Informal Meeting of the ­Justice
and Home Affairs Ministers,
­Amsterdam 25-26 January 2016
Discussion Paper European Border and
Coast Guard

Meeting of of Home Affairs,
25 January 2016
In order to have an area without internal border
controls within the Schengen area, an efficient
and well functioning control of the external
borders of the Schengen area is essential.
The control by each Schengen Member State and
Associated State of its parts of these external
borders is not only in the interest of that Member
State (MS), but in the interest of all. Border
control is necessary to prevent illegal
immigration and crossing of the borders by
persons who pose a threat to the public order or
security of MS or the Schengen area. Our citizens
expect us to carry out this task, and will lose their
confidence in Schengen if we don’t. MS are not
only controlling their external borders in their
own interest, but in the interest of all EU citizens.
Since the conclusion of the Schengen Treaty in
1985, the Schengen States (and later the EU) have
worked on a broad range of legislative and policy
instruments with the goal of creating common
rules (Schengen Borders Code), common
practices (Frontex, Schengen Evaluation
Mechanism) and common tools (SIS, VIS,
Eurosur) for managing the external borders.
The Integrated Border Management (IBM)
concept has been a leading principle when
developing these new instruments.
A true Integrated Border Management requires
cooperation and genuine solidarity and sharing
of responsibility among MS, which is reflected at
EU level by the creation of Frontex in 2004 and
funding possibilities under the Internal Security
Fund. Solidarity however comes with
responsibility. The main and final responsibility
for border management is with the MS. Until
now, this has worked relatively well in the
‘normal’ situation which we have experienced
most of the time since the Schengen area was

created. Since last summer we are facing a
different situation. The constantly increasing
pressure of (irregular) migration at the EU’s
external border and present security threats
within and outside the EU have shown that the
existing border management tools are not
sufficient to guarantee an efficient integrated
border management. This puts the question on
the table of what should be done to change the
concept in a way to equip the EU and Schengen
to counter these challenges effectively.
On 15 October 2015 the European Council set out
clear political guidance to strengthen the EU
external borders, especially in emergency
situations. The European Council concluded that
this must be done by enhancing the mandate of
Frontex in the context of discussions over the
development of a European Border and Coast Guard
System.
On 15 December 2015 the European Commission
presented its “border management package”,
which contains a Communication on a European
Border and Coast Guard and effective
management of Europe’s external borders
associated with a number of proposals and
measures, including in particular the proposal for
a Regulation of the European Parliament and of
the Council on the European Border and Coast
Guard.
The proposal is the main element in the
Commissions’ response to address the current
situation and aims at making border
management more effective, reliable and to
enable the EU to intervene to prevent and resolve
crises, by proposing a new framework for border
management. The proposal does not replace the
national border guards, but puts them within this

new framework in order to achieve a more
integrated management of Europe’s external
borders, as foreseen by Art. 77(2)(d) TFEU.
The proposal lays down the general principles of
genuine European integrated border
management (IBM). It establishes a European
Border and Coast Guard, with a strengthened
agency, named the European Border and Coast
Guard Agency, being a key player in the system.
With the establishment of the European Border
and Coast Guard, the IBM becomes a shared
responsibility of the Agency and the national
authorities responsible for border management,
as proposed in the European Agenda on
Migration and the European Agenda on Security.
The Netherlands Presidency is convinced of the
importance of this file and reiterates the
conclusion of the European Council of
17 December 2015, stating that a Council position
on the proposal on a European Borer and Coast
Guard should be adopted under the Netherlands
Presidency. With a view to fulfilling this task given
by the European leaders, it is suggested that the
file is discussed during the informal meeting of
JHA ministers in order to give a political steer to
expert work at the Council on the below main
elements of the Commissions’ proposal,
in relation to situations requiring urgent actions
on the external borders.
1. Definition of the European integrated border
management (IBM) concept in the proposal for
a Regulation, and introduction of the principle
of ‘shared responsibility’
A European Border and Coast Guard is set up
bringing together the European Border and Coast
Guard Agency and the MS authorities responsible
for border management. The national coastguard
authorities are also part of the EU Border and
Coast Guard in so far as they perform maritime
border surveillance. The European Border and
Coast Guard will ensure the full and coherent
implementation of the European IBM.
The national border guard authorities will
continue performing their regular functions on a
daily basis at national level. However,
in exceptional situations, the European Border
and Coast Guard Agency will have a capacity to
act in order to ensure the protections of the
affected sections of the external border. In this
context, the MS will have the obligation to make
available a certain percentage of their border
guards to be deployed by the Agency. MS are also
required to register in the Agency’s technical
equipment pool. Furthermore, to ensure the
implementation of the European IBM, the
mandate of the Agency is strengthened.

Questions:
1. What is needed to effectively protect our
external borders, including security aspects
and screening?
2. Do you agree that the European Border and
Coast Guard (European Border and Coast
Guard Agency and MS authorities) should
carry a ‘shared responsibility’ for implementing the EU IBM as proposed?
3. Do you agree that the principle of ‘shared
responsibility’ should bring the obligation for
MS to contribute a certain percentage to a
pool of officers and to a pool of equipment in
order to bring the Agency in the position to
act more pro-actively, flexible and effective?
2. The introduction of a vulnerability assessment
In parallel to the ‘stress test’ in the Banking
Union, the Commission proposes a system to
ensure that the European Border and Coast
Guard has the capacity and means to be ready to
face challenges at the external borders.
The Agency will have the mandate to carry out a
vulnerability assessment in order to assess the
capacity of MS to face challenges at their external
borders, including by means of an assessment of
the equipment and resources of MS as well as of
their contingency planning. On the basis of this
assessment the Agency will identify and decide
on measures that need to be taken by the MS.
This decision will be binding. In case a MS
concerned fails to act, the matter will be referred
to the management board of the Agency.
Questions:
1. Do you agree that a vulnerability assessment
should be carried out in order to ensure that
a MS and/or the European Border and Coast
Guard is ready to face upcoming challenges
at the external borders? Should the Agency
carry out this assessment on its own or
should MS be involved?
2. Do you agree that this assessment could lead
to a decision by the Executive Director of the
Agency and, where necessary, a further
decision by the Management Board of the
Agency, with regard to the Member State
concerned to take corrective measures
concerning technical equipment, systems,
capabilities, resources and contingency
plans? Should this decision be binding?
3. The right to intervene in case of a situation at
the external border requiring urgent action
The Commission proposes a new procedure to
address deficiencies rendering the control of the
external borders ineffective to such an extent
that it risks putting in jeopardy the functioning of
the Schengen area. This procedure can be applied
in case a MS has not taken corrective measures
decided by the Management Board of the

Agency, or in case of disproportionate migratory
pressure at the external border. The Commission
can adopt an implementing decision providing
for measures such as for example organizing
rapid border interventions and deploying
European Border and Coast Guard Teams.
The Member State concerned is required to
comply with the Commission decision and
cooperate with the Agency for that purpose.
This applies even when there is no request from
a Member State for assistance; however, the
operational plan of the operation will have to be
drawn up in cooperation with the MS concerned.
Questions:
1. What remedies/measures should be taken
regarding the Member States concerned in
the situations referred to?
2. Can Member States agree to a solution based
on the proposal made by the Commission in
order to prevent a situation meant in article
26 Schengen Borders Code?
3. What should be the role of the Council in that
situation?