\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\nThe Civil Liberties Committee agreed\u00a0that:\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n\n- the initial period for border checks for foreseeable events should be limited to two months, instead of the current six-month period, and\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
\n- border checks cannot be extended beyond one year, halving the current maximum limit of two years.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
MEPs in the Civil Liberties Committee also stressed that as the free movement of persons is affected by temporary border checks, these should only be used in exceptional circumstances and as a measure of last resort.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\nNew safeguards for extensions<\/b>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\nEU countries should provide a detailed risk assessment if temporary border checks are extended beyond the initial two months. This assessment should explain why alternative measures have proved to be insufficient and how border checks would help to address the identified threat.\u00a0Neighbouring\u00a0EU countries affected by the possible border checks should be involved in the risk assessment.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\nFurthermore, any subsequent extension of border checks beyond six months would require an opinion from the Commission and should be\u00a0authorised\u00a0by the EU Council of Ministers. MEPs also want the Parliament to be more informed and involved in the process.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Internal\u00a0border checks within the Schengen area would be limited to a maximum of one year, instead of the current two-year period, the Civil Liberties Committee agreed.\u00a0 The Schengen Borders […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":7,"featured_media":2126,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mi_skip_tracking":false,"spay_email":""},"issuem_issue":[89],"issuem_issue_categories":[8],"issuem_issue_tags":[],"translation":{"provider":"WPGlobus","version":"2.8.8","language":"en","enabled_languages":["mt","en"],"languages":{"mt":{"title":true,"content":true,"excerpt":false},"en":{"title":true,"content":true,"excerpt":false}}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article\/2139"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/article"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/7"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2139"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article\/2139\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2141,"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article\/2139\/revisions\/2141"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2126"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2139"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"issuem_issue","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issuem_issue?post=2139"},{"taxonomy":"issuem_issue_categories","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issuem_issue_categories?post=2139"},{"taxonomy":"issuem_issue_tags","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issuem_issue_tags?post=2139"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/EP-News.jpg\")
<\/p>\n