natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
På kort sigt bør medlemsstaterne indføre måder til at kontrollere, at en tredjelandsstatsborger har forladt EU, bl.a. inden for fristen for frivillig udrejse og uden bistand, for at sikre en effektiv opfølgning i tilfælde af manglende overholdelse af forpligtelsen.
Member States may, however, change their assessment of the situation at any moment (a previously non-cooperating returnee may change attitude and accept an offer for assisted voluntary return) and grant a period for voluntary departure even though there was initially a risk of absconding.
Medlemsstaterne opfordres til at udnytte de tilgængelige informationskanaler bedst muligt og til dette formål:
It is not possible to exclude in general all illegal entrants from the possibility of obtaining a period for voluntary departure.
Systematisk opfordre de personer, der skal tilbagesendes, og som har fået en frist for frivillig udrejse, til at underrette de myndigheder, der har truffet afgørelsen om tilbagesendelse (og indrejseforbud), om, at de er udrejst.
Such generalising rule would be contrary to the definition of risk of absconding, the principle of proportionality and the obligation to carry out a case-by-case assessment, undermining the effet utile of Article 7 (promotion of voluntary departure).
Et sådant informationsark skal indeholde oplysninger om fordelene for de pågældende ved at informere myndighederne om, at de er udrejst.
Abusive applications normally involve a higher degree of reprehensible behaviour than manifestly unfounded applications, therefore Article 7(4) should be interpreted as also covering abusive applications.
Opfordre grænsevagter, der foretager udrejsekontrol, til — når de får kendskab til en irregulær migrants udrejse — at spørge, om den tilbagesendte er genstand for en afgørelse om tilbagesendelse ledsaget af en frist for frivillig udrejse, og — i givet fald — systematisk underrette de myndigheder, der traf afgørelsen om tilbagesendelse, om den tilbagesendtes udrejse.
It is also possible to exclude persons who pose a risk to public policy, public security or national security.
Anvende bilag 39 (se afsnit 6.4) til at bekræfte, at en tredjelandsstatsborger med ulovligt ophold er udrejst og i transit over land gennem en anden medlemsstats område end den medlemsstat, der traf afgørelsen om tilbagesendelse.
In Case C-554/13, Zh. and O. [41], the ECJ clarified in this respect that Member States essentially retain the freedom to determine the requirements of the concept of public policy in accordance with their national needs.
Medlemsstaterne skal også overveje at etablere kontakt til flyselskaber for at få oplysninger om, hvorvidt de har haft tredjelandsstatsborgere, der blev tilbagesendt uledsaget, om bord på et fly på tidspunktet for den forventede udrejse.
The concept of ‘risk of absconding’ is distinct from that of ‘risk to public policy’.
Retsgrundlag: tilbagesendelsesdirektivet — artikel 8, stk. 1-4
The concept of ‘risk to public policy’ presupposes the existence, in addition to the perturbation of the social order which any infringement of the law involves, of a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society.
Medlemsstaterne træffer alle nødvendige foranstaltninger til at fuldbyrde afgørelsen om tilbagesendelse, hvis der ikke er indrømmet en frist for frivillig udrejse i henhold til artikel 7, stk. 4, eller hvis forpligtelsen til at vende tilbage ikke er blevet opfyldt inden for den frist for frivillig udrejse, som er indrømmet i henhold til artikel 7.
A Member State cannot deem a third-country national to pose a risk to public policy on the sole ground that that national is suspected, or has been criminally convicted, of an act punishable as a criminal offence under national law.
Har medlemsstaten indrømmet en frist for frivillig udrejse i henhold til artikel 7, kan afgørelsen om tilbagesendelse først fuldbyrdes efter fristens udløb, medmindre der inden for denne frist opstår en af de i artikel 7, stk. 4, omhandlede risici.
Other factors, such as the nature and seriousness of that act, the time which has elapsed since it was committed and any matter which relates to the reliability of the suspicion that the third-country national concerned committed the alleged criminal offence is also relevant for a case-by-case assessment which has to be carried out in any case.
Medlemsstaterne kan vedtage en særskilt administrativ eller retslig afgørelse eller retsakt om udsendelse.
Annex 39 to the Schengen Handbook, ‘Standard form for recognising a return decision for the purposes of transit by land’
Foranstaltningerne gennemføres i henhold til den nationale lovgivning i overensstemmelse med de grundlæggende rettigheder og med behørig respekt for den pågældende tredjelandsstatsborgers værdighed og fysiske integritet.
Map of participating Member States (available as EMN ad hoc query, return, 2015, at the EMN Europa website)
Afgrænsning af forskellen mellem frivillig udrejse og udsendelse: Tilbagesendelse er et meget bredt begreb og omfatter processen med (frivilligt eller tvunget) at vende tilbage til et tredjeland i overensstemmelse med en forpligtelse til at gøre dette.
Reminder/explanation: a returnee who intends to leave the territory of the EU by land within the period for voluntary departure does not have any valid visa or other permission to transit through another Member States to his/her country of return, therefore running the risk of being apprehended/stopped by the police on the way and being subject of a second return decision issued by the transit Member State.
Udsendelse er et langt mere snævert begreb.
This runs contrary to the policy objective of the Return Directive to ensure effective return, including through voluntary departure.
Udsendelse er håndhævelse af forpligtelsen til at vende tilbage, dvs. den fysiske transport ud af medlemsstaten.
Issuing a transit visa to the returnee would be an inappropriate and inadequate solution, since granting a visa to illegally staying third-country nationals who are obliged to leave would be contrary to EU rules on visa.
Domstolen har allerede i sin dom i sag C-61/11, El Dridi (præmis 41) og sag C-329/11, Achughbabian, understreget, at tilbagesendelsesdirektivet indebærer en »graduering af foranstaltninger« fra frivillighed til tvang.
Moreover transit Member States do not seem to have any incentive to issue such kind of visa (risk that persons may abscond and/or cause removal costs) and would in practice therefore frequently refuse issuing the visa.
I praksis er der ofte tilfælde, der både har elementer af tvangsmæssig tilbagesendelse (frihedsberøvelse) og frivillighed (efterfølgende frivillig udrejse, uden at det er nødvendigt at bruge fysisk tvang).
Providing for a ‘European laissez-passer’ for the returnee does not offer a solution either: in the absence of a clearly defined legal nature and legal effects of such a ‘laissez-passer’, the returnee would — strictly legally speaking — still be considered as illegally staying in the transit Member State and might therefore be subject of a new return decision in accordance with Article 6(1).
Medlemsstaterne opfordres til — på hvert trin i proceduren — at bruge de mindst indgribende foranstaltninger.
One way of avoiding the problem is to promote direct return to third countries by air.
Hvis personer, der skal tilbagesendes, og som er genstand for udsendelse/frihedsberøvelse, ændrer holdning og tilkendegiver deres vilje til at samarbejde og rejse frivilligt, opfordres medlemsstaterne til og har ret til at udvise fleksibilitet.
This may, however, be expensive and unpractical for the returnee.
Fuldbyrdelse af en afgørelse om tilbagesendelse efter afslag på en ansøgning om international beskyttelse: Domstolen fastslog i sin dom i sag C-601/15, J.N.
An approach expressly recommended by the Commission is for the transit Member States to recognise return decisions issued by the first Member State using Annex 39 to the Schengen Handbook ‘Standard form for recognising a return decision for the purposes of transit by land’ (issued by the Commission in September 2011, following consultations with concerned Member States at technical level and discussion within the Migration-Expulsion Working Party of the Council of the European Union).
(præmis 75-76 og 80), at efter afslag i første instans af en asylansøgning skal fuldbyrdelsen af en tidligere truffet afgørelse om tilbagesendelse genoptages på det trin, hvor den blev afbrudt, og at tilbagesendelsesprocedurer ikke skal starte forfra: »[…] den effektive virkning af direktiv 2008/115[/EF] under alle omstændigheder kræver, at en procedure, der er indledt i henhold til dette direktiv, og inden for rammerne af hvilken der er blevet truffet en afgørelse om tilbagesendelse, i givet fald ledsaget af et indrejseforbud, kan genoptages på det trin, hvor den blev afbrudt som følge af indgivelsen af en ansøgning om international beskyttelse, så snart denne ansøgning er blevet afslået i første instans.
According to this approach, the transit Member State may recognise the return decision, including the period for voluntary departure, granted by the first Member State and will let the returnee transit on the basis of the recognised decision and the recognised period for voluntary departure.
I denne henseende følger det både af medlemsstaternes loyalitetspligt — der følger af artikel 4, stk. 3, TEU, og som er anført i præmis 56 i dom El Dridi […], at den ved direktivets artikel 8 pålagte forpligtelse for medlemsstaterne til at foretage udsendelse i de tilfælde, der er omhandlet i artiklens stk. 1, skal opfyldes hurtigst muligt […].
This approach has the advantage that the transit Member State is not obliged to issue a new return decision and that it can ask the first Member State to reimburse all cost related to removal if something goes wrong and the returnee needs to be removed at the cost of the transit State (in application of Council Decision 2004/191/EC [42]).Those Member States which are still reluctant to use this voluntary option (either as sending or receiving Member State) are encouraged to join in and to inform Commission and other Member States about their participation.
Denne forpligtelse er imidlertid ikke opfyldt, hvis udsendelsen bliver forsinket som følge af, at en procedure som den i den foregående præmis omhandlede efter afslaget i første instans på ansøgningen om international beskyttelse ikke skal genoptages på det trin, hvor den blev afbrudt, men fra start.«
Form of recognition: the very broad and general wording of Directive 2001/40/EC provides for discretion as regards the practical modalities (procedural details) for mutual recognition in accordance with practical needs and national legislation.
Fængselsstraf (som strafferetlig sanktion ved ulovligt ophold) kan aldrig være »en nødvendig foranstaltning«, jf. tilbagesendelsesdirektivets artikel 8, stk. 1 (se afsnit 4).
The form proposed in Annex 39 of the Schengen Handbook is one possible but not the exclusive way to proceed.
I henhold til artikel 6 i chartret om grundlæggende rettigheder fortolket i lyset af artikel 5 i menneskerettighedskonventionen er frihedsberøvelse i forbindelse med tilbagesendelse kun tilladt med henblik på udsendelse som omhandlet i tilbagesendelsesdirektivets artikel 15 — se Domstolens dom i sag C-329/11, Achughbabian (præmis 37): »… Pålæggelse og fuldbyrdelse af en fængselsstraf under den tilbagesendelsesprocedure, der er fastsat i direktiv 2008/115[/EF], medvirker imidlertid åbenbart ikke til at gennemføre den udsendelse, som forfølges med proceduren, dvs. den pågældendes fysiske transport ud af den omhandlede medlemsstat.
Legally speaking, all relevant elements of the return decision issued by Member State A are recognised by Member State B, including recognition of the statement that the third-country national is illegally staying and enjoys a period for voluntary departure — with effect for the territory of the recognising Member State B.
En sådan straf udgør således ikke »foranstaltninger« eller »tvangsforanstaltninger« i den forstand, hvori udtrykkene er anvendt i artikel 8 i direktiv 2008/115[/EF])«.
The recognising Member State enjoys three different ‘safeguards’, namely:
Medlemsstaterne skal tage behørigt hensyn til tredjelandsstatsborgeres helbredstilstand, når de gennemfører tilbagesendelsesdirektivet, jf. artikel 5, litra c).
use of the standard form of Annex 39 is made on a voluntary basis only; this always leaves Member States with the option not to recognise a return decision issued by another Member State in a specific individual case;
Desuden skal de, når de fuldbyrder afgørelser om tilbagesendelse i medfør af direktivets artikel 8, stk. 1, handle under behørig hensyntagen til tredjelandsstatsborgeres værdighed og fysiske integritet.
the first Member State may only grant a period for voluntary departure in accordance with Article 7 of the Return Directive if there is no ‘counter-indication’, such as a risk of absconding.
Underfuld overholdelse af retten til sundhed og under hensyntagen til, at direktivet ikke pålægger medlemsstaterne en forpligtelse til systematisk at foretage lægeundersøgelser af tredjelandsstatsborgere, der skal udsendes, eller at udstede en erklæring om, at de er i stand til at rejse, anbefaler Kommissionen, at medlemsstaterne træffer foranstaltninger til at forhindre et eventuelt misbrug i forbindelse med falske lægeerklæringer fra tredjelandsstatsborgere, som uretmæssigt ville forhindre eller udsætte udsendelsen af helbredsmæssige grunde (se også afsnit 12.4), f.eks. ved at sikre, at det kvalificerede lægepersonale, som den relevante nationale myndighed har udpeget, står til rådighed og kan afgive en uafhængig og objektiv lægelige udtalelse i den specifikke sag.
The assessment of the personal situation of returnees in accordance with Article 7 which has to be carried out by the first Member State may be a helpful reassurance for the recognising transit Member State;
Retsgrundlag: tilbagesendelsesdirektivet — artikel 8, stk. 5, fælles retningslinjer for sikkerhedsbestemmelser i forbindelse med fælles udsendelse med fly, der er knyttet som bilag til beslutning 2004/573/EF [48], forordning (EU) 2016/1624 om den europæiske grænse- og kystvagt [49] — artikel 28, stk. 3Ved gennemførelsen af udsendelser med fly tager medlemsstaterne hensyn til de fælles retningslinjer for sikkerhedsbestemmelser i forbindelse med fælles udsendelse med fly, der er knyttet som bilag til beslutning 2004/573/EF.
if something goes wrong and the returnee needs to be removed at the cost of the transit State, all cost related to removal can be charged to the first Member State in application of Council Decision 2004/191/EC.
I henhold til tilbagesendelsesdirektivet skal medlemsstaterne tage hensyn til de fælles retningslinjer for sikkerhedsbestemmelser i forbindelse med fælles udsendelse med fly, der er knyttet som bilag til beslutning 2004/573/EF, ved gennemførelsen af alle udsendelser med fly og ikke blot — som oprindeligt i henhold til beslutning 2004/573/EF — ved fælles udsendelser.
Council Directive 2003/110/EC [43] on assistance in cases of transit for the purpose of removal by air provides for a legal frame on cooperation between the competent authorities at Member States' airports of transit with regard to both escorted and unescorted removal by air.
Visse dele af retningslinjerne skal i sagens natur kun anvendes ved fælles udsendelser med fly, f.eks. reglerne om rollefordelingen og fordelingen af opgaver mellem den medlemsstat, der varetager tilrettelæggelsen, og den deltagende medlemsstat; der kan derfor ikke tages hensyn hertil i en ren national kontekst.
The term ‘unescorted removal’ in this Directive (which was adopted five years before the Return Directive) can be interpreted as also covering ‘voluntary departure’ within the meaning of the Return Directive [44].
Der skal dog tages hensyn til alle andre dele af retningslinjerne (se de mest relevante uddrag i boksen nedenfor) ved rent nationale udsendelser.
The Commission recommends to make systematic use of Directive 2003/110/EC when organising transit by air in the context of voluntary departure (see also section 7.2).
FÆLLES RETNINGSLINJER FOR SIKKERHEDSBESTEMMELSER I FORBINDELSE MED FÆLLES UDSENDELSE MED FLY
Currently there is no central EU system for keeping track of voluntary departure.
(uddrag)
In cases of transit by land of returnees in accordance with the recommendation set out in Annex 39 to the Schengen Handbook, a confirmation is faxed back from the border guard to the Member State that issued the return decision.
FASEN FORUD FOR TILBAGESENDELSE
In other cases, returnees sometimes report back via Member States' consulates in third countries.
Helbredstilstand og sygejournaler
Sometimes departure is also registered by border guards conducting exit checks.
Den medlemsstat, der varetager tilrettelæggelsen, og hver deltagende medlemsstat sikrer, at de tilbagesendtes helbredstilstand er sådan, at den, retligt og praktisk, tillader en risikofri udsendelse med fly.
The absence of a central Union system for keeping track of voluntary departure creates a gap, both in terms of enforcement verification and in terms of statistics.
Der tilvejebringes en sygejournal for tilbagesendte personer med et kendt helbredsmæssigt problem, eller hvor der kræves medicinsk behandling.
The Commission proposal for a Regulation on the use of the Schengen Information System for the return of illegally staying third-country nationals [45] aims at addressing this situation.
Disse sygejournaler omfatter resultaterne af lægeundersøgelser, en diagnose og specificering af eventuelt behov for medicin med henblik på nødvendige lægelige foranstaltninger.
In the short term, Member States should put in place means to verify whether a third-country national has left the Union, including within the period for voluntary departure and without assistance, to ensure an effective follow up in case of non-compliance.
Dokumentation
Member States are encouraged to make best use of the available information channels and for this purpose:
Den medlemsstat, der varetager tilrettelæggelsen, og hver deltagende medlemsstat sikrer, at der for hver tilbagesendt person forefindes gyldige rejsedokumenter og andre nødvendige dokumenter, certifikater eller journaler.
Systematically encourage those returnees who are granted a period for voluntary departure to inform the authorities who had issued the return decision (and entry ban) about their successful departure.
Den befuldmægtigede opbevarer dokumenterne indtil ankomsten til destinationslandet.
The returnee may signal his departure to the border guard upon departure, at the consular representation of a Member State in his country of origin following return, or even in writing with sufficient proof in annex.
Anvendelse af private ledsagere
In order to enhance this practice, an information sheet may be systematically attached to the return decision or to the travel document, containing the name and other identifiers of the third-country national, instructions and contact details of the issuing authority, so that the border guard could stamp it at exit and send it back as proof of departure to the issuing authority.
Hvis en deltagende medlemsstat gør brug af private ledsagere, sørger denne medlemsstats myndigheder for mindst én officiel repræsentant om bord på flyet.
Such information sheet could also specify the benefits for the returnee of informing the authorities about successful departure.
Ledsagernes kompetence og uddannelse
Ask border guards conducting exit checks to enquire — when they become aware of the exit of an irregular migrant — whether the returnee is subject of a return decision accompanied by a period for voluntary departure and, if this is the case, to systematically inform the authorities who issued the return decision about departure.
Ledsagere, der udpeges til tjeneste om bord på de fælles fly, skal have gennemgået specialuddannelse med henblik på sådanne opgaver; de skal tildeles den nødvendige lægelige støtte alt efter opgavens art.
Use Annex 39 (see section 6.4) for confirming the departure of illegally staying third-country nationals transiting by land through the territory of a Member State other than the one that issued the return decision.
De kan bære civil påklædning.
Member States shall take all necessary measures to enforce the return decision if no period for voluntary departure has been granted in accordance with Article 7(4) or if the obligation to return has not been complied with within the period for voluntary departure granted in accordance with Article 7.
Medlemmerne af ledsagegruppen skal være strategisk anbragt i flyet med henblik på at sørge for den størst mulige sikkerhed.
Where Member States use — as a last resort — coercive measures to carry out the removal of a third-country national who resists removal, such measures shall be proportionate and shall not exceed reasonable force.
Endvidere skal de placeres sammen med de tilbagesendte, som de har ansvar for.
They shall be implemented as provided for in national legislation in accordance with fundamental rights and with due respect for the dignity and physical integrity of the third-country national concerned.
Ordning vedrørende antallet af ledsagere
The Return Directive fixes an objective (‘enforce the return decision’) which should be achieved in an effective and proportionate manner with ‘all necessary measures’, whilst leaving the concrete modalities (the ‘how’) up to Member States' legislation and administrative practices — see judgment of the ECJ in Case C-329/11, Achughbabian, paragraph 36: ‘[…] the expressions “measures” and “coercive measures” contained therein refer to any intervention which leads, in an effective and proportionate manner, to the return of the person concerned’.
Antallet af ledsagere afgøres i hvert enkelt tilfælde på grundlag af en analyse af eventuelle risici og samråd.
Irrespective of the duties of third-country nationals to cooperate on their identification and to request the necessary documents to their national authorities, the obligation on the Member States to take ‘all necessary measures’ also include to timely request to the third country of readmission to deliver a valid identity or travel document, or to request accepting the use of the European Travel Document for Return [46] if foreseen by the agreements or arrangements in force with the third country, in order to allow for the physical transportation of the third-country national out of the Member State.
Det anbefales i de fleste tilfælde, at antallet af ledsagere mindst svarer til antallet af tilbagesendte personer om bord.
The use of the European Travel document for Return should be further promoted in negotiations and application of bilateral and EU readmission agreements and other arrangements with third countries.
En reserveenhed skal være til rådighed til at yde støtte, hvor det er nødvendigt (f.eks. i tilfælde af rejser over lange distancer).
Administrative procedures with third countries aimed at preparing the removal operation (for example obtaining the necessary travel documents and authorisations) can be launched during the period for voluntary departure, without putting at risk the third-country national concerned (see also section 6).To reduce the impact of potential abuses, in particular those related to unfounded, multiple and ‘last-minute’ asylum applications, as well as unfounded appeals against asylum or return-related decisions made with the sole purpose of delaying or frustrating the enforcement of return decisions, the Commission recommends that Member States take measures to organise proceedings for the examination of applications for international protection in an accelerated or, where appropriate, border procedures, in accordance with Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council [47] (the ‘Asylum Procedures Directive’).
FASEN INDEN AFGANG I AFGANGS- ELLER TRANSITLUFTHAVNE
Borderline between voluntary departure and removal: return is a very broad concept and covers the process of going back to a third country in compliance (voluntary or enforced) with an obligation to return.
Transport til lufthavnen og ophold i lufthavnen
Removal is much narrower.