Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър Assoc. prof. Dragomir Krastev PhD. Dublin Regulation

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър The Dublin Regulation (Regulation No. 604/2013; sometimes theDublin III Regulation; previously the Dublin II Regulation andDublin Convention) is a European Union (EU) law that determines the EU Member State responsible to examine an application for asylum seekers seeking international protection under the Geneva Convention and the EU Qualification Directive, within the European Union. It is the cornerstone of the Dublin System, which consists of the Dublin European Union (EU) lawEU Member Stateasylum seekersinternational protectionGeneva ConventionEuropean Union

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър Regulation and the EURODAC Regulation, which establishes a Europe-wide fingerprinting database for unauthorised entrants to the EU. The Dublin Regulation aims to "determine rapidly the Member State responsible [for an asylum claim]" [1] and provides for the transfer of an asylum seeker to that Member State. Usually, the responsible Member State will be the state through which the asylum seeker first entered the EU. [1]

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър 1. History The Dublin regime was originally established by the Dublin Convention, which was signed in Dublin, Ireland on 15 June 1990, and first came into force on 1 September 1997 for the first twelve signatories (Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany,Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom), on 1 October 1997 for Austria and Sweden, and on 1 January 1998 for Finland. While the convention was only open to accession by member states of the European Communities, Norway and Iceland, non-member states, concluded agreements with the EC to apply the provisions of the Convention in their territories.Dublin, IrelandBelgiumDenmarkGreeceLuxembourgNetherlandsPortugalAustriaSwedenFinlandEuropean CommunitiesNorwayIceland

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър The Dublin II Regulation was adopted in 2003, replacing the Dublin Convention in all EU member states except Denmark, which has an opt-out from implementing regulations under the area of freedom, security and justice. An agreement with Denmark on extending the application of the Regulation to Denmark came into force in A separate protocol also extended the Iceland-Norway agreement to Denmark in The provisions of the Regulation were also extended by a treaty to non-member states Switzerland on 1 March 2008, which on 5 June 2005 voted by 54.6% to ratify it, and Liechtenstein. A protocol subsequently made this agreement also applicable to Denmark.opt-outarea of freedom, security and justiceSwitzerlandvotedLiechtenstein

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър On 3 December 2008, the European Commission proposed amendments to the Dublin Regulation, creating an opportunity for reform of the Dublin System. The Dublin III Regulation (No. 604/2013) was approved in June 2013, replacing the Dublin II Regulation, and applies to all member states except Denmark. It came into force on 19 July It is based on the same principle on the previous two i.e. that the first Member State where finger prints are stored or an asylum claim is lodged is responsible for a person's asylum claim.European Commission

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър 2. Objectives One of the principal aims of the Dublin Regulation is to prevent an applicant from submitting applications in multiple Member States. Another aim is to reduce the number of "orbiting" asylum seekers, who are shuttled from member state to member state. The country that the asylum seeker first applies for asylum is responsible for either accepting or rejecting asylum, and the seeker may not restart the process in another jurisdiction.

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър 3.Criticism According to European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) and UNHCR the current system fails in providing fair, efficient and effective protection. Around 2008, those refugees transferred under Dublin were not always able to access an asylum procedure. This put people at risk of being returned to persecution. The claim has been made on a number of occasions both by ECRE and UNHCR, that the Dublin regulation impedes the legal rights and personal welfare of asylum seekers, including the right to a fair examination of their asylum claim and, where recognised, to effective protection, as well as the uneven distribution of asylum claims among Member States.European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE)UNHCRrefugees

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър Application of this regulation can seriously delay the presentation of claims, and can result in claims never being heard. Causes of concern include the use of detention to enforce transfers of asylum seekers from the state where they apply to the state deemed responsible, also known as Dublin transfers, the separation of families and the denial of an effective opportunity to appeal against transfers. The Dublin system also increases pressures on the external border regions of the EU, where the majority of asylum seekers enter EU and where states are often least able to offer asylum seekers support and protection.

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър After ECRE, the UNHCR and other non-governmental organisations openly criticised Greece's asylum system, including the lack of protection and care for unaccompanied children, several countries suspended transfers of asylum seekers to Greece under the Dublin II regulation. Norway announced in February 2008 it would stop transferring any asylum seeker back to Greece under the Dublin II regulation. In September, it backtracked and announced that transfers to Greece would be based on individual assessments. In April 2008 Finland announced a similar move.

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър The regulation is also criticised by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights as undermining refugee rights.Commissioner for Human Rights The European Court of Human Rights in the case M.S.S. v Belgium and Greece, judged on 21 January 2011 that both the Greek and the Belgian governments violated the European Convention on Human Rights by applying the EU's own law on asylum seekers and were given fines of 6,000 and 30,000, respectively. Recently, voices have been heard calling for the imposition of tougher sanctions, should similar cases of trying to follow EU asylum laws occur in the futureEuropean Court of Human RightsEuropean Convention on Human Rights

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър 4. Partial suspension of the regulation during 2015 European refugee and migrant crisis Under the Dublin Regulation, an asylum seeker has to apply for asylum in the first EU country they entered, and, if they cross borders to another country after being fingerprinted, they can be returned to the former. During the 2015 European refugee and migrant crisis, Hungary became overburdened by asylum applications to the point that it stopped on 23 June 2015 receiving back its applicants who later crossed the borders to other EU countries and were detained there. On 24 August 2015, Germany decided to make use of the "sovereignty clause" to voluntarily assume responsibility for processing Syrian asylum applications for which it is not otherwise responsible under the criteria of the Regulation

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър On 2 September 2015, the Czech Republic also decided to offer Syrian refugees who have already applied for asylum in other EU countries and who reach the country to either have their application processed in the Czech Republic (i.e. get asylum there) or to continue their journey elsewhere. Other member states such as Hungary, Slovakia and Poland officially stated their opposition to any possible revision or enlargement of the Dublin Regulation, specifically referring to the eventual introduction of new mandatory or permanent quotas for solidarity measures.solidarity

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър 5. Identification of applicants (EURODAC) The EURODAC Regulation establishes an EU asylum fingerprint database. When someone applies for asylum, no matter where they are in the EU, their fingerprints are transmitted to the EURODAC central system. EURODAC has been operating since 2003 and has proved a very successful IT tool. Some updates were however required, in particular to reduce the delay of transmission by some Member States, to address data protection concerns and to help combat terrorism and serious crime.

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър The new Regulation improves the regular functioning of EURODAC. It sets new time limits for fingerprint data to be transmitted, reducing the time which elapses between the taking and sending of fingerprints to the Central Unit of EURODAC. It also ensures full compatibility with the latest asylum legislation and better addresses data protection requirements. Until now, the EURODAC database could only be used for asylum purposes. The new Regulation now allows national police forces and Europol to compare fingerprints linked to criminal investigations with those contained in EURODAC. This will take place under strictly controlled circumstances and only for the purpose of the prevention, detection and investigation of serious crimes and terrorism.

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър Specific safeguards include a requirement to check all available criminal records databases first and limiting searches only to the most serious crimes, such as murder and terrorism. In addition, prior to making a EURODAC check, law enforcement authorities must undertake a comparison of fingerprints against the Visa Information System (where permitted). Law enforcement checks may not be made in a systematic way, but only as a last resort when all the conditions for access are fulfilled. No data received from EURODAC may be shared with third countries.

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър 6. Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System The Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS) is a national automated fingerprint identificationand criminal history system maintained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). IAFIS provides automated fingerprintsearch capabilities, latent searching capability, electronic image storage, and electronic exchange of fingerprints and responses. IAFIS houses the fingerprints and criminal histories of 70 million subjects in the criminal master file, 31 million civil prints and fingerprints from 73,000 known and suspected terrorists processed by the U.S. or by international law enforcement agencies.automated fingerprint identificationFederal Bureau of Investigationfingerprint

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър Employment background checks and legitimate firearms purchases cause citizens to be permanently recorded in the system. For instance, the State of Washington mandates that all applicants seeking employment in an inpatient setting that houses vulnerable minors (such as children who are mentally challenged, physically or emotionally ill) are fingerprinted and entered into IAFIS as part of their background check in order to determine if the applicant has any record of criminal behavior.

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър Fingerprints are voluntarily submitted to the FBI by local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies. These agencies acquire the fingerprints through criminal arrests or from non-criminal sources, such as employment background checks and the US- VISIT program. The FBI then catalogs the fingerprints along with any criminal history linked with the subject.statefederallaw enforcementagenciesbackground checksUS- VISIT Law enforcement agencies can then request a search in IAFIS to identify crime scene (latent) fingerprints obtained during criminal investigations. Civil searches are also performed, but the FBI charges a fee and the response time is slower. The FBI has announced plans to replace IAFIS with a Next Generation Identification system, developed by Lockheed Martin in partnership with Safran.Next Generation IdentificationLockheed MartinSafran

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър Technology The device used for scanning live fingerprints into AFIS is called Live scan. The process of obtaining the prints by way of LiveScan employs rolling prints or placing flat impressions onto a glass platen above a camera unit. The process of obtaining prints by placing a ten-print card (prints taken using ink) onto a flatbed or high-speed scanner is called CardScan (or occasionally DeadScan). In addition to these devices, there are other devices to capture prints from crime scenes, as well as devices (both wired and wireless) to capture one or two live finger impressions. The most common method of acquiring fingerprint images remains the inexpensive ink pad and paper form. Scanning forms ("fingerprint cards") with a forensic AFIS complies with standards established by the FBI and National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).Live scanten-print cardNational Institute of Standards and Technology

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър To match a print, a fingerprint technician scans in the print in question, and computer algorithms are utilized to mark allminutia points, cores, and deltas detected on the print. In some systems, the technician is allowed to perform a review of the points that the software has detected, and submits the feature set to a one-to-many (1:N) search. The better commercial systems provide fully automated processing and searching ("lights-out") of print features. The fingerprint image processor will generally assign a "quality measure" that indicates if the print is acceptable for searching.minutia Speed The average response time for an electronic criminal fingerprint submission is about 27 minutes, while electronic civil submissions are processed within an hour and 12 minutes. IAFIS processed more than 61 million ten-print submissions during fiscal year 2010.fiscal year

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър The second-generation Schengen Information System (SIS II)SIS II As the SIS has been operational since 1995, work is in progress on a new system with enhanced functionalities and based on new technology. This new system (SIS II) is currently undergoing extensive tests in cooperation with Member States. The Council adopted two legislative instruments on 6 December 2001: Regulation (EC) No 2424/2001and Decision 2001/886/JHA, making the Commission responsible for developing SIS II and providing for the related expenditure to be covered by the general budget of the EU. These instruments were modified in 2006, extending the period of their validity until 31 December / /886/JHA SIRENE - Schengen Information System SIRENE - Schengen Information System SIRENE - Schengen Information System In accordance with the Schengen Convention, the purpose of the Schengen Information System is to maintain public order and security, inclusive of state security on the territories of Member States (parties to the Convention) and application of the provisions of this Convention related to the movement of persons in these territories using information transmitted through this system. The SIS contains only those categories of data which are supplied by each of the contracting parties, as required for the purposes laid down in Articles 95 to 100. The contracting party issuing an alert shall determine whether the case is important enough to warrant entry of the alert in the Schengen Information System.

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър Only the following data for persons are indicated: surname and forename, any aliases possibly registered separately; any particular objective and permanent physical features; first letter of second forename; date and place of birth; sex; nationality; whether the persons concerned are armed; whether the persons concerned are violent; reason for the alert; action to be taken.

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър Categories of SIS alerts are as follows: Article 95 - data relating to persons wanted for arrest for extradition purposes; Article 96 - data relating to aliens who are reported for the purposes of being refused entry; Article 97 - Data relating to persons who have disappeared or to persons who, in the interests of their own protection or in order to prevent threats require temporary police protection at the request of the competent authority or the competent judicial authority of the reporting Party;

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър Article 98 - Data relating to witnesses, persons summoned to appear before the judicial authorities in connection with criminal proceedings in order to account for acts for which they are being prosecuted, or persons who are to be notified of a criminal judgment or of a summons to appear in order to serve a custodial sentence; Article 99 - Data relating to persons or vehicles for the purposes of discreet surveillance or specific checks Article Data relating to objects sought for the purposes of seizure or of evidence in criminal proceedings.

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър If a contracting party considers that an alert in accordance with Articles 95, 97 or 99 is incompatible with its national law, its international obligations or essential national interests, it may subsequently flag the alert in question - add in the data file of the national section of the Schengen Information System a note to the effect that the action referred to will not be taken in its territory in connection with the alert. Consultations must be held in this connection with the other contracting parties. If the alerting contracting party does not withdraw the alert, it will continue to apply in full for the other contracting parties. Access to data included in the Schengen Information System and the right to search such data directly is reserved exclusively for the authorities responsible for:

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър border checks; other police and customs checks carried out within the country, and the co-ordination of such checks; in addition, access to data included in accordance with Article 96 and the right to search such data directly may be exercised by the authorities responsible for issuing visas, the central authorities responsible for examining visa applications and the authorities responsible for issuing residence permits and the administration of aliens within the framework of the application of the provisions on the movement of persons under this Convention. Access to data shall be governed by the national law of each Contracting Party.

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър organizations competent for the registration of motor vehicles and issuing of registration plates; competent judicial bodies of Member States and EUROPOL, EUROJUST.

Варненски Свободен Университет Черноризец Храбър THANK YOU!