Annexes to SWD(2015)150 - On Implementation of the Eurodac Regulation as regards the obligation to take fingerprints - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | SWD(2015)150 - On Implementation of the Eurodac Regulation as regards the obligation to take fingerprints. |
|---|---|
| document | SWD(2015)150  |
| date | May 27, 2015 |
7. It is suggested that if the initial counselling does not succeed, the Member State may consider resorting, in full respect of the principle of proportionality and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, to coercion as a last resort. If a Member States chooses to do this the data-subject should be informed that coercion may be used in order to take his/her fingerprints. If the data-subject still refuses to cooperate it is suggested that officials trained in the proportionate use of coercion may apply the minimum level of coercion required, while ensuring respect of the dignity and physical integrity of the data-subject, as specified in an approved procedure for taking fingerprints. This procedure should include a clear explanation to the data-subject of the steps the official intends to take in order to compel cooperation. The official should demonstrate that there was no other practicable alternative measure to using reasonable coercion. A case-by-case assessment should always be made of whether there is no such alternative,
taking into account the specific circumstances and vulnerabilities of the person concerned. Member States may consider that it is never appropriate to use coercion to compel the fingerprinting of certain vulnerable persons, such as minors or pregnant women. If some degree of coercion is used for vulnerable persons it should be ensured that the procedure used is specifically adapted to such persons. It is suggested that the use of coercion should always be recorded and that a record of the procedure be retained for as long as necessary in order to enable the person concerned to legally challenge the actions of the authority.
8. It is suggested that Member States make an effort to avoid fingerprinting migrants twice. Therefore, Member States may consider carrying out identification for Asylum/Dublin purposes and identification of irregular migrants under national law for return and other lawful purposes, which are not incompatible with the Asylum/Dublin ones, within one act ("uno actu"), thereby limiting the burden for both the administration and the migrants. Member States should have systems in place in order to be able to use the same set of fingerprints both for storage in their national AFIS and for transmitting to the Eurodac Central System. The identification and fingerprinting should take place as early as possible in the procedure.
9. In cases where an applicant has damaged his/her fingertips or otherwise made it impossible to take the fingerprints (such as via the use of glue), and where there is a reasonable prospect that within a short period of time it will be possible to take such fingerprints, Member States may consider that is it necessary that he/she be kept in detention until such time as his/her fingerprints can be taken. Attempts to re-fingerprint data-subjects should take place at regular intervals.
10. Following the successful taking of fingerprints, the data-subject should be released from detention unless there is a specific reason as specified in the Return Directive or under the EU asylum legislation to detain them further.