               8.11.2019

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 380/1

      Recommendations to national courts and tribunals in relation to the initiation of preliminary ruling proceedings
      (2019/C 380/01)
      These recommendations have been drawn up for the attention of the courts and tribunals of the Member States of the European Union and echo the provisions of Title III of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice (1). They serve as a reminder of the essential characteristics of the preliminary ruling procedure and the matters to be taken into account by the national courts and tribunals before a reference for a preliminary ruling is made to the Court of Justice, while providing practical guidance as to the form and content of requests for a preliminary ruling. Since such requests will be served, after having been translated, on all the interested persons referred to in Article 23 of the Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the decisions of the Court closing the proceedings will in principle be published in all the official languages of the European Union, close attention must be paid to the presentation of requests for a preliminary ruling and, in particular, to the protection of the personal data which they contain.

         Table of contents

                     Paragraphs

                  Introduction

                  1-2

                  I.

                  Provisions which apply to all requests for a preliminary ruling

                  3-32

                  The originator of the request for a preliminary ruling

                  3-7

                  The subject matter and scope of the request for a preliminary ruling

                  8-11

                  The appropriate stage at which to make a reference for a preliminary ruling

                  12-13

                  The form and content of the request for a preliminary ruling

                  14-20

                  Protection of personal data and anonymisation of the request for a preliminary ruling

                  21-22

                  Transmission to the Court of the request for a preliminary ruling and of the case file in the national proceedings

                  23-24

                  Interaction between the reference for a preliminary ruling and the national proceedings

                  25-27

                  Costs and legal aid

                  28-29

                  Conduct of the proceedings before the Court and the action taken by the referring court or tribunal upon the Court’s decision

                  30-32

                  II.

                  Provisions applicable to requests for a preliminary ruling requiring particularly expeditious handling

                  33-41

                  Conditions for the application of the expedited procedure and the urgent procedure

                  34-36

                  The request for application of the expedited procedure or the urgent procedure

                  37-39

                  Communication between the Court, the referring court or tribunal and the parties to the main proceedings

                  40-41

                  Annex — The essential elements of a request for a preliminary ruling

         INTRODUCTION

                  1.

                  The reference for a preliminary ruling, provided for in Article 19(3)(b) of the Treaty on European Union (‘TEU’) and Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’), is a fundamental mechanism of EU law. It is designed to ensure the uniform interpretation and application of EU law within the European Union, by offering the courts and tribunals of the Member States a means of bringing before the Court of Justice of the European Union (‘the Court’) for a preliminary ruling questions concerning the interpretation of EU law or the validity of acts adopted by the institutions, bodies, offices or agencies of the Union.

                  2.

                  The preliminary ruling procedure is based on close cooperation between the Court and the courts and tribunals of the Member States. In order to ensure that that procedure is fully effective, it is necessary to recall its essential characteristics and to provide further information to clarify the provisions of the rules of procedure relating, in particular, to the originator, subject matter and scope of a request for a preliminary ruling, as well as to the form and content of such a request. That information — which applies to all requests for a preliminary ruling (I) — is supplemented by provisions concerning requests for a preliminary ruling requiring particularly expeditious handling (II) and by an annex which summarises, by way of a reminder, all the elements that must be included in a request for a preliminary ruling.

            I.   PROVISIONS WHICH APPLY TO ALL REQUESTS FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING

         The originator of the request for a preliminary ruling

                  3.

                  The jurisdiction of the Court to give a preliminary ruling on the interpretation or validity of EU law is exercised exclusively on the initiative of the national courts and tribunals, whether or not the parties to the main proceedings have expressed the wish that a question be referred to the Court. In so far as it is called upon to assume responsibility for the subsequent judicial decision, it is for the national court or tribunal before which a dispute has been brought — and for that court or tribunal alone — to determine, in the light of the particular circumstances of each case, both the need for a request for a preliminary ruling in order to enable it to deliver its decision and the relevance of the questions which it submits to the Court.

                  4.

                  Status as a court or tribunal is interpreted by the Court as an autonomous concept of EU law. The Court takes account of a number of factors such as whether the body making the reference is established by law, whether it is permanent, whether its jurisdiction is compulsory, whether its procedure is inter partes, whether it applies rules of law and whether it is independent.

                  5.

                  The courts and tribunals of the Member States may refer a question to the Court on the interpretation or validity of EU law where they consider that a decision of the Court on the question is necessary to enable them to give judgment (see second paragraph of Article 267 TFEU). A reference for a preliminary ruling may, inter alia, prove particularly useful when a question of interpretation is raised before the national court or tribunal that is new and of general interest for the uniform application of EU law, or where the existing case-law does not appear to provide the necessary guidance in a new legal context or set of facts.

                  6.

                  Where a question is raised in the context of a case that is pending before a court or tribunal against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law, that court or tribunal is nonetheless required to bring a request for a preliminary ruling before the Court (see third paragraph of Article 267 TFEU), unless there is already well-established case-law on the point or unless the correct interpretation of the rule of law in question admits of no reasonable doubt.

                  7.

                  It follows, moreover, from settled case-law that although national courts and tribunals may reject pleas raised before them challenging the validity of acts of an institution, body, office or agency of the Union, the Court has exclusive jurisdiction to declare such acts invalid. When it has doubts about the validity of such an act, a court or tribunal of a Member State must therefore refer the matter to the Court, stating the reasons why it has such doubts.

         The subject matter and scope of the request for a preliminary ruling

                  8.

                  A request for a preliminary ruling must concern the interpretation or validity of EU law, not the interpretation of rules of national law or issues of fact raised in the main proceedings.

                  9.

                     The Court can give a preliminary ruling only if EU law applies to the case in the main proceedings. It is essential, in that respect, that the referring court or tribunal set out all the relevant matters of fact and of law that have prompted it to consider that any provisions of EU law may be applicable in the case.

                  10.

                  With regard to references for a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, it must be noted that, under Article 51(1) of the Charter, the provisions of the Charter are addressed to the Member States only when they are implementing EU law. While the circumstances of such implementation can vary, it must nevertheless be clearly and unequivocally apparent from the request for a preliminary ruling that a rule of EU law other than the Charter is applicable to the case in the main proceedings. Since the Court has no jurisdiction to give a preliminary ruling where a legal situation does not come within the scope of EU law, any provisions of the Charter that may be relied upon by the referring court or tribunal cannot, of themselves, form the basis for such jurisdiction.

                  11.

                  Lastly, although, in order to deliver its decision, the Court necessarily takes into account the legal and factual context of the dispute in the main proceedings, as defined by the referring court or tribunal in its request for a preliminary ruling, it does not itself apply EU law to that dispute. When ruling on the interpretation or validity of EU law, the Court makes every effort to give a reply which will be of assistance in resolving the dispute in the main proceedings, but it is for the referring court or tribunal to draw case-specific conclusions, if necessary by disapplying the rule of national law that has been held to be incompatible with EU law.

         The appropriate stage at which to make a reference for a preliminary ruling

                  12.

                  A national court or tribunal may submit a request for a preliminary ruling to the Court as soon as it finds that a ruling on the interpretation or validity of EU law is necessary to enable it to give judgment. It is that court or tribunal which is in fact in the best position to decide at what stage of the national proceedings such a request should be made.

                  13.

                  Since, however, that request will serve as the basis of the proceedings before the Court and the Court must therefore have available to it all the information that will enable it both to assess whether it has jurisdiction to give a reply to the questions raised and, if so, to give a useful reply to those questions, it is necessary that a decision to make a reference for a preliminary ruling be taken when the national proceedings have reached a stage at which the referring court or tribunal is able to define, in sufficient detail, the legal and factual context of the case in the main proceedings, and the legal issues which it raises. In the interests of the proper administration of justice, it may also be appropriate for the reference to be made only after both sides have been heard.

         The form and content of the request for a preliminary ruling

                  14.

                  The request for a preliminary ruling may be in any form allowed by national law, but it should be borne in mind that that request serves as the basis of the proceedings before the Court and is served on all the interested persons referred to in Article 23 of the Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union (‘the Statute’) and, in particular, on all the Member States, with a view to obtaining any observations they may wish to make. Owing to the consequential need to translate it into all the official languages of the European Union, the request for a preliminary ruling should therefore be drafted simply, clearly and precisely by the referring court or tribunal, avoiding superfluous detail. As experience has shown, about 10 pages are often sufficient to set out adequately the legal and factual context of a request for a preliminary ruling and the grounds for making the reference to the Court.

                  15.

                  The content of any request for a preliminary ruling is prescribed by Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court and is summarised, by way of a reminder, in the annex hereto. In addition to the text of the questions referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling, the request for a preliminary ruling must contain:

                              —

                              a summary of the subject matter of the dispute in the main proceedings and the relevant findings of fact as determined by the referring court or tribunal, or, at the very least, an account of the facts on which the questions referred are based,

                              —

                              the tenor of any national provisions applicable in the case and, where appropriate, the relevant national case-law, and

                              —

                              a statement of the reasons which prompted the referring court or tribunal to inquire about the interpretation or validity of certain provisions of EU law, and the relationship between those provisions and the national legislation applicable to the main proceedings.

                        In the absence of one or more of the above, the Court may find it necessary, notably on the basis of Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure, to decline jurisdiction to give a preliminary ruling on the questions referred or dismiss the request for a preliminary ruling as inadmissible.

                  16.

                  In its request for a preliminary ruling, the referring court or tribunal must provide the precise references for the national provisions applicable to the facts of the dispute in the main proceedings and for the provisions of EU law whose interpretation is sought or whose validity is challenged. Those references must, as far as possible, include both the exact title and date of adoption of the acts containing the provisions concerned and the publication references for those acts. When referring to case-law, the referring court or tribunal is also requested to mention the European Case Law Identifier (ECLI) of the decision concerned.

                  17.

                  If it considers it necessary for the purpose of understanding the case, the referring court or tribunal may briefly set out the main arguments of the parties to the main proceedings. It should be borne in mind in that context that only the request for a preliminary ruling will be translated, not any annexes to that request.

                  18.

                  The referring court or tribunal may also briefly state its view on the answer to be given to the questions referred for a preliminary ruling. That information may be useful to the Court, particularly where it is called upon to give a preliminary ruling in an expedited or urgent procedure.

                  19.

                  Lastly, the questions referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling must appear in a separate and clearly identified section of the order for reference, preferably at the beginning or the end. It must be possible to understand them on their own terms, without it being necessary to refer to the statement of the grounds for the request.

                  20.

                  In order to make the request for a preliminary ruling easier to read, it is essential that the Court receive it in typewritten form and that the pages and paragraphs of the order for reference be numbered. Handwritten requests for a preliminary ruling will not be processed by the Court.

         Protection of personal data and anonymisation of the request for a preliminary ruling

                  21.

                  In order to ensure optimal protection of personal data in the Court’s handling of the case, service of the request for a preliminary ruling on the interested persons referred to in Article 23 of the Statute and the subsequent dissemination, in all official languages of the European Union, of the decision closing the proceedings, the referring court or tribunal — which alone has full knowledge of the file submitted to the Court — is invited to anonymise the case by replacing, for example using initials or a combination of letters, the names of individuals referred to in the request and by redacting information that might enable them to be identified. Given the increasing use of new information technologies and, in particular, the use of search engines, any anonymisation effected after the request for a preliminary ruling has been served on the interested persons referred to in Article 23 of the Statute and publication of the notice relating to the case in the Official Journal of the European Union is likely to be less effective.

                  22.

                  If the referring court or tribunal has a nominative version of the request for a preliminary ruling, containing the full names and contact details of the parties to the main proceedings, and an anonymised version of that request, it is requested to send both versions to the Court to facilitate the Court’s handling of the case.

         Transmission to the Court of the request for a preliminary ruling and of the case file in the national proceedings

                  23.

                  The request for a preliminary ruling must be dated and signed, then sent to the Court Registry electronically or by post (Registry of the Court of Justice, Rue du Fort Niedergrünewald, L-2925 Luxembourg). For reasons connected, in particular, with the need to ensure expeditious handling of the case and optimal communication with the referring court or tribunal, the Court recommends that national courts and tribunals use the e-Curia application. The rules on access to that application, which enables procedural documents to be lodged and served electronically, and the conditions of use of e-Curia may be viewed on the institution’s website (https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/P_78957/en/). In order to facilitate the Court’s processing of requests for a preliminary ruling and, in particular, their translation into all the official languages of the European Union, national courts and tribunals are requested, in addition to sending the original version of the request for a preliminary ruling via e-Curia, to send an editable version (word processing software such as ‘Word’, ‘OpenOffice’ or ‘LibreOffice’) of that request to the following address: DDP-GreffeCour@curia.europa.eu.

                  24.

                  The request for a preliminary ruling must reach the Registry together with all the relevant documents and documents useful for the Court’s handling of the case and, in particular, the precise contact details for the parties to the main proceedings and their representatives, if any, as well as the file of the case in the main proceedings or a copy of it. The file (or copy file) — which may be sent electronically or by post — will be retained at the Registry throughout the proceedings before the Court where, unless otherwise indicated by the referring court or tribunal, it may be consulted by the interested persons referred to in Article 23 of the Statute.

         Interaction between the reference for a preliminary ruling and the national proceedings

                  25.

                  Although the referring court or tribunal may still order protective measures, particularly in connection with a reference on determination of validity, the lodging of a request for a preliminary ruling nevertheless calls for the national proceedings to be stayed until the Court has given its ruling.

                  26.

                  While the Court, in principle, remains seised of a request for a preliminary ruling for so long as that request is not withdrawn by the referring court or tribunal, it must nevertheless be borne in mind that the Court’s role in the preliminary ruling procedure is to contribute to the effective administration of justice in the Member States, and not to give opinions on general or hypothetical questions. Since the preliminary ruling procedure is predicated on there being proceedings actually pending before the referring court or tribunal, it is incumbent on that court or tribunal to inform the Court of any procedural step that may affect the referral and, in particular, of any discontinuance or withdrawal or of any amicable settlement of the dispute in the main proceedings, and of any other event leading to the termination of the proceedings. The referring court or tribunal must also inform the Court of any decision delivered in the context of an appeal against the order for reference and of the consequences of that decision for the request for a preliminary ruling. In the interests of the proper conduct of the preliminary ruling proceedings before the Court and, in particular, to ensure that the Court does not devote time and resources to a case that is likely to be withdrawn or become devoid of purpose, it is important that such information is communicated to the Court with the minimum of delay.

                  27.

                  National courts and tribunals should also note that the withdrawal of a request for a preliminary ruling may have an impact on the management of similar cases by the referring court or tribunal. Where the outcome of a number of cases pending before the referring court or tribunal depends on the reply to be given by the Court to the questions submitted by that court or tribunal, it is appropriate for that court or tribunal to join those cases before submitting to the Court its request for a preliminary ruling in order to enable the Court to reply to the questions referred notwithstanding any withdrawal of one or more cases.

         Costs and legal aid

                  28.

                  Preliminary ruling proceedings before the Court are free of charge and the Court does not rule on the costs of the parties to the proceedings pending before the referring court or tribunal. It is for the referring court or tribunal to rule on those costs.

                  29.

                  If a party to the main proceedings has insufficient means, the Court may grant that party legal aid to cover the costs, particularly those in respect of its representation, which it incurs before the Court. That aid can, however, be granted only if the party in question is not already in receipt of aid under national rules or to the extent to which that aid does not cover, or covers only partly, costs incurred before the Court. That party is requested in any event to send to the Court all information and supporting documents that will enable his or her true financial situation to be assessed.

         Conduct of the proceedings before the Court and the action taken by the referring court or tribunal upon the Court’s decision

                  30.

                  The Court Registry will remain in contact with the referring court or tribunal throughout the proceedings, and will send it copies of all procedural documents and any requests for information or clarification deemed necessary in order for a useful reply to be given to the questions referred by that court or tribunal.

                  31.

                  At the end of the proceedings which, as a rule, comprise a written part and an oral part, the Court gives its ruling in the form of a judgment on the questions put by the referring court or tribunal. In some cases, however, the Court may find it necessary to rule on those questions without an oral part of the procedure, or even without seeking the written observations of the interested persons referred to in Article 23 of the Statute. That is the case, in particular, when the question referred for a preliminary ruling is identical to a question on which the Court has already ruled, or where the answer to such a question may be clearly deduced from existing case-law or admits of no reasonable doubt. In such cases, the Court will, on the basis of Article 99 of its Rules of Procedure, rule expeditiously on the question put, by a reasoned order which has the same scope and the same binding force as a judgment.

                  32.

                  After the judgment has been delivered or the order closing the proceedings has been signed, the Registry will send the Court’s decision to the referring court or tribunal, which is requested to inform the Court of the action taken upon that decision in the case in the main proceedings. The final decision of the referring court or tribunal must be sent, with an express reference to the case number of the case before the Court, to the following address: Follow-up-DDP@curia.europa.eu.

            II.   PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO REQUESTS FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING REQUIRING PARTICULARLY EXPEDITIOUS HANDLING

                  33.

                  As provided in Article 23a of the Statute and Articles 105 to 114 of the Rules of Procedure, a reference for a preliminary ruling may, in certain circumstances, be determined pursuant to an expedited procedure or an urgent procedure. The Court will decide whether these procedures are to be applied, either on submission by the referring court or tribunal of a separate, duly reasoned, request setting out the matters of fact or of law which justify the application of such procedure(s), or, exceptionally, of its own motion, where that appears to be required by the nature or the particular circumstances of the case.

         Conditions for the application of the expedited procedure and the urgent procedure

                  34.

                  Article 105 of the Rules of Procedure provides that a reference for a preliminary ruling may thus be determined pursuant to an expedited procedure, derogating from the provisions of those rules, where the nature of the case requires that it be dealt with within a short time. Since that procedure imposes significant constraints on all those involved in it, and, in particular, on all the Member States called upon to lodge observations, whether written or oral, within much shorter time limits than would ordinarily apply, its application must be sought only when particular circumstances create an emergency that warrants the Court ruling quickly on the questions referred. That may be the case, inter alia, if there is a serious and immediate danger to public health or to the environment which a prompt decision by the Court might help to avert, or if particular circumstances require uncertainties concerning fundamental issues of national constitutional law and of EU law to be resolved within a very short time. According to settled case-law, the large number of persons or legal situations potentially affected by the decision that the referring court or tribunal has to deliver after bringing the matter before the Court for a preliminary ruling, the fact that there may be important economic issues at stake or that the referring court or tribunal is obliged to rule expeditiously do not, however, in themselves constitute exceptional circumstances that would justify the use of the expedited procedure.

                  35.

                  The same applies a fortiori to the urgent preliminary ruling procedure, provided for in Article 107 of the Rules of Procedure. That procedure, which applies only in the areas covered by Title V of Part Three of the TFEU, relating to the area of freedom, security and justice, imposes even greater constraints on those concerned, since it limits the number of parties authorised to lodge written observations and, in cases of extreme urgency, allows the written part of the procedure before the Court to be omitted altogether. The application of the urgent procedure must therefore be requested only where it is absolutely necessary for the Court to give its ruling very quickly on the questions submitted by the referring court or tribunal.

                  36.

                  Although it is not possible to provide an exhaustive list of such circumstances, particularly because of the varied and evolving nature of the rules of EU law governing the area of freedom, security and justice, a national court or tribunal may, for example, consider submitting a request for the urgent preliminary ruling procedure to be applied in the case, referred to in the fourth paragraph of Article 267 TFEU, of a person in custody or deprived of his or her liberty, where the answer to the question raised is decisive as to the assessment of that person’s legal situation, or in proceedings concerning parental authority or custody of young children, in so far, in particular, as the outcome of the dispute in the main proceedings depends on the answer to the question referred for a preliminary ruling and the use of the ordinary procedure could cause serious, and perhaps irreparable, harm to the relationship between a child and (one of) that child’s parents or to the child’s development and integration into his or her family and social environment. By contrast, mere economic interests, however substantial and legitimate they may be, the legal uncertainty affecting the parties to the main proceedings or other parties to similar disputes, the large number of persons or legal situations potentially affected by the decision that a referring court has to deliver after bringing a matter before the Court for a preliminary ruling, or the large number of cases that may be affected by the decision of the Court do not constitute, as such, circumstances that would justify the application of the urgent preliminary ruling procedure.

         The request for application of the expedited procedure or the urgent procedure

                  37.

                  To enable the Court to decide quickly whether the expedited procedure or the urgent preliminary ruling procedure should be applied, the request must set out precisely the matters of fact and law which establish the urgency and, in particular, the risks involved in following the ordinary procedure. In so far as it is possible to do so, the referring court or tribunal must also briefly state its view on the answer to be given to the questions referred. Such a statement makes it easier for the parties to the main proceedings and the other interested persons participating in the procedure to define their positions, and therefore contributes to the rapidity of the procedure.

                  38.

                  The request for the application of the expedited procedure or the urgent procedure must in any event be submitted in an unambiguous form that enables the Registry to establish immediately that the file has to be dealt with in a particular way. Accordingly, the referring court or tribunal is requested to specify which of the two procedures is required in the particular case, and to mention in its request the relevant article of the Rules of Procedure (Article 105 for the expedited procedure or Article 107 for the urgent procedure). That mention must be included in a clearly identifiable place in its order for reference or in a separate letter from the referring court or tribunal.

                  39.

                  As regards the order for reference itself, it is particularly important that it should be concise where the matter is urgent, as this will help to ensure the rapidity of the procedure.

         Communication between the Court, the referring court or tribunal and the parties to the main proceedings

                  40.

                  A court or tribunal submitting a request for the expedited procedure or the urgent procedure to be applied is requested to send that request and the order for reference itself — together with the text of the latter in an editable format (word processing software such as ‘Word’, ‘Open Office’ or ‘LibreOffice’) — by means of the e-Curia application or by email (DDP-GreffeCour@curia.europa.eu).

                  41.

                  In order to facilitate subsequent communication by the Court with the referring court or tribunal and with the parties to the main proceedings, the referring court or tribunal is also requested to state its email address and any fax number which may be used by the Court, together with the email addresses and any fax numbers of the representatives of the parties to the main proceedings.

         (1)  OJ L 265, 29.9.2012, p. 1.

            ANNEX

         The essential elements of a request for a preliminary ruling
         This annex summarises, by way of a reminder, the main elements that must be included in a request for a preliminary ruling. These are followed by an indication of the paragraphs in the present recommendations in which those elements are discussed in more detail.
         Whether transmitted electronically or by post, all requests for a preliminary ruling must mention:

                     1.

                     the identity of the court or tribunal making the reference and, where appropriate, the chamber or formation of the court or tribunal having jurisdiction (see, in that respect, paragraphs 3 to 7);

                     2.

                     the precise identity of the parties to the main proceedings and of anyone representing them before the referring court or tribunal (with regard to the parties to the main proceedings, see, however, paragraphs 21 and 22 of the present recommendations, in relation to the protection of personal data);

                     3.

                     the subject matter of the dispute in the main proceedings and the relevant facts (see paragraph 15);

                     4.

                     the relevant provisions of national law and of EU law (see paragraphs 15 and 16);

                     5.

                     the reasons that prompted the referring court or tribunal to inquire about the interpretation or validity of EU law (see paragraphs 8 to 11 and 15 to 18);

                     6.

                     the questions referred for a preliminary ruling (see paragraph 19) and, if applicable,

                     7.

                     the possible need for specific treatment of the request, related, for example, to the need to preserve the anonymity of individuals concerned by the dispute or to the particularly expeditious way in which the request should be dealt with by the Court (see paragraph 33 et seq.).

               As regards form, requests for a preliminary ruling must be typewritten, dated and signed and must be received at the Court Registry, preferably electronically, together with all the documents that are relevant and useful for the handling of the case (see, in that respect, paragraphs 20 to 24 of the present recommendations and, with regard to requests requiring particularly expeditious treatment, paragraphs 40 and 41).

            Transmission channels recommended by the Court

         In order to ensure the best possible communication with courts and tribunals that have referred questions to the Court for a preliminary ruling, the Court recommends the use of the following transmission channels:

                     (1)

                     Lodging of the request for a preliminary ruling (or of other relevant documents linked to that request):

                                 —

                                 Signed original of the request for a preliminary ruling (or of the other documents linked to that request): to be sent via the e-Curia application. The rules on access to that application, which is free of charge and secure, and the conditions of use of e-Curia, are available here: https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/P_78957/en/

                                 —

                                 Editable version of the request for a preliminary ruling (or of the other documents linked to it): DDP-GreffeCour@curia.europa.eu

                     (2)

                     Transmission of the final decision of the referring court or tribunal (anonymised, if necessary, including for the purposes of being placed online), following the Court’s decision on the request for a preliminary ruling: Follow-up-DDP@curia.europa.eu


title: Council Recommendation (EU) 2020/1144 of 30 July 2020 amending Recommendation (EU) 2020/912 on the temporary restriction on non-essential travel into the EU and the possible lifting of such restriction

text:
                  31.7.2020

                  EN

                  Official Journal of the European Union

                  L 248/26

         COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION (EU) 2020/1144
         of 30 July 2020
         amending Recommendation (EU) 2020/912 on the temporary restriction on non-essential travel into the EU and the possible lifting of such restriction
         THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
         Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article Article 77 (2) (b) and (e) and Article 292, first and second sentence thereof,
         Whereas:

                     (1)

                     On 30 June 2020, the Council adopted a Recommendation on the temporary restriction on non-essential travel into the EU and the possible lifting of such restriction (1) (‘Council Recommendation’). On 16 July 2020, the Council adopted Recommendation (EU) 2020/1052 of 16 July 2020 amending Council Recommendation (EU) 2020/912 on the temporary restriction on non-essential travel into the EU and the possible lifting of such restriction (2).

                     (2)

                     The Council Recommendation provides that Member States should gradually lift the temporary restriction on non-essential travel to the EU as from 1 July 2020 in a coordinated manner with regard to the residents of the third countries listed in Annex I to the Council Recommendation. Every two weeks, the list of third countries referred to in Annex I should be reviewed, and as the case may be updated, by the Council, after close consultation with the Commission and the relevant EU agencies and services following an overall assessment based on the methodology, criteria and information referred to in the Council Recommendation.

                     (3)

                     Discussions have since then taken place within the Council, in close consultation with the Commission and the relevant EU agencies and services, on the review of the list of third countries set out in Annex I to the Council Recommendation and in application of the criteria and methodology laid down in the Council Recommendation. As a result of these discussions, the list of third countries set out in Annex I should be amended. In particular, Algeria should be deleted from the list.

                     (4)

                     Border control is in the interest not only of the Member State at whose external borders it is carried out but of all Member States which have abolished internal border control. Member States should therefore ensure that measures taken at the external borders are coordinated in order to ensure a well functioning Schengen area. To that end, as of 31 July 2020, Member States should continue lifting the temporary restriction on non-essential travel into the EU in a coordinated manner with regard to the residents of the third countries listed in Annex I of the Council Recommendation as amended by this Recommendation.

                     (5)

                     In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 22 on the Position of Denmark annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the TFEU, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Recommendation and is not bound by it or subject to its application. Given that this Recommendation builds upon the Schengen acquis, Denmark shall, in accordance with Article 4 of the said Protocol, decide within a period of six months after the Council has decided on this Recommendation whether it will implement it.

                     (6)

                     This Recommendation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis in which Ireland does not take part, in accordance with Council Decision 2002/192/EC (3); Ireland is therefore not taking part in its adoption and is not bound by it or subject to its application.

                     (7)

                     As regards Iceland and Norway, this Recommendation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Agreement concluded by the Council of the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the latter's association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A, of Council Decision 1999/437/EC (4).

                     (8)

                     As regards Switzerland, this Recommendation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation's association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A, of Decision 1999/437/EC (5) read in conjunction with Article 3 of Council Decision 2008/146/EC (6).

                     (9)

                     As regards Liechtenstein, this Recommendation constitutes a development of provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Protocol between the European Union, the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation's association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis which fall within the area referred to in Article 1 point A, of Decision 1999/437/EC (7) read in conjunction with Article 3 of Decision 2011/350/EU (8),

               HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:
         Council Recommendation (EU) 2020/912, as amended by Recommendation (EU) 2020/1052, on the temporary restriction on non-essential travel into the EU and the possible lifting of such restriction is amended as follows:

                     (1)

                     the first paragraph of point 1 of the Council Recommendation is replaced by the following:

                                 ‘1.

                                 As from 31 July 2020, Member States should gradually lift the temporary restriction on non-essential travel to the EU in a coordinated manner with regard to the residents of the third countries listed in Annex I.’;

                     (2)

                     Annex I to the Recommendation is replaced by the following:

                           ‘ANNEX I
                           Third countries whose residents should not be affected by temporary external borders restriction on non-essential travel into the EU

                                       1.

                                       AUSTRALIA

                                       2.

                                       CANADA

                                       3.

                                       GEORGIA

                                       4.

                                       JAPAN

                                       5.

                                       MOROCCO

                                       6.

                                       NEW ZEALAND

                                       7.

                                       RWANDA

                                       8.

                                       SOUTH KOREA

                                       9.

                                       THAILAND

                                       10.

                                       TUNISIA

                                       11.

                                       URUGUAY

                                       12.

                                       CHINA  (*)

                     ’

            Done at Brussels, 30 July 2020.

                  For the Council

                  The President

               M. ROTH

            (1)  OJ L 208 I, 1.7.2020, p 1

            (2)  OJ L 230, 17.7.2020, p.26.

            (3)  Council Decision 2002/192/EC of 28 February 2002 concerning Ireland’s request to take part in some of the provisions of the Schengen acquis (OJ L 64, 7.3.2002, p. 20).

            (4)  OJ L 176, 10.7.1999, p. 36.

            (5)  OJ L 53, 27.2.2008, p. 52.

            (6)  Council Decision 2008/146/EC of 28 January 2008 on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Community, of the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis (OJ L 53, 27.2.2008, p. 1).

            (7)  OJ L 160, 18.6.2011, p. 21.

            (8)  Council Decision 2011/350/EU of 7 March 2011 on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Protocol between the European Union, the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis, relating to the abolition of checks at internal borders and movement of persons (OJ L 160, 18.6.2011, p. 19).

            (*)  subject to confirmation of reciprocity


title: Recommendation of the European Central Bank of 27 July 2020 on dividend distributions during the COVID-19 pandemic and repealing Recommendation ECB/2020/19 (ECB/2020/35) 2020/C 251/01

text:
               31.7.2020

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 251/1

      RECOMMENDATION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK
      of 27 July 2020
      on dividend distributions during the COVID-19 pandemic and repealing Recommendation ECB/2020/19
      (ECB/2020/35)
      (2020/C 251/01)
      THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK,
      Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
      Having regard to Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 of 15 October 2013 conferring specific tasks on the European Central Bank concerning policies relating to the prudential supervision of credit institutions (1), and in particular Article 4(3) thereof,
      Whereas:

                  (1)

                  On 27 March 2020, the European Central Bank (ECB) adopted Recommendation ECB/2020/19 of the European Central Bank (2) which recommended that at least until 1 October 2020 no dividends are paid out and no irrevocable commitment to pay out dividends is undertaken by credit institutions for the financial years 2019 and 2020 and that credit institutions refrain from share buy-backs aimed at remunerating shareholders. This recommendation was based on the consideration that it is crucial that credit institutions continue to fulfil their role of funding households, small and medium-sized businesses and corporations amid the COVID-19-related economic shock. Therefore it was considered essential that credit institutions conserve capital to retain their capacity to support the economy in an environment of heightened uncertainty caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. To this end, conserving capital resources to support the real economy and absorb losses was considered as needing to take priority over discretionary dividend distributions and share buy-backs.

                  (2)

                  In connection with Recommendation ECB/2020/19, the ECB has undertaken work to further evaluate the economic situation and consider whether further suspension of dividends is advisable after 1 October 2020. In this context, the ECB considers that the level of economic uncertainty due to the COVID-19 pandemic remains elevated and, consequently, that credit institutions face difficulties in forecasting accurately their medium-term capital needs. The ECB also considers that there is an ongoing need in this environment of exceptional systemic uncertainty and stressed economic conditions for prudent capital planning, which includes preserving credit institutions’ capital position by postponing or cancelling distributions. Therefore, the ECB considers it necessary to extend the dividend recommendation until 1 January 2021 and repeal Recommendation ECB/2020/19. This approach is also consistent with Recommendation ESRB/2020/7 of the European Systemic Risk Board (3).

                  (3)

                  Having full regard to the unity and integrity of the internal market, the ECB sees the need to engage in discussions with the relevant authorities of concerned Member States to determine whether it is appropriate that dividends are paid out to a parent institution, parent financial holding company or parent mixed financial holding company located in a Member State which is not a participating Member State. These discussions should be guided, inter alia, by the principles of equivalence and reciprocity with a view to supporting the smooth functioning of the internal market of the Union as a whole, to preserving a sound capital position of a credit institution from a prudential perspective and to contributing to the stability of the financial system within the Union and each Member State.

                  (4)

                  In order to maximise support to the real economy, it is also appropriate that discretionary dividend distributions should also not be made by less significant credit institutions.

                  (5)

                  While this measure has a temporary nature that is warranted only by these exceptional circumstances, the ECB intends to decide in the fourth quarter of 2020 on the approach to be followed after 1 January 2021, taking into account the economic environment, the stability of the financial system and the level of certainty around capital planning,

            HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:

         I.

                  1.

                  The ECB recommends that until 1 January 2021 no dividends (4) are paid out and no irrevocable commitment to pay out dividends is undertaken by credit institutions for the financial years 2019 and 2020 and that credit institutions refrain from share buy-backs aimed at remunerating shareholders (5).

                  2.

                  Credit institutions that are unable to comply with this Recommendation because they consider themselves legally required to pay out dividends should immediately explain the underlying reasons to their joint supervisory team.

                  3.

                  This Recommendation applies on a consolidated level of a significant supervised group as defined in point (22) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 468/2014 of the European Central Bank (ECB/2014/17) (6) and on an individual level of a significant supervised entity as defined in point (16) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 468/2014 (ECB/2014/17), if such significant supervised entity is not part of a significant supervised group.

                  4.

                  Credit institutions that intend to pay out dividends or undertake an irrevocable commitment to pay out dividends to their parent institution, parent financial holding company or parent mixed financial holding company which is established in a Member State that is not a participating Member State should contact their joint supervisory team to determine whether such dividend pay-outs or irrevocable commitments to make a dividend pay-out are appropriate.

         II.

      This Recommendation is addressed to significant supervised entities and significant supervised groups as defined in points (16) and (22) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 468/2014 (ECB/2014/17).

         III.

      This Recommendation is also addressed to the national competent authorities with regard to less significant supervised entities and less significant supervised groups as defined in points (7) and (23) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 468/2014 (ECB/2014/17). The national competent authorities are expected to apply this Recommendation to such entities and groups, as deemed appropriate.

         IV.

      Given the temporary nature of this measure, the ECB will further evaluate the economic situation and consider whether further suspension of dividends is advisable after 1 January 2021.

         V.

      Recommendation ECB/2020/19 is hereby repealed.

         Done at Frankfurt am Main, 27 July 2020.

               The President of the ECB

            Christine LAGARDE

         (1)  OJ L 287, 29.10.2013, p. 63.

         (2)  Recommendation ECB/2020/19 of the European Central Bank of 27 March 2020 on dividend distributions during the COVID-19 pandemic and repealing Recommendation ECB/2020/1 (OJ C 102I, 30.3.2020, p. 1).

         (3)  Recommendation ESRB/2020/7 of the European Systemic Risk Board of 27 May 2020 on restriction of distributions during the COVID-19 pandemic (OJ C 212, 26.6.2020, p. 1).

         (4)  Credit institutions may have various legal forms, e.g. listed companies and non-joint stock companies such as mutuals, cooperatives or savings institutions. The term ‘dividend’ as used in this Recommendation refers to any type of cash pay-out in connection with Common Equity Tier 1 capital which has the effect of reducing the quantity or quality of own funds.

         (5)  If a financial institution wanted to replace ordinary shares, this would be in line with this Recommendation.

         (6)  Regulation (EU) No 468/2014 of the European Central Bank of 16 April 2014 establishing the framework for cooperation within the Single Supervisory Mechanism between the European Central Bank and national competent authorities and with national designated authorities (SSM Framework Regulation) (ECB/2014/17) (OJ L 141, 14.5.2014, p. 1).


title: Commission Recommendation (EU) 2020/1364 of 23 September 2020 on legal pathways to protection in the EU: promoting resettlement, humanitarian admission and other complementary pathways

text:
                  1.10.2020

                  EN

                  Official Journal of the European Union

                  L 317/13

         COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (EU) 2020/1364
         of 23 September 2020
         on legal pathways to protection in the EU: promoting resettlement, humanitarian admission and other complementary pathways
         THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
         Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 292 thereof,
         Whereas:

                     (1)

                     The number of refugees and others in need of international protection is rising globally. As a result, there is a need to strengthen the Union’s capacity to fulfil its moral duty to provide effective assistance. All Member States should participate in the Union’s collective efforts to show solidarity to those in need of international protection by offering legal pathways to the Union and enhancing the protection space outside the Union.

                     (2)

                     This Recommendation aims to support Member States’ sustained efforts in providing and enhancing legal and safe channels for those in need of international protection. In particular, recommended action aims to show solidarity towards non-EU countries where a large number of people in need of international protection is displaced, contribute to international resettlement and humanitarian admission initiatives and to better overall management of migration.

                     (3)

                     The Union is working on developing and enhancing the protection space in countries of transit, destination or first asylum in order to assist both people in need of international protection and migrants who are particularly vulnerable, as well as help host communities. The Regional Development and Protection Programmes (1) in the Horn of Africa and North Africa and the Middle East support, among others, upholding and improving the protection space through capacity development of national systems and supporting authorities and civil society. They provide protection by offering direct assistance to those in need of international protection. All actions are delivered by implementing partners. The programmes support durable solutions for those in need of international protection, in particular resettlement, by ensuring screening and registration, facilitating the effective determination of refugee status as well as by directly supporting the resettlement operations of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Member States are called upon to play an active role as consortium members or make financial contributions to support and implement the Regional Development and Protection Programmes in order to strengthen the external dimension of EU migration policy.

                     (4)

                     Resettlement is an important tool for offering protection to those in need of international protection and demonstrating global solidarity with non-EU countries to help them cope with large numbers of people fleeing war or persecution. It is also a key element of the Union’s comprehensive asylum and migration policy: by offering safe and legal pathways for those in need of protection, resettlement helps save lives, reduce irregular migration and counter the business model of smuggling networks. Resettlement is also an important and integral part of the comprehensive approach to migration when engaging partner countries on the whole spectrum of migration-related areas.

                     (5)

                     The UNHCR has confirmed that the global resettlement needs remain high, with 1,44 million cases in 2020. This number is expected to increase in the coming years.

                     (6)

                     The first Global Refugee Forum, which was held in December 2019, took stock of progress on implementation of the UNHCR’s Global Compact on Refugees (2). It mobilised broad international support for seeking durable solutions for the world’s refugees, including solutions for resettlement and expansion of the number and range of legal pathways available for those in need of international protection. The UNHCR’s three-year strategy (2019-2021) on resettlement and complementary pathways provides a roadmap for expanding them by offering more places, mobilising more actors and creating more welcoming societies. To take on a global leadership role on resettlement, Member States are called upon to support implementation of the strategy and counter the current trend of a decreasing number of resettling countries globally and a sharp drop in resettlement pledges (3).

                     (7)

                     Since 2015, two successful EU-sponsored resettlement programmes, involving the participation of a significant number of Member States, have helped more than 70 000 of the most vulnerable people in need of international protection find shelter in the Union. Between 2015 and 2018, when the global resettlement landscape changed considerably, annual resettlements to Member States tripled, with the EU’s share of global resettlement increasing from below 9 % before 2016 to 41 % in 2018. This increase shows the benefit and potential of EU-level cooperation and coordination in the area of resettlement. It also shows the importance of funding from the EU budget, with EUR 1 billion dedicated to directly supporting the resettlement efforts of Member States for 2015-2020.

                     (8)

                     Under the first EU resettlement scheme (4), Member States, together with the Dublin Associated States, agreed to resettle 22 504 people in need of international protection from the Middle East, the Horn of Africa and North Africa over a period of 2 years (2015-2017) (5). In total, 19 452 people were resettled under this first, successful EU scheme (86 % of the total pledge).

                     (9)

                     Under the second EU resettlement scheme (6), Member States agreed to resettle 50 039 people in need of international protection from Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan as well as from countries along the Central Mediterranean route, supporting in particular the emergency transit mechanisms established by UNHCR in Niger (2017) and Rwanda (2019). The scheme was a success, with 43 827 people resettled (88 % of the total pledge).

                     (10)

                     To maximise the number of resettlements and make good use of available funding, Member States that have not yet fully implemented their pledges under the second EU resettlement scheme are afforded the opportunity to do so in 2020 and 2021 to fulfil their previous commitments.

                     (11)

                     Under the EU-Turkey Statement (7), more than 27 000 people had been resettled by mid-September 2020 (8). The Member States have resettled further people in need of international protection from Turkey via their own national schemes.

                     (12)

                     The Union needs to move from ad hoc resettlement schemes to schemes that operate on the basis of a stable framework that ensures that Union resettlement schemes are sustainable and predictable. To this end, the Commission proposed a Regulation in 2016 establishing a Union Resettlement Framework (9) to provide safe and legal pathways to international protection for those in need as part of the overhaul of the Union asylum system. A partial provisional political agreement was reached in June 2018, which included adding humanitarian admission – alongside resettlement – to the scope of the proposed Regulation. Swift adoption of the proposal is an important element for a more efficient, fair and stable EU policy on asylum and migration including a stable resettlement framework.

                     (13)

                     To ensure resettlement efforts continue until a stable framework is in place, the Commission invited Member States to submit resettlement pledges for 2020 at the 9th Resettlement Forum in July 2019. This was based on the agreed priorities for this period and in line with UNHCR’s projected global resettlement needs for 2020 and UNHCR recommendations for 2020 EU resettlement planning, which called for 30 000 places for 2020. It resulted in just under 29 500 pledges submitted by Member States. This sizeable overall pledge, which amounts to more than 50 % of all resettlement places made available by states to UNHCR for 2020, underlines the Member States’ continued commitment to offering protection, saving lives and offering credible alternatives to irregular movements.

                     (14)

                     Against the background of the projected global resettlement needs for 2020, the UNHCR three-year strategy (2019-2021) on resettlement and complementary pathways and the first Global Refugee Forum (December 2019), this significant pledge by Member States affirms the EU’s role as a global leader on resettlement.

                     (15)

                     The choice of priority regions for resettlements under the 2020 pledging exercise is based on the UNHCR projected global resettlement needs and the need to continue implementing the EU-Turkey Statement of March 2016. Member States should continue resettlements from Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon, as well as from the key African countries along and leading to the Central Mediterranean route, including Libya, Niger, Chad, Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan. They should also support the emergency transit mechanisms in Niger and Rwanda, and provide places for emergency resettlements. The implementation of the EU-Turkey Statement includes activation of the Voluntary Humanitarian Admission Scheme with Turkey provided that all preconditions for it have been met and irregular crossings between Turkey and the EU end or have at least been substantially and sustainably reduced.

                     (16)

                     To help Member States implement the target of 29 500 places in 2020, some EUR 300 million has been made available from the Union budget (10). Subject to the rules of the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF), Member States may qualify for an incentive payment of EUR 10 000 per resettled person from priority regions or particularly vulnerable groups and EUR 6 000 for other resettlements.

                     (17)

                     Between January and March 2020, there were more than 3 600 resettlement arrivals in the EU as part of the 2020 pledging exercise. However, the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic has led to a severe disruption of resettlement operations. The Member States, UNHCR and the International Organization for Migration (IOM) suspended such operations as of mid-March 2020. On 18 June 2020, UNHCR and IOM announced the resumption of resettlement travel for refugees (11). Since the summer, several Member States have started to resume gradually their resettlement activity.

                     (18)

                     This unprecedented global health threat and the measures to contain the spread of the virus have had a considerable impact on all operations and procedures related to resettlement, humanitarian admission and community sponsorship. The need for EU coordination has become clear to maximise the impact of the measures taken.

                     (19)

                     In its Guidance on the implementation of relevant EU provisions in the area of asylum and return procedures and on resettlement (12), the Commission invited the Member States to continue showing solidarity with those in need of international protection and with non-EU countries hosting large numbers of refugees by ensuring, to the extent possible, continuity of resettlement-related procedures. The Commission invited Member States to consider new ways of working, such as remote interviewing or dossier resettlement. On these topics, the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) has provided swift operational support thanks to a series of thematic online meetings as part of the Resettlement and Humanitarian Admission Network.

                     (20)

                     Acknowledging the disruptive effect of the coronavirus pandemic on the implementation of the pledges made under the 2020 pledging exercise, the Commission decided to extend the implementation period beyond 2020 to ensure that Member States have enough time to implement these pledges fully. The original one-year programme will therefore be transformed into a two-year programme covering 2020-2021, during which the Member States should implement 29 500 pledges. In addition, Member States are invited to consider additional state-funded national resettlement programmes, if possible.

                     (21)

                     To ensure seamless continuation of EU resettlement efforts after the disruptions caused by the coronavirus pandemic, new resettlement programmes should be considered from 2022 onwards, taking into account the financial resources allocated in the 2021-2027 Asylum and Migration Fund to support the Member States’ pledges. The Union’s ambition remains to embark on a path of steadily growing resettlement numbers in the years to come.

                     (22)

                     Beyond EU financial support, various measures are in place to help Member States resettle people. EASO aims to help Member States fulfil their resettlement pledges. The Resettlement Support Facility in Istanbul, which has been operational since April 2019 (pilot phase), supports Member States’ resettlement efforts from Turkey. Moreover, the Resettlement and Humanitarian Admission Network, facilitated by EASO, which has been operational since January 2020, fosters cooperation and knowledge sharing between the Member States, with the focus on EU-specific topics. The network has been the main forum for Member States to address the impact of the coronavirus pandemic through information sharing and peer learning.

                     (23)

                     In addition, in line with the UNHCR three-year strategy (2019-2021) on resettlement and complementary pathways, it is appropriate to promote the putting in place or making further use of humanitarian admission models and other complementary pathways as an additional means of admission to expand the number of places offered through safe and legal pathways, in addition to resettlement.

                     (24)

                     The proposed Union Resettlement Framework Regulation envisages providing Member States with funding for humanitarian admission.

                     (25)

                     Reflecting the diversity of humanitarian admission models, a wide array of promising experiences already exist in the Member States and in non-EU countries, which can be scaled up or replicated in other Member States.

                     (26)

                     Several Member States have implemented community sponsorship schemes (13), which can underpin resettlement, humanitarian admission and other complementary pathways. In all cases, private sponsors, groups of private individuals or non-profit organisations can play a structured role in welcoming and integrating those in need of international protection.

                     (27)

                     In the context of resettlement, community sponsorship schemes can help Member States increase the number of resettlement places and successfully integrate refugees into welcoming host communities. Based on a strong partnership between the State and civil society organisations, individuals or groups of individuals, private sponsors usually provide financial, practical and moral support for the admission or integration of refugees. As demonstrated in the 2018 study on the feasibility and added value of sponsorship schemes (14), community sponsorship models can take many different forms. Depending on their design and objective, they help increase the number of admission places available to those in need of protection, enable faster and more efficient integration, improve public support for refugees and resettlement and help prevent irregular onward movements of resettled persons.

                     (28)

                     Other forms of community sponsorship beyond resettlement, which can serve as a model, include what some Member States and private organisations refer to as ‘humanitarian corridors’, namely the community sponsorship model currently implemented by faith-based organisations in Italy, France and Belgium in cooperation with the respective national governments. Under this model, private sponsors are involved in all stages of the admission process, from identifying those in need of international protection to transferring them to the Member State concerned. They also take charge of reception and integration efforts and bear the related costs. Since 2016, more than 2 700 people in need of international protection arrived in Europe through this pathway, mostly to Italy and France. The detailed rules of cooperation between the State and the private sponsors are often set out in memoranda of understanding.

                     (29)

                     Considering the benefits of community sponsorship, the Union should further promote an EU approach to community sponsorship building on existing Member State experience and involving EASO. The Union will continue to provide support for capacity building of civil society actors engaged in community sponsorship schemes and promotes transnational exchanges on knowledge sharing in order to scale up existing community sponsorship programmes, create new programmes, including in Member States that have not yet implemented such schemes. In 2019, the Commission launched a specific call for proposals to this effect under the AMIF Union Actions Programme (15). Promoting complementary pathways for people in need of protection and their further integration is one of the topics included in the call for proposals for transnational actions on Asylum, Migration and Integration under the AMIF 2020 Work Programme (16).

                     (30)

                     The coronavirus pandemic has also affected community sponsorship schemes. In its Guidance on the implementation of relevant EU provisions in the area of asylum and return procedures and on resettlement, the Commission encouraged Member States to keep communication channels open with sponsors, keep them informed of developments and continue sponsor recruitment and screening to increase future hosting availability.

                     (31)

                     As highlighted by the UNHCR, family reunification is widely recognised as a key factor for successful integration in the host country. Forcibly displaced people in need of international protection often face many challenges to their right to family reunification, such as lengthy and burdensome administrative processes (17). This can lead to attempts to circumvent the rules through dangerous irregular migration. To facilitate access to the right to family reunification in line with the Family Reunification Directive (18), Member States are encouraged to put in place family reunification assistance programmes that improve access to information and simplify the visa application process. In addition, for cases falling outside the scope of the Family Reunification Directive, Member States are invited to set up humanitarian admission programmes, such as family-based sponsorship.

                     (32)

                     To leverage skills, qualifications and the motivation of individuals in need of international protection, other complementary pathways for admission, such as education or work, should also be explored. Several Member States support programmes that facilitate access to existing legal avenues for those in need of international protection, such as students or workers. Member States are encouraged to use the EU Skills Profile Tool for Third Country Nationals in such procedures. This dedicated online tool helps map and document the skills and qualifications of people with a migrant background (19).

                     (33)

                     It is estimated that less than three percent of refugees worldwide have access to higher education (20). Even when they have the skills and necessary knowledge, they often lack the information and financial means to apply for undergraduate or postgraduate programmes in the Union. Member States should consider improving access to universities for young people in need of international protection and therefore make it easier for them to be admitted on their territory as students. Such initiatives may require a proactive selection process in non-EU countries, language training, flexibility on the admission criteria to study programmes as well as scholarships and dedicated integration measures upon arrival. After graduation, students wishing to stay in the Member State concerned in line with Directive (EU) 2016/801 of the European Parliament and of the Council (21) should benefit from counselling and help in looking for a job.

                     (34)

                     To facilitate the implementation of such programmes, the Commission will encourage peer learning and the exchange of experiences between Member States, and will explore possibilities for EU financial support in designing and developing these pathways for students.

                     (35)

                     Member States should further consider working in partnership with the private sector, employers, trade unions and civil society to develop innovative international labour mobility schemes for those in need of protection.

                     (36)

                     EASO, together with the Resettlement and Humanitarian Admission Network, will help Member States design and implement programmes for humanitarian admission and other complementary pathways.

                     (37)

                     When implementing resettlement, humanitarian admission and other complementary pathways programmes, Member States should take into account the obligations set out in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

                     (38)

                     To ensure monitoring of the implementation of EU resettlement schemes in 2020 and 2021, Member States should, upon request, report to the Commission on those resettled on their territory in line with their pledges, specifying the country from which the person has been resettled. The Commission will also monitor the various projects and programmes for humanitarian admission implemented in the Member States to maintain an overview of all legal pathways for those in need of international protection and the number of places offered through these channels.

                     (39)

                     This recommendation should be addressed to the Member States. The Dublin Associated States are invited to contribute to common European resettlement efforts as well as common efforts in relation to other complementary pathways.

               HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:

            INCREASING THE NUMBER OF MEMBER STATES ENGAGED IN RESETTLEMENT AND HUMANITARIAN ADMISSION

                     1.

                     Member States should contribute to providing legal pathways for those in need of international protection in the spirit of international solidarity with the countries of first asylum or transit and strengthen solidarity between each other.

            STEPPING UP IMPLEMENTATION EFFORTS AMID THE CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC AND SCALING UP RESETTLEMENT IN THE MEDIUM TERM

                     2.

                     Building on the experience achieved in the implementation of the previous EU resettlement schemes and to bridge the transition between these schemes and the stable Union Resettlement Framework, Member States are invited to achieve the resettlement target made under the 2020 pledging exercise of at least 29 500 people in need of international protection from non-EU countries over a two-year period (1 January 2020 to 31 December 2021).

                     3.

                     Member States are invited to implement their pledges made under the 2020 pledging exercise as swiftly as practically feasible in the light of the impact of the coronavirus pandemic. They are encouraged to consider innovative ways of working and to adapt their procedures to respond to the changing realities on the ground, including in countries of first asylum.

                     4.

                     Member States that have not entirely fulfilled their pledges under the EU resettlement scheme for 2018-2019 (22) are encouraged to implement these pledges in 2020 and 2021 in line with their AMIF National Programmes.

                     5.

                     In 2020 and 2021, Member States should continue their resettlement-related activities to the extent possible amid the coronavirus pandemic and focus their pledges:

                                 (a)

                                 to ensure continued resettlement from Turkey of Syrian and third-country nationals and stateless persons displaced by the Syrian conflict in order to support the implementation of the EU-Turkey Statement of March 2016; this includes activation of the Voluntary Humanitarian Admission Scheme provided that all preconditions for it have been met and irregular crossings between Turkey and the EU end or have at least been substantially and sustainably reduced;

                                 (b)

                                 to ensure continued resettlement from Lebanon and Jordan;

                                 (c)

                                 to contribute to the continued stabilisation of the situation in the Central Mediterranean by resettling those in need of protection from Libya, Niger, Chad, Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan, including by supporting the UNHCR’s temporary mechanisms for emergency evacuation of the most vulnerable groups of migrants from Libya located in Niger and Rwanda.

                     6.

                     Member States are invited to react flexibly to emergency resettlement needs worldwide. They are called upon to implement as many resettlement pledges as possible and make good use of the budget made available to them. They should implement their resettlement programmes in close cooperation with UNHCR and with support from EASO where appropriate.

                     7.

                     To ensure continuity and renewed growth of resettlement operations after the disruptions caused by the coronavirus pandemic, Member States are invited to contribute to future EU resettlement programmes. They are invited to scale up their existing resettlement programmes, resume their previous resettlement programmes or set up new resettlement programmes to expand the number of admission places available to those in need of international protection when resettlements are again possible under safe conditions for all involved.

            ENSURING QUALITY RESETTLEMENT PROGRAMMES

                     8.

                     Member States should ensure that all stages of the resettlement process are carried out to a high quality standard, in particular (remote) pre-departure orientation and post-arrival information. They are invited to provide adequate and sufficient reception capacity, taking into account heightened health concerns to guarantee the rapid arrival of selected persons in Europe.

                     9.

                     Member States are encouraged to design dedicated and effective integration and social inclusion programmes for resettled persons that take into account vulnerability in particular. They are invited to work closely with civil society and receiving communities to put in place or expand community sponsorship schemes for resettlement that aim to integrate resettled refugees in the host societies in an efficient, better and faster manner.

                     10.

                     Member States should put in place internal monitoring and evaluation programmes to measure the efficiency and effectiveness of their resettlement schemes and of relevant integration programmes.

            PROMOTING HUMANITARIAN ADMISSION

                     11.

                     Member States are invited to increase the number of admissions to their territory of vulnerable people in need of international protection. Besides resettlement, they should consider in particular establishing or scaling up other forms of legal pathways for vulnerable people in need of international protection.

                     12.

                     In addition, Member States are called upon to facilitate access to the right to family reunification by putting in place family reunification assistance programmes that improve access to information and simplify the application process. In addition, they are invited to provide pathways for admitting family members of beneficiaries of international protection through humanitarian admission programmes such as family-based sponsorship schemes.

                     13.

                     Member States are invited to contribute to an EU approach to community sponsorship, drawing upon the wide range of models of humanitarian admission to design admission programmes in line with their respective national priorities and take into account EU external relation priorities and interests.

                     14.

                     Member States are invited to cooperate closely with civil society to put in place or expand community sponsorship schemes as a humanitarian pathway for admission, where the private sponsors, groups of private individuals or non-profit organisations are involved in different stages of the programme – from identification of those in need of international protection in the non-EU country to integration following their arrival.

                     15.

                     In designing those community sponsorship schemes, Member States and their partners should define transparent and non-discriminatory selection criteria for those in need of international protection. From the start of the programme, they should ensure that the respective roles and responsibilities of civil society and government are clearly defined in the pre-departure and post-arrival phase. Member States remain responsible for the security checks and admission procedures and need to guarantee that appropriate safeguards and safety nets are in place.

                     16.

                     Member States are invited to put in place or expand community sponsorship schemes that aim to ensure better and faster integration and social inclusion of those granted international protection in the host societies and improved public support by creating more welcoming and inclusive societies.

                     17.

                     Member States are encouraged to keep communication channels open with private sponsors during and after the coronavirus pandemic, and to keep private sponsors engaged in actively supporting the sponsorship schemes.

                     18.

                     Member States are invited to make use of the various EU co-funding possibilities to promote community sponsorship schemes.

            PROMOTING COMPLEMENTARY PATHWAYS FOR THOSE IN NEED OF INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION LINKED TO EDUCATION AND WORK

                     19.

                     Member States are encouraged to develop and support programmes that facilitate access to other existing legal avenues for those in need of international protection, making use where relevant of EU tools to map and document their skills and qualifications. Member States are also encouraged to provide access to the labour market, including with activation programmes (such as re- and upskilling) as early as possible. To facilitate the integration in the labour market, Member States should work closely with social partners.

                     20.

                     Member States should consider improving access to universities for young people in need of international protection by enabling them to qualify as a student, taking into account their specific needs. In close partnership with universities, Member States could consider setting up dedicated programmes, which could include a specific, more flexible academic selection process, financial support and adapted language classes, or scale up their existing initiatives. They should provide counselling and help graduates wishing to stay in the Member State look for a job.

                     21.

                     Member States should consider working in partnership with the private sector and employers to develop innovative international labour mobility schemes for those in need of international protection without prejudice to their protection rights.

                     22.

                     Member States are invited to contribute to an EU approach to community sponsorship to underpin the complementary pathways for education and work for those in need of international protection.

            STRENGTHENING COOPERATION BETWEEN MEMBER STATES AND PROMOTING RESETTLEMENT AT GLOBAL LEVEL

                     23.

                     To leverage the benefits and potential of EU-level cooperation and coordination in the area of resettlement, humanitarian admission, community sponsorship and complementary pathways, the Member States are invited to participate in the EASO Resettlement and Humanitarian Admission Network and are encouraged to actively contribute to its meetings and activities.

                     24.

                     Member States should cooperate within the framework of the EASO Resettlement and Humanitarian Admission Network to facilitate a timely and smooth resumption of resettlements after the restrictions linked to the coronavirus pandemic are lifted and develop new ways of working and new procedures to make resettlement operations more resilient in the medium term.

                     25.

                     To further expand resettlement worldwide, Member States should partner with non-EU countries and help them build their resettlement programmes through capacity building and sharing of experiences and best practice, drawing on EASO’s expertise and in cooperation with UNHCR and IOM.

            MONITORING

                     26.

                     Upon request, Member States should communicate to the Commission the number of people resettled on their territory in line with their pledges, specifying the countries from which they have been resettled.

                     27.

                     Member States should keep the Commission informed of admissions through humanitarian admission schemes and other complementary pathways.

            FINANCIAL SUPPORT

                     28.

                     Member States should make full use of the financial support made available through the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund for the remainder of its implementation period to fulfil the resettlement pledges in order to ensure that all stages of the resettlement process referred to in this Recommendation are carried out to a high quality standard.

                     29.

                     Member States should also make full use of other EU funding opportunities to support and improve resettlement, humanitarian admission and other complementary pathways for those in need of international protection and their integration and social inclusion in the host societies, in particular the European Social Fund and the European Regional Development Fund in line with their respective objectives.

            ADDRESSEES

         This Recommendation is addressed to the Member States.

            Done at Brussels, 23 September 2020.

                  For the Commission

               Ylva JOHANSSON

                  Member of the Commission

            (1)  Co-funded by the Union budget and implemented by Member-State-led consortia.

            (2)  https://www.unhcr.org/the-global-compact-on-refugees.html

            (3)  UNHCR received resettlement pledges from 29 countries in 2018 compared to 35 countries in 2017; the number of departures for resettlement decreased from 65 100 in 2017 to 55 680 in 2018.

            (4)  Commission Recommendation (EU) 2015/914 of 8 June 2015 on a European resettlement scheme (OJ L 148, 13.6.2015, p. 32).

            (5)  Conclusions of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting within the Council of 20 July 2015.

            (6)  Commission Recommendation (EU) 2017/1803 of 3 October 2017 on enhancing legal pathways for persons in need of international protection (OJ L 259, 7.10.2017, p. 21).

            (7)  https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2016/03/18/eu-turkey-statement/

            (8)  These resettlements have been partly counted under the EU resettlement schemes referred to in recitals (8) and (9).

            (9)  COM(2016) 468 final.

            (10)  The financial support combines 2019 and 2020 budgetary appropriations, which were made available to the Member States in two instalments.

            (11)  https://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2020/6/5eeb85be4/joint-statement-un-refugee-chief-grandi-ioms-vitorino-announce-resumption.html?query=resettlement resumption

            (12)  C(2020) 2516 final.

            (13)  In some countries, they are also called ‘private sponsorship schemes’.

            (14)  https://op.europa.eu/fr/publication-detail/-/publication/1dbb0873-d349-11e8-9424-01aa75ed71a1/language-en/format-PDF/source-114630059

            (15)  2019 Call for Proposals AMIF-2019-AG-Call, Topic 1: Fostering the integration of persons in need of protection through private sponsorship schemes.

            (16)  Commission Implementing Decision of 26.6.2020 on the financing of Union Actions in the framework of the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund and the adoption of the work programme for 2020: https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/financing/fundings/migration-asylum-borders/asylum-migration-integration-fund/union-actions/docs/c4223-annex-decision-amif-awp-2020.pdf

            (17)  https://www.unhcr.org/uk/protection/basic/5f5743f84/families-together-family-reunification-for-refugees-in-the-european-union.html

            (18)  Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification (OJ L 251, 3.10.2003, p. 12).

            (19)  https://ec.europa.eu/migrantskills/#/

            (20)  UNHCR estimates: https://www.unhcr.org/tertiary-education.html

            (21)  Directive (EU) 2016/801 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2016 on the conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purposes of research, studies, training, voluntary service, pupil exchange schemes or educational projects and au pairing (OJ L 132, 21.5.2016, p. 21), Article 25.

            (22)  Recommendation (EU) 2017/1803.

            ANNEX

               Resettlement: 2020 Pledges

                        Member State

                        Total places 2020

                        Belgium

                        758

                        Bulgaria (*1)

                        [25]

                        Czechia

                        Denmark

                        Germany

                        5 500

                        Estonia

                        Ireland

                        994

                        Greece

                        Spain

                        1 000

                        France

                        5 200

                        Croatia

                        100

                        Italy

                        700

                        Cyprus

                        Latvia

                        Lithuania

                        18

                        Luxembourg (*1)

                        [50]

                        Hungary

                        Malta (*1)

                        [20]

                        Netherlands

                        1 902

                        Austria

                        Poland

                        Portugal

                        1 150

                        Romania

                        200

                        Slovenia

                        Slovakia

                        Finland

                        850

                        Sweden

                        5 114

                        United Kingdom

                        6 000

                           TOTAL

                           29 487

               (*1)  Implementation of pledges from the previous scheme (not counted under the 2020 pledging exercise).