The Schengen Area: From
Crises to Further
Integration
Sarah Léonard
BACKGROUND & RESEARCH QUESTION
Crises in the Schengen Area in 2011
 Hypothesis: the crises have led to power shifts in
favour of the Member States in this policy area

e.g. exceptions to common rules, more discretion for
Member States
 But the history of European integration may suggest
the opposite hypothesis


Questions:
Have the crises led to the opening of policy debates?
 Have (some) Member States made requests

for specific measures?
 for a stock-taking exercise?
 for unspecified change?


Have these requests been successful?
PLAN
Background: the Schengen Area
 Crises in the Schengen Area
 Analysis:

Requests from the Member States
 Proposals by the European Commission
 State of play
 Necessity to consider longer-term trends and the
broader context


Conclusions
BACKGROUND: THE SCHENGEN
AREA (I)
BACKGROUND: THE SCHENGEN
AREA (II)

Article 2 of the Schengen Convention (now in Schengen
Borders Code):
1. Internal borders may be crossed at any point without any checks on
persons being carried out.
 2. However, where public policy or national security so require a
Contracting Party may, after consulting the other Contracting
Parties, decide that for a limited period national border checks
appropriate to the situation shall be carried out at internal
borders. If public policy or national security require immediate
action, the Contracting Party concerned shall take the necessary
measures and at the earliest opportunity shall inform the other
Contracting Parties thereof.


Article 78 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European
Union:
3. In the event of one or more Member States being confronted by an
emergency situation characterised by a sudden inflow of nationals of
third countries, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission, may
adopt provisional measures for the benefit of the Member State(s)
concerned. It shall act after consulting the European Parliament.
CRISES IN THE SCHENGEN AREA

Franco-Italian crisis in April 2011:

Political unrest in Tunisia  arrival of irregular migrants in
Lampedusa (about 45,000)


“Human tsunami” (Roberto Maroni) and call for solidarity
Migrants are granted temporary residency documents
April 2011: Temporary re-introduction of border controls by
the French government at the French-Italian border
 Bilateral summit between Sarkozy and Berlusconi
 March 2012: Sarkozy’s speech:




Suspension or exclusion from Schengen area for states not fulfilling
their duties
Suspension of French participation if no serious progress in the reform
negotiations in the next twelve months
Re-introduction of customs controls by the Danish
authorities at the Swedish and German borders
REQUESTS FROM THE EU MEMBER
STATES

Improvement of the enforcement of common rules, in
particular through the Schengen evaluation system


Effective and reliable monitoring and evaluation system
Introduction of a mechanism to respond to “exceptional
circumstances putting the overall functioning of Schengen
cooperation at risk”
Assistance to Member States facing “heavy pressure” at the
external borders (e.g. inspection visits, technical and
financial support, Frontex assistance, coordination and
intervention)
 Safeguard clause (“as a very last resort”): exceptional
reintroduction of internal border controls “in a truly critical
situation” – on the basis of specified objective criteria and a
common assessment, for a strictly limited scope and period of
time

PROPOSALS BY THE EUROPEAN
COMMISSION
Communication on migration (May 2011)
 Schengen legislative package of September 2011:

Communication on Schengen governance (September
2011)
 Proposal for a Regulation – common rules on the
temporary reintroduction of border controls at
internal borders in exceptional circumstances
 Amended proposal for a Regulation – establishment
of an evaluation mechanism to verify the application
of the Schengen acquis

RULES ON THE TEMPORARY REINTRODUCTION OF BORDER CONTROLS

I
General rules:
Reintroduction of internal border controls based on a
decision proposed and adopted by the European
Commission
 Length: renewable periods of 30 days with a
maximum of six months
 This period can be extended in the case of adverse
findings under the Schengen evaluation mechanism

RULES ON THE TEMPORARY REINTRODUCTION OF BORDER CONTROLS

II
Exception:
For unforeseeable events: Member States may
unilaterally reintroduce border control at internal
borders if immediate action is needed.
 Reintroduction limited to five days
 Possible prolongation only on the basis of a decision
by the Commission

SCHENGEN EVALUATION
2009 Proposals
 Proposal of the Commission in November 2010:


Aim: to strengthen the Schengen evaluation
mechanism
Follow-up: action plan to remedy weaknesses and report on
the implementation of the plan
 Peer pressure by Council and European Parliament


Amended proposal in September 2011:
Safeguard clause: « truly critical situations »
 Additional support & Union-based mechanism for the
re-introduction of border control at internal borders

NEGOTIATIONS

Position of the European Parliament:
No new exemptions from the current rules (serious
threat to public policy or internal security)
 Need to implement a common European asylum and
migration system


Regular reports from the Commission to the
European Parliament and to the Council:
Weakenesses/threats
 Basis for political and strategic discussions in the
Mixed Committee once during each Presidency

LONGER-TERM TRENDS & BROADER
CONTEXT
Discussions on Schengen evaluation
 Enlargement of the Schengen Area to Romania
and Bulgaria
 Situation in Greece

Border controls
 Asylum
 Economic crisis

CONCLUSIONS
Negotiations are still on-going
 Possible move towards greater European
integration and greater role for the European
Commission in this policy area?
 Evolution of the situation in Greece


Impact on Bulgaria and Romania