The creation of an area in which the free movement of persons across internal borders is ensured is one of the main achievements of the Union. In an area without internal border control, it is necessary to have a common response to situations seriously affecting the public policy or internal security of that area, of parts thereof, or of one or more Member States, by allowing for the temporary reintroduction of internal border control in exceptional circumstances, but without jeopardising the principle of the free movement of persons. Given the impact that such measures of last resort may have on all persons having the right to move within the area without internal border control, the conditions and procedures for reintroducing such measures should be laid down, in order to ensure that they are exceptional and that the principle of proportionality is respected. The scope and duration of any temporary reintroduction of such measures should be restricted to the bare minimum needed to respond to a serious threat to public policy or internal security.
(2)
Free movement of persons within the area without internal border control is a key Union achievement. As free movement of persons is affected by the temporary reintroduction of internal border control, any decision to reintroduce such control should be taken in accordance with commonly agreed criteria and should be duly notified to the Commission or be recommended by a Union institution. In any case, the reintroduction of internal border control should remain an exception and should only be effected as a measure of last resort, for a strictly limited scope and period of time, based on specific objective criteria and on an assessment of its necessity which should be monitored at Union level. Where a serious threat to public policy or internal security requires immediate action, a Member State should be able to reintroduce border control at its internal borders for a period not exceeding ten days. Any prolongation of that period needs to be monitored at Union level.
(3)
The necessity and proportionality of reintroducing internal border control should be balanced against the threat to public policy or internal security triggering the need for such reintroduction, as should alternative measures which could be taken at national or Union level, or both, and the impact of such control on the free movement of persons within the area without internal border control.
(4)
The reintroduction of internal border control might exceptionally be necessary in the case of a serious threat to public policy or to internal security at the level of the area without internal border control or at national level, in particular following terrorist incidents or threats, or because of threats posed by organised crime.
(5)
Migration and the crossing of external borders by a large number of third-country nationals should not, per se, be considered to be a threat to public policy or internal security.
(6)
In accordance with the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, a derogation from the fundamental principle of free movement of persons must be interpreted strictly and the concept of public policy presupposes the existence of a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society.
(7)
Based on the experience gathered with respect to the functioning of the area without internal border control and in order to help ensure the consistent implementation of the Schengen acquis, the Commission may draw up guidelines on the reintroduction of internal border control in cases which require such a measure on a temporary basis and in cases where immediate action is needed. Those guidelines should provide clear indicators to facilitate the assessment of the circumstances that could constitute serious threats to public policy or internal security.
(8)
Where serious deficiencies in the carrying out of external border control are identified in an evaluation report drawn up pursuant to Council Regulation (EU) No 1053/2013 of 7 October 2013 establishing an evaluation and monitoring mechanism to verify the application of the Schengen acquis (2) and with a view to ensuring compliance with the recommendations adopted pursuant to that Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission to recommend that the evaluated Member State take specific measures, such as deploying European border guard teams, submitting strategic plans or, as a last resort and taking into account the seriousness of the situation, closing a specific border crossing-point. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers (3). In view of the terms of Article 2(2)(b)(iii) of that Regulation, the examination procedure is applicable.
(9)
The temporary reintroduction of border control at certain internal borders under a specific Union-level procedure could also be justified in the case of exceptional circumstances and as a measure of last resort where the overall functioning of the area without internal border control is put at risk as a result of persistent serious deficiencies relating to external border control identified in the context of a rigorous evaluation process in accordance with Articles 14 and 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1053/2013, where those circumstances would constitute a serious threat to public policy or internal security in that area or in parts thereof. Such a specific procedure for the temporary reintroduction of border control at certain internal borders could also be triggered, under the same conditions, as a result of the serious negligence by the evaluated Member State of its obligations. In view of the politically sensitive nature of such measures which touch on national executive and enforcement powers regarding internal border control, implementing powers to adopt recommendations under that specific Union-level procedure should be conferred on the Council, acting on a proposal from the Commission.
(10)
Before any recommendation on the temporary reintroduction of border control at certain internal borders is adopted, the possibility of resorting to measures aiming to address the underlying situation, including assistance by Union bodies, offices or agencies, such as the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders (‘Frontex’), established by Council Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004 (4), or the European Police Office (‘Europol’), established by Council Decision 2009/371/JHA (5), and technical or financial support measures at national level, Union level, or both, should be fully explored in a timely manner. Where a serious deficiency is detected, the Commission may provide financial support measures to help the Member State concerned. Moreover, any Commission and Council recommendation should be based on substantiated information.
(11)
The Commission should have the possibility to adopt immediately applicable implementing acts where, in duly justified cases relating to the need to prolong border control at internal borders, imperative grounds of urgency so require.
(12)
The evaluation reports and the recommendations referred to in Articles 14 and 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1053/2013 should form the basis for the triggering of the specific measures in the case of serious deficiencies relating to external border control and of the specific procedure in case of exceptional circumstances putting the overall functioning of the area without internal border control at risk provided for in this Regulation. The Member States and the Commission jointly conduct regular, objective and impartial evaluations in order to verify the correct application of this Regulation and the Commission coordinates the evaluations in close cooperation with the Member States. The evaluation mechanism consists of the following elements: multiannual and annual evaluation programmes, announced and unannounced on-site visits carried out by a small team of Commission representatives and of experts designated by Member States, reports on the outcome of the evaluations adopted by the Commission and recommendations for remedial action adopted by the Council on a proposal from the Commission, appropriate follow-up, monitoring and reporting.
(13)
Since the objective of this Regulation, namely to provide for common rules on the temporary reintroduction of internal border control in exceptional circumstances, can only be achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 TEU. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.
(14)
In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is therefore not bound by it or subject to its application. Given that this Regulation builds upon the Schengen acquis, Denmark shall, in accordance with Article 4 of that Protocol, decide within a period of six months after the Council has decided on this Regulation whether it will implement it in its national law.
(15)
This Regulation constitutes a development of provisions of the Schengen acquis, in which the United Kingdom does not take part, in accordance with Council Decision 2000/365/EC of 29 May 2000 concerning the request of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to take part in some of the provisions of the Schengen acquis (6). The United Kingdom is therefore not taking part in adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application.
(16)
This Regulation constitutes a development of provisions of the Schengen acquis, in which Ireland does not take part, in accordance with 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 (7). Ireland is therefore not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application.
(17)
As regards Iceland and Norway, this Regulation 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 latters' association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis (8) which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A, of Council Decision 1999/437/EC (9) on certain arrangements for the application of that Agreement.
(18)
As regards Switzerland, this Regulation constitutes a development of 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 (10) which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A, of Decision 1999/437/EC read in conjunction with Article 3 of Council Decision 2008/146/EC (11).
(19)
As regards Liechtenstein, this Regulation 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 (12) which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A, of Decision 1999/437/EC read in conjunction with Article 3 of Council Decision 2011/350/EU (13).
(20)
As regards Cyprus, this Regulation constitutes an act building upon, or otherwise related to, the Schengen acquis within the meaning of Article 3(2) of the 2003 Act of Accession.
(21)
As regards Bulgaria and Romania, this Regulation constitutes an act building upon, or otherwise related to, the Schengen acquis within the meaning of Article 4(2) of the 2005 Act of Accession.
(22)
As regards Croatia, this Regulation constitutes an act building upon, or otherwise related to, the Schengen acquis within the meaning of Article 4(2) of the 2011 Act of Accession.
(23)
This Regulation respects fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, including the freedom of movement of persons and of residence. This Regulation must be implemented according to those rights and principles.
(24)
Regulation (EC) No 562/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 establishing a Community Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code) (14) should therefore be amended accordingly,
