EU member states will decide the risk indicators against which passengers travelling to and from the Schengen area could be subjected to checks but a recent agreement does not necessarily mean that all passengers will be checked, according to a Home Affairs Ministry spokesperson.
During last week’s EU council meeting, European Heads of State agreed to reinforce action against terrorist threats, in full compliance with human rights and the rule of law.
European Passenger Name Records Directive
In order to detect and disrupt terrorist-related travel, notably of foreign terrorist fighters, the EU leaders agreed on the need for legislators to urgently adopt a European Passenger Name Records directive.
They also agreed for full use to be made of the existing Schengen framework to reinforce and modernize border control. “We agree to proceed without delay to systematic and coordinated checks on individuals enjoying the right of free movement against databases relevant to the fight against terrorism based on common risk indicators; the Commission should issue rapidly operational guidelines for this; we will also consider a targeted amendment to the Schengen Borders Code where necessary to provide for permanent checks, based on a proposal by the Commission.
Checks at points of entry
Replying to questions by The Malta Independent, a spokesperson for Home Affairs Minister Carmelo Abela said: “regarding checks at the borders, it is to be noted that any systematic checks that will be carried out will be within the existing Schengen framework and will be at the points of entry into the Schengen area, regardless of the mode of transport.
The statement of the Heads of State indicates that these checks will be based on common risk indicators; therefore not all passengers entering Schengen will be subject to additional checks. These common risk indicators will be decided on by the Member States’ authorities responsible for the security of our citizens and will surely seek to balance such checks with the need for security, which is of priority.” The spokesperson said there will be no effect on intra-Schengen travel.
The Schengen area comprises 26 EU member states and other non-EU countries that have abolished passport and any other type of border control at their common borders, also referred to as internal borders. For all intents and purposes, the Schengen area functions as a single country for international travel purposes. Countries in the Schengen Area have eliminated internal border controls with the other Schengen members, and strengthened external border controls with non-Schengen states.
Non Schengen checks
The new procedures could possibly affect passengers travelling from within the Schengen area to non-Schengen areas. For example, someone travelling from Malta to the UK or vice versa could be subjected to further checks (since the UK is not a Schengen country) with passenger names being cross referenced with known terrorist lists.
Information sharing and operational cooperation
EU leaders have also agreed that law enforcement and judicial authorities should step up information sharing and operational cooperation, including through Europol and Eurojust. All competent authorities increase cooperation in the fight against illicit trafficking of firearms, including by a swift adaptation of the relevant legislation and member states' security services deepen their cooperation. They should also implement strengthened rules to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing, and all competent authorities have to step up action to trace financial flows and to freeze effectively assets used for financing terrorism. EU member states should also work towards the adoption of the Network and Information Security Directive advance rapidly, given the importance of cyber-security.
Other measures agreed upon during the summit include the prevention of radicalism. “Adequate measures should be taken to detect and remove internet content promoting terrorism or extremism.
The agreement still has to be approved by the European Parliament, which has warned against curtailing civil rights in the name of boosting public security.