Malta will not be able to freely decide to close its borders for more than five days if controversial European Commission proposals on the future governance of the Schengen free movement area gets the support of the European Parliament and the majority of member states.
The proposals, which have already been criticised by major EU countries like Germany and France, are aimed at taking away the powers of individual member states from declaring their borders closed in emergencies. Instead, the Commission is proposing to transfer this prerogative to a more collegial decision-making process, involving all EU states.
The long-awaited proposals are a direct response to incidents between France and Italy last spring when Paris decided to reintroduce border checks to keep out thousands of Tunisians who had arrived illegally in Italy following the fall of the Ben Ali regime.
France’s unilateral decision was deemed abusive by the Commission. However, the move was followed by Denmark, which introduced border checks with Germany.
According to the Commission’s new legislative proposal, individual member states would only be able to decide to close their border and reintroduce passport checks in case of emergencies for a maximum of up to five days. Should they wish to prolong that period they would have to make a formal request to the Commission and, if accepted, it will then need the approval of a qualified majority of the countries participating in the Schengen acquis to be validated.
The Commission also wants to introduce a more collegial governance to make sure Schengen rules are being fully observed by all member states, further reducing the need for any closures.
Admitting that the monitoring process in place is inefficient, the Commission is proposing to transform the inter-governmental peer review approach into an EU-based Schengen governance mechanism.
The mechanism stipulates announced and unannounced monitoring visits to a given member state by Commission-led teams with experts from other member states and Frontex, which will verify the application of the Schengen rules.
A report drawn up following each visit would identify any shortcomings and make clear proposals for remedial action, with a deadline for implementing them. As a follow up, the member state in question would have to establish an action plan setting out how it intends to address the recommendations.
Another innovation is a “Schengen health check” that will take place twice a year with a debate in the Council and in the EP on Schengen’s functioning, based on an overview presented by the Commission.
Despite the harsh criticism levelled at the Commission for its proposals even before they were made public – with accusations by member states that these are impinging on their national sovereignty – Home Affairs Commissioner Cecilia Malmström said the proposed rules were intended to strengthen the Schengen area in the interest of all member states.
“Our proposals will introduce a European decision-making system that will reinforce trust among member states and will make the Schengen area better equipped to cope with future challenges and unforeseen events,” she insisted.
In an immediate response, the European People’s Party spokesmen in the EP responsible for this dossier, Manfred Weber and Simon Busuttil, welcomed the Commission’s proposals describing them as well balanced and urged member states to take them on board. However, although MEPs in general seem to be on the Commission’s side over this dossier, observers said they doubted whether the new proposals will manage to gather the required support among member state governments.
Malta, a member of the Schengen area since 2007, has not yet taken a stand over the new proposals and is studying the details and their implications.