Background:

Regulation (EU) 2018/1860 concerns the use of the Schengen Information System (SIS) to support the return of third-country nationals residing illegally in the EU. It establishes the conditions and procedures for entering alerts on these individuals, sharing information, and ensuring these return decisions are enforced across Member States.

The Czech Republic is facing a situation in which alerts remain in the SIS for third-country nationals who were entered under Article 3 of this Regulation, but failed to fulfil their obligation to leave the Schengen area. As a result, the record continues to appear in the SIS.

According to point 17 of this Regulation and in accordance with all paragraphs of Article 39 of Regulation 2018/1861, the alert may be extended (if necessary), but the entry must be reviewed on an individual basis. The Czech Republic intends to extend all such alerts and launched this query to determine how to effectively meet the requirement for individual review, given the number of cases.

Respondents:

A total of 21 EMN Member Countries (including BE) provided a public answer to this ad-hoc query.

Key findings:

A preliminary analysis of the results of the ad hoc query shows that:

• Among the 21 responding Member States, practices regarding the extension of SIS alerts created under Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1860 vary. Around half of the countries either extend or plan to extend alerts if the third-country national has not left the territory. Another group extends alerts only under specific conditions, for instance, when the return decision includes an entry ban (e.g., BE) or after an individual assessment (e.g., HR, LT). In contrast, EL, ES, IT do not extend alerts. In EL, for example, the measure is not prolonged unless the third-country national is found again on Greek territory, in which case a new alert is entered into the system.
   
• The expected duration of extension varies depending on national practices and may reflect either the length of each extension or the total period an alert can remain in place. In several countries, such as DE, EE, FI, HU, LU, NL, alerts are generally extended in five-year increments. In SI and SE, extensions are also made in five-year periods but may result in alerts remaining valid for up to ten and twenty years, respectively. CZ usually extends alerts for up to three years, or until the person is confirmed to have left the territory, whichever comes first, while PL applies a two-year extension. In BE, the extension of alerts depends on the duration of the entry bans accompanying return decisions.
   
• Member States differ in how they reassess SIS alerts when it cannot be confirmed that the person has left the territory. In one group, alerts are reviewed automatically or according to a set schedule, generally at or shortly before the alert’s expiration. For example, CZ plans to review alerts every three years starting with the first round in March 2026, with future procedures depending on the functionality of new IT systems; and NL reviews alerts at the expiration of the five-year period. Some Member States carry out reviews of SIS alerts on a case-by-case basis, with the frequency and timing depending on the circumstances of the individual case. This is the approach in BE, or in MT where the timing of reassessment depends on the seriousness of the situation that led to the return decision.

For more information, please consult the compilation of answers and the summary attached above.