BAKGRUNN (fra europaparlaments- og rådsforordningen)

(1) The Union, in constituting an area of freedom, security and justice, should ensure the absence of internal border controls for persons, frame a common policy on asylum and migration, external border control and returns, and prevent unauthorised movements between Member States, based on solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility between Member States, which is also fair towards third-country nationals and stateless persons and in full respect of fundamental rights.

(2) A comprehensive approach is required, with the objective of reinforcing mutual trust between Member States, recognising that the effectiveness of the overall approach depends on all components being jointly addressed and implemented in an integrated manner.

(3) The Union and its Member States could be confronted with migratory challenges that can vary greatly, in particular with regard to the scale and the composition of the arrivals. It is therefore essential that the Union be equipped with a variety of tools to respond to all types of situations. The comprehensive approach as outlined in Regulation (EU) 2024/1351 of the European Parliament and of the Council (4), including through partnerships with relevant third countries, should ensure that the Union has at its disposal specific rules to manage migration effectively, in particular with regard to the triggering of a mandatory solidarity mechanism, and that all the necessary measures are put in place to prevent crises from happening. This Regulation sets out rules that are complementary to that approach as well as to the rules set out in Council Directive 2001/55/EC (5), which can be used at the same time.

(4) Notwithstanding the putting in place of the necessary preventive measures, it cannot be excluded that a situation of crisis or force majeure in the field of migration and asylum arises due to circumstances beyond the control of the Union and its Member States. Such exceptional situations can include the mass arrivals of third-country nationals and stateless persons in the territory of one or more Member States, or a situation of instrumentalisation of migrants by a third country or a hostile non-state actor with the aim of destabilising the Member State or the Union, or a situation of force majeure in the Member State. In those circumstances, it is possible that the measures and flexibility provided under Regulation (EU) 2024/1351 and Regulation (EU) 2024/1348 of the European Parliament and of the Council (6) are not sufficient to address such exceptional situations. Those exceptional situations are different from those in which a Member State faces a significant migratory situation due to the cumulative effect of arrivals on its well-prepared asylum, reception and migration system or where a Member State is under migratory pressure because of the scale of arrivals which, while not reaching the levels of mass arrivals, nevertheless creates disproportionate obligations on its well-prepared systems, and for which situations Regulation (EU) 2024/1351 provides for relevant measures. Furthermore, this Regulation does not affect the exercise of the responsibilities incumbent upon Member States with regard to the maintenance of law and order and the safeguarding of internal security.

(5) This Regulation intends to enhance the preparedness and resilience of the Union to manage situations of crisis and to facilitate operational coordination, capacity support and the availability of funding in situations of crisis.

(6) This Regulation ensures the effective application of the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility between Member States and the adaptation of the relevant rules on asylum procedure, including the application of the expedited procedure so that the Member States and the Union have the necessary legal tools at their disposal to react swiftly to situations of crisis and force majeure, including the adaptation of the timelines to carry out all procedures.

(7) This Regulation ensures that Member States receive full support in situations of crisis and force majeure, including through the solidarity mechanism that ensures a fair sharing of responsibility and a balance of efforts between Member States in situations of crisis.

(8) This Regulation respects the fundamental rights of third-country nationals and stateless persons and observes the principles recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’), in particular the respect and protection of human dignity, prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, respect for private and family life, the principle of the best interests of the child, the right to asylum and protection in the event of removal, expulsion or extradition, as well as the Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, as supplemented by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967 (the ‘Geneva Convention’). This Regulation should be implemented in compliance with the Charter and general principles of Union law as well as with international law. In order to reflect the primary consideration that must be given to the best interests of the child, in line with the 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the need to respect family life, as well as to ensure the protection of the health of the persons concerned, safeguards should be applied in respect of minors and their family members, and of applicants for international protection (‘applicants’) whose state of health requires specific and adequate support. The rules and guarantees set out in Regulation (EU) 2024/1348 should continue to apply in respect of persons subject to the derogations provided for in this Regulation, except where this Regulation provides otherwise. The rules set out in Directive (EU) 2024/1346 of the European Parliament and of the Council (7), including those concerning the detention of applicants, should continue to apply from the moment an application for international protection is made.

(9) This Regulation does not provide for derogations from the rules and guarantees, including those related to material reception conditions, under Directive (EU) 2024/1346. A Member State in a situation of crisis should provide for additional and sufficient human and material resources to be able to meet its obligations under that Directive.

(10) The rules and guarantees set out in Regulations (EU) 2024/1356 (8), (EU) 2024/1358 (9) and (EU) 2024/1347 (10) of the European Parliament and of the Council and in Directive (EU) 2024/XXX of the European Parliament and of the Council (11) should continue to apply irrespective of derogations applied under this Regulation. Member States should apply the measures provided for in this Regulation only in accordance with the conditions to which those measures are subject, as provided for in the relevant Council implementing decision adopted pursuant to this Regulation and where strictly necessary and proportionate.

(11) The adoption of measures under this Regulation in respect of a particular Member State should be without prejudice to the possibility to apply Article 78(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).

(12) Mass arrivals of third-country nationals or stateless persons could lead to a situation where a Member State is not in a position to process the applications for international protection of third-country nationals and stateless persons in accordance with the rules set out in Regulation (EU) 2024/1351 and Regulation (EU) 2024/1348, and that has consequences for the functioning of the asylum and migration system, not only in that Member State but in the Union as a whole. Therefore, it is necessary to lay down specific rules and mechanisms that should enable effective action to address such situations.

(13) Member States should have sufficient human and financial resources and infrastructure to implement asylum and migration management policies effectively. Member States should ensure appropriate coordination between the relevant national authorities as well as with the national authorities of the other Member States to ensure that their asylum, reception, including child protection services, or return system is well prepared, including preparedness and contingency planning and that each component has sufficient capacity.

(14) A situation of instrumentalisation could arise where a third country or a hostile non-state actor encourages or facilitates the movement of third-country nationals or stateless persons to the external borders of the Union or to a Member State, where such actions are indicative of an intention of a third country or a hostile non-state actor to destabilise the Union or a Member State, and where such actions are liable to put at risk essential functions of a Member State, including the maintenance of law and order or the safeguard of its national security.

(15) Situations in which non-state actors are involved in organised crime, in particular smuggling, should not be considered as instrumentalisation of migrants when there is no aim to destabilise the Union or a Member State.

(16) Humanitarian assistance should not be considered as instrumentalisation of migrants when there is no aim to destabilise the Union or a Member State.

(17) Without prejudice to measures applicable under other policy fields and legal instruments, to ensure an immediate and appropriate response to hybrid threats in accordance with Union law and international obligations, this Regulation focuses on the specific measures applicable in the area of migration aimed at addressing the situations of instrumentalisation.

(18) In a situation of instrumentalisation, third-country nationals and stateless persons could apply for international protection at the external border or in a transit zone of a Member State, often being persons apprehended in connection with unauthorised crossings of the external border by land, sea or air or who are disembarked following search and rescue operations. This can lead, in particular, to an unexpected significant increase in the caseload of applications for international protection at the external borders. In that regard, effective and genuine access to the international protection procedure must be ensured in accordance with Article 18 of the Charter and the Geneva Convention.

(19) As regards Cyprus, Council Regulation (EC) No 866/2004 (12) provides for specific rules that apply to the line between the areas of the Republic of Cyprus in which the Government of the Republic of Cyprus exercises effective control and those areas in which it does not exercise effective control. Although that line does not constitute an external border, a situation where a third country or a hostile non-state actor encourages or facilitates the movement of third-country nationals or stateless persons to cross that line should be considered as instrumentalisation, if all the other elements of instrumentalisation are present.

(20) A Member State can also be faced with abnormal and unforeseeable circumstances outside its control, the consequences of which could not have been avoided in spite of the exercise of all due care. Such situations of force majeure could prevent the Member State from complying with its obligations under Union law and could have consequences not only in that Member State, but in the Union as a whole. Examples of a situation of force majeure include, among others, pandemics and natural disasters.

(21) Where a Member State considers itself to be in a situation of crisis or force majeure, that Member State should be able to request authorisation to apply the derogations and solidarity measures provided for in this Regulation. That request should include a description of the situation and should specify which measures it requests in order to address the specific situation. It should also provide the reasons why the situation requires it to resort to those measures and, where relevant, indicate which measures have already been taken to address the situation.

(22) The use of measures included in the Permanent EU Migration Support Toolbox as established by Article 6(3) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1351 (the ‘Toolbox’) should not be a precondition to benefit from solidarity measures under this Regulation.

(23) In a situation of crisis, the Member State facing such a situation should have the possibility to request from other Member States solidarity and support measures that are the most suited to its needs in order to manage the situation, and that call for enhanced solidarity compared to that provided for in Regulation (EU) 2024/1351 in alleviating the Member State’s responsibility for handling a situation of crisis. The enhanced solidarity and support measures could take the form of relocations, financial contributions, alternative solidarity measures or a combination of the above.

(24) In a situation of crisis or force majeure, the Member State facing such a situation should have the possibility to request authorisation to apply derogations from relevant rules on the asylum procedure, including the asylum border procedure. Where relevant, such requests should also include the choice of the Member State concerned as regards the exclusion or the cessation of the border procedure for specific categories of applicants. Together with such a request, the Member State concerned should be able to notify the Commission of its intention to apply the derogation from the registration deadline, before it is authorised to do so in a Council implementing decision, as well as the precise reasons for which immediate action is required. The application of that derogation should not exceed ten days from the day following the request unless authorised in the Council implementing decision. The Commission and the Council, when fulfilling their respective responsibilities under the authorisation procedure, should proceed expeditiously in order to limit the time gap between the end of such period and the adoption of the corresponding Council implementing decision.

(25) Considering that a Member State could be faced with several of the situations described in this Regulation at the same time, it is possible for that Member State to request various measures under this Regulation and be authorised to apply or benefit from those measures simultaneously, which are conceived as complementary.

(26) In order to allow for the proper management of a situation of crisis, including instrumentalisation, or force majeure, and to ensure predictability and the appropriate adaptation of the relevant rules on the asylum procedure to such situations, including the asylum border procedure, power should be conferred upon the Commission to assess the situation, upon a reasoned request by the Member State concerned, and to determine, by way of an implementing decision, whether the requesting Member State is facing a situation of crisis, including instrumentalisation, or force majeure.

(27) In a situation of crisis, the solidarity measures to address such a situation should go beyond those provided for in Regulation (EU) 2024/1351. For that reason, when assessing the situation, the Commission should take into account quantitative and qualitative indicators provided for in Article 9 of that Regulation and substantiated information provided by the requesting Member State and information gathered pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2021/2303 of the European Parliament and of the Council (13) and Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and of the Council (14) and the European Annual Asylum and Migration Report referred to in Regulation (EU) 2024/1351. In situations of instrumentalisation, the Commission should also take into account the reasons why the Toolbox is not sufficient to address the situation. The Commission should gather sufficient information to properly assess whether the requesting Member State is facing a situation of crisis, including instrumentalisation, or force majeure, in consultation with the relevant Agencies, in particular the European Union Agency for Asylum (the ‘Asylum Agency’), the European Border and Coast Guard Agency and the European Union Agency for the Fundamental Rights, as well as international organisations, in particular the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), and other relevant organisations.

(28) To ensure a high level of political scrutiny and support and expression of the Union’s solidarity, it is relevant to consider whether the European Council has acknowledged that the Union or one or more of its Member States are facing a situation of instrumentalisation of migrants. The instrumentalisation of migrants is liable to put at risk the essential functions of a Member State, including the maintenance of law and order or the safeguard of its national security.

(29) In order to provide for an appropriate response that is necessary and proportionate to address the situation, the Commission proposal should identify, where relevant, the specific derogations that Member States should be authorised to apply. In a situation of instrumentalisation, the persons subject to instrumentalisation to whom the relevant derogations could be applied should be clearly identified. In a situation of crisis, where appropriate and after consultation with the Member State facing the situation of crisis, the Commission should include in its proposal a draft Solidarity Response Plan, indicating the relevant solidarity measures and their level required for the specific situation, including the total amount of relocations, financial contributions or alternative solidarity measures and their level, recognising that the various types of solidarity are of equal value, and respecting the full discretion of Member States in choosing the solidarity measures.

(30) Whereas in a situation of migratory pressure, relocation or responsibility offsets are to cover 60 % of the relocation needs under Regulation (EU) 2024/1351, in a situation of crisis, it is important that all solidarity needs of the Member State concerned are addressed. For that reason, if a Council implementing decision establishes a Solidarity Response Plan, the Member State facing the situation of crisis should have priority to use the unallocated solidarity pledges or those that have not yet been implemented and that are available in the Annual Solidarity Pool established in accordance with Article 57 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1351. If that is not possible or if the Annual Solidarity Pool does not contain sufficient pledges to cover the identified needs, the Member State facing the situation of crisis should also be able to make use of the contributions contained in the Council implementing decision, recognising that the various types of solidarity are of equal value. With a view to addressing all the needs of the Member State concerned, if the combination of the relocation pledges available in the Annual Solidarity Pool and in the Council implementing decision is not sufficient, responsibility offsets should become mandatory to cover the needs set out in the Solidarity Response Plan. For that to happen, there should be persons present on the territory of the contributing Member State to whom the offsets apply.

(31) Situations of crisis or force majeure are also liable to put at risk the essential functions of a Member State. In order to strengthen mutual trust between the Member States and to improve coordination at Union level, implementing powers should be conferred upon the Council to adopt an implementing decision authorising a Member State to apply the derogations and the solidarity measures provided for in this Regulation where the conditions laid down are met. The time period for the application of the measures authorised by the initial implementing decision should be three months. It should be possible to extend that period for a further three months upon confirmation by the Commission that the situation of crisis or force majeure persists. The Council should be empowered to further extend the authorisation to apply the derogations and the solidarity measures, by up to three months, on the basis of a Commission proposal, if the circumstances justifying the extension of the derogations and solidarity measures persist. It should be possible to extend that period by a further three months upon confirmation by the Commission that the situation persists. The Council should be empowered to repeal the application of the measures on the basis of a Commission proposal when the circumstances justifying the application of the derogations and solidarity measures have come to an end. It should be possible for the decision extending the authorisation to amend the derogations applied. In exercising their powers and carrying out their responsibilities, the Commission and the Council should ensure at all times that the principles of proportionality and necessity are respected.

(32) The Council implementing decision should specify, where appropriate, the specific derogations that the Member State facing a situation of crisis, or force majeure is authorised to apply, depending on the nature of each derogation, and set the date from which they could be applied. Moreover, the decision should state the grounds on which it is based and the personal scope of the derogations.

(33) The Council implementing decision should establish, where appropriate, a Solidarity Response Plan, indicating the specific solidarity and support measures required and the levels thereof, as well as the pledges made by the contributing Member States. To that end, the pledging exercise should take place in the framework of the adoption of the Council implementing decision. It is important to ensure the full discretion of the contributing Member States to choose between the types of solidarity and support measures.

(34) Given the importance of applying the measures set out in this Regulation only for as long and to the extent strictly necessary, the Commission and the Council should keep the situation under constant monitoring and review as regards the necessity and proportionality of those measures. In that context, the Commission should pay particular attention to compliance with fundamental rights and humanitarian standards and can request the Asylum Agency to initiate a monitoring exercise of the concerned Member State’s asylum or reception system pursuant to Article 15(2) of Regulation (EU) 2021/2303.

(35) The procedural rules set out in Regulation (EU) 2024/1351 for carrying out relocation apply for the purpose of ensuring the proper implementation of the solidarity measures in a situation of crisis, taking into account the gravity and urgency of that situation.

(36) To ensure the smooth implementation of the solidarity mechanism under this Regulation, the EU Solidarity Coordinator should, in addition to the tasks laid down in Regulation (EU) 2024/1351, support relocation activities and promote a culture of preparedness, cooperation and resilience among Member States. In a situation of crisis, the EU Solidarity Coordinator should, every two weeks, provide a bulletin on the state of the implementation and functioning of the relocation mechanism. The office of the EU Solidarity Coordinator should be provided with sufficient staff and resources to effectively fulfil its role under this Regulation. When implementing relocation, primary consideration should be given to vulnerable persons.

(37) Vulnerable persons should be given primary consideration for relocation, in particular when they have special reception needs within the meaning of Article 24 of Directive (EU) 2024/1346, or are in need of special procedural guarantees as referred to in Articles 20 to 23 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1348. According to Article 24 of Directive (EU) 2024/1346, applicants falling within any of the following categories are more likely to have special reception needs: minors, unaccompanied minors, persons with disabilities, elderly persons, pregnant women, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex persons, single parents with minor children, victims of trafficking in human beings, persons with serious illnesses, persons with mental disorders including post traumatic stress disorder and persons who have been subjected to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violence, such as victims of gender-based violence, of female genital mutilation, of child or forced marriage, or violence committed with a sexual, gender, racist or religious motive.

(38) In contrast to the rules set out in Regulation (EU) 2024/1351 where Member States are not obliged to take responsibility above their fair share, in a situation of crisis, the implementation of the Solidarity Response plan could potentially lead to one or several contributing Member States taking responsibility for examining applications for international protection above their fair share. In such cases, such a Member State should be entitled to reduce proportionally the part above the fair share from the implementation of solidarity pledges under the upcoming annual cycles of Regulation (EU) 2024/1351 over a period of five years. Such reduction could also be applied in a Council implementing decision adopted pursuant to Article 4(3) with the corresponding amount of applications beyond the fair share and within five years from the date in which the Council implementing decision that led the Member State to go beyond its fair share is no longer in force. It should be possible for the reductions under the upcoming annual cycles and in a Council implementing decision to be applied alternatively or simultaneously, provided that they correspond to and do not go beyond the number of applications for which that Member State contributed above its fair share.

(39) When a Member State is facing a situation of crisis or force majeure, it might need to divert resources to manage arrivals of third-country nationals and stateless persons at its borders. As a result, that Member State might need time to reorganise its resources and increase its capacity, including with the support of the relevant Union agencies. That Member State might also need more time to be able to decide on applications without allowing entry into its territory. In such a situation, it should be possible for that Member State to derogate from the deadlines for registration and border procedure.

(40) Where a Member State applies one or more of the measures provided for in this Regulation, the Member State should inform third-country nationals and stateless persons in a language which they understand or are reasonably supposed to understand, about the derogations applied and the duration of the measures. Member States are obliged to address any special procedural and special reception needs of the applicants that could arise and provide information in an appropriate manner accordingly. Moreover Article 8 on provision of information and Article 36(3) with regard to the information on the possibility to appeal the decision on the application, of the Regulation (EU) 2024/1348 apply.

(41) Where derogations from the asylum procedure are applied, the safeguards for applicants with special procedural and special reception needs, including medical conditions, should be a primary consideration for the competent authorities. For that reason, the Member State facing a situation of crisis or force majeure should not apply, or should cease to apply, the derogations from the asylum procedure in cases where there are medical reasons for not applying the border procedure in accordance with Article 53(2), point (d), of Regulation (EU) 2024/1348, where the necessary support cannot be provided to applicants with special procedural needs in accordance with Article 53(2), point (b), of that Regulation or where the necessary support cannot be provided to applicants with special reception needs in accordance with Directive (EU) 2024/1346. The Member State concerned should prioritise the examination of applications from persons with special procedural needs in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2024/1348 and with special reception needs as defined in Article 2, point (14) of Directive (EU) 2024/1346, especially minors and their family members.

(42) In situations of crisis and force majeure, the Member State should be authorised to derogate from Regulation (EU) 2024/1348 in order to register applications for international protection no later than four weeks after they are made. Such an extension should be without prejudice to the rights of asylum applicants guaranteed by the Charter, Regulation (EU) 2024/1348 and Directive (EU) 2024/1346. Without prejudice to the exception provided for during the period between the request and the adoption of the Council implementing decision, in a situation of crisis, characterised by mass arrivals of third-country nationals and stateless persons, the extension of the registration period should only be applied during the time period set out in the initial Council implementing decision.

(43) When confronted with a situation of crisis or force majeure, it should be possible for the Member State concerned to extend the examination of applications for international protection at the border by six weeks. The extension should not be used in addition to the period referred to in Article 51(2), third subparagraph, of Regulation (EU) 2024/1348.

(44) When faced with a situation of crisis or force majeure, a Member State should be able to request measures from among several options with regard to the application of the border procedure, taking into account the composition of the flows and their diverse nature, depending on the precise situation of crisis.

(45) In situations of crisis, characterised by mass arrivals of third-country nationals and stateless persons, or of force majeure, it could be necessary to allow a Member State not to apply the border procedure in respect of persons who come from third countries where the Union-wide average recognition rate is below 20 %. In order to apply such a derogation, the Council implementing decision should assess whether the measures contained in the contingency plan of the Member State concerned, referred to in Article 32 of Directive (EU) 2024/1346 are sufficient to address the situation. In any event, Member States are obliged to apply the border procedure in the situations referred to in Article 42(1), points (c) and (f), of Regulation (EU) 2024/1348.

(46) In a situation of crisis characterised by mass arrivals of third-country nationals and stateless persons applying for international protection, it could be necessary to allow a Member State to lower the threshold for the mandatory application of the border procedure provided for in Article 42(1), point (j), of Regulation (EU) 2024/1348. In any event, the reduced threshold should not go below 5 %. Member States are obliged to apply the border procedure in the situations referred to in Article 42(1), points (c) and (f), of that Regulation.

(47) In a situation of crisis characterised by mass arrivals of third-country nationals and stateless persons applying for international protection, it could be necessary to broaden the scope of the application of the border procedure, established by Article 43 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1348 and to allow a Member State to take a decision in the framework of a border procedure also on the merits of an application in cases where the applicant is a national or, in the case of stateless persons, a former habitual resident, of a third country, for which the proportion of decisions granting international protection Union-wide is 50 % or lower. As a result, in the application of the crisis border procedure, Member States should continue to apply the border procedure as provided by Articles 43 to 54 of that Regulation but could extend the application of the border procedure to third-country nationals or stateless persons who come from third countries where the Union-wide average recognition rate is above 20 % but under 50 %, taking into account the rapidly evolving protection needs that might arise in the country of origin as reflected in quarterly updates of Eurostat data. This broadening of the scope of the border procedure should not affect the grounds and other rules applicable to the mandatory border procedure under that Regulation. Where a Member State is authorised to broaden the scope of the border procedure, applications examined under that procedure should not be considered as part of the adequate capacity pursuant to Article 47 or counted for the application of the annual cap pursuant to Article 50 of that Regulation.

(48) The detention of applicants should be applied in accordance with the underlying principle that a person should not be held in detention for the sole reason that that person is seeking international protection, particularly in accordance with the international legal obligations of the Member States and with Article 31 of the Geneva Convention. In accordance with Directive (EU) 2024/1346, minors should, as a rule, not be detained, but should be placed in accommodation with special provisions for minors, including where appropriate in non-custodial, community-based placements. Given the negative impact of detention on minors, such detention could be used, in accordance with Union law, exclusively in exceptional circumstances, where strictly necessary, only as a last resort, for the shortest time possible and never in prison accommodation or any other facility destined for law enforcement purposes. Minors are not to be separated from their parents or care givers, and the principle of family unity should generally lead to the use of adequate alternatives to detention for families with minors, in accommodation suitable for them. Moreover, everything possible must be done to ensure that a viable range of adequate alternatives to detention of minors is available and accessible.

(49) In a situation of instrumentalisation and to prevent a third country or a hostile non-state actor from targeting specific nationalities or specific categories of third-country nationals or stateless persons, it should be possible for a Member State to derogate from the asylum procedure set out in this Regulation by taking a decision in the framework of the border procedure, as set out in Articles 44 to 55 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1348 on the merits of all applications for international protection. The principles and guarantees set out in that Regulation should be respected. The Council implementing decision authorising the Member State to apply the referred derogations should specify the third-country nationals or stateless persons subject to the situation of instrumentalisation. Where applying this derogation, specific attention should be given to certain categories of third-country nationals and stateless persons who have been subject to instrumentalisation, in particular minors under the age of 12 and their family members, and vulnerable persons with special procedural or special reception needs. Those groups should therefore either be excluded from the border procedure, or, when an individual assessment concludes that their applications are likely to be well-founded, that procedure should cease to apply to them. The choice between those alternatives remains at the discretion of the Member State requesting the application of that derogation. The choice indicated in the request should be reflected in the Council implementing decision authorising the application of this derogation. The broadening of the scope of the border procedure in a situation of instrumentalisation should not affect the grounds and other rules applicable to the mandatory border procedure under Regulation (EU) 2024/1348. Where a Member State is authorised to broaden the scope of the border procedure, applications examined under that procedure should not be considered as part of the adequate capacity pursuant to Article 48 or counted for the application of the annual cap pursuant to Article 51 of that Regulation.

(50) In order to support the Member State concerned in providing the necessary assistance to third-country nationals and stateless persons falling under the scope of this Regulation, United Nations agencies, and the UNHCR in particular, and other relevant partner organisations entrusted with specific tasks by Member States, should have effective access to the border under the conditions set out in Directive (EU) 2024/1346 and Regulation (EU) 2024/1348. The UNHCR should be allowed access to applicants, including to those at the border. To this end, the Member State concerned should maintain cooperation with those organisations.

(51) Specific rules should be laid down for situations of crisis characterised by mass arrivals and for force majeure, to allow Member States to extend the time limits set out in Regulation (EU) 2024/1351 under strict conditions where it is impossible to comply with those time limits due to the extraordinary situation. Such extension should apply simultaneously to the time limits set out for sending and replying to take charge requests and take back notifications as well as the time limit to transfer an applicant to the Member State responsible. The time limits should be extended irrespective of whether that Regulation provides for shorter time limits for certain situations.

(52) In order to ensure effective access to the procedure for granting international protection, where the transfer does not take place due to the persistence of the situation of crisis characterised by mass arrivals or force majeure, or where the transferring Member State does not implement the transfer when the applicant is available to the competent authorities of the transferring Member State, a maximum time limit to carry out the transfer to a Member State facing that situation should be set out. That maximum time limit should not be longer than one year from the acceptance of the take charge request, from the confirmation of the take back notification by another Member State or from the final decision on an appeal or review of a transfer decision that has suspensive effect in accordance with Article 43(3) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1351. That maximum time limit is without prejudice to the possibility to extend the time limits pursuant to Article 46(2) of that Regulation for carrying out a transfer.

(53) In order to avoid the Common European Asylum System becoming non-functional due to mass arrivals of such extraordinary scale and intensity that, even if a Member State has a well-prepared asylum, reception and return system, if the situation is not addressed by the Union as a whole, it could create a serious risk of serious deficiencies in the treatment of applicants, the Member State should, in those most exceptional circumstances, be able to be relieved of its obligation to take back an applicant pursuant to Article 16(2) and Article 38(4) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1351. However, in order to ensure that the application of such a derogation does not lead to additional pressure on the Member State facing that situation, that derogation should only apply retroactively to applications already registered in that Member State within four months before the date on which the Council implementing decision is adopted.

(54) Where, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2024/1347, objective circumstances suggest that applications for international protection from groups of applicants from a specific country of origin or former habitual residence or a part of that country or on the basis of the criteria drawn from that Regulation could be well-founded, it is in the interest of both the determining authorities and the applicants concerned to conclude the examination of the merits of the application as soon as possible and to allow for a swift and efficient granting of international protection in a situation of crisis.

(55) Applicants whose applications are examined in the context of the expedited procedure provided for in this Regulation enjoy all of the rights and guarantees, to which applicants are entitled in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2024/1348, including the right to information and to an effective remedy.

(56) When applying a Commission recommendation on expedited procedure, there should be no interview on the merits, but if there are doubts whether the applicant belongs to the category or categories of persons identified in that recommendation or whether the exclusion grounds apply, such an interview might be needed. In all cases, the procedure should not last longer than four weeks from the date of the lodging of the application. Where a Member State has established that an applicant is a threat to internal security, that Member State should be able not to apply the expedited procedure in respect of that applicant. In such circumstances, the application should be examined in accordance with Articles 36 and 40 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1348.

(57) Applicants whose applications are examined in the context of the expedited procedure provided for in this Regulation, should, in accordance with Article 29 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1348, receive a document certifying their status in a language they can understand or can reasonably be supposed to understand.

(58) The relevant Union Agencies, UNHCR and other relevant organisations can be consulted at the different stages of the application of the expedited procedure.

(59) To ensure a sufficient level of preparedness for a situation of crisis, Members States should include in their contingency plans measures needed to respond to and resolve a situation of crisis, including measures needed to overcome challenges in the functioning of the Common European Asylum System and to protect the rights of applicants and beneficiaries of international protection as well as foster future resilience in the Member State concerned. Member States should also use all the tools available under national and Union law, including making use of anticipation and early warning tools under the EU mechanism for preparedness and management of crises related to migration provided for in Commission Recommendation (EU) 2020/1366 (15).

(60) Without prejudice to the above and where relevant, in a situation of crisis, all mechanisms for crisis included in the Toolbox should be mobilised, particularly the financial and operational support that Union agencies, Union Funds and the Union Civil Protection Mechanism can provide in accordance with the applicable legal acts. Thereafter, the Commission should, in the context of the Technical-Level Migration Forum, ensure coordination and exchange of information with other platforms that are relevant to manage the situation of crisis, including the EU Migration Preparedness and Crisis Management Network in accordance with Recommendation (EU) 2020/1366, and the Integrated Political Crisis Response (IPCR) arrangements.

(61) A Member State facing a situation of crisis or force majeure can request support from the Asylum Agency, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency or Europol in accordance with their mandates. In addition and as appropriate, the Asylum Agency can propose assistance on its own initiative in accordance with Article 16(1), point (d), of Regulation (EU) 2021/2303, whereas the European Border and Coast Guard Agency can propose assistance in the field of return in accordance with Articles 48, 50, 52 and 53 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 in agreement with the Member State concerned, and Europol can propose assistance in accordance with Article 6(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/794 of the European Parliament and of the Council (16).

(62) To support Member States that undertake relocation as a solidarity measure, financial support from the EU budget should be provided, including from the thematic facility as set out in Regulation (EU) 2021/1147 of the European Parliament and of the Council (17).

(63) Since the objectives of this Regulation, namely to provide for the necessary adaptation of the rules on asylum procedures and where relevant those on solidarity in order to ensure that Member States are able to address situations of crisis and force majeure, in the field of asylum and migration management within the Union, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States but can rather, by reason of the scale and effects of the action, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 Treaty on European Union (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 those objectives.

(64) 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 not bound by it or subject to its application. Given that Articles 12 and 13, and Articles 1 to 6 insofar as they concern the derogations in Articles 12 and 13 of this Regulation constitute amendments within the meaning of Article 3 of the Agreement concluded between the European Community and the Kingdom of Denmark on the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in Denmark or any other Member State of the European Union and ‘Eurodac’ for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective application of the Dublin Convention (18), Denmark has to notify the Commission of its decision whether or not to implement the content of such amendments at the time of the adoption of the amendments or within 30 days hereafter.

(65) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 and Article 4a(1) of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, Ireland is not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application.

(66) As regards Iceland and Norway, Articles 12 and 13, and Articles 1 to 6 insofar as they concern the derogations in Articles 12 and 13 of this Regulation constitute new legislation in a field which is covered by the subject matter of the Annex to the Agreement concluded by the European Community and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Iceland or Norway (19).

(67) As regards Switzerland, Articles 12 and 13, and Articles 1 to 6 insofar as they concern the derogations in Articles 12 and 13 of this Regulation constitute acts or measures amending or building upon the provisions of Article 1 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland (20).

(68) As regards Liechtenstein, Articles 12 and 13, and Articles 1 to 6 insofar as they concern the derogations in Articles 12 and 13 of this Regulation constitute acts or measures amending or building upon the provisions of Article 1 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland to which Article 3 of the Protocol between 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 Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland (21) refers,