 2004 on the obligation of carriers to communicate passenger data. 
42 See Annex I to Commission Work Programme 2022, COM(2021) 645 of 19.10.2021. 
43 The European Border Surveillance system (EUROSUR) is a framework for information exchange and cooperation 
between Member States and Frontex to improve situational awareness and increase reaction capability at the external 
borders. 

14 

 
 
 
                                                 
external  borders.  They  have  contributed  to  identifying  deficiencies  and  recommendations  for 
improvement. Allegations of fundamental rights violations at external borders are always a cause 
for  concern.  Effective  assessments  of  all  alleged  violations  and  swift  and  independent 
investigations  where  relevant  is  essential  to  ensure  that  fundamental  rights  are  protected  at  the 
external  borders.  Independent  fundamental  rights monitoring mechanisms are a  good practice in 
this  respect,  which  the  Commission  will  continue  to  support  and  finance.  The  respect  of 
fundamental rights is an aspect that is covered by the  new Schengen Evaluation and Monitoring 
Mechanism, which will ensure that measures are taken to prevent and address any shortcomings. 

Box 5. Priorities for European external border management  

  Efficient implementation of the European Integrated Border Management; 
 

Increase  the  use  of  risk  analysis  in  border  control  and  the  full  integration  of  vulnerability 
assessment results into the planning and operations of the European Border and Coast Guard; 
Improve the quality of border checks by applying information led procedures and step up the use 
of pre-arrival information by implementing information systems for border control, including the 
adoption by the Commission of a proposal for a revision of the  Advance Passenger Information 
Directive; 

 

  Strengthen national integrated border surveillance systems and inter-agency cooperation; 
 
 

Implementation of sound national training systems for border control44; 
Implement national monitoring mechanisms for fundamental rights.  

4.2. Visa policy 

The  Schengen  area  cannot  function  efficiently  without  a  common  visa  policy.  It  is  a  tool  to 
facilitate  the  entry  of  legal  visitors,  such  as  tourists  and  persons  travelling  on  business,  while 
preventing security risks and the risk of irregular migration to the EU. The Visa Code45 establishes 
harmonised procedures and conditions for the processing of visa applications and issuing of visas, 
while  the  Visa  Information  System46  ensures  that  consulates,  border  guards,  law  enforcement, 
immigration and other relevant authorities have access to data of visa applicants. 

The travel restrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a massive drop of Schengen 
visa  applications.  While  before  the  pandemic  consulates  of  States  participating  in  the  Schengen 
area  received  16  million  visa  applications  in  2018  and  17  million  in  2019,  the  number  of 
applications dropped to 3 million in 2020 and 2.5 million in 2021. 

The  pandemic  also  placed  constraints  on  carrying  out  Schengen  evaluations  in  this  policy  area 
given  that  the  evaluations  are  taking  place  at  Member  States’  consulates  in  visa-required  third 
countries. Only two evaluations could be carried out in 2020 and 2021. However, many Member 
States  progressed  well  with  the  implementation  of  their  action  plans  related  to  previous 
evaluations. The closure of 12 action plans in the past two years means that a substantial number 
of the deficiencies identified have been successfully rectified. 

Member  States  adequately  implement,  to  a  large  extent,  the  common  visa  policy  with  decisions 
that,  overall,  are  well  justified  on  whether  visas  should  be  issued  or  refused.  Some  of  the  main 
issues of concern relate to:  

  Member  States’  practices  still  diverge  when  determining  the  validity  of  visas  or  the 
supporting  documents  requested,  despite  the  rules  on  visa  validity  enshrined  in  the  Visa 

44  The  Common  Core  Curriculum  for  Border  and  Coast  Guard  Basic  Training  in  the  EU  is  the  only  curriculum 
establishing the core learning standards on the operational level of border guarding in the European Union Member 
States. The Commission and Frontex have continuously encouraged Member States to make use of it. 
45 Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 (OJ L 243, 15.9.2009, p. 1). 
46 Regulation (EC) No 767/2008 (OJ L 218, 13.8.2008, p. 60). 

15 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Code  and  the  legally  binding  harmonised  lists  of  supporting  documents  adopted  by  the 
Commission. 
Insufficient training and staff shortages leading to procedural errors.  

 
  The use of external service providers is widespread, but the monitoring of their activities is 

insufficient.  

  The  use  of  the  Visa  Information  System  is  suboptimal  due  to  the  sometimes  inadequate 
quality of the data entered therein, the fact that the national case handling systems are not 
always  adapted  to  the  Visa  Code  and  Visa  Information  System  workflow,  the  lack  of 
adequate IT training and the limited awareness of certain functionalities and benefits of the 
system.  

As  part  of  the  monitoring  process  of  previous  evaluations,  the  Commission  has  been  repeatedly 
calling  on  Member  States  to  address  these  issues  and  adequate  financial  support  has  been  made 
available under the Integrated Border Management Fund Border Management and Visa Instrument 
(2021-27) to support relevant actions. 

On 27 April 2022, the Commission presented a Proposal on the digitalisation of visa procedures 
to  modernise  and  make  the  lodging  and  processing  of  visa  applications  more  efficient  while 
reinforcing  the  security  of  the  Schengen  area.  On  the  same  day,  the  Commission  proposed  to 
abolish  the  visa  requirement  for  nationals  of  Kuwait  and  Qatar.  In  the  months  to  come,  it  will 
carry out an evaluation of the revised Visa Code that entered into force in February 2020. It will 
continue to monitor closely third countries that have been granted visa free access to the EU, in 
particular  through  the  visa  suspension  mechanism  report47  and  it  will  also  continue  working  in 
close  cooperation  with  the  Member  States  concerned  and  the  United  States  to  achieve  full  visa 
waiver  reciprocity  for  the  remaining  Member  States,  namely,  Bulgaria,  Cyprus  and  Romania. 
Furthermore,  the  Commission,  in  coordination  with  Member  States,  is  closely  following 
citizenship  for  investment  programmes  run  by  visa-free  third  countries  as  beneficiaries  of  these 
schemes can get free access to the Schengen area. Recently, upon proposal of the Commission, the 
Council decided to suspend temporarily the visa exemption requirements for holders of Vanuatu 
passports  issued  after  2015  due  to  risks  linked  to  its  Citizenship  for  Investment  programme48. 
Member  States  will  have  to  continue  working  in  close  cooperation  with  eu-LISA  and  the 
Commission to upgrade their visa processing IT systems to comply with the upgrade of the Visa 
Information System. Schengen evaluations in this policy field will be resumed in June 2022 taking 
into due account the evolving epidemiological situation. 

Box 6. Priorities for visa policy 

  Swift progress on the negotiations of the proposal regarding the digitalisation of visa procedures 
  Swift progress on the negotiations on the proposal for Visa exemption for Kuwait and Qatar. 
  Preparation of the implementation of the revised Visa Information System  
  Stepping up the monitoring of third countries having obtained visa free access to the EU  
  Stepping up the monitoring of investors citizenship and residence schemes run by third countries 

in line with recommendation C/2022/202849. 
  Resuming Schengen evaluations from June 2022. 

47 The Commission must report annually to the European Parliament and to the Council on the continuous fulfilment 
of the visa exemption requirements by the countries, whose nationals obtained visa-free access less than seven years 
ago,  following  the  successful  completion  of  a  visa  liberalisation  dialogue  (Republic  of  Albania,  Bosnia  and 
Herzegovina,  Montenegro,  Republic  of  North  Macedonia,  Republic  of  Serbia,  Georgia,  Republic  of  Moldova, 
Ukraine). The fourth Visa Suspension mechanism report was adopted on four August 2021 (COM(2021) 602). 
48 EU 2022/366. 
49 C(2022) 724 final. 

16 

 
 
 
                                                 
4.3. Return of people with no legal right to stay  

Stepping up efforts to reduce irregular migration to the EU and better protect the external borders 
should go hand in hand with taking measures to effectively return third country nationals illegally 
staying on the territory of Member States. Every year around 400 000 third country nationals are 
ordered to leave, but only 140 000 (less in 2020 also due to the restrictive measures to contain the 
pandemic)  of  the  persons  concerned  effectively  return  to  a  third  country,  out  of  which 
approximately  45% are  voluntary  returns.  Improving the effectiveness  of Member States’ return 
systems is also an important aspect of the work on establishing a common EU system for return as 
set out in the Pact on Migration and Asylum combining stronger structures inside the EU, notably 
a  reinforced  legal  framework  with  the  recast  Return  Directive,  with  more  effective  cooperation 
with  third  countries.  Furthermore,  in  line  with  the  EU  Strategy  on  voluntary  return  and 
reintegration  adopted  in  April  2021,  a  more  uniform  and  coordinated  approach  among  Member 
States to unlock the full potential of voluntary return and reintegration is being developed with the 
aim of boosting the effectiveness and sustainability of the common EU system for returns for the 
mutual benefit of the returnees, the EU and the third countries. 

Schengen evaluations have demonstrated improvements in this field and Member States’ national 
legislation  and  practices  are  now  better  aligned  to  the  requirements  of  the  Return  Directive. 
However,  there  are  still  improvements  to  be  made  to  ensure  full  respect  of  fundamental  rights. 
Serious  deficiencies  have  been  identified  in  one  Member  State  due  to  inadequate  detention 
conditions and insufficient procedural safeguards.  

Furthermore,  as  regards  the  effectiveness  of  the  return  systems,  not  all  Member  States 
systematically  issue  return  decisions  to  third-country  nationals  with  no  legal  right  to  stay. 
Divergent  practices  exist  regarding  entry  bans  which  are  not  systematically  issued  when  third-
country nationals do not comply with the obligation to return, limiting their deterrent effect.  

The effective enforcement of return decisions remains a challenge, which is also influenced by 
the limited cooperation on readmission of third countries. Despite these external challenges, there 
are  obstacles  within  the  national  systems,  revealed  by  Schengen  evaluations,  which  hamper  the 
effectiveness  of  the  Member  States’  return  systems.  Furthermore,  data  collection  in  the  field  of 
return  needs  to  be  improved  to  allow  for  better  policy-making,  implementation  and  evaluation. 
The main issues identified in a number of Member States relate to: 

  Limited/insufficient resources dedicated to return, in terms of personnel and infrastructure. 
  Lack  of  or  ineffective  monitoring  of  the  implementation  of  return  decisions,  including 

through IT return case management systems. 

  Limited  availability  and  use  of  the  voluntary  return  and  reintegration  programmes 

(including in relation to return counselling). 

  Limited  use  of  alternatives  to  detention  to  prevent  absconding  and  lack  of  sufficient 

specialised detention capacity.  

The  Commission  is  working  closely  with  Member  States  to  ensure  the  full  implementation  of 
return rules and following up as appropriate, including through infringement procedures. Special 
focus is being put on the implementation of the return procedures, such as the issuance of return 
decisions and their effective enforcement, as well as when it comes to the respect of the rights of 
migrants – children and vulnerable people in particular – during all steps of the return process.  

On  2  March  2022  the  Commission  appointed  the  first  EU  Return  Coordinator.  The  Return 
Coordinator will bring together the strands of EU return policy, building on positive experiences 
of Member States in managing returns and facilitating a seamless and interlinked implementation 
of the return process. The Commission is in the process of setting up the High-Level Network for 
Return  which  will  support  the  Return  Coordinator  to  facilitate  practical  cooperation  between 

17 

 
 
 
 
Member  States,  the  Commission  and  Frontex  and  serve  as  a  trusted  space  for  constructive 
exchange and dialogue on return matters at high level.  

Box 7. Priorities for return policy.  

  Swift adoption of the renewed return legal framework based on the recast Return Directive. 
  Promotion of voluntary return and reintegration as an integral part of a common EU system for 

return, in line with the EU strategy on voluntary return and reintegration.  

  Make full use of the operational and practical support Frontex can provide in this area. 

4.4. Police cooperation50 

In an area without controls at the internal borders, solid police cooperation among Member States 
is  indispensable  to  ensure  security  and  trust  within  the  Schengen  area,  and  border  regions  in 
particular.  According  to  the  2021  ‘EU  Serious  and  Organised  Crime  Threat  Assessment’  (EU 
SOCTA)  published  by  Europol,  almost  70%  of  organised  criminal  networks  are  active  in  more 
than  three  Member  States.  Police  officers  need  to  be  able  to  cooperate  effectively,  quickly,  and 
systematically across the EU to fight transnational crime.  

The  Schengen  evaluations  conducted  so  far  in  the  field  of  police  cooperation  have  highlighted 
that,  even  though  Member  States  are  generally  legally  compliant  with  the  Schengen  acquis,  a 
number of obstacles hamper the practical use of some of the cross-border police cooperation 
tools available to Member States.  

Cross-border  police  cooperation,  as  set  out  in  the  Proposal  for  a  Council  Recommendation  on 
operational  police  cooperation,  is  made  more  complicated  by  the  coexistence  in  many  Member 
States of different police bodies, e.g. military-status police, civil-status police, national, regional or 
local  police.  It  is  essential  that  each  Member  State  organises  its  internal  coordination  in  such  a 
manner  that  all  relevant  services  can  participate  in  cross-border  and  international  police 
cooperation. To that end, almost all Member States have designated one service as a Single Point 
of Contact51 that is competent for all cross-border and international law enforcement operational 
cooperation and information exchange. Single Points of Contact, which are corner stones of cross-
border law enforcement cooperation and operational information exchange, suffer from a lack of 
integration and of tailored training for the staff, thus limiting the benefit of the sharp increase in 
information exchange over the past years.  

Efficient cross-border cooperation requires interoperable communication means and mobile access 
to  relevant  databases  in  compliance  with  the  necessary  safeguards.  Technical  systems  used 
nationally should be available for secure cross-border information exchange, including secure e-
mail as well as radio communication systems, most notably in case of hot pursuits. As a result of 
the lack of adequate technical tools, in the majority of the Member States police officers resort to 
non-secure  radio  communication  tools  or  mobile  phones  in  order  to  contact  their  respective 
dispatch  for  background  checks.  This  carries  a  risk  of  communication  failure  (frequent  in 
mountainous  areas)  and  misunderstandings  (e.g.  in  the  case  of  transliteration  issues).  The  same 
risks are encountered in case of absence of adequate mobile access to databases for police officers 
in  the  field.  When  police  officers  check  a  person  during  a  joint  patrol  or  during  targeted  joint 

50  ‘Police  cooperation’  involves  all  the  Member  States'  competent  authorities,  including  police,  customs  and  other 
specialised  law  enforcement  services  in  relation  to  the  prevention,  detection  and  investigation  of  criminal  offences 
(Article 87 TFUE). 
51  The  Single  Point  of  Contact  (SPOC)  means  the  national  central  body  responsible  for  international  police 
cooperation referred to in Article 39(3) of the Convention Implementing the Schengen Agreement.  

18 

 
 
 
                                                 
actions in the border areas, they need to have immediate and adequate access to their national and 
international databases to which they have access under national law. If the available information 
or  actions  to  be  taken  are  not  correctly  displayed,  wanted  criminals  for  instance  could  pass 
undetected through several countries. In addition to police officers in the field, investigators also 
need  more  direct  access  to  relevant  international  databases.  With  the  majority  of  criminals 
working across borders, an early detection of international links is crucial for a successful criminal 
investigation.  

Finally,  the  extent  to  which  cross-border  operational  police  activities  (such  as  hot  pursuits  or 
cross-border  surveillance)  are  facilitated  varies  significantly  throughout  the  EU.  Whilst  some 
countries vastly allow for mutual access to each other’s law enforcement (including Customs and 
Border Guards) databases, others impose too narrow geographic or time limitations to hot pursuits 
or do not allow foreign police officers to apprehend suspects on their territory during a hot pursuit.  

The Convention Implementing the Schengen Agreement (CISA)52 setting out basic principles for 
police  cooperation,  and  the  Swedish  Framework  Decision  2006/960/JHA  simplifying  the 
exchange  of  information  between  law  enforcement  authorities  both  form  part  of  the  Schengen 
acquis. The Convention's provisions give considerable flexibility to state parties in the way they 
choose to implement it. In practice, bilateral or multilateral agreements are used systematically to 
further develop this common baseline53. There are currently around 60 such agreements between 
EU Member States. 

A major challenge in the field of police cooperation is that the legislative framework is fragmented 
and  leaves  wide  flexibility  to  the  Member  States  in  the  way  they  choose  to  implement  it.  The 
police cooperation proposals54 aim to address this and strengthen police cooperation by providing 
clear channels and timeframes for exchanging information and giving Europol a stronger role. The 
Commission  welcomes  the  progress  made  by  the  Council,  which  aims  to  adopt  its  general 
approach  on  the  Directive  and  the  Regulation  in  June  2022  as  well  as  to  endorse  the 
Recommendation on operational police cooperation. Trilogues for these proposals could therefore 
still start this year with the ensuing adoptions expected before the end of 2023. 

It  is  essential  to  continue  developing  the  tools  in  the  hands  of  police  authorities.  The  use  and 
exchange  of  Advance  Passenger  Information  in  combination  with  Passenger  Name  Records 
already  delivered  tangible  results  in  the  fight  against  terrorism  and  serious  crime.  A  new 
legislative initiative is under preparation to improve the use of Advanced Passenger Information 
also  for  law  enforcement  purposes  by  enhancing  legal  certainty  and  closing  gaps  that  became 
apparent  from  the  2020  evaluation  of  the  Advance  Passenger  Information  Directive55,  whilst 
providing for the necessary safeguards. It is scheduled to be presented by the end of 2022. 

Box 8. Priorities for police cooperation.  

  Swift adoption of the Police Cooperation proposals, and implementation of the Recommendation 

on operational police cooperation expected to be adopted by the Council in June.  

  Adoption by the end of 2022 by the Commission of a proposal for a new legislative measure on 

Advance Passenger Information strengthening its use for law enforcement purposes. 

52 Articles 39 to 47 of the Convention Implementing the Schengen Agreement. 
53 Article 39(5) of the Convention Implementing the Schengen Agreement. 
54  They  cover  a  Proposal  for  a  Council  Recommendation  on  operational  police  cooperation  (COM/2021/780  final), 
Proposal  for  a  Directive  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  information  exchange  between  law 
enforcement authorities of Member States (COM/2021/782 final), and the Proposal for a Regulation of the European 
Parliament and of the Council on automated data exchange for police cooperation (COM/2021/784 final). 
55 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32004L0082&from=EN  

19 

 
 
 
                                                 
  Further  integration  of  international  cooperation  channels,  improvement  of  case  management 

systems and automation of processes in the Single Points of Contact (SPOC). 

  Efficient and direct online access to national, EU and international law enforcement databases for 
the staff of the Single Points of Contact, investigators and police officers in the field in as far as 
this is necessary for their tasks. 

  Efficient mobile access to (inter)national databases for police officers in the field, specifically in 

border regions. 
Interoperability of radio communication tools.  

 

4.5. Schengen Information System  

The  Schengen  Information  System  (SIS)  is  the  main  compensatory  measure  for  the  abolition  of 
internal  border  controls  as  it  offers  essential  support  to  migration  and  security  policy  across  the 
Schengen area and at its external borders.  

The  importance  of  the  SIS  for  the  security  and  border  management  in  Europe  keeps  growing. 
Although the use of the system was affected by the COVID-19 crisis due to the related reduction 
in travel and the reduction in the number of border checks performed during the time, the use of 
SIS in Europe is now steadily growing, reaching at the end of 2021 a peak of almost 90 million 
alerts56  introduced  by  the  Member  States  in  the  Schengen  Information  System  database57.  By 
December  2019,  just  before  the  pandemic  started,  the  number  of  searches  in  the  Schengen 
Information  System  reached  a  record  of  6.6  billion,  and  a  record  level  of  283  713  hits58  was 
achieved (it more than doubled from 128 598 hits in 2014). In 2021, more than 7 billion searches 
were performed in SIS,59 and 222 967 hits achieved, contributing to solving this number of cases 
in European countries that use the system. 

Based  on  the  Schengen  evaluations  carried  out,  it  can  be  concluded  that  Member  States  have 
generally  implemented  and  used  the  Schengen  Information  System  effectively  and  in  a 
uniform  manner.  Although  serious  deficiencies  in  the  implementation  of  the  Schengen 
Information  System  were  identified  in  some  Member  States,  these  countries  have  been  urgently 
and actively working on remedying the shortcomings.  

Certain recurrent deficiencies emerged during evaluations: 

  Member States do not insert all relevant information in the Schengen Information System. 
For instance, fingerprints and photographs are not always attached, even if these data are 
available  at  country  level.  In  some  cases  this  is  due  to  a  lack  of  technical  tools  or 
mandatory  procedures  at  the  country  level  requiring  authorities  issuing  the  alert  to  add 
these data when available.  

  Not  all  information  available  in  the  Schengen  Information  System  alert  (for  example 
available photograph of a person) is displayed to the end-users, i.e. police officers, borders 
guards and other users when they consult the system. This makes it difficult to correctly 
identify the person subject of an alert and take the appropriate action.  
In  some  Member  States  there  is  a  lack  of  progress  in  the  use  of  new  tools,  such  as  the 
fingerprint  search  functionality  of  SIS.  This  has  important  consequences,  leading  to 
security gaps. 

 

56  ‘Alert’  means  a  set  of  data  entered  into  the  Schengen  Information  System  allowing  the  competent  authorities  to 
identify a person or an object with a view to taking specific action. 
57  This  is  an  increase  of  almost  20  million  additional  alerts  compared  to  data  from  four  years  ago  (71  million  by 
December 2016). 
58 A ‘hit’ means any match which fulfils the following criteria: (a) it has been confirmed by: (i) the end-user; or (ii) 
the  competent  authority  in  accordance  with  national  procedures,  where  the  match  concerned  was  based  on  the 
comparison of biometric data; and (b) further actions are requested. 
59 There were 6.6 billion searches performed in SIS in 2019 and 7.0 billion searches in 2021.  

20 

 
 
 
                                                 
  The  ‘SIRENE  Bureaux’,  the  administrative  structures  dealing  with  the  exchange  of 
information  supplementary  to  the  Schengen  Information  System  alerts,  are  at  the  very 
heart  of  Schengen  Information  System  operation  but  do  not  always  have  sufficient 
personnel and technical resources, including automated and integrated workflow tools, to 
enable them to exchange this information effectively.  

  Limited  reinforcement  of  human  and  technical  resources  in  the  SIRENE  Bureaux  often 
brings  these  structures  to  the  limits  of  their  capacity.  The  quality  and  speed  of  the 
information  exchange  and  the  operational  cooperation  between  offices  is  crucial  in  the 
follow-up to hits to ensure, for example, the protection of missing and vulnerable persons.  
  Some Member States did not connect their Automatic Number Plate Recognition systems 
to the Schengen Information System limiting the overall security within Schengen and at 
the external borders.  

Box 9. Priorities for the Schengen Information System.  

  Swift  implementation  of  the  renewed  Schengen  Information  System  as  soon  as  possible, 
which will include new alert categories and bring about new functionalities that will further 
enhance the effectiveness of the Schengen Information System. 

  Proper staffing and resources to be enhanced in the SIRENE Bureaux of the Member States 
with the automation of the workflow in order to process the high number of incoming hits and 
ensure the quality and speed of the information exchange and cooperation. 

  Full use of the fingerprint search functionality of the Schengen Information System. 

4.6. Data protection  

A further important part of the Schengen acquis are the rules on the protection of personal data. 
The  specific  personal  data  protection  provisions  in  the  Schengen  Information  System  and  Visa 
Information System acquis and, in the future, of the new information systems (Entry-Exit System, 
ETIAS,  interoperability),  the  provisions  in  the  General  Data  Protection  Regulation  (GDPR)60  to 
which  those  systems’  acquis  makes  cross-references  and  the  Data  Protection  Law  Enforcement 
Directive (LED61) are the main legislative requirements applicable in this area. 

Assessing how Member States implement and apply the Schengen acquis, in particular in relation 
to  the  SIS  and  VIS,  against  the  background  of  data  protection  requirements  is  an  essential 
safeguard.  

Although no serious deficiencies were identified during the Schengen evaluation and compliance 
with the applicable acts of EU law in individual instances needs to be assessed on a case-by-case 
basis, there are still several recurrent issues that need to be addressed:  

  Some  national  data  protection  authorities  (DPAs)  lack  sufficient  human  and  financial 
resources,  which  hampers  their  possibilities  to  carry  out  all  their  Schengen  Information 
System and Visa Information System related tasks.  

  Some  of  the  data  protection  authorities  risk  being  subject  to  external  influence  on  their 

work which could affect their independence.  

  Not all data protection authorities have been given effective corrective powers towards law 

 

enforcement authorities.  
In  some  Member  States,  more  frequent  and  comprehensive  inspections  by  the  data 
protection authorities were deemed necessary for them to fulfil their task of monitoring the 

60 Regulation (EU) 2016/679, OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1. 
61 Directive (EU) 2016/680, OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 89. 

21 

 
 
 
                                                 
lawfulness  of  the  processing  of  Schengen  Information  System  and  Visa  Information 
System data.  

  Often the requirement to carry out audits of the data processing operations in the Schengen 
Information System and Visa Information Systems at least every four  years has not been 
met by the data protection authorities.  
Improvement is also often required as regards information on data subject rights in relation 
to the Schengen Information System and the Visa Information System and the procedure to 
use those rights.  

 

  The period of keeping logs from the queries in the information systems remains, in some 

cases, still not in line with the Schengen acquis.  

  Frequently,  there  is  no  pro-active  self-auditing  on  data  protection  compliance  by  data 

controllers, including no regular review of logs.  

  Finally,  regular,  and  continuous  training  on  data  protection  and  data  security  for  all 

operational staff having access to the information systems is not always provided.  

Box 10. Priorities for data protection.  

  Member States should provide sufficient resources to the data protection authorities in order for 
them  to  carry  out  all  their  Schengen  Information  System  and  Visa  Information  System  related 
tasks.  

  Data protection authorities should ensure that the audits of the data processing operations in the 
Schengen Information System and Visa Information System will be carried out at least every four 
years.  

  Schengen Information System and Visa Information System competent authorities should follow-

up on the recommendations in particular in relation to self-auditing and training. 

  During  the  implementation  of  the  new  information  systems  for  border  control  (Entry-Exit 
System, ETIAS, interoperability), the privacy-by-design approach shall be fully embraced by all 
responsible  entities.  It  should  be  ensured  that  data  protection  requirements  are  fully  integrated 
and will be respected from the beginning of the use of those systems.  

5.  Next steps 

While today we are better equipped to respond to the current and future challenges, any legislation 
or framework is only as good as its effective and timely implementation.  

Schengen  evaluations  conducted  during  the  last  years  confirmed  that  Member  States  are 
adequately  implementing  the  Schengen  acquis  in  the  different  policy  fields  and  that  the 
Mechanism has achieved its desired and intended effect. However, shortcomings and deficiencies 
have  been  identified  and  progress  in  some  areas  is  still  needed.  This  report  identifies  the  key 
priority  areas  requiring  urgent 
that  swift  and  adequate 
implementation of all available tools is necessary.  

improvements  and  highlights 

With the Schengen Cycle, the Schengen area now has a reinforced and robust governance, that 
ensures  political  steer  for  legislation  to  be  adequately  implemented  and  regularly  monitored. 
Following the first steps in implementing the cycle, it is necessary to continue guaranteeing joint 
efforts and common ownership by Member States, EU institutions and agencies of the process on 
the way towards the next annual cycle of 2023.  

It  is  essential  to  continue  working  towards  a  fully  effective  European  integrated  border 
management, bringing together all relevant actors at both European and national levels. In an area 
without controls at the internal borders, solid police cooperation between Member States together 
with  effective  implementation  of  the  large-scale  information  systems,  notably  the  Schengen 
Information System, as well as effective return and common visa policies, are indispensable. 

22 

 
 
 
 
Moreover, it is crucial not to lose focus on the full implementation of the new IT architecture by 
the end of 2023. The EU has designed one of the world’s most technologically advanced border 
management systems and we need to deliver on this ambitious project on time.  

Providing sufficient resources and training to those implementing and enforcing the Schengen 
acquis  is  vital  to  ensure  that  our  legal  commitments  are  effectively  implemented  in  practice.  In 
this context, EU agencies play a key role and it is important to ensure that their mandates are fully 
used. 

Finally,  swift and effective  implementation  of the  recommendations identified in  the Schengen 
evaluations is key. 

Increased  political  ownership  based  on  dialogue  and  regular  monitoring  will  ensure 
implementation of the priorities for the Schengen area. Therefore, the Commission calls on 
Member States and EU agencies to take the necessary steps to deliver on these priorities and 
take the necessary follow-up actions.  

In  this  respect,  the  Commission  invites  the  Schengen  Council  in  June  to  endorse  the  key 
elements of the new Schengen governance model and the priorities for 2022-2023 as set out 
in this report. The Commission will closely accompany this process both at the political and 
technical levels, and it will report on progress achieved and follow-up actions at the end of 
the annual cycle. 

23