And it is always important to recall, that this Parliamentary Assembly has approved previous work

regarding this issue, namely in its Resolution 1894 adopted in 2012 regarding “The inadmissibility of

restrictions on freedom of movement as punishment for political positions”.

In which it had been stressed out that:

“(...) freedom of movement should not be restricted as a sanction for the expression of peacefully held

political opinions”.

So, this Assembly has a clear position about this issue since 2012 and I trust that after 10 years the position

remains the same.

Besides this Resolution, it is never enough to mention that:

The States limited themselves in their own sovereignty to determine the conditions of entries into their

territory, in order to comply both with international treaties on human rights protection and the rule of

law.

In fact, the obligation to protect requires specifically that the States protect individuals and groups against

human rights abuses.

So, the use of alerts in the Schengen Information System should not lead to any misuse of the system.

More important, the use of alerts should not infringe fundamental rights and freedoms.

In reality, before entering an alert in the Schengen Information System, an assessment of proportionality

must be made.

And there are 3 requirements to be fulfilled:

- the case must be adequate,

- relevant,

- and important enough to warrant entry of the alert in Schengen Information System.

Nevertheless, in case of misuse or violations identified, they should be immediately addressed.

23 DE NOVEMBRO DE 2022_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

7