Tag Archives: Maintenance

Rail infrastructure: multi-annual contracts

Rail infrastructure: multi-annual contracts

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Rail infrastructure: multi-annual contracts

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Transport > Rail transport

Rail infrastructure: multi-annual contracts

Document or Iniciative

Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of 6 February 2008 entitled “Multi-annual contracts for rail infrastructure quality” [COM (2008) 54 final – not published in the Official Journal].

Summary

The Commission recommends extending the system of multi-annual contracts between the State and the rail infrastructure management to improve the quality and maintenance of infrastructures in this sector.

Legal framework and legal requirements regarding the rail infrastructure

Current EU legislation requires defining measures to reduce the costs of infrastructure provision and of charges for their use, taking account of safety and maintaining the quality of the infrastructure service. Nevertheless, there are no obligations at European level for monitoring infrastructure service.

Member States may choose to meet this obligation by way of regulatory measures and/or contractual agreements known as multi-annual contracts, concluded for a minimum period of three years. The situation regarding multi-annual contracts varies widely between the Member States. In fact half of all Member States do not use them, nor are they considering using them.

Apart from these rules, EU rail directives set out other provisions which may be helpful in terms of implementation, namely:

  • Member States must take the necessary measures to develop their national infrastructure;
  • Infrastructure managers’ expenditure and revenue must balance over a reasonable period of time.

Other particular provisions apply regarding validity and transparency of financial transfers from the State, taking account of the requirement for management independence on the part of the infrastructure manager and the economic nature of its activities.

The role of multi-annual contracts

The availability and the quality of the infrastructure have a strong impact on the competitiveness of the rail sector. However, maintenance of infrastructure does not always gain the finance that railway operators expect to enable them to compete with other modes of transport. Almost one third of managers state that the finance available to them is not sufficient to maintain their network.

If properly negotiated and prepared, a multi-annual contract can bring many advantages. More particularly, its role is to:

  • Provide a long-term financing framework for maintenance forcing both parties to take a long-term view and develop maintenance programmes on the basis of future service demand. In fact, it is important that the rail infrastructure corresponds with future transport demand structures in order to boost traffic and revenues. These contracts also permit trade-offs between taxpayers’ and users’ interests, between maintenance and quality of the network, and between short-term maintenance and renewal;
  • Complementing the charging system by transfers made within the framework of these contracts so as to ensure financial stability. A multi-annual contract has to be consistent with the charging framework, which has to comply with the existing charging rules;
  • Enable effective cost control by long-term planning of rail maintenance to reduce unit costs. This procedure enables the volume of work to be adapted without changing plans at the last minute. With a multi-annual allocation, the manager can actually make use of funds in a more flexible manner which is thus better suited to business needs, rather than according to the rigid rules of public spending;
  • Enable benchmarking and regulatory supervision by setting performance targets more effectively. In fact, setting more precise performance targets makes it easier to gauge the relative positions of infrastructure managers and to define cost effectiveness in terms of a national infrastructure manager’s cost elements and their performance in comparison with other managers;
  • Improve performance based on performance-related payments and not on compensating the infrastructure manager for a particular expenditure as well as reinforcing quality control. Quality criteria can be divided into two categories: Indicators based on the quality of the train service (speed, safety) and indicators based on infrastructure provision (maintenance costs per km of track, percentage of lines under temporary speed restrictions);
  • Secure the effectiveness of contractual agreements providing for, for example, sanctions applicable in cases of non-compliance. The monitoring process should be undertaken by an independent body rather than by the two contracting parties. Sanctions may consist of penalties (fines), reduced financial input or even a replacement of infrastructure managers and need to be progressive and in proportion with the infringement.

Member States and their infrastructure managers should conclude multi-annual contracts which comply with the national strategic transport plan and with the infrastructure managers’ business plans. The State should consult stakeholders on any proposal for multi-annual contracts before entering into a new contract or renegotiating existing provisions.

Infrastructure managers should check track condition at least once a year on all their lines and more frequently on main lines, and should indicate cases where infrastructure quality is considered to be substandard.

Background

Some years after the adoption of the rail infrastructure package, consultations conducted by the Commission revealed concerns in the areas of sustainable financing of the existing infrastructure, the quality of infrastructure service and how to improve the performance of infrastructure managers.

Applying the codecision procedure to maintenance obligations

Applying the codecision procedure to maintenance obligations

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Applying the codecision procedure to maintenance obligations

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Justice freedom and security > Judicial cooperation in civil matters

Applying the codecision procedure to maintenance obligations

Document or Iniciative

Commission Communication of 15 December 2005 calling on the Council to provide for measures relating to maintenance obligations taken under Article 65 of the Treaty establishing the European Community to be governed by the procedure laid down in Article 251 of that Treaty [COM/2005/648].

Summary

The European Commission has called on the Council of the European Union to take a decision which would make it possible to apply the codecision procedure of Article 251 of the Treaty establishing the European Communities (“the EC Treaty”) to measures relating to maintenance obligations, which require a unanimous vote in the Council.

Making Article 251 applicable to maintenance obligations

Under the second indent of Article 67(2) of the Treaty, the Council, acting unanimously after consulting the European Parliament, may take a decision providing for all or parts of the areas covered by Title IV of the Treaty to be governed by the procedure referred to in Article 251.

Recovering maintenance claims: primarily a pecuniary claim

Despite close links between maintenance and family relations, the European Commission considers that the recovery of a maintenance claim does not go to the heart of family relations, unlike a decision on visiting rights or custody. Such a decision has a direct effect on the personal relationship between children and parents and thus affects the equilibrium of the family relationship, which is heavily influenced by the Member States’ differing legal and cultural traditions. A maintenance claim, on the other hand, is indeed a specific kind of claim but it remains a claim, an amount of money to be recovered. The recovery mechanisms that apply are the same as for any other pecuniary decision, such as an attachment on salaries and wages.

Moreover, if the codecision procedure applied in place of unanimity, it would be possible for rules specifically devoted to maintenance obligations to be subject to the same legislative procedure, with in particular the same prerogatives of the European Parliament, as applies to instruments such as the European enforcement order (EEO) Regulation, which established a common arrangement extending to maintenance claims like any other credit.

In view of the foregoing considerations, the Commission calls on the Council to decide that the procedure established by Article 251 of the Treaty is applicable to maintenance obligations with effect from 1 June 2006. Article 251 applies to opinions of the European Parliament received by the Council before that date on proposals concerning measures for which the Council takes a decision by the codecision procedure.

Adopting Community measures in civil matters

Since the Amsterdam Treaty entered into force on 1 May 1999, the European Community has been able to adopt measures in matters of judicial cooperation in civil matters with cross-border implications. The Council:

  • decides on proposals from the Commission;
  • acting unanimously after consulting the European Parliament, takes decisions providing for all or parts of the areas covered by this Title to be governed by the procedure referred to in Article 251 and adapting the provisions relating to the powers of the Court of Justice.

Denmark does not take part in the adoption of the decision. The United Kingdom and Ireland have notified their wish to take part in the adoption and application of the decision.

Under the second indent of Article 67(5) of the EC Treaty, as amended by the Treaty of Nice, in force since 1 February 2003, the measures provided for by Article 65 of the Treaty are to be adopted by the codecision procedure, with the exception of the aspects relating to family law.

Under the second indent of Article 67(2) of the Treaty, the Council, acting unanimously after consulting the European Parliament, is to take a decision providing for all or parts of the areas covered by Title IV of Part Three to be governed by the codecision procedure.

Judicial cooperation in civil matters has thus been governed by two separate procedures since the Treaty of Nice entered into force – the codecision procedure, which is now the standard procedure, and adoption by the Council, acting unanimously after consulting the European Parliament, which is the exceptional procedure for measures involving aspects relating to family law.

 

Maintenance obligations

Maintenance obligations

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Maintenance obligations

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Justice freedom and security > Judicial cooperation in civil matters

Maintenance obligations

Document or Iniciative

Council Regulation (EC) No 4/2009 of 18 December 2008 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and cooperation in matters relating to maintenance obligations.

Summary

This Regulation provides a series of measures aimed at facilitating the payment of maintenance claims in cross-border situations. Such claims arise from the obligation to help family members in need. For example, they may take the form of maintenance paid to a child or to a former spouse following divorce.

The Regulation applies to maintenance obligations arising from:

  • a family relationship;
  • parentage;
  • marriage or affinity.

Jurisdiction

In matters relating to maintenance obligations, jurisdiction shall lie with:

  • the court of the place where the defendant or the creditor is habitually resident; or
  • the court which has jurisdiction to entertain proceedings regarding the status of a person (a divorce for example) or parental responsibility, if the matter concerning maintenance is related thereto (provided that jurisdiction is not based solely on the nationality of one of the parties).

Unless the dispute relates to a maintenance obligation towards a child under the age of 18, the parties may, subject to certain conditions, agree on the court or courts of a Member State which have jurisdiction to settle it.

Where the defendant makes an appearance before a court of a Member State, that court shall have jurisdiction, unless the defendant contests the jurisdiction.

If none of the conditions cited above is fulfilled, the dispute may, subject to certain conditions, be brought before the courts of a Member State of which both parties are nationals.

Failing this, if the proceedings cannot be brought in a country outside the EU with which the dispute is closely connected, the matter may be brought before the court of a Member State with which the case has sufficient connection.

As long as the creditor continues to reside in the Member State which gave the decision on maintenance obligations, the debtor may not, subject to exceptions, bring proceedings to modify the decision in another Member State. The creditor may nevertheless agree that the dispute is decided by another court.

If proceedings concerning the same parties and involving the same cause of action are brought before the courts of different Member States, jurisdiction shall lie with the court first seised.

Regardless of the court having jurisdiction as to substance, applications for provisional and protective measures may be lodged with any court of any Member State where they are provided for by the law of the State concerned.

Recognition and enforcement of decisions

A decision on maintenance obligations by one Member State is to be recognised in another Member State without any special procedure.

The vast majority of Member States are bound by the Hague Protocol of 23 November 2007 on the Law Applicable to Maintenance Obligations.

Where the decision was taken by a Member State bound by the 2007 Hague Protocol, its recognition may not be opposed. If it is enforceable in the Member State in which it was taken, it is enforceable in another Member State without the need for a declaration. In certain cases, however, it is still possible to apply for a review of the decision and the refusal or suspension of its enforcement.

Where the decision was taken by a Member State not bound by the 2007 Hague Protocol, its recognition may be refused in certain cases. It may be enforced in another Member State – if it is enforceable in the Member State in which it was taken – on condition that a declaration of enforceability is obtained from the Member State of enforcement.

In all cases, the court of origin may declare a decision as provisionally enforceable. When the decision is to be enforced in a Member State other than that in which it was originally taken, enforcement is governed by the law of that Member State.

The decision taken in a Member State cannot be reviewed as to its substance in the Member State in which its recognition, enforceability or enforcement is sought.

Parties who are involved in a dispute covered by this Regulation shall have effective access to justice in another Member State, including enforcement and appeal and review procedures. In particular, Member States shall provide legal aid under certain conditions. Free legal aid shall be provided in respect of applications by creditors concerning a decision on maintenance obligations arising from a parent-child relationship towards a person under the age of 21.

Central authorities

Each Member State must appoint a central authority responsible for assisting parties in the establishment and recovery of maintenance. In particular, they will send and receive applications provided for under the Regulation and take all appropriate measures to introduce or facilitate the introduction of the necessary procedures.

The central authorities shall cooperate with each other, promote cooperation among the competent authorities of their Member State and seek solutions to difficulties which may arise in the application of this Regulation. Moreover, to facilitate the application of the Regulation and to strengthen cooperation between the central authorities, use shall be made of the European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters.

Final provisions

This Regulation replaces the provisions concerning maintenance obligations of Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters. It also replaces Regulation (EC) No 805/2004 creating a European enforcement order for uncontested claims, except for European enforcement orders concerning maintenance obligations issued by Member States that are not bound by the 2007 Hague Protocol.

This Regulation has been applicable since 18 June 2011.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Regulation (EC) No 4/2009

30.1.2009

OJ L 7 of 10.1.2009

Related Acts

Council Decision 2011/220/EU of 31 March 2011 on the signing, on behalf of the European Union, of the Hague Convention of 23 November 2007 on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance [Official Journal L 93 of 7.4.2011].
The Hague Convention of 23 November 2007 establishes, between the parties to the Convention, a worldwide system for the recovery of maintenance claims.

Motor vehicle distribution and after-sales service

Motor vehicle distribution and after-sales service

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Motor vehicle distribution and after-sales service

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Internal market > Motor vehicles > Interactions between the automobile industry and specific policies

Motor vehicle distribution and after-sales service

Document or Iniciative

Commission Regulation (EU) No 461/2010 of 27 May 2010 on the application of Article 101(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices in the motor vehicle sector.

Summary

Article 101(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) exempts vertical agreements * which confer sufficient benefits to outweigh the anti-competitive effects. Regulation (EC) No 1400/2002, which expired on 31 May 2010, provided the motor vehicle sector with a specific block exemption for vertical agreements for the purchase, sale or resale of new motor vehicles and vertical agreements for the provision of repair and maintenance services for such vehicles and for the distribution of spare parts. Regulation 461/2010 replaces Regulation 1400/2002.

Vertical agreements relating to the purchase, sale or resale of new motor vehicles

Regulation 461/2010 applies Regulation No 330/2010 to vertical agreements concerning the purchase, sale or resale of new motor vehicles. However, to give operators time to adapt to the general regime, those provisions of Regulation No 1400/2002 which relate to such agreements are extended until 31 May 2013.

Vertical agreements relating to the motor vehicle aftermarket

Regulation 461/2010 also applies Regulation No 330/2010 to vertical agreements concerning conditions for the purchase, sale or resale of spare parts for motor vehicles, or for the provision of repair and maintenance services for motor vehicles, so long as these fulfil the requirements for exemption under Regulation No 330/2010, and do not contain any of the following hardcore restrictions described in Regulation 461/2010:

  • restriction of the sales of spare parts for motor vehicles by members of a selective distribution system;
  • restriction, agreed between a supplier of spare parts or repair equipment and a manufacturer of motor vehicles, of the supplier’s ability to sell those goods to authorised or independent distributors, repairers or end users;
  • restriction, agreed between a manufacturer of motor vehicles which uses components for the initial assembly of motor vehicles and the supplier of such components, of the supplier’s ability to visibly place its trade mark or logo on the components supplied.

In accordance with Regulation No 19/65/EEC, when parallel networks of similar vertical restraints cover more than 50 % of a relevant market, the Commission may decide that this regulation does not apply to vertical agreements that include specific restraints relating to that market.

Key terms used in the act
  • Vertical agreement: an agreement or concerted practice entered into between two or more undertakings each of which operates at a different level of the production or distribution chain, and relating to the conditions under which the parties may purchase, sell or resell certain goods or services.

References

Act Entry into force – Date of expiry Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Regulation No 461/2010

1.6.2010 – 31.5.2023

OJ L 129 of 28.5.2010

Second generation Schengen Information System – former 1st pillar regulation

Second generation Schengen Information System – former 1st pillar regulation

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Second generation Schengen Information System – former 1st pillar regulation

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Justice freedom and security > Free movement of persons asylum and immigration

Second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) – former 1st pillar regulation

The SIS II Regulation lays down the technical aspects and the operation of SIS II, the conditions for issuing alerts on refusal of entry or stay for non-EU nationals, the processing of data relating to alerts, and conditions of data access and protection. It constitutes the legislative basis for governing SIS II with respect to matters falling under Title IV of the Treaty establishing the European Community (former first pillar).

Document or Iniciative

Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on the establishment, operation and use of the second-generation Schengen Information System (SIS II).

Summary

The second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) will be a large-scale information system containing alerts * on persons and objects. It will be used by border guards, customs officers, visa- and law-enforcement authorities throughout the Schengen area, with a view to ensuring a high level of security. This new system is currently undergoing extensive testing in close cooperation with European Union (EU) countries and associated countries participating in the Schengen area (referred to below as the Member States *) and will replace the current system, providing enhanced functionalities.

The SIS II Regulation constitutes the necessary legislative basis for governing SIS II with respect to alert procedures falling under Title IV of the Treaty establishing the European Community (former first pillar). It is supplemented by a decision relating to procedures falling under Title VI of the Treaty on European Union (former third pillar).

Technical architecture and ways of operating SIS II

SIS II will be composed of:

  • a central system (“Central SIS II”);
  • a national system (the “N.SIS II”) in each Member State (the national data systems that will communicate with the Central SIS II);
  • a communication infrastructure between the central system and the national systems providing an encrypted virtual network dedicated to SIS II data and the exchange of data between the authorities responsible for the exchange of all supplementary information * (SIRENE Bureaux).

SIS II data will be entered, updated, deleted and searched via the various national systems. The central system, which will perform technical supervision and administration functions, is located in Strasbourg (France). It will provide the necessary services for the entry and processing of SIS II data. A backup central system, capable of ensuring all functionalities of the principal central system in the event of failure of this system, is located near Salzburg (Austria). Each Member State will be responsible for setting up, operating and maintaining its own national system and for connecting it to the central system. It designates an authority, the national SIS II office (N.SIS II office), which has central responsibility for its national SIS II project. This authority will be responsible for the smooth operation and security of its national system.

Each Member State designates its SIRENE Bureau. Supplementary information relating to SIS II alerts will be exchanged in accordance with the provisions of the “SIRENE Manual” and by using the communication infrastructure. Member States will keep a reference to the decisions giving rise to an alert at the SIRENE Bureau.

Member States will be liable for any damage caused to a person through the use of the national SIS II systems. They will also ensure that any potential misuse of data entered in SIS II or any exchange of supplementary information contrary to this regulation will be subject to effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties.

Operational management of the Central SIS II will consist of all the necessary tasks for keeping it running 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, in accordance with this regulation.

After a transitional period, a management authority, funded from the general budget of the EU, shall be responsible for the operational management of the Central SIS II and for a number of tasks relating to the communication infrastructure (supervision, security and coordination of relations between Member States and the provider). The Commission will be responsible for all other tasks relating to the communication infrastructure.

During a transitional period before the management authority takes up its responsibilities, the Commission shall be responsible for the operational management of Central SIS II. In accordance with the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities, the Commission may delegate the operational management and tasks relating to implementation of the budget to national public-sector bodies in two different countries that meet the specific criteria outlined in Article 15, paragraph 4 of the SIS II Regulation.

The regulation contains provisions to ensure adequate protection of personal data. In cooperation with the national supervisory authorities and the European Data Protection Supervisor, the Commission will accompany the start of the operation of SIS II with an information campaign informing the public about the objectives, the data stored, the authorities having access and the rights of individuals.

Alerts issued in respect of non-EU nationals for the purpose of refusing entry and stay

SIS II will only contain those categories of data supplied by each of the Member States, which are necessary for alerts for refusing entry or stay. Once the system is operational and alerts are included in it, the SIS II will only be possible to store the following information on persons for whom an alert has been issued: surname(s) and forename(s), name(s) at birth, aliases, specific physical characteristics, place and date of birth, sex, photographs, fingerprints, nationality(ies), whether the person concerned is armed, violent or has escaped, reason for the alert, authority issuing the alert, a reference to the decision giving rise to the alert and link(s) to other alerts issued in SIS II. It will also include the action to be taken in the event that there is a “hit” (i.e. if a competent national authority finds an alert in SIS II concerning a non-EU national on whom they have carried out a check). Should a Member State be unable to perform the requested action after obtaining a hit in SIS II, it will immediately inform the Member State that issued the alert.

Photographs and fingerprints will be used to confirm the identity of a non-EU national who has been located as a result of an alphanumeric search made in SIS II. As soon as this becomes technically possible, fingerprints may also be used to allow identification of a non-EU national on the basis of his/her biometric identifier. Before this functionality is implemented in SIS II, the Commission will present a report on the availability and readiness of the required technology.

Data on non-EU nationals, for whom an alert has been issued for refusing entry or stay, will be entered on the basis of a national alert based on a decision by the competent courts and administrative authorities taken on the basis of an individual assessment. An alert will be entered where the decision is based on a threat to public policy, to public security or to national security, which the presence of the non-EU national in question in the territory of a Member State may pose. It will also be possible to enter an alert when the decision is based on the fact that the non-EU national has been subject to a measure involving expulsion.

Access to and processing of data in SIS II

Authorities responsible for border control and other police and customs checks within the Member State concerned will have a right to access alerts. By extension, it will also be possible for national judicial authorities to access the system for the performance of their tasks. In any case, users will only be able to access data that is required for the performance of their tasks.

Before issuing an alert, Member States will determine whether the case is relevant enough to warrant the entry of the alert in SIS II. These alerts will only be kept for the time required to achieve the purposes for which they were entered. A Member State issuing an alert shall review the need to keep it within three years of its entry in SIS II.

It will only be possible to copy data for technical purposes. Such copies, which lead to off-line databases, may be retained for no more than 48 hours. It will not be possible to use data for administrative purposes.

A Member State issuing an alert will be responsible for ensuring that the data are accurate, up-to-date and lawfully entered in SIS II. Only the Member State issuing an alert will be authorised to modify, add to, correct, update or delete data that it has entered. If a Member State other than that issuing an alert obtains evidence suggesting that an item of data is incorrect, it will inform the Member State that issued the alert as soon as possible. The Member State that issued the alert will check the communication and, if necessary, correct or delete the item in question without delay. If the Member States are unable to reach an agreement within two months, the Member State that did not issue the alert will submit the matter to the European Data Protection Supervisor who will act as a mediator, jointly with the national supervisory authorities concerned.

It will be possible for a Member State to create a link between alerts it enters in SIS II, but this should only be done when there is a clear operational need.

Data processed in SIS II will not be transferred or made available to non-EU countries or to international organisations.

Data protection

Processing of sensitive categories of data (personal data revealing racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs or trade-union membership and data concerning health or sex life) will be prohibited.

Any person will have the right to request access to data relating to him/her (personal data *) that has been entered in SIS II, and to have factually inaccurate personal data corrected or unlawfully stored personal data deleted.

Information may not be communicated to the data subject if this is indispensable for the performance of a task in connection with an alert or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of third parties. Regarding the exercise of their rights of correction and deletion, individuals will be informed about the follow-up as soon as possible, and in any event no later than three months from the date of their application for correction or deletion.

It will be possible for any person to bring an action before the competent courts or authorities to access, correct, delete, or obtain information or compensation in connection with an alert relating to him/her.

The authority or authorities designated in each Member State, endowed with the powers referred to in Directive 95/46/EC on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, will independently monitor the lawfulness of the processing of SIS II personal data on their territory and the transmission of this data from their territory. They will ensure that an audit of the data-processing operations in the N.SIS II is carried out at least every four years.

The European Data Protection Supervisor will check that the personal data-processing activities of the management authority are carried out in accordance with this regulation. S/he will also ensure that an audit of the personal data-processing activities is carried out at least every four years. A report of this audit will be sent to the European Parliament, the Council, the management authority, the Commission and the national supervisory authorities.

The national supervisory authorities and the European Data Protection Supervisor cooperate actively. They exchange relevant information, assist one another and meet at least twice a year.

Final provisions

The regulation will apply to the Member States participating in the current Schengen Information System (SIS 1+) from the date to be set by the Council (acting by unanimity of its members representing the governments of the Member States participating in SIS 1+) once all necessary technical preparations for SIS II have been completed at central and Member State level and once all implementing measures have been adopted. Precise information on this matter is given in Article 55 of the regulation and in the legal instruments governing migration from SIS 1+ to SIS II.

Three years after the SIS II is brought into operation, and then every four years, the Commission will produce an overall evaluation of the Central SIS II and the bilateral and multilateral exchanges of supplementary information between Member States. It will transmit the evaluation to the European Parliament and the Council.

Key terms used in the act
  • Alert: a set of data entered in SIS II allowing the competent authorities to identify a person with a view to taking specific action.
  • Member States: EU countries and associated countries participating in the Schengen area. The United Kingdom and Ireland are not participating in aspects of SIS II falling under this regulation.
  • Supplementary information: information not stored in SIS II, but connected to SIS II alerts, which is to be exchanged, in order to allow Member States to consult or inform each other in the following cases: when entering an alert, following a hit in order to allow the appropriate action to be taken, when the required action cannot be taken, when dealing with the quality of SIS II data, when dealing with the compatibility and priority of alerts, when dealing with the right of access.
  • Additional data: data stored in SIS II and connected with SIS II alerts, which are to be made immediately available to the competent authorities of a Member State where a person in relation to whom data has been entered in SIS II is located as a result of searches made there.
  • Personal data: any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person.
  • Processing of personal data: any operation or set of operations, which is performed upon personal data, whether or not by automatic means, such as: collection, recording, organisation, storage, adaptation or alteration, retrieval, consultation, use, disclosure by transmission, dissemination or otherwise making available, alignment or combination, blocking, erasure or destruction.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Regulation No 1987/2006/EC

17.1.2007

OJ L 381 of 28.12.2006

Related Acts

Commission Decision 2010/261/EU of 4 May 2010 on the Security Plan for Central SIS II and the Communication Infrastructure [Official Journal L 112 of 5.5.2010].
This decision provides for the organisation of the security of the Central SIS II and its communication infrastructure, and establishes a security plan for both. The purpose is to ensure protection against any threats to their availability, integrity and confidentiality. The Commission is responsible for implementing and monitoring the security measures for the communication infrastructure and, during the transitional period, for the Central SIS II. Once the management authority becomes operational, it must adopt its own security plan for the Central SIS II.
For monitoring the implementation of the security measures, the Commission designates a System Security Officer. A Local Security Officer is designated for the Central SIS II and for the communication infrastructure. They are responsible for implementing and monitoring the security measures and procedures in the principal CS-SIS, including the backup CS-SIS, and in the communication infrastructure respectively.
The System Security Officer, in cooperation with the Local Security Officers, prepares a security policy that provides detailed measures and procedures for protecting the Central SIS II and the communication infrastructure. Among others, the policy provides measures for controlling:

  • access to data processing facilities;
  • removable media containing data and any other important assets;
  • storage of data;
  • passwords;
  • access to SIS II hardware and software;
  • communications through the communication infrastructure.

It also lays down security measures in relation to human resources, defining for example the functions and responsibilities of staff that have access to the Central SIS II.

Commission Decision 2008/333/EC of 4 March 2008 adopting the SIRENE Manual and other implementing measures for the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) [Official Journal L 123 of 08.05.2008].
The alerts in SIS II will contain a set of data that is absolutely necessary for identification of a person or object sought. In cases where the future end-users (officers from the competent national authorities) need to take action after obtaining a matching alert, they will require supplementary information on this alert (information that will not be contained in SIS II, but that will be connected to SIS II alerts).
National offices known as SIRENE Bureaux (Supplementary Information Request at the National Entries) have been set up in all Schengen countries to assist with obtaining supplementary information for SIS by acting as the contact points between a Member State creating an alert and one achieving the match. The same offices will be used for SIS II.
The SIRENE Manual is a set of instructions indicating both the general and specific procedures that competent authorities will have to follow for exchanging supplementary information on the following categories of alerts:

  • alerts for refusal of entry or stay (first pillar);
  • alerts for arrest for surrender or extradition purposes (this and the following categories fall under the third pillar);
  • alerts on missing persons;
  • alerts sought for a judicial procedure;
  • alerts for discreet and specific checks;
  • alerts on objects for seizure or use as evidence.

The purpose will be to assure communication among Member States, in particular when entering an alert, acting on an alert, handling multiple alerts, and dealing with the quality of SIS II data or with rights of access.
The implementing measures cover SIS II aspects that, due to their technical nature, level of detail and need for regular updating, are not covered exhaustively by the SIS II legal instruments.
As is the case for other instruments related to SIS II, there are two legal instruments (Commission decisions) for the SIRENE Manual and implementing measures: one for the first pillar (Annex of Decision 2008/333/JHA) and one for the third pillar (Annex of Decision 2008/334/JHA). The Annexes to both decisions are identical.