Connection between the facilitations set out in the Visa Code and readmission - Main contents

Document date	25-01-2016
Publication date	26-01-2016
Reference	5509/16
From	Presidency
External link	original article
Original document in PDF

Council of the European Union Brussels, 25 January 2016

PUBLIC

(OR. en)

5509/16 Interinstitutional File:

2014/0094 (COD) i LIMITE

VISA 23 MIGR 10 CODEC 68

NOTE

From: Presidency

To: Working Party on Integration, Migration and Expulsion

No. prev. doc.: 15507/15 VISA 398 MIGR 77 CODEC 1765 COMIX 719

No. Cion doc.: 8401/14 VISA 90 CODEC 971 COMIX 201 (COM(2014) 164 final i)

Subject: Connection between the facilitations set out in the Visa Code and readmission

At its meeting on 8 October 2015, the Council adopted the 'suggestions made by the Luxemburg

Presidency for the continuation of the work on the Visa Package' and the 'conclusions on the future of the return policy'. Both decisions emphasize the importance of a link between the Visa Code and cooperation on readmission.

The return of irregular migrants who do not have a right to stay in the EU, is an essential part of the EU's comprehensive efforts to manage migration and in particular to reduce irregular migration. In June 2015, the Council concluded that all tools shall be mobilised to promote readmission of irregular migrants to countries of origin and transit. Member States' experience illustrates that a fine balance of restrictions and incentives is needed to enhance cooperation on readmission. The Visa policy is important leverage for readmission in relations with third countries. Partly because there is a natural link between the conditions under which nationals from a third country can enter the EU, and the level of cooperation of a certain third country regarding return and readmission. However, the visa policy can only serve as efficient leverage if the "benefits" for the third country concerned are of concrete added value.

The procedural facilitations in the Visa Code, as proposed by the Commission in its original proposal, might affect the scope for making separate agreements with third countries: countries might no longer be interested in a separate agreement on readmission if elements of visa facilitation are already included in the Visa Code. Therefore, it might be necessary to include cooperation with readmission as a condition in the Visa Code itself in order to achieve the same result.

On 19 January 2016, the Visa Working Party discussed a paper with several options to include readmission in the Visa Code (15507/15). Member States underlined their general support for the proposal to create a link between the Visa Code and readmission and indicated their provisional preference for the two options (described below). In order to be able to choose an option that is both feasible and effective, the Visa Working Party would like to consult the Working Party on Integration, Migration and Expulsion.

Preferred options Visa Working Party

With regards to the connection between the Visa Code and readmission, the Visa Working Party showed its preference for two possible options:

• 1. 

  The addition of a condition to several articles in the Visa Code, in order to insure that these facilitations are possible, only for nationals of third countries that cooperate on

return and readmission 1 . A list of third countries whose nationals are eligible for the

facilitations of these articles shall be established by the Commission by means of an implementing act, adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 51(2).

The articles mentioned have been chosen because they are part of the text that is open for

negotiation for the Council and the European Parliament 2 and are specifically aimed at

persons (diplomats, government employees, business travellers) who are able to influence the government most when it comes to cooperation on return and readmission.

1 The articles concerned would be the articles concerning the facilitation of VIS registered

regular travellers (13(2) supporting documents, 18(2) the verification of entry conditions and risk assessment, 21(3), 21(4) the issuing of multiple entry visa): and/or Article 14(3)(d) about the exemption of the fees for holders of diplomatic and service passports.

2 It is recalled that the proposal on the Union Code on Visas is a "recast" proposal.

A harmonised common list of cooperating (or non-cooperating) countries could possibly be complemented by national lists or could otherwise leave room for national assessment of the cooperation on return and readmission. The Visa Working Party considers the option of exclusive national assessment – without a harmonised common list – undesirable because this

would lead to an unharmonised practice and visa shopping. 1

• 2. 

  The introduction of a recital stating that visa facilitation with third countries - beyond the rules provided for in the Visa Code - is reserved only for nationals of third countries that cooperate on return and readmission.

  This option would affirm the current practice that an agreement on visa facilitation is always be accompanied by a readmission agreement. Member States however mentioned that apart from signing readmission agreements, the actual cooperation on return and readmission should also be considered. Linking visa facilitation and readmission via separate agreements leaves room for manoeuvre. Partly because there under this option is no need to establish a harmonised common list of cooperating or non-cooperating countries. For this option to be effective, facilitations in the Visa Code recast should be limited to a minimum in order to have something to offer while negotiating on readmission. This option therefore leaves little room for manoeuvre during negotiations on the Visa Code with the European Parliament. It should be recalled that the effectiveness of this option with regard to third countries without a formalised cooperation on readmission is limited by Member States' lack of willingness to conclude further visa facilitation agreements.

Principal questions

• 1. 

  Which of the two options suggested do you consider most effective in terms of actual cooperation on return and readmission? Why?

• 2. 

  Would you prefer to set up a white list (of cooperative third countries) or a black list (of noncooperative countries)? Should Member States have the possibility to complement the common list with national lists?

1 Establishing national lists in addition to a common list could also lead to an unharmonised

practice and visa shopping, but in a lesser extent.

• 3. 

  Would the following indicators be suitable and appropriate for setting up a list? And could these indicators be useful in the context of the recital (option 2) as well?

  • a. 

    Existence of EU Readmission Agreements and practical experiences of Member States in the implementation of these agreements;

  • b. 

    Existence of bilateral readmission agreements and practical experiences of Member States in the implementation of these agreements;

  • c. 

    Practical experiences of Member States in their cooperation with third-country authorities in view of ...

    • - 

      timely identification of persons subject of a return decision;

    • - 

      recognition of the European travel document for the return of illegally staying third-country nationals (EU Laissez Passer);

    • - 

      timely delivery of the necessary travel documents;

    • - 

      timely fulfilment of other administrative requirements;

    • - 

      organising and agreeing swiftly on practical modalities for effective return and readmission

  ... for carrying out return and removal of illegally staying third-country nationals from the EU to the concerned third country in accordance with Directive 2008/115/EC i.

Other questions posed in Visa Working Party:

• 1. 

  What will be the impact of the insertion of a "readmission clause" in the Visa Code for current agreements on readmission with third countries? Will it be necessary to reconsider all

  agreements?

• 2. 

  What should be the scope: own nationals or also third-country nationals?

What kind of visa facilitation do you consider (most) important as a leverage for readmission?

Which categories should be focussed on in order to improve the effectiveness of the measures taken?