Entry/exit system is unfit for purpose

Today is the final debate and vote on the agreement between the European Parliament and the Council on the entry/exit system. The Greens/EFA group commissioned a study from the University of Luxembourg which shows that the proposals are against EU fundamental rights. The study builds on a July 2017 opinion from the European Court of Justice on the EU-Canada-PNR which cast major doubts on the legality of storing such data for longer than the actual travel.

The entry/exit system will store data of passengers travelling inside the EU and out of the EU. Information will include face scans and finger prints from third country nationals and will affect mainly tourists and business people. The data would be stored for up to four years and be accessible to police and law enforcement authorities. The estimated cost is €1 billion.

Greens/EFA MEP Jan Philipp Albrecht comments:

"It is highly doubtful that the proposal on the table is compatible with ECJ case law or fundamental EU rights. Despite this, the majority of MEPs look set to back this deal as it stands.

“The proposed entry/exit system is unfit for purpose. The proposals are completely disproportionate and wildly expensive. It is outrageous that ordinary travellers such as tourists and business people will be put under blanket suspicion. There is no evidence that this will benefit police and law enforcement authorities in tackling serious crime and terrorism. Millions of euros will be wasted collecting irrelevant and useless information.

"Instead, we need to see better exchange of information via the already existing Schengen Information System and more personnel to investigate genuine suspects and persons of risk. The deal should be renegotiated and brought back to the parliament in a more acceptable form."

Background and links

The EU-LISA database agency in Tallinn is expected to store the data for three years, or four years for travellers with a non-valid visa. The current Schengen Information System already collects and provides data but only when there is suspicion.

• You can view the study commissioned by the Greens/EFA group here: https://www.janalbrecht.eu/fileadmin/material/Dokumente/MDC_Opinion_Impact_CJEU_Opinion_on_EES_10_2017_FINAL.pdf
• The July 2017 opinion from the European Court of Justice on the EU-Canada-PNR: https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2017-07/cp170084en.pdf
• A study on behalf of the European Parliament estimated costs of €1 billion (page 21): http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2016/571381/IPOL_STU(2016)571381_EN.pdf
• The debate starts at 9am: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/home.html