HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"EN
6.11.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
295/27
II
(Non-legislative acts)
REGULATIONS
COUNCIL REGULATION (EU) No 1053/2013
of 7 October 2013
establishing an evaluation and monitoring mechanism to verify the application of the Schengen
acquis and repealing the Decision of the Executive Committee of 16 September 1998 setting up a
Standing Committee on the evaluation and implementation of Schengen
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
application in practice and to maintain a high level of
mutual trust between those Member States that form part
of an area without border control at internal borders.
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European
Such a mechanism should build upon close cooperation
Union, and in particular Article 70 thereof,
between the Commission and those Member States.
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
(4) The
Hague
Programme
( 3 ) invited the Commission to
submit, as soon as the abolition of controls at internal
borders has been completed, a proposal to supplement
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament ( 1 ),
the existing Schengen evaluation mechanism with a
supervisory mechanism, ensuring full involvement of
Member States experts, and including unannounced
Whereas:
inspections.
(1) The
Schengen
area
without
border
control
at
internal
borders relies on the effective and efficient application
(5) The
Stockholm
Programme
( 4 ) considers that the
by the Member States of accompanying measures in
evaluation of the Schengen area will continue to be of
the areas of external borders, visa policy, the Schengen
key importance and that it therefore should be improved
Information System, data protection, police cooperation,
by strengthening the role of the European Agency for the
judicial cooperation in criminal matters and drugs
Management of Operational Cooperation at the External
policies.
Borders of the European Union (‘Frontex’), established by
Council Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004 ( 5 ), in this field.
(2) By the Decision of the Executive Committee of
16 September 1998 ( 2 ) (SCH/Com-ex (98) 26 def) (here
inafter referred to as ‘the Decision of 16 September
(6)
The evaluation mechanism set up by the Decision of
1998’), a Standing Committee on the evaluation and
16 September 1998 should therefore be revised and
implementation of Schengen was set up. The Standing
the Decision of 16 September 1998 be repealed.
Committee was given the mandate, first, to establish
whether all the preconditions for lifting border control
at internal borders with a candidate State have been
fulfilled and, second, to ensure that the Schengen acquis
(7) The
experience
gathered
during
previous
evaluations
is properly applied by the States already implementing it
demonstrates the need to maintain a coherent evaluation
in full.
mechanism covering all areas of the Schengen acquis
except those where a specific evaluation mechanism
already exists under Union law.
(3) A
specific
evaluation
and
monitoring
mechanism
to
verify application of the Schengen acquis is necessary
( 3 ) OJ C 53, 3.3.2005, p. 1.
given the need to ensure high uniform standards in its
( 4 ) OJ C 115, 4.5.2010, p. 1.
( 5 ) Council Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004 of 26 October 2004 estab
lishing a European Agency for the Management of Operational
( 1 ) Opinion of 12 June 2013 (not yet published in the Official Journal).
Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the
( 2 ) OJ L 239, 22.9.2000, p. 138.
European Union (OJ L 349, 25.11.2004, p. 1).

---

L 295/28
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
6.11.2013
(8)
In accordance with Article 70 of the Treaty on the Func
applied effectively in accordance with the agreed
tioning of the European Union (TFEU), objective and
common standards and with fundamental principles
impartial evaluation of the implementation of the
and norms. Such implementing power also contributes,
Union policies within the area of freedom, security and
in accordance with the Council conclusions of 8 March
justice should be conducted by Members States in collab
2012, to improving the governance of the Schengen area
oration with the Commission. To be efficient, a proper
through political discussions at ministerial level on the
evaluation process should comprise a proper follow-up
correct functioning of the Schengen area, including
and monitoring of the evaluation reports which should
discussions in situations where evaluation reports have
be ensured by the Commission.
shown serious shortcomings. Such discussions, taking
place within the Mixed Committee made up of the EU
Member States and the Schengen associated States,
should assist the Council in taking decisions within the
(9)
In addition, for the evaluation mechanism to be more
scope of its competences to ensure the efficient func
efficient, uniform conditions for the implementation of
tioning of the Schengen area. Finally, conferring such
this Regulation should be ensured. To that end, some
implementing power on the Council adequately takes
implementing powers should be conferred on the
into account the potential politically-sensitive nature of
Commission and others on the Council.
recommendations, often touching on national executive
and enforcement powers.
(10) The powers to prepare and plan the evaluations and the
power to adopt the evaluation reports should be
(12) The
evaluation
mechanism
should
set
up
transparent,
conferred on the Commission. A number of those
efficient and clear rules on the method to be applied
powers should be exercised in accordance with Regu
for the evaluations, the use of highly qualified experts
lation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament
for on-site visits and the follow-up to the findings of
and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down
the evaluations. In particular, the method should
the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms
provide for unannounced on-site visits to supplement
for control by Member States of the Commission’s
announced on-site visits, in particular with regard to
exercise of implementing powers ( 1 ). In view of the
border controls and visas.
terms of Article 2(2)(b)(iii) of that Regulation, the exam
ination procedure is applicable for the adoption of such
acts.
(13) The
evaluation
and
monitoring
mechanism
should
cover
all aspects of the Schengen acquis. As regards the issue of
borders, the evaluation and monitoring mechanism
(11) In
order
to
strengthen
mutual
trust
between
the
Member
should cover both the efficiency of border controls at
States, to ensure their better coordination at Union level
external borders and the absence of border controls at
and to reinforce peer pressure amongst them, the imple
internal borders.
menting power to adopt the recommendations for
remedial action aimed at addressing any deficiencies
identified in the evaluation reports, should be conferred
on the Council. Such an implementing power mirrors the
specific powers conferred on the Council, under
(14) During the evaluation and monitoring particular
Article 70 of the TFEU, in the field of mutual evaluation
attention to respect for fundamental rights in the appli
of the implementation of Union policies within the area
cation of the Schengen acquis should be paid.
of freedom, security and justice. It reflects adequately the
purpose of an evaluation mechanism based on this lex
specialis, which is, within this particular area, and in
parallel with the general power of the Commission to
(15) The
evaluation
should
guarantee
that
the
Member
States
oversee the application of Union law under the control
apply the Schengen rules effectively in accordance with
of the Court of Justice of the European Union through
fundamental principles and norms. Therefore the
infringement procedures, to fulfil a complementary
evaluation mechanism should encompass all relevant
function of monitoring the effectiveness of the practical
legislation and operational activities contributing to the
implementation of Union policies through peer review.
functioning of an area without border control at internal
borders.
Moreover, such an implementing power conferred on the
Council contributes to giving effect to the wish of the
(16) In
view
of
strengthening
the
effectiveness
and
reliability
European Council, expressed in its conclusions of 23 and
of the evaluation mechanism, the correct functioning of
24 June 2011, that cooperation in the Schengen area be
the authorities that apply the relevant parts of the
further strengthened by enhancing mutual trust between
Schengen acquis should be taken into account in all the
the Member States, and that the Member States be
evaluations. That will increase the ability of the
responsible for guaranteeing that all Schengen rules are
evaluation mechanism to guarantee an effective appli
cation of the Schengen rules by Member States in
( 1 ) OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13.
accordance with fundamental principles and norms as

---

EN
6.11.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
295/29
requested by the European Council in its conclusions of
the European Parliament in order to take into
23 and 24 June 2011. It will comply with the request of
consideration its opinion, to the fullest extent possible,
the European Council, set out in its conclusions of 1 and
before adopting a final text.
2 March 2012, that the evaluation mechanism address
the required functioning of the institutions involved in
the application of the Schengen acquis.
(21) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 22
on the position of Denmark, annexed to the TEU and to
the TFEU, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of
this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its
(17) Frontex should support the implementation of the
application. Given that this Regulation builds upon the
evaluation mechanism, primarily in the area of risk
Schengen acquis, Denmark shall, in accordance with
analysis relating to external borders. The evaluation
Article 4 of that Protocol, decide within a period of six
mechanism should also be able to rely on the expertise
months after the Council has decided on this Regulation
of Frontex’s assistance on an ad hoc basis when carrying
whether it will implement it in its national law.
out on-site visits at the external borders.


(22) The
United
Kingdom
is
taking
part
in
this
Regulation,
in
(18) Other
Union
bodies,
offices
and
agencies,
such
as
the
accordance with Article 5(1) of Protocol No 19 on the
European Police Office(‘Europol’), established by Council
Schengen acquis integrated into the framework of the
Decision 2009/371/JHA ( 1 ), and Eurojust, established by
Union, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, and
Council Decision 2002/187/JHA
( 2 ), should, where
Article 8(2) of Council Decision 2000/365/EC of
relevant, support the implementation of the evaluation
29 May 2000 concerning the request of the United
mechanism in the areas covered by their mandate. The
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to take
evaluation mechanism should also, where relevant, be
part in some of the provisions of the Schengen acquis ( 3 ).
able to rely on the expertise of Union bodies, offices
or agencies when they assist in carrying out on-site
visits relating to areas of the Schengen acquis that fall
(23) Ireland is taking part in this Regulation, in accordance
within their mandate. That should for instance be the
with Article 5(1) of Protocol No 19 on the Schengen
case of the European Data Protection Supervisor as
acquis integrated into the framework of the European
regards evaluations concerning data protection, in
Union, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, and
which national data protection authorities may also be
Article 6(2) of Council Decision 2002/192/EC of
involved.
28 February 2002 concerning Ireland’s request to take
part in some of the provisions of the Schengen acquis ( 4 ).
(19) Member
States
and
the
Commission
should
ensure
that
experts made available for on-site visits have the
(24) As regards Iceland and Norway, this Regulation
necessary experience and have undergone specific
constitutes a development of the provisions of the
training for that purpose, including in respect of funda
Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Agreement
mental rights. Appropriate training should be provided
concluded by the Council of the European Union and
by the relevant Union bodies, offices or agencies, such as
the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway
Frontex, and funds should be made available to Member
concerning the latters’ association with the implemen
States for initiatives targeted at specific training in the
tation, application and development of the Schengen
field of evaluating the Schengen acquis from the existing
acquis ( 5 ) which fall within the area referred to in
financial instruments of the Union and by development
Article 1 of Council Decision 1999/437/EC ( 6 ) on
of such instruments.
certain arrangements for the application of that
Agreement.
(20) In view of the particular role entrusted to the European
(25) As
regards
Switzerland,
this Regulation
constitutes
a
Parliament and to the national parliaments under the last
development of provisions of the Schengen acquis
sentence of Article 70 TFEU, as underlined in point (c) of
within the meaning of the Agreement between the
Article 12 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) as
European Union, the European Community and the
regards the national parliaments, it is necessary to
Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s
provide that the Council and the Commission will fully
association with the implementation, application and
inform the European Parliament and the national
development of the Schengen acquis ( 7 ) which fall
parliaments of the content and results of the evaluation.
within the area referred to in Article 1 of Decision
In addition, should the Commission submit a proposal to
1999/437/EC read in conjunction with Article 3 of
amend this Regulation, the Council would, in accordance
Council Decision 2008/146/EC ( 8 ).
with Article 19(7)(h) of its Rules of Procedure, consult
( 3 ) OJ L 131, 1.6.2000, p. 43.
( 1 ) Council Decision 2009/371/JHA of 6 April 2009 establishing the
( 4 ) OJ L 64, 7.3.2002, p. 20.
European Police Office (Europol) (OJ L 121, 15.5.2009, p. 37).
( 5 ) OJ L 176, 10.7.1999, p. 36.
( 2 ) Council Decision 2002/187/JHA of 28 February 2002 setting up
( 6 ) OJ L 176, 10.7.1999, p. 31.
Eurojust with a view to reinforcing the fight against serious crime
( 7 ) OJ L 53, 27.2.2008, p. 52.
(OJ L 63, 6.3.2002, p. 1).
( 8 ) OJ L 53, 27.2.2008, p. 1.

---

L 295/30
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
6.11.2013
(26) As
regards
Liechtenstein,
this
Regulation
constitutes
a
3. Experts
from
the
Member
States
which,
in
accordance
development of provisions of the Schengen acquis
with the relevant Act of Accession, do not yet fully apply the
within the meaning of the Protocol between the
Schengen acquis shall nevertheless participate in the evaluation
European Union, the European Community, the Swiss
of all parts of the Schengen acquis.
Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on
the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the
Agreement between the European Union, the European
Article 2
Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss
Confederation’s association with the implementation,
Definition
application and development of the Schengen acquis ( 1 )
For the purpose of this Regulation, ‘Schengen acquis’ means the
which fall within the area referred to in Article 1 of
provisions integrated into the framework of the Union in
Decision 1999/437/EC read in conjunction with
accordance with Protocol No 19 annexed to the TEU and to
Article 3 of Council Decision 2011/350/EU ( 2 ).
the TFEU, together with the acts building upon them or
otherwise related to them.
(27) Since, at the date of entry into force of this Regulation,
the evaluation of Cyprus will have already commenced
under the Decision of 16 September 1998, this Regu
Article 3
lation will not apply to Cyprus until 1 January 2016.
Responsibilities
1. The
Member
States
and
the
Commission
shall
be
jointly
(28) Given that the verification in accordance with the
responsible for the implementation of the evaluation and moni
applicable Schengen evaluation procedures concerning
toring mechanism as specified in this Regulation, with the
Bulgaria and Romania has already been completed
support of the Union bodies, offices and agencies involved in
pursuant to Article 4(2) of the 2005 Act of Accession,
the implementation of the Schengen acquis.
the verification under Article 1(1)(b) of this Regulation
will not be carried out in respect of those Member States.
2. The
Commission
shall
have
an
overall
coordination
role
in
relation to establishing annual and multiannual evaluation
(29) Experts
from
Cyprus,
Bulgaria,
Romania
and Croatia
programmes, drafting questionnaires and setting schedules of
should nevertheless participate in the evaluation of all
visits, conducting visits and drafting evaluation reports and
parts of the Schengen acquis,
recommendations. It shall also ensure the follow-up and moni
toring of the evaluation reports and recommendations in
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
accordance with Article 16.
Article 1
3. The
Member
States
and
the
Commission
shall
cooperate
fully at all stages of evaluations in order to carry out the tasks
Purpose and scope
entrusted to them under this Regulation.
1. This
Regulation
establishes
an
evaluation
and
monitoring
mechanism, which serves the following purposes:
Article 4
(a) to verify application of the Schengen acquis in the Member
Evaluations
States to which it applies in full as well as in Member States
1. Evaluations
may
cover
all
aspects
of
the
Schengen acquis,
to which, in accordance with the relevant Protocols annexed
including the effective and efficient application by the Member
to the TEU and to the TFEU, the Schengen acquis applies in
States of accompanying measures in the areas of external
part;
borders, visa policy, the Schengen Information System, data
protection, police cooperation, judicial cooperation in criminal
(b) to verify that the necessary conditions for the application of
matters, as well as the absence of border control at internal
all relevant parts of the Schengen acquis have been met in
borders. All the evaluations should take into account the func
those Member States in respect of which a Council decision
tioning of the authorities that apply the relevant parts of the
stating that the provisions of the Schengen acquis are to
Schengen acquis, as set out in this paragraph.
apply in full or in part has not been taken, with the
exception of those Member States whose evaluation will
already have been completed at the time of entry into
2. Evaluations
may
consist
of
questionnaires
and
of
on-site
force of this Regulation.
visits which may be announced or unannounced. Announced
on-site visits shall be preceded by a questionnaire. The on-site
visits and questionnaires may, where appropriate, be used either
2. The
verification
referred
to
in
paragraph
1(b)
of
this independently or in combination in evaluating specific Member
Article is without prejudice to the second paragraph of
States and/or specific areas.
Article 23 as regards Member States in which the evaluation
procedures have already commenced at 26 November 2013.
3. Both
questionnaires
and
on-site
visits
may
be
supple
( 1 ) OJ L 160, 18.6.2011, p. 21.
mented by presentations by the evaluated Member State on
( 2 ) OJ L 160, 18.6.2011, p. 19.
the area covered by the evaluation.

---

EN
6.11.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
295/31
Article 5
2. The
Commission
shall
establish,
by
means
of
imple
menting acts, the first section of the annual evaluation
Multiannual evaluation programme
programme, including a provisional time-schedule of the on-
1. A
multiannual
evaluation
programme
covering
a
period
of site visits. That section shall list the Member States to be
five years shall be established by the Commission, where appro
evaluated in the following year in accordance with the multi
priate after consulting Frontex and Europol, not later than six
annual evaluation programme, the areas to be evaluated and the
months before the beginning of the following five-year period.
on-site visits. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in
That implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the
accordance with the examination procedure referred to in
examination procedure referred to in Article 21(2). The
Article 21(2). The Commission shall transmit the annual
Commission shall transmit the multiannual evaluation
evaluation programme to the European Parliament and to the
programme to the European Parliament and to the Council.
Council.
2. Each
Member
State
shall
be
evaluated
during
each
five-
year period covered by the multiannual evaluation programme.
3. The
Commission
shall
draft
and
adopt
the
second
section
The multiannual evaluation programme shall list the order of
of the annual evaluation programme. That section shall list the
Member States to be evaluated each year. The order in which
unannounced on-site visits to be carried out in the following
the Member States are to be evaluated shall take into account
year. It shall be considered confidential and shall not be
the time which has elapsed since the previous evaluation and
communicated.
the balance between the different parts of the Schengen acquis
to be evaluated.
4. The
annual
evaluation
programme
may
be
adapted,
if
necessary, in accordance with paragraphs 2 and 3.
3. The
multiannual
evaluation
programme
may
be
adapted,
where necessary, in accordance with the procedure referred to
in paragraph 1.
5. The
first
annual
evaluation
programme
shall
be
established
by 27 May 2014. The starting date of that programme shall be
4. The
multiannual
evaluation
programme
may
contain
a 27 November 2014 and the end date shall be 31 December
reference to thematic evaluations as referred to in
2014.
Article 6(1)(b).
5. The
first
multiannual
evaluation
programme
shall
be
Article 7
established by 27 May 2014. The starting date of that
Frontex risk analyses
programme shall be 27 November 2014 and the end date
shall be 31 December 2019.
1. By
31
August
each
year,
Frontex
shall
submit
a
risk
analysis to the Commission and to the Member States in
accordance with its mandate. Such risk analysis shall take into
account, inter alia, illegal immigration and significant changes in
Article 6
the operational environment at the external borders, and shall
Annual evaluation programme
include recommendations on the priorities for evaluations in the
following year. The recommendations shall refer to specific
1. The
Commission
shall
establish
an
annual
evaluation sections of the external borders and to specific border
programme by 31 October of the year preceding that to
crossing-points to be evaluated in the following year under
which the programme relates, taking into account in particular
the multiannual evaluation programme. The Commission shall
the risk analyses provided by Frontex in accordance with
transmit that risk analysis without delay to the European
Article 7 and, where appropriate, the information provided by
Parliament and to the Council.
Europol and other Union bodies, offices and agencies, in
particular in accordance with Article 8.
2. By
31
August
each
year,
Frontex
shall
submit
to
the
The annual evaluation programme shall include proposals for
Commission a separate risk analysis that is distinct from that
the evaluation of:
referred to in paragraph 1, which shall include recommen
dations on the priorities for evaluations to be implemented in
the form of unannounced on-site visits in the following year,
irrespective of the order of Member States to be evaluated each
(a) the application of the Schengen acquis or parts thereof by
year, as established in the multiannual evaluation programme in
one Member State, as specified in the multiannual
accordance with Article 5(2). Those recommendations may
evaluation programme; and
concern any region or specific area and shall contain a list of
at least ten specific sections of the external borders and at least
ten specific border crossing-points. The Commission may at any
(b) where relevant, the application of specific parts of the
time request Frontex to submit to it a risk analysis making
Schengen acquis across several Member States (i.e. thematic
recommendations for evaluations to be implemented in the
evaluations).
form of unannounced on-site visits.

---

L 295/32
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
6.11.2013
3. The
risk
analyses,
referred
to
in
paragraphs
1
and
2,
to
be
In the case of announced on-site visits, the Commission shall,
provided by Frontex shall be submitted for the first time to the
no later than three months before the on-site visit is scheduled
Commission not later than 27 February 2014.
to commence, invite Member States to designate experts.
Member States shall designate experts within two weeks of
receiving that invitation.
Article 8
Risk analyses by Union bodies, offices and agencies, other
than Frontex
In the case of unannounced on-site visits, the Commission shall,
no later than two weeks before the on-site visit is scheduled to
The Commission shall, where appropriate, request Union
commence, invite Member States to designate experts. Member
bodies, offices and agencies, other than Frontex, which are
States shall designate experts within 72 hours of receiving that
involved in the implementation of the Schengen acquis to
invitation.
carry out risk analyses, including on corruption and organised
crime, in so far as these may undermine the application of the
Schengen acquis by the Member States. Such analyses could be
used for preparing the annual evaluation programmes.
3. The
maximum
number
of
Commission
representatives
participating in an on-site visit shall be two. The maximum
number of Member States’ experts participating in an
Article 9
announced on-site visit shall be eight and six for an
unannounced on-site visit.
Questionnaire
1. The
Commission
shall,
by
means
of
implementing
acts,
establish and update a standard questionnaire in close
cooperation with the Member States. Frontex and Europol
If experts designated by Member States exceed the relevant
may be consulted on the draft standard questionnaire. The
maximum number set out in the first subparagraph, the
standard questionnaire shall cover the relevant legislation,
Commission, after consulting the Member States concerned,
commonly agreed recommendations and best practices, in
shall appoint the members of the team on the basis of a
particular as stated in the Schengen catalogues, and the organi
geographical balance and the competences of the experts.
sational and technical means available for the implementation
of the Schengen acquis and available statistical data on each field
of the evaluation. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in
accordance with the examination procedure referred to in
4. Member
States’
experts
may
not
participate
in
an
Article 21(2).
evaluation mission that includes an on-site visit to the
Member State where they are employed.
2. By
1
July
each
year,
the
Commission
shall
send
the
standard questionnaire to those Member States which are to
5. The
Commission
may
invite
Frontex,
Europol,
or
other
be evaluated in the following year. The Member States shall
Union bodies, offices or agencies involved in the implemen
provide the Commission with their replies to the questionnaire
tation of the Schengen acquis to designate a representative to
within eight weeks of communication of the questionnaire. The
take part as an observer in an on-site visit concerning an area
Commission shall make the replies available to the other
covered by their mandate.
Member States and shall inform the European Parliament of
the replies. If so requested by the European Parliament, in
particular as a result of the seriousness of the matter, the
Commission shall, on a case-by-case basis and in accordance
with the applicable rules on relations between the European
6. The
leading
experts
of
an
on-site
team
shall
be
a
Parliament and the Commission, also inform the European
Commission representative and an expert from a Member
Parliament of the content of a specific reply.
State, who shall be appointed jointly by the members of that
team as soon as possible after the team has been set up. The
leading experts shall be appointed in due time before the
detailed programme referred to in Article 13(2) is established.
Article 10
Teams responsible for on-site visits
1. A
team
responsible
for
on-site
visits
(the
‘on-site
team’)
Article 11
shall consist of experts designated by Member States and of
Teams responsible for evaluations on the basis of a
Commission representatives.
questionnaire
1. Where
a
questionnaire
is
used
independently,
i.e.
without
being followed by an on-site visit as referred to in Article 4(2),
2. The
Commission
shall
invite
Member
States
to
designate the team responsible for evaluating the answers to the ques
experts who are available for participation in the respective on-
tionnaire (the ‘questionnaire team’) shall consist of experts from
site visits, indicating their area of expertise.
the Member States and of Commission representatives.

---

EN
6.11.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
295/33
2. When sending out the questionnaire to the Member State
activities in the areas to be evaluated. It shall, in particular,
to be evaluated, the Commission shall invite Member States to
ensure that the on-site team can directly address relevant
designate experts who are available to participate in the evalu
persons and has access to all areas, premises and documents
ation, indicating their area of expertise. Member States shall
required for the evaluation.
designate experts within two weeks of receiving that invitation.
Experts shall be designated in accordance with Article 10(3)
and (4).
5. The
Member
State
to
be
evaluated
shall,
by
any
means
within its legal powers, assist the on-site team in performing its
task.
Article 12
Experts
6. In
the
case
of
announced
on-site
visits,
the
Commission
The experts participating in evaluations shall have appropriate
shall provide in advance the names of the experts in the on-site
qualifications, including a solid theoretical knowledge and
team to the Member State to be evaluated. That Member State
practical experience in the areas covered by the evaluation
shall designate a contact point for making the practical
mechanism, along with sound knowledge of evaluation prin
arrangements for the on-site visit.
ciples, procedures and techniques, and shall be able to
communicate effectively in a common language. To that end,
the Member States and the Commission, in cooperation with
7. The
Commission
and
the
Member
States
shall
be
relevant Union bodies, offices or agencies, shall ensure that
responsible for making the necessary travel arrangements to
experts receive appropriate training, including on respect for
and from the Member State(s) to be evaluated for their
fundamental rights.
respective experts participating in the on-site team. The travel
and accommodation costs for experts participating in the on-
site visits shall be reimbursed by the Commission.
Article 13
Conduct of on-site visits
The Member State(s) to be evaluated shall be responsible for
making the necessary accommodation arrangements and for
1. The on-site teams shall undertake all necessary providing the necessary transport on location. For unannounced
preparatory activities in order to ensure the efficiency,
on-site visits, the Commission shall facilitate the accom
accuracy and consistency of on-site visits.
modation arrangements for experts.
2. The
detailed
programme
for
announced
on-site
visits
shall
Article 14
be established by the Commission in close cooperation with the
leading experts and the Member State concerned. The Member
Evaluation reports
States shall be informed about that programme. The detailed
1. An
evaluation
report
shall
be
drawn
up
following
each
programme for unannounced on-site visits shall be established
evaluation. The evaluation report shall be based on the findings
by the Commission.
of the on-site visit and the questionnaire, as appropriate. In case
of on-site visits, the evaluation report shall be drawn up by the
on-site team during the visit.
The Member State concerned shall be consulted and notified of
the timetable and detailed programme:
The Member States’ experts and the Commission representatives
shall take overall responsibility for drafting the evaluation report
(a) at least six weeks before an announced on-site visit is due to
and ensuring its integrity and quality. In case of disagreement,
take place;
the on-site team or the questionnaire team, as appropriate, shall
endeavour to reach a compromise.
(b) at least 24 hours before an unannounced on-site visit takes
place.
2. The
evaluation
report
shall
analyse
the
qualitative,
quanti
tative, operational, administrative and organisational aspects, as
appropriate, and shall list any deficiencies identified during the
Unannounced on-site visits to the internal borders shall take
evaluation.
place without prior notification to the Member State(s)
concerned. General guidelines on practical arrangements for
such visits shall be established by the Commission in close
3. One
of
the
following
assessments
shall
be
given
to
each
cooperation with the Member States.
finding in the evaluation report:
3. The
members
of
the
on-site
team
shall
each
carry
identi
(a) compliant;
fication authorising them to conduct on-site visits in accordance
with this Regulation.
(b) compliant but improvement necessary;
4. The
Member
State
to
be
evaluated
shall
ensure
that
the
on-site team is able to exercise its mandate to verify the
(c) non-compliant.

---

L 295/34
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
6.11.2013
4. The
Commission
shall
communicate
the
draft
evaluation 2. After consulting the on-site team or the questionnaire
report to the evaluated Member State within six weeks of the
team, as appropriate, the Commission shall present its
on-site visit or of receipt of the reply to the questionnaire, as
assessment of the adequacy of the action plan to the Council
appropriate. The evaluated Member State shall provide its
within one month of receiving the action plan from the
comments on the draft evaluation report within two weeks of
evaluated Member State. The other Member States shall be
its receipt. A drafting meeting shall be held at the request of the
invited to comment on the action plan.
evaluated Member State. The comments of the evaluated
Member State may be reflected in the draft evaluation report.
3. The evaluated Member State shall report to the
5. The
draft
evaluation
report
and
the
comments
on
it
from Commission on the implementation of its action plan within
the evaluated Member State shall be submitted by the
six months of adoption of the recommendations and shall
Commission to the other Member States who shall be invited
thereafter continue to report every three months until the
to comment on the reply to the questionnaire, the draft
action plan is fully implemented.
evaluation report and the comments of the evaluated Member
State.
4. Notwithstanding
the
six-month
period
for
reporting
on
the implementation of an action plan referred to in paragraph
On that basis, the Commission, if necessary after making
3, if the recommendations conclude that the evaluated Member
relevant changes to the draft evaluation report, shall adopt, by
State is seriously neglecting its obligations, that Member State
means of an implementing act, the evaluation report. That
shall report on the implementation of its action plan within
implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the
three months of adoption of the recommendations.
examination procedure referred to in Article 21(2). The
Commission shall transmit the evaluation report to the
European Parliament.
5. Depending
on
the
seriousness
of
the
deficiencies
identified
and the measures taken to remedy them, the Commission may
Article 15
schedule announced on-site revisits to verify implementation of
the action plan. The Commission shall invite at least four
Recommendations
experts who have participated in the on-site visit to participate
1. When
drafting
the
evaluation
report
and
in
the
light
of in the revisit. The Commission may invite observers to
the findings and the assessments contained in that evaluation
participate in the revisit. The Commission shall establish the
report, Member States’ experts and the Commission represen
programme of the revisit. The evaluated Member State shall
tatives shall draft recommendations for remedial action aimed at
be notified of the programme at least one month before the
addressing any deficiencies identified during the evaluation and
revisit is due to take place. The Commission may also schedule
give an indication of the priorities for implementing them, as
unannounced on-site revisits.
well as, where appropriate, examples of good practices.
6. The
Commission
shall
inform
the
European
Parliament
2. The
Commission
shall
submit
a
proposal
to
the
Council and the Council on a regular basis about the implementation
to adopt the recommendations referred to in paragraph 1.
of the action plans or improvement measures referred to in this
Article.
3. The
Council
shall
adopt
the
recommendations
referred
to
in paragraph 1 and shall transmit them to the European
Parliament and to the national parliaments.
7. If
an
on-site
visit
reveals
a
serious
deficiency
deemed
to
constitute a serious threat to public policy or internal security
within the area without internal border controls, the
Commission, on its own initiative or at the request of the
Article 16
European Parliament or of a Member State, shall inform the
European Parliament and the Council as soon as possible
Follow-up and monitoring
thereof.
1. Within
three
months
of
adoption
of
the
recommendations
referred to in Article 15, the evaluated Member State shall
provide the Commission and the Council with an action plan
to remedy any deficiencies identified in the evaluation report. If
8. Where
the
Member
State
has
been
found
to
be
compliant,
the recommendations conclude that the evaluated Member State
but where the recommendations contain indications for possible
is seriously neglecting its obligations, that Member State shall
further improvements in accordance with Article 14(3)(b), the
provide its action plan within one month of adoption of those
evaluated Member State shall provide to the Commission its
recommendations. The Commission shall transmit such action
assessment on a possible implementation of such indications
plan to the European Parliament.
within six months of adoption of the recommendations.

---

EN
6.11.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
295/35
Article 17
from each evaluation and on the state of play with regard to
remedial action. The Commission shall forward that report to
Sensitive information
the national parliaments.
The members of the on-site teams and of the questionnaire
teams shall regard as confidential any information they
acquire in the course of performing their duties. The evaluation
reports drawn up following on-site visits shall be classified as
Article 21
EU RESTRICTED/RESTREINT UE in accordance with applicable
Committee procedure
security rules. Classification shall not preclude information
being made available to the European Parliament. The trans
1. The
Commission
shall
be
assisted
by
a
committee.
That
mission and handling of information and documents trans
committee shall be a committee within the meaning of Regu
mitted to the European Parliament in accordance with this
lation (EU) No 182/2011.
Regulation shall comply with rules concerning the forwarding
and handling of classified information which are applicable
between the European Parliament and the Commission. The
Commission, after consulting the Member State concerned,
2. Where
reference
is
made
to
this
paragraph,
Article
5
of
shall decide which part of the evaluation report can be made
Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply. Where the
public.
committee delivers no opinion, the Commission shall not
adopt the draft implementing act and the third subparagraph
of Article 5(4) of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply.
Article 18
Article 22
Conditions of participation of the United Kingdom and
Ireland
Review
1. Experts
of
the
United
Kingdom
and
Ireland
shall
only The Commission shall undertake a review of the operation of
participate in the evaluation of the part of the Schengen
this Regulation and submit a report to the Council within 6
acquis in which those Member States have been authorised to
months of the adoption of all evaluation reports regarding the
participate.
evaluations covered by the first multiannual evaluation
programme referred to in Article 5(5). Such review shall
cover all the elements of this Regulation, including the func
tioning of the procedures for adopting acts under the evaluation
mechanism. The Commission shall transmit that report to the
2. The
evaluations,
as
described
in
Article
4(1),
shall
only European Parliament.
cover the effective and efficient application by the United
Kingdom and Ireland of the part of the Schengen acquis in
which those Member States have been authorised to participate.
Article 23
Transitional provisions and repeal
3. The United Kingdom and Ireland shall only take part in
Without prejudice to the second and third paragraphs of this
the adoption of the recommendations by the Council, as
Article, the Decision of 16 September 1998 is repealed with
provided for in Article 15(3), as regards the part of the
effect from 26 November 2013.
Schengen acquis in which those Member States have been auth
orised to participate.
Part I of the Decision referred to in the first paragraph is to
continue to apply until 1 January 2016 with respect to the
evaluation procedures of Member States which have already
Article 19
commenced on 26 November 2013.
Information of the national parliaments
The Commission shall inform the national parliaments of the
content and results of the evaluation.
Part II of the Decision referred to in the first paragraph is to
continue to apply until 27 November 2014 with respect to the
evaluation procedures of Member States which have already
commenced on 26 November 2013.
Article 20
Reporting to the European Parliament and to the Council
Article 24
The Commission shall present a yearly comprehensive report to
Entry into force
the European Parliament and to the Council on the evaluations
carried out pursuant to this Regulation. That report shall be
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day
made public and shall include information on the evaluations
following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the
carried out during the previous year, on the conclusions drawn
European Union.

---

L 295/36
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
6.11.2013
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in the Member States in
accordance with the Treaties.
Done at Luxembourg, 7 October 2013.
For the Council
The President
J. BERNATONIS

---

EN
6.11.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
295/37
Statement from the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission
The European Parliament, the Council and the Commission welcome the adoption of the Regulation
amending the Schengen Borders Code in order to provide for common rules on the temporary reintro
duction of border control at internal borders in exceptional circumstances and of the Regulation on the
establishment of an evaluation and monitoring mechanism to verify the application of the Schengen acquis.
They believe that these new mechanisms address adequately the call of the European Council in its
Conclusions of 24 June 2011 for an enhancement of the cooperation and the mutual trust between the
Member States in the Schengen area and for an effective and reliable monitoring and evaluation system in
order to ensure the enforcement of common rules and the strengthening, adaptation and extension of the
criteria based on the EU acquis, while recalling that Europe’s external borders must be effectively and
consistently managed, on the basis of common responsibility, solidarity and practical cooperation.
They state that this amendment to the Schengen Borders Code will reinforce the coordination and
cooperation at the level of the Union by providing on the one hand for criteria for any reintroduction
of border controls by Member States and on the other hand for an EU-based mechanism to respond to truly
critical situations where the overall functioning of the area without internal border controls is put at risk.
They underline that this new evaluation system is an EU-based mechanism and that it will cover all aspects
of the Schengen acquis and involve experts from the Member States, the Commission and relevant EU
agencies.
They understand that any future proposal from the Commission for amending this evaluation system would
be submitted to the consultation of the European Parliament in order to take into consideration its opinion,
to the fullest extent possible, before the adoption of a final text.

---

Document Outline

• �

---