eu-com-schengen-coop

More documents

Recommendations

Info

4. Challenges 1. Describe the response to challenges, if any, listed in the 2012-2013 report MS made a lot of efforts towards upgrading the mechanism to address suspected cases of visa fraud or migration alerts and regular exchanges proved to be efficient. MS continued exchange information in matters of relevance to the LSC consuls to ensure standardisation of practices (for example regarding multiple visas). It was not achieved remarkable progress on the establishment of a common information sheet, as per guidelines, and Local Schengen Manual that would serve as country introduction for new consular staff/ new MS. MS have not been started enhanced cooperation between consular offices through exchange of personal/on the job training. During last reporting period none training sessions in Baku with participation of competent Commission DG and MS experts on LSC issues were organised. 2. Describe subjects to be addressed within the next reporting period (2014-2015). LSC Azerbaijan has set a number of goals for the next period. Those can be listed as follows (list non exhaustive): The final version of the Harmonisation of lists of supporting documents will submitted to DG Home, possible adopted by Commission and MS will synchronize the implementation of list in the framework of endorsed Visa Facilitation and Readmission Agreements. Establish format for regular meetings between MS and Azerbaijan's MFA Consular Department. Exchange of good practices regarding introduction of VIS. Organise few training sessions in Baku with participation of competent Commission DG and MS experts on relevant to LSC issues. Establishment of a common information sheet, as per guidelines, and Local Schengen Manual that would serve as country introduction for new consular staff/ new MS. 5. Other issues Visa application centres: France and UK finalised negotiations with one international company, which will provide outsourcing services for collecting and returning processed applications. 12893/14 PR/lm 23 DG D 1 A EN
EUROPEAN UNION DELEGATION TO THE REPUBLIC OF BELARUS 20/06/2014 LOCAL SCHENGEN COOPERATION (LSC) in MINSK (BELARUS) 2013- 2014 REPORT 12 1. Introduction Ten Schengen Member states deliver visas (Czech Republic, Estonia, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Slovakia) out of fourteen (+ Austria, Finland, Sweden and Switzerland) present in Minsk. Bulgaria and Romania are also present and deliver visas. The United Kingdom was present and delivered visas until March 2014. In November 2013, a visa center was opened in Minsk for the collection of applications for Denmark and Spain (located in Moscow). As representation is concerned, please note the following: - Estonia represents Finland and Sweden; - France represents Iceland and Norway; - Germany represents Austria, Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Slovenia; - Hungary represents Switzerland; - Italy represents Malta; - Latvia represents Spain in Belarus, and represents Estonia, France and Poland in Vitebsk consular district; - Lithuania represents Greece; Lithuania also represents Estonia in Grodno (Grodno and Brest regions); - Slovakia represents Portugal. The MS work towards the full implementation of the Council conclusions of 2011 and 2012 on Belarus. 2. LSC meetings held in 2013-2014 During the reporting period (past 12 months), there have been five LSC meetings (May, September, December 2013 and February 2014). Attendance: the meetings are generally very well attended; from 9 to 10 MS were present in the meetings. As previously, EUDEL is organising and chairing these meetings in its premises. Embassies of Bulgaria and Romania are always invited to the meetings and attend most of them. EUDEL draws up the meetings' minutes and disseminates first draft among LSC members for comments before their final adoption. Also, EUDEL asks MS for input to the meetings' agenda before each meeting. Some MS send the minutes of the meetings to their capitals. 12 April 2013 – March 2014 12893/14 PR/lm 24 DG D 1 A EN
Page 1 and 2: Council of the European Union Bruss
Page 3 and 4: SENEGAL* SERBIA SOUTH KOREA SRI LAN
Page 5 and 6: 3.2 Assessment of the need to harmo
Page 7 and 8: The harmonisation of the list of su
Page 9 and 10: 5 réunions habituelles (en avril,
Page 11 and 12: EUROPEAN UNION DELEGATION TO ARGENT
Page 13 and 14: The main challenge for 2014 with re
Page 15 and 16: organized as another step in the pu
Page 17 and 18: The EUDEL held an extraordinary mee
Page 19 and 20: EUROPEAN UNION DELEGATION TO Azerba
Page 21 and 22: information via established Local S
Page 23: 3.3 Exchange of information Monthly
Page 27 and 28: 4. Challenges 1. Response to challe
Page 29 and 30: A partir du 31 mars 2014, aucun vis
Page 31 and 32: 1. Le récent cas de trafic de 200
Page 33 and 34: The harmonization of the list of su
Page 35 and 36: 2. LSC meetings held in 2013 During
Page 37 and 38: Please see annex A, which table sho
Page 39 and 40: (BAC is a mechanism specified to en
Page 41 and 42: Due to the continental size of Braz
Page 43 and 44: UNION EUROPÉENE DÉLÉGATION AU RO
Page 45 and 46: Il est constaté que pour les EM no
Page 47 and 48: ouleversement en ce qui concerne la
Page 49 and 50: EUROPEAN UNION DELEGATION TO CANADA
Page 51 and 52: 3.3 Exchange of information The gro
Page 53 and 54: EUROPEAN UNION DELEGATION TO THE RE
Page 55 and 56: 3.3 Exchange of information The fol
Page 57 and 58: The Member States do not, apparentl
Page 59 and 60: EUROPEAN UNION DELEGATION TO CHINA
Page 61 and 62: 3.2 Assessment of the need to harmo
Page 63 and 64: Related to the "ban" on setting up
Page 65 and 66: UNION EUROPEENNE DELEGATION EN REPU
Page 67 and 68: COOPERATION LOCALE AU TITRE DE SCHE
Page 69 and 70: Allemagne Belgique Espagne France I
Page 71 and 72: Coordination with Member States rep
Page 73 and 74: 3.4 Any other initiative taken in L
Page 75 and 76:
3.2 Assessment of the need to harmo
Page 77 and 78:
3. State of play 3.1 Application of
Page 79 and 80:
UNION EUROPÉENNE DELEGATION AU GAB
Page 81 and 82:
2. Réunions LSC organisées en 201
Page 83 and 84:
EUROPEAN UNION DELEGATION TO GEORGI
Page 85 and 86:
3.4 Any other initiative taken in L
Page 87 and 88:
situation triggered notably the vig
Page 89 and 90:
3. Etat des lieux 3.1 Application d
Page 91 and 92:
EUROPEAN UNION DELEGATION TO INDIA
Page 93 and 94:
exchange served as a basis for futu
Page 95 and 96:
more useful than the previous ones
Page 97 and 98:
Other SGs focused on the assessment
Page 99 and 100:
This report was prepared by the EUD
Page 101 and 102:
any implications. While there were
Page 103 and 104:
3.1 Application of the Visa Code In
Page 105 and 106:
This report has been approved by th
Page 107 and 108:
Precise formulations were found to
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
EUROPEAN UNION DELEGATION OF THE EU
Page 113 and 114:
4. Challenges in 2014-2015 On local
Page 115 and 116:
2. LSC meetings held in 2013-2014 F
Page 117 and 118:
5. Other issues Kosovo is still con
Page 119 and 120:
La coopération est encouragée et
Page 121 and 122:
UNION EUROPEENNE DELEGATION EN REPU
Page 123 and 124:
EUROPEAN UNION DELEGATION TO MONTEN
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
isks. Therefore, in general terms,
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
- Belgium - France - Germany - The
Page 133 and 134:
oader scale changes both in Abuja a
Page 135 and 136:
30 May 2014 LOCAL SCHENGEN COOPERAT
Page 137 and 138:
Ensure that regular meetings of con
Page 139 and 140:
applications for Filipino applicant
Page 141 and 142:
done to discuss how an accredited c
Page 143 and 144:
The Schengen Member States and EUD
Page 145 and 146:
LOCAL SCHENGEN COOPERATION (LSC) in
Page 147 and 148:
As regards the challenges indicated
Page 149 and 150:
The key challenge during the report
Page 151 and 152:
UNION EUROPÉENNE Délégation en R
Page 153 and 154:
EUROPEAN UNION DELEGATION TO THE RE
Page 155 and 156:
LSC Serbia Schengen office 2012 A v
Page 157 and 158:
The possibility to trigger such a '
Page 159 and 160:
Coordination meetings are chaired b
Page 161 and 162:
from the US Foreign Service Institu
Page 163 and 164:
The EU Delegations main role in the
Page 165 and 166:
LOCAL SCHENGEN COOPERATION (LSC) in
Page 167 and 168:
European Economic and Trade Office
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
that as a reciprocity measure the E
Page 173 and 174:
From 2013 on Schengen states' citiz
Page 175 and 176:
Republic. In at least one instance
Page 177 and 178:
September 2013. Because of the larg
Page 179 and 180:
The participation of Bulgaria, Roma
Page 181 and 182:
LSC exchanged information on the co
Page 183 and 184:
% Multiple entry % refusal rate 201
Page 185 and 186:
3.2. Exchange of information on the
Page 187 and 188:
Early 2013 the Yammer tool for exch
Page 189 and 190:
provide solutions for approval by t
Page 191 and 192:
EUDEL has also been regularly updat
Page 193 and 194:
3. State of play 3.1 Application of
Page 195 and 196:
Annex 1: Representation arrangement
Page 197 and 198:
2. LSC meetings in 2013-2014 Three
Page 199 and 200:
EUROPEAN UNION Office of the Europe
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Due to difficulties in harmonising
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209:
show all

eu-com-schengen-coop

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?