Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-03-Speech-3-280"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011003.8.3-280"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the questions raised by Messrs Papayannakis and Sjöstedt concern, on the one hand, the conditions surrounding the reinstatement of internal border controls in a Member State which applies the Schengen acquis and, on the other hand, the conditions for the entry of an alert in the ‘Schengen Information System’ in relation to the events at the G8 meeting in Genoa.
As regards the first point, this situation does not in fact correspond to what the two Members have referred to in their question as, and I quote, “an abolition of the validity of the Schengen Convention”. The reinstatement of border controls is a measure which is explicitly laid down in Article 2 item 2 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement. And this article, along with the method of applying this article adopted in 1995 by the governments of those Member States applying the Schengen acquis, is part of the Schengen acquis, incorporated into European Union law. The Italian authorities felt that public order or national security required that national border checks appropriate to the situation be carried out at internal borders for the duration of the G8 Summit in Genoa, more specifically from 14 to 21 July 2001.
This was admittedly an exceptional measure, but a measure that other Member States have used in the past during political or sporting events or during events which could have involved a threat to public order.
Turning now to the second point, I refer the two Members to the answer that we gave on the same subject at the June 2001 part-session, namely that the Council is not qualified to answer the question as to whether an alert was issued in the ‘Schengen Information System’ for certain individuals involved in these events. Entry of an alert in the SIS actually falls within the competence of the Member States. Let me point out that, according to Article 94 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement, and I quote: ‘The Schengen Information System shall contain only the 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. Furthermore, Article 104 stipulates that, and I quote: ‘Alerts shall be governed by the national law of the Contracting Party issuing the alert unless more stringent conditions are laid down in this Convention’.
Finally, may I remind Mr Sjöstedt that the Schengen acquis was published in Official Gazette L 239 on 22 September 2000."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples