{
  "id": "schengen-area",
  "title": "Schengen Area",
  "lang": "en",
  "source_lang": "en",
  "summary": "A European area without routine internal border checks, supported by common external-border rules, visa policies, and security cooperation.",
  "category": "society",
  "subcategory": "politics",
  "type": "place",
  "aliases": [
    "Schengen zone",
    "Schengen space"
  ],
  "generated_at": "2026-10-13",
  "model": "pro/gpt-6.1-sol",
  "url": "https://aiwiki.page/en/schengen-area/",
  "translations": {
    "zh-Hans": {
      "url": "https://aiwiki.page/zh/schengen-area/",
      "json": "https://aiwiki.page/zh/schengen-area.json"
    }
  },
  "sections": [
    {
      "heading": "",
      "text": "The Schengen Area is a group of European countries that have abolished routine checks on persons at their mutual borders and apply common rules governing external border controls and short-stay visas. As of October 13, 2026, it comprises 29 countries: 25 members of the European Union and four associated non-EU states—Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, and Liechtenstein. Its name comes from Schengen, a village in Luxembourg where the original agreement was signed in 1985. (consilium.europa.eu)\n\nSchengen facilitates travel, cross-border commuting, and economic and social exchange while requiring cooperation over external borders, policing, and information sharing. It is distinct from EU membership, the EU customs union, and the euro area: removing checks on persons does not erase national boundaries or independently confer rights to work or settle in another country. Its operation combines national administration with European legal standards, monitoring, and safeguards, including provisions permitting temporary internal border controls in exceptional circumstances. (home-affairs.ec.europa.eu)"
    },
    {
      "heading": "Origins and historical development",
      "text": "Schengen cooperation built on earlier regional arrangements for crossing national borders. The 1960 Benelux convention transferred checks on persons from the borders between Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg to their common external frontier, providing a precedent for the later Schengen system. Within the European Communities, governments differed over how far the free movement of persons should entail abolishing border checks. Five states therefore proceeded through a separate intergovernmental agreement rather than waiting for a Community-wide settlement. On June 14, 1985, Belgium, France, West Germany, Luxembourg and the Netherlands signed the Schengen Agreement aboard the Marie-Astrid on the Moselle at Schengen, Luxembourg, near the French and German borders. The signatories included France’s secretary of state for European affairs, Catherine Lalumière, and Luxembourg’s secretary of state for foreign affairs, Robert Goebbels. The village gave the agreement its name. (benelux.int)\n\nThe 1985 agreement envisaged the gradual abolition of checks at common borders; its signature did not immediately create an operational border-check-free area. The implementing convention, signed on June 19, 1990, supplied the detailed arrangements needed to carry out that objective. It combined the removal of internal checks with common external-border requirements, procedures for uniform short-stay visas, police and judicial cooperation, and the Schengen Information System for exchanging alerts on persons and objects. Practical implementation began on March 26, 1995, when the five original signatories, together with Spain and Portugal, abolished routine checks on persons at their internal borders. Signature, ratification and operational implementation were thus distinct stages, a distinction that also characterised subsequent enlargements. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nInitially, Schengen operated outside the institutional framework of the European Union. The Treaty of Amsterdam, signed in 1997 and effective from May 1, 1999, incorporated the Schengen agreements and their implementing measures—the Schengen acquis—into that framework. This changed the institutional basis for developing the rules without making Schengen participation identical to EU membership. Meanwhile, internal-border checks were removed with Italy and Austria in 1997, followed by Greece in 2000. On March 25, 2001, implementation extended to Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Iceland and Norway. The coordinated Nordic participation accommodated existing regional passport arrangements, while Iceland and Norway participated as associated non-EU states. (home-affairs.ec.europa.eu)\n\nThe December 2007 enlargement brought nine more countries into the operational area: the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia. Switzerland followed on December 12, 2008, with checks on internal air connections removed on March 29, 2009; Liechtenstein followed in 2011. These accessions extended the area through association arrangements rather than EU membership. Croatia entered on January 1, 2023, when checks at its internal land and sea borders were lifted. Its internal air-border checks ended on March 26, 2023, a separate date chosen to coincide with the seasonal change in airline schedules. (home-affairs.ec.europa.eu)\n\nBulgaria and Romania underwent a further staged implementation. Both had already applied parts of the Schengen framework, including external-border controls, police cooperation and information exchange, before their internal checks were lifted. A Council decision adopted on December 30, 2023, made the remaining Schengen provisions applicable from March 31, 2024, and removed checks on persons at internal air and sea borders from that date, while retaining land-border checks. On December 12, 2024, the Council decided to remove the remaining checks at internal land borders with and between the two countries from January 1, 2025. The air-and-sea stage and the later land-border stage therefore represented separate operational milestones, not a single undifferentiated accession date. (consilium.europa.eu)"
    },
    {
      "heading": "Membership and territorial scope",
      "text": "As of 13 October 2026, the Schengen area comprises 29 countries: 25 members of the European Union and four associated non-EU states. The tables record operational implementation, rather than treaty-signature dates. Where implementation was staged, the dates distinguish the removal of checks at different types of internal border; they do not indicate whether exceptional temporary controls are currently in force. (consilium.europa.eu)\n\nEU participating countries (25), grouped by implementation date | Implementation of border-check abolition\nBelgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain | 26 March 1995. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\nItaly | Implementation began on 26 October 1997; full application followed by 31 March 1998. (ambabudhabi.esteri.it)\nAustria | Implementation began on 1 December 1997, with the transitional removal of internal checks completed by 31 March 1998. (bmi.gv.at)\nGreece | Maritime checks removed on 1 January 2000; airport checks removed progressively, no later than 26 March 2000. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\nDenmark, Finland, Sweden | 25 March 2001. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\nCzechia, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia | Land and sea borders: 21 December 2007; air borders: 30 March 2008. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\nCroatia | Land and sea borders: 1 January 2023; air borders: 26 March 2023. (consilium.europa.eu)\nBulgaria, Romania | Air and sea borders: 31 March 2024; land borders: 1 January 2025. (consilium.europa.eu)\n\nAssociated non-EU participating countries (4) | Implementation of border-check abolition\nIceland, Norway | 25 March 2001. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\nSwitzerland | Land borders: 12 December 2008; air borders: 29 March 2009. (sem.admin.ch)\nLiechtenstein | 19 December 2011. (data.consilium.europa.eu)\n\nIreland has an opt-out from participation in the border-free area and retains its own visa arrangements. It nevertheless participates in selected Schengen police and judicial cooperation measures; its connection to the Schengen Information System became operational on 15 March 2021. Cyprus has a different position: the Schengen acquis has been binding on it since EU accession in 2004, but implementation of provisions abolishing internal border checks requires a positive evaluation and a unanimous Council decision. Those checks have not yet been lifted, and Cyprus does not issue Schengen visas. Participation in individual cooperation mechanisms therefore does not, by itself, establish inclusion in the border-free area. (gov.ie)\n\nTerritorial coverage is not identical to the entirety of each participating state. France’s European territory, including Corsica, is covered, but its overseas territories are excluded. These include French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Réunion and Mayotte, as well as overseas collectivities such as French Polynesia and New Caledonia; the exclusion applies even where the territory belongs to the EU. For the Netherlands, coverage is likewise confined to European territory: Aruba, Curaçao, Sint Maarten, Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba have separate Caribbean entry arrangements. A Caribbean visa is not a Schengen visa, although Caribbean rules exempt holders of certain Schengen visas or residence permits from their own visa requirement. (france-visas.gouv.fr)\n\nWithin the Danish realm, Greenland and the Faroe Islands are outside Schengen; an ordinary Schengen visa does not automatically authorise entry to either. Norway’s Svalbard archipelago is also excluded, so travel between Svalbard and mainland Norway crosses the Schengen boundary. Conversely, geographical distance from continental Europe does not necessarily imply exclusion: Portugal’s Azores and Madeira and Spain’s Canary Islands are covered by the Schengen acquis. These contrasts reflect the applicable territorial arrangements, not simply whether a territory is an island or lies outside continental Europe. (thedanishparliament.dk)\n\nMonaco, San Marino, Vatican City and Andorra are not formal Schengen participants. Monaco has closely integrated entry arrangements with France: French consulates issue Schengen short-stay visas for visits whose principal destination is Monaco. San Marino and Vatican City have open borders with Italy, but this practical accessibility does not confer membership. Andorra remains outside the area and requires no tourist visa of its own; ordinary access through France or Spain nevertheless requires compliance with Schengen entry conditions, including permission to re-enter where a visa is required. Open borders, recognition of a neighbouring state’s visas and geographical access are distinct from formal participation. (en.wikipedia.org)"
    },
    {
      "heading": "Legal framework and institutional responsibilities",
      "text": "The Schengen acquis is the body of agreements, implementing decisions and subsequent legislation governing Schengen cooperation, rather than a single treaty. Its original components include the 1985 Schengen Agreement, the 1990 implementing convention, accession instruments and decisions of the convention’s Executive Committee. Council Decision 1999/435/EC defined this inherited body of rules for incorporation into the European Union framework; Decision 1999/436/EC assigned legal bases to its provisions. The Amsterdam Treaty’s entry into force in 1999 brought Schengen cooperation within EU institutions, while later legislation amended or replaced parts of the original arrangements. For participating EU states, obligations therefore arise principally through EU law and the relevant treaty protocols; for non-EU participants, association agreements provide the legal connection to the acquis and its development. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nTwo regulations organise distinct aspects of this framework. The Schengen Borders Code, Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of 9 March 2016, governs the movement of persons across borders: it establishes the absence of routine internal border controls, rules for external border checks and surveillance, and conditions for temporarily restoring internal controls. It codified the earlier Regulation (EC) No 562/2006 and has subsequently been amended. The Visa Code, Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of 13 July 2009, governs procedures and conditions for issuing short-stay and airport-transit visas, including consular competence, application assessment, decisions and appeals. Its short-stay scope concerns visits not exceeding 90 days in any 180-day period, not national permission for long-term residence. A consular visa decision and a border admission decision are legally separate: possession of a visa does not automatically confer a right of entry. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nOperational enforcement remains primarily national. Border services conduct checks and surveillance, consulates assess visa applications, and designated national authorities administer the relevant police and immigration functions. The Borders Code requires states to provide sufficient personnel and resources for effective external-border control; the Visa Code assigns examination and decision-making principally to consulates, with specified exceptions and representation arrangements. These national responsibilities differ from the European Commission’s supervisory and legislative roles. The Commission normally proposes EU legislation, oversees compliance with EU law and can pursue infringement proceedings against an EU member state, ultimately referring a failure to fulfil treaty obligations to the Court of Justice under Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nThe Council of the European Union, representing member-state governments, and the European Parliament generally adopt border and visa legislation jointly through the ordinary legislative procedure; both Codes were adopted through that procedure. The Council also takes decisions authorising the full application of Schengen rules and lifting internal border checks after the required assessment. The Court of Justice of the European Union provides judicial review within its treaty jurisdiction, including infringement judgments and preliminary rulings on the interpretation or validity of EU measures requested by national courts. For example, its judgment of 26 April 2022 in joined cases C-368/20 and C-369/20 interpreted the then-applicable limits on successive internal-border controls, illustrating that national operational decisions remain subject to EU legal constraints. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nParticipation is differentiated. Under Protocol No 22, Denmark generally does not participate in adopting measures under the treaties’ freedom, security and justice provisions and is not bound by them as EU law. For measures developing the Schengen acquis covered by that protocol, it has six months after Council adoption to decide whether to implement them nationally; acceptance creates an obligation under international law towards the other member states bound by the measure. Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Liechtenstein participate through association agreements. Mixed Committees allow their representatives to discuss proposed developments with the Council and Commission: they influence preparation but do not vote on adoption in EU institutions. New measures are subsequently accepted through the agreements’ procedures; non-acceptance can trigger procedures leading to termination of the association. Ireland’s selective participation likewise means that application must be checked measure by measure, rather than inferred simply from EU membership. (eur-lex.europa.eu)"
    },
    {
      "heading": "Travel across internal borders",
      "text": "Article 22 of the Schengen Borders Code, adopted as Regulation (EU) 2016/399 on 9 March 2016, establishes that internal borders may be crossed at any point without border checks on persons, irrespective of nationality. Internal borders include common land frontiers, including river and lake boundaries; airports handling flights exclusively between Schengen territories without a landing outside them; and ports serving regular internal ferry connections. The latter are scheduled services between participating territories without calls at ports outside the area. Thus, an internal flight is classified by its route, not by the passenger’s nationality or the airline’s country of registration. These rules concern checks on people, rather than the abolition of national boundaries or every form of inspection. Temporary reintroduction of border controls is an exceptional procedure governed separately by the Code. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nThe absence of border checks does not prevent national authorities from exercising police powers within their territory, including border regions, but Article 23 prohibits measures having an effect equivalent to border checks. Under the amendment adopted on 13 June 2024, relevant distinctions include whether checks lack a border-control objective, rely on general police information or risk assessment, and are designed and conducted differently from systematic checks on people at borders. Checks may take place at transport hubs or aboard passenger services; their location alone does not determine their legality. For example, a targeted operation responding to information about cross-border crime differs from a systematic examination of travellers’ entitlement to enter simply because they have crossed an internal frontier. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nTransport-security screening and identity-document obligations also remain distinct from immigration border checks. Article 23 preserves security checks at airports and ports where equivalent checks apply to domestic travellers, and permits national legislation requiring people to hold or carry identity documents. Consequently, passage through an airport security checkpoint does not mean that immigration control has been restored. EU citizens can establish their identity and nationality with a valid passport or national identity card; driving licences and bank cards are not travel documents. Third-country nationals remain subject to applicable passport and visa requirements. National law may also require them to report their presence, despite the absence of routine checks when crossing an internal border. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nSchengen’s removal of routine checks is separate from the substantive right to live or work abroad. For citizens of the European Union, free movement and residence rights derive from EU treaties and legislation, notably Directive 2004/38/EC of 29 April 2004, rather than from Schengen membership. Residence beyond three months depends on the applicable status, such as employment, self-employment or study, and may involve registration. EU workers have a right to reside in the member state where they work. Conversely, a third-country national’s residence permit or long-stay visa issued by one Schengen state generally permits visits to other Schengen states for up to 90 days in any 180-day period, not automatic settlement or employment there. Moving to another state for work or longer residence remains subject to the relevant national permissions and any applicable EU mobility rules. (commission.europa.eu)\n\nThese arrangements likewise differ from the European single market, which concerns movement of goods, services, people and capital; the EU customs union, which removes internal customs duties and applies common external tariffs; and the euro area, whose members share the euro. Switzerland demonstrates the practical distinction: it participates in Schengen but lies outside the EU customs union, so customs formalities and goods inspections remain at its borders with neighbouring EU states despite the normal absence of immigration checks. Its access to parts of the single market rests on separate bilateral agreements. Travellers entering Switzerland must declare dutiable or restricted goods through the applicable customs procedure, including when arriving by train; airports retain red and green customs channels. A stop to inspect luggage or collect import taxes therefore need not constitute a check on the traveller’s immigration entitlement. (consilium.europa.eu)"
    },
    {
      "heading": "External borders and entry conditions",
      "text": "External-border control comprises checks at crossing points and surveillance between them. Under the Schengen Borders Code, external borders normally must be crossed at authorised points during their opening hours, subject to specified exceptions. At land crossings, airports handling non-Schengen flights, and seaports serving external connections, checks establish travellers’ identities and whether they satisfy entry or exit requirements. Surveillance covers stretches between crossing points and crossing points outside opening hours, using patrols, observation equipment, and other resources to detect unauthorised crossings and cross-border crime. Air-border checks concern passengers arriving from or departing to destinations outside Schengen, rather than every flight crossing a national boundary. The Code’s annexes provide differentiated procedures for road and rail traffic, aviation, shipping, and particular traveller categories. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nFor ordinary third-country visitors intending a short stay—no more than 90 days in any 180-day period—Article 6 requires a valid travel document issued within the preceding ten years and normally valid for at least three months after intended departure. Travellers must hold a visa where required, unless an applicable residence permit or long-stay visa provides an exemption; justify their visit’s purpose and conditions; and demonstrate sufficient resources for the stay and return or onward travel, or the ability to obtain those resources lawfully. They must not be subject to a Schengen Information System alert for refusal of entry or considered a threat to public policy, internal security, public health, or a participating state’s international relations. Relevant biometric requirements also apply. Supporting evidence can include accommodation details, invitations, return bookings, or sponsorship; national reference amounts vary rather than constituting one Schengen-wide financial threshold. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nPeople enjoying EU free-movement rights are not assessed against the ordinary short-stay visitor conditions. They nevertheless undergo identity, document-validity, and security checks at external borders. Regulation (EU) 2017/458, adopted on 15 March 2017, introduced systematic checks against relevant databases on entry and exit for this group, including EU citizens and covered family members. Limited, risk-assessed exceptions allow targeted database checks at land and sea crossing points where systematic consultation would disproportionately disrupt traffic. Other third-country travellers undergo thorough checks covering admission conditions, document authenticity, relevant alerts, and compliance with authorised-stay limits. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nA refusal of entry under Article 14 requires a substantiated decision stating the precise reasons, issued through the standard form in Annex V. The traveller receives information about appeal procedures and contacts able to provide representation. An appeal does not itself suspend the refusal, although a successful challenge entails correction of the relevant records. These procedures operate without prejudice to asylum and international-protection rules. The Code also permits admission on humanitarian grounds, grounds of national interest, or because of international obligations, notwithstanding failure to meet ordinary entry conditions. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nNational border services retain primary operational responsibility, while Frontex, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, supports authorities through personnel, equipment, risk analysis, and coordinated operations. European integrated border management combines border control with inter-agency cooperation, measures against cross-border crime, and referral of vulnerable people or those needing protection. A separate facilitation regime, established by Regulation (EC) No 1931/2006 of 20 December 2006, allows bilateral local border-traffic arrangements with neighbouring third countries. Eligible residents may receive permits for repeated visits within designated border areas, normally extending 30 kilometres from the frontier, with specified administrative districts included up to 50 kilometres. Each uninterrupted stay may not exceed three months; the permit does not authorise travel throughout Schengen. (home-affairs.ec.europa.eu)\n\nMaritime surveillance also entails responsibilities under international law concerning rescue and disembarkation. Regulation (EU) No 656/2014 governs sea operations coordinated by Frontex: participating units must assist persons in distress, cooperate with the responsible rescue coordination centre, and arrange disembarkation consistently with the operational plan and applicable law. Its non-refoulement safeguards prohibit transfer to places where people face specified serious harms. Before contemplated disembarkation in a third country, authorities must assess personal circumstances, explain the destination, and allow intercepted or rescued persons to express reasons why transfer there would violate that principle. (eur-lex.europa.eu)"
    },
    {
      "heading": "Common visa policy and authorised stays",
      "text": "Regulation (EU) 2018/1806, adopted on 14 November 2018, distinguishes third-country nationals who normally require a short-stay visa from those exempt from that requirement. Annex I contains visa-required countries, including India; Annex II contains visa-exempt countries, including the United States. Exemptions can depend on passport type, and special rules apply to certain categories of traveller. Visa exemption removes the requirement to obtain a visa before a short visit, not the obligation to satisfy entry conditions or respect the permitted duration of stay. The procedures for issuing short-stay and airport-transit visas are governed by the Visa Code, originally adopted as Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 on 13 July 2009. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nA uniform short-stay visa, generally designated type C, is valid throughout the area and may permit one, two, or multiple entries. Its validity period and authorised number of days are distinct: a multiple-entry visa valid for a year does not authorise continuous residence for that year. A visa with limited territorial validity applies only to the issuing state or specified participating states. Such visas may be issued exceptionally, including on humanitarian grounds, for reasons of national interest, or because of international obligations. An airport-transit visa, designated type A, permits passage through an airport’s international transit zone but does not authorise entry into the country. Airport-transit requirements concern specified nationalities under both a common list and additional national requirements; exemptions include certain holders of valid visas or residence permits. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nThe general short-stay ceiling is 90 days in any rolling 180-day period, whether the traveller requires a visa or is visa-exempt. For each day of presence, the calculation considers that day and the preceding 179 days; both arrival and departure days count. Days are aggregated across participating countries rather than allocated separately to each state. Thus, an itinerary containing 30 days in France, 30 in Italy, and 30 in Switzerland uses 90 days of the common allowance. Crossing an internal border or briefly leaving the area does not reset it. Visa holders must also comply with any shorter authorised stay and the visa’s validity dates. Periods authorised under a long-stay visa or residence permit are excluded from the short-stay calculation, although visits to other participating states remain subject to the applicable short-stay limit. (ec.europa.eu)\n\nConsular responsibility normally lies with the state constituting the sole or main destination, determined by the duration or purpose of the visit. If no main destination can be identified, responsibility falls to the state whose external border the applicant intends to cross first. Applications are generally lodged with the competent consulate for the applicant’s country of legal residence. Supporting evidence includes a valid travel document, accommodation, financial resources, the journey’s purpose, intention to leave, and travel medical insurance. Consular assessment considers document authenticity, immigration and security risks, and whether the applicant intends to depart before permission expires. Biometric collection normally includes a photograph and ten fingerprints, subject to exemptions; eligible fingerprints from an earlier application can generally be reused within 59 months. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nThe normal decision period is 15 days, extendable to 45 days where further examination is necessary. A refusal must be communicated with its reasons and information about appeal procedures; appeals are brought against the state taking the final decision under its national law. National long-stay visas, generally designated type D, and residence permits authorise longer stays in the issuing state, rather than unrestricted residence throughout the area. Their holders can generally make short visits to other participating states for up to 90 days in any 180-day period, subject to entry conditions. Neither a short-stay visa nor visa exemption independently authorises employment: applicable national immigration and employment requirements remain relevant. Under Article 30 of the Visa Code, possession of a uniform or limited-territorial-validity visa does not itself guarantee admission at the external border. (home-affairs.ec.europa.eu)"
    },
    {
      "heading": "Police and judicial cooperation",
      "text": "Police cooperation compensates for the removal of routine internal border checks by enabling authorities to exchange information and coordinate action across national jurisdictions. Joint patrols and operations allow officers from different countries to work together under agreed legal arrangements. Police and Customs Cooperation Centres, established through bilateral or multilateral agreements near internal borders, bring together neighbouring countries’ services to exchange operational information and support investigations. Council Recommendation (EU) 2022/915, adopted on 9 June 2022, encouraged these centres to support joint patrols and produce shared analyses of cross-border crime; it also recommended common training and secure communications. These recommendations do not themselves confer police powers in another country. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nArticle 40 of the 1990 implementing convention permits cross-border surveillance with the receiving state’s prior authorisation. For specified offences, urgent surveillance may continue without prior permission, but notification and an authorisation request must follow immediately. It must cease when the receiving state requests, or after five hours without authorisation. Officers must obey local law and instructions; they cannot enter private premises or challenge or arrest the person observed. Weapons may be used only in legitimate self-defence. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nArticle 41 permits urgent “hot pursuit” across land borders of persons caught committing qualifying offences or escaping custody. Officers must contact the receiving authorities by the time they cross and stop if instructed. State declarations determine eligible offences, geographical or time limits, and whether pursuers may temporarily detain someone pending local intervention. Officers must be identifiable, obey local law, and cannot enter private premises; weapons use is restricted to legitimate self-defence. These are conditional permissions, not a general transfer of sovereign police authority. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nThe convention’s judicial provisions supplemented existing mutual-assistance treaties; Article 53 allowed requests to pass directly between judicial authorities. (eur-lex.europa.eu) Article 54 establishes the cross-border ne bis in idem rule: a person whose case has been finally disposed of in one participating state cannot be prosecuted in another for the same acts, provided that any penalty imposed has been enforced, is being enforced, or can no longer be enforced under the sentencing state’s law. In Van Esbroeck (C-436/04), decided on 9 March 2006, the Court of Justice held that the relevant criterion was the identity of the material acts, rather than their legal classification. The case concerned successive prosecutions in Norway and Belgium for exporting and importing the same narcotic drugs, illustrating how differently defined national offences can concern the same conduct. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nThese original Schengen arrangements are distinct from broader European Union mechanisms. Europol, fully operational from 1 July 1999, supports national law-enforcement agencies but has no independent power to arrest suspects. (europol.europa.eu) Eurojust, established in 2002, supports coordination between national investigating and prosecuting authorities in serious cross-border cases; formal judicial acts remain the responsibility of competent national officials. (eurojust.europa.eu) The European Arrest Warrant, introduced by the Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 and operational from 1 January 2004, provides a judicial surrender procedure for prosecution or enforcement of custodial sentences, based on mutual recognition of judicial decisions. Its legal basis is EU criminal-justice cooperation, not the original Schengen convention, and its operation extends across EU countries rather than being determined by participation in border-check abolition. (europarl.europa.eu)"
    },
    {
      "heading": "Information systems and digital border management",
      "text": "The Schengen Information System (SIS) distributes alerts on specified categories of persons and objects, rather than maintaining a register of everyone travelling through the area. Person alerts concern, among others, people wanted for arrest, missing persons, vulnerable people requiring protection, and third-country nationals subject to return decisions or refusal of entry and stay. Object alerts cover items sought for seizure or evidence, including vehicles and travel documents. Each alert combines identifying information with instructions for the authority encountering a match. Authorised border, police, customs, judicial and immigration authorities consult SIS within their statutory responsibilities; access is not unrestricted across all categories. National SIRENE bureaux—“Supplementary Information Request at the National Entries”—exchange information beyond the alert itself and coordinate subsequent action. For example, a match on a wanted-person alert can require clarification with the issuing country before further proceedings. The March 2023 upgrade expanded alert categories and biometric capabilities, including palm prints and DNA profiles restricted to missing-person identification. (home-affairs.ec.europa.eu)\n\nThe Visa Information System (VIS) connects consular visa processing with checks at external borders. It holds application information, decisions and biometric records, enabling a border guard to compare a traveller’s fingerprints with those associated with a visa. Its short-stay application records include ten fingerprints and a digital photograph, subject to statutory exemptions; records are normally retained for five years. Access is differentiated between visa, border, immigration and asylum functions, while designated law-enforcement authorities and Europol may obtain access under specific conditions. Eurodac serves a different purpose: identification and information exchange for asylum and migration management, rather than visa administration. Its redesigned system entered operation on 12 June 2026, expanding beyond fingerprint comparison to include facial images, identity information and travel-document data. Neither VIS nor Eurodac is interchangeable with SIS’s action-oriented alerts. (home-affairs.ec.europa.eu)\n\nThe Entry/Exit System (EES) electronically records eligible third-country nationals crossing external borders for short stays, whether they require a visa or are visa-exempt. Records contain travel-document information, the date and place of entry or exit, refusals of entry, and biometric information comprising facial images and fingerprints where required. These records support identity verification and calculation of the permitted stay, generally 90 days within any 180-day period across the participating countries collectively. Deployment began progressively on 12 October 2025; EES became fully operational on 10 April 2026, replacing passport stamping for travellers within its scope at participating external crossing points. It records border events, rather than journeys between Schengen countries. (travel-europe.europa.eu)\n\nThe European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) is a separate pre-travel authorisation mechanism, not a visa. It is designed principally for visa-exempt third-country nationals, screening applications for security, irregular-migration and high epidemic risks before travel. An authorisation does not remove the requirement to satisfy entry conditions at the border or confer residence or employment rights. As of 13 October 2026, ETIAS was not operational and applications were not being collected. The official information stated that a specific starting date would be announced several months before launch; earlier projections of a fourth-quarter 2026 launch therefore did not establish an operational requirement. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\neu-LISA manages the central technical infrastructure of these large-scale systems, while national authorities retain responsibilities for national components, data entry and operational decisions. The interoperability framework established in 2019 comprises a European Search Portal for simultaneous searches, a shared biometric matching service, a Common Identity Repository and a Multiple-Identity Detector. The biometric service became operational on 19 May 2025, followed by the search portal and identity repository on 12 June 2026; remaining components were still under development. Interoperability does not confer blanket access: permissions and conditions attached to the underlying systems continue to apply. Personal-data protection includes purpose-limited access, retention rules, supervisory oversight and rights to seek access, correction of inaccuracies and deletion of unlawfully stored information. For SIS, the issuing country alone can amend or delete its alert, and individuals may pursue remedies before competent authorities or courts. (home-affairs.ec.europa.eu)"
    },
    {
      "heading": "Evaluation, monitoring, and accession requirements",
      "text": "The Schengen evaluation and monitoring mechanism verifies both readiness to apply Schengen rules and their implementation after internal border controls have been abolished. Council Regulation (EU) 2022/922, adopted on 9 June 2022, introduced the framework used for the 2023–2029 evaluation programme: a seven-year cycle combining periodic country assessments with first-time, thematic and unannounced evaluations. Multidisciplinary teams comprise European Commission and national experts, supported by observers from relevant EU agencies. Assessments draw on standard questionnaires, operational information and on-site visits rather than national legislation alone. The country-centred approach examines how border, immigration, police and other authorities work together; thematic evaluations address shared problems across countries, as illustrated by the 2023 assessment of national capabilities to combat drug trafficking through ports. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nEvaluation findings lead to reports, recommendations and monitored remedial action. For ordinary periodic evaluations, the Commission adopts the report and recommendations together; the Council adopts recommendations in specified cases, including first-time evaluations and serious deficiencies. Under the ordinary follow-up procedure, the evaluated state must submit an action plan within two months, identifying measures to implement every recommendation. The Commission assesses its adequacy within one month, and the state normally reports progress every six months until implementation is complete. Verification visits provide an additional check on reported improvements. Unannounced evaluations can examine systemic weaknesses or suspected serious violations of fundamental rights; visits concerning internal borders take place without advance notification, allowing scrutiny of whether police or other public powers produce effects equivalent to border checks. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nAccession assessments cover effective external-border management, common visa administration, information-system use, police cooperation and personal-data protection, with fundamental-rights compliance examined across these functions. A state must demonstrate operational capacity to apply the rules, not merely adopt the required laws. A positive evaluation nevertheless does not itself abolish internal border controls: the Council must take the relevant decision unanimously, after consulting the European Parliament. Bulgaria and Romania illustrate this distinction. The Council concluded in June 2011 that they fulfilled the necessary conditions, but controls were subsequently lifted in stages—at internal air and sea borders on 31 March 2024 and at internal land borders on 1 January 2025. Technical assessment and the decision authorising border-check abolition are therefore separate steps. (data.consilium.europa.eu)\n\nSince 2022, the annual Schengen cycle has connected technical monitoring with ministerial oversight. The Commission’s State of Schengen report identifies operational and political priorities for discussions in the Schengen Council, which brings together participating countries’ home-affairs ministers. The Schengen Scoreboard measures implementation of evaluation recommendations using a common methodology agreed in 2023; it is a follow-up instrument rather than an accession decision or a general ranking of countries. The December 2024 scoreboard recorded average implementation of open recommendations at approximately 55–60%. The fifth State of Schengen report, published on 18 May 2026, used the December 2025 scoreboard and reported that more than 500 experts participated in evaluation and monitoring work during 2025. (home-affairs.ec.europa.eu)\n\nSerious deficiencies trigger accelerated procedures and closer political scrutiny. The state concerned must immediately mobilise necessary operational and financial resources, while the Commission informs the Council. Following Council recommendations, an action plan must be submitted within one month; the Commission reviews it within two weeks, and a revisit must take place within a year. Persistent serious deficiencies in external-border control can also engage the exceptional safeguards in Articles 21 and 29 of the Schengen Borders Code, including a Council recommendation for temporary internal border controls when the statutory conditions are met. Such controls are not an automatic consequence of an adverse evaluation: they are exceptional measures to protect the area’s functioning while the underlying deficiencies are remedied. (eur-lex.europa.eu)"
    },
    {
      "heading": "Temporary controls and responses to exceptional circumstances",
      "text": "The Schengen Borders Code, amended by Regulation (EU) 2024/1717 of 13 June 2024, permits temporary internal border controls where a serious threat to public policy or internal security exists. Relevant circumstances include terrorism, serious organised crime, large-scale public-health emergencies, major international events, and exceptional sudden, large-scale unauthorised movements between participating states that substantially strain prepared authorities and threaten the area’s functioning. Controls must remain a last resort: authorities must assess their necessity, proportionality, territorial scope and duration, and whether less restrictive measures could address the threat. The reform emphasises police checks and cross-border cooperation as alternatives; such checks must not have an effect equivalent to border checks. Reintroduction changes the checking arrangements, not the country’s Schengen membership. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nFor an unforeseeable threat requiring immediate action, a state may restore controls immediately for up to one month, informing the European Parliament, Council, Commission and other member states simultaneously. Extensions cannot exceed three months in total under this procedure. For foreseeable threats, notification is normally required at least four weeks beforehand, or as soon as possible if the circumstances become known later. Controls may initially last up to six months and be renewed in periods of up to six months, normally for no more than two years. A major exceptional situation permits an additional six months, followed, under further conditions, by a final six-month extension. Subsequent notifications after six months require a risk assessment; implementation reports are required after controls end and whenever they have continued for twelve months. (home-affairs.ec.europa.eu)\n\nNotifications identify the reasons, affected border sections, authorised crossing points, intended dates, and necessity-and-proportionality assessment. The Commission can organise consultations with affected states and relevant EU agencies; consultation is obligatory when a directly affected state requests it. It must issue an opinion on necessity and proportionality when notified prolongations bring controls to twelve months. These procedures distinguish a national decision to restore checks from EU-level scrutiny of its justification and effects on neighbouring countries. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nDuring the 2015–2016 migration situation, Germany restored checks on 13 September 2015, concentrating on its border with Austria. In May 2016, Council recommendations provided a separate safeguard framework for selected controls following deficiencies in external-border management. Security-related measures had different triggers: French interior minister Bernard Cazeneuve announced controls for 13 November–13 December 2015 to secure the COP21 climate conference; France subsequently notified controls for 14 December 2015–26 May 2016 in connection with the emergency following the Paris attacks. These historical measures operated under the rules then applicable, rather than the longer duration limits introduced in 2024. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, Germany introduced checks on 16 March 2020 at its land borders with Austria, Denmark, France, Luxembourg and Switzerland to enforce restrictions on non-essential travel. These internal checks were distinct from the coordinated restriction on non-essential travel into the EU agreed by EU leaders on 17 March 2020, initially for thirty days. The 2024 reform created mechanisms for both dimensions: the Council can adopt harmonised external-entry and health-related restrictions, while Article 28 allows it, on a Commission proposal, to authorise internal controls where a large-scale public-health emergency threatens the area’s overall functioning. That authorisation lasts up to six months and can be renewed while the emergency persists. (op.europa.eu)\n\nThe reform also introduced Article 23a’s cross-border transfer procedure. Within an agreed bilateral cooperation framework, authorities from both states may apprehend a third-country national in a border area and transfer that person to the neighbouring state where clear indications establish direct arrival from it and no right to remain in the apprehending state. The procedure excludes applicants for and beneficiaries of international protection. It requires an individual decision and provides a right of appeal, although the appeal does not suspend transfer automatically; transfers involving presumed minors must respect the child’s best interests. This is a specified police-cooperation procedure, not a general authority to return everyone encountered at an internal border. (eur-lex.europa.eu)"
    },
    {
      "heading": "Economic, social, and fundamental-rights dimensions",
      "text": "The absence of routine internal border checks supports daily activities as well as occasional travel. In its declaration of 12 June 2025 marking Schengen’s fortieth anniversary, the Council reported that two million people commuted daily across its internal borders. This measures cross-border commuting, not all international journeys or the number of people exercising EU residence rights. The Council separately estimates approximately 3.5 million daily internal-border crossings for work, study, and visits to relatives and friends, and 1.25 billion journeys within Schengen annually; these are mobility estimates rather than counts of unique travellers or tourist arrivals. The arrangements also facilitate multi-country itineraries for tourists and movement by exchange students, including eligible non-EU nationals, without granting employment rights or replacing national residence requirements. (consilium.europa.eu)\n\nFor transport logistics, the principal mechanism is reduced journey time and uncertainty: checks on drivers and passengers can delay vehicles, disrupt delivery schedules, and increase labour costs even when goods face no customs duties. The European Commission’s March 2016 Back to Schengen communication estimated that full restoration of internal checks would generate €5–18 billion in direct annual costs for the EU economy. Its scenarios included €1.7–7.5 billion in additional road-haulage costs and €1.3–5.2 billion in time lost by cross-border workers and other travellers. These were prospective estimates, not measured losses. Schengen complements the single market by reducing physical travel friction; tariff removal, regulatory integration, and EU citizens’ employment rights derive from other legal arrangements. The 2024 Borders Code reform expressly requires assessment of effects on cross-border regions and mitigating measures for people and goods when internal checks return. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nBinding fundamental-rights safeguards constrain border management. Articles 3 and 4 of the Schengen Borders Code preserve the rights of refugees and applicants for international protection, require compliance with the EU Charter and the 1951 Refugee Convention, and require decisions on an individual basis. The principle of non-refoulement prohibits removal contrary to applicable international-protection obligations. Article 7 requires respect for human dignity, proportionate measures, and non-discrimination on grounds including racial or ethnic origin, religion, disability, age, and sexual orientation. Article 14 requires reasoned refusal-of-entry decisions and provides an appeal, although that appeal does not automatically suspend refusal. These rules govern border treatment, not the allocation of responsibility for examining asylum applications, which is addressed separately by EU asylum legislation, including Regulation (EU) 2024/1351. (eur-lex.europa.eu)\n\nProlonged internal controls have produced specific findings through judicial review. On 26 April 2022, in joined cases C-368/20 and C-369/20 concerning Austrian checks at the Slovenian border, the Court of Justice held that the then-applicable six-month limit could not be restarted on the basis of the same serious threat; a new threat was necessary. That judgment interpreted the rules preceding the 2024 amendment, rather than establishing the present duration limits. On 21 September 2023, in C-143/22, ADDE and Others, the Court held that a refusal issued at a temporarily controlled internal crossing could not bypass the Returns Directive’s common procedures when removing a third-country national already on the state’s territory. (curia.europa.eu)\n\nOfficial evaluations also document coordination and personal-data protection questions. The Commission’s 2026 State of Schengen Report, adopted on 18 May 2026, found that none of the five countries evaluated in 2025—Austria, Bulgaria, Romania, Slovenia, and Switzerland—had a law-enforcement Single Point of Contact fully meeting the Information Exchange Directive’s requirements, contributing to slower and less standardised exchanges. For biometric visa information, safeguards include task-based access, a five-year retention period, correction of inaccurate records, deletion of unlawfully recorded data, and national and European supervisory oversight. A fingerprint mismatch in the Visa Information System requires further identity checks, rather than automatic refusal. The European Data Protection Supervisor’s October 2025 statement on the Entry/Exit System identified coordinated national and EU supervision as the mechanism for monitoring lawful processing at both levels. (home-affairs.ec.europa.eu)"
    }
  ],
  "links": [
    "european-union",
    "iceland",
    "norway",
    "switzerland",
    "liechtenstein",
    "luxembourg",
    "belgium",
    "netherlands",
    "france",
    "germany",
    "spain",
    "portugal",
    "italy",
    "austria",
    "greece",
    "denmark",
    "finland",
    "sweden",
    "czech-republic",
    "estonia",
    "hungary",
    "latvia",
    "lithuania",
    "malta",
    "poland",
    "slovakia",
    "slovenia",
    "croatia",
    "bulgaria",
    "romania",
    "ireland",
    "cyprus",
    "greenland",
    "monaco",
    "san-marino",
    "vatican-city",
    "andorra",
    "judicial-review",
    "international-law",
    "euro",
    "sovereignty",
    "data-privacy",
    "human-rights",
    "pandemic",
    "logistics"
  ],
  "sources": [
    {
      "title": "The Benelux Union highlights its historical role during a debate on 40 years of Schengen",
      "url": "https://www.benelux.int/en/post/the-benelux-union-highlights-its-historical-role-during-a-debate-on-40-years-of-schengen/"
    },
    {
      "title": "Signature of the Schengen Agreements",
      "url": "https://audiovisual.ec.europa.eu/en/media/video/I-002946"
    },
    {
      "title": "Bulletin de documentation 4/1985",
      "url": "https://sip.gouvernement.lu/dam-assets/publications/bulletin/1985/BID_1985_4/BID_1985_4.pdf"
    },
    {
      "title": "The gradual establishment of an area of freedom, security and justice",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=legissum%3Aa11000"
    },
    {
      "title": "History of Schengen",
      "url": "https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/schengen/schengen-area/history-schengen_en"
    },
    {
      "title": "Council Decision 2013/115/EU, consolidated text",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX%3A02013D0115-20150218"
    },
    {
      "title": "Schengen/Dublin",
      "url": "https://www.europa.eda.admin.ch/en/schengendublin"
    },
    {
      "title": "Council Implementing Decision 2011/406/EU",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1771075044543&uri=CELEX%3A32011D0406"
    },
    {
      "title": "Visto d’ingresso e soggiorno in Italia (Visto Schengen)",
      "url": "https://ambabudhabi.esteri.it/en/servizi-consolari-e-visti/servizi-per-il-cittadino-straniero/visti/visto-dingresso-e-soggiorno-in-italia-visto-schengen/"
    },
    {
      "title": "Europa ohne Grenzen",
      "url": "https://www.bmi.gv.at/magazinfiles/2007/11_12/files/schengen.pdf"
    },
    {
      "title": "Council Decision 1999/848/EC",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A31999D0848"
    },
    {
      "title": "Council Decision 2007/801/EC",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32007D0801"
    },
    {
      "title": "Cooperation with the EU and EFTA",
      "url": "https://www.sem.admin.ch/sem/en/home/international-rueckkehr/kollab-eu-efta.html"
    },
    {
      "title": "Council decision on the full application of the Schengen acquis in the Principality of Liechtenstein",
      "url": "https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-17219-2011-INIT/en/pdf"
    },
    {
      "title": "Council Decision 1999/435/EC concerning the definition of the Schengen acquis",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?toc=OJ%3AL%3A1999%3A176%3ATOC&uri=uriserv%3AOJ.L_.1999.176.01.0001.01.ENG"
    },
    {
      "title": "Council Decision 1999/436/EC",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A31999D0436"
    },
    {
      "title": "Commission proposal 52009PC0606 on Schengen-associated states’ participation",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A52009PC0606"
    },
    {
      "title": "Schengen Borders Code—consolidated text",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/399"
    },
    {
      "title": "Regulation (EU) 2016/399—Schengen Borders Code",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32016R0399"
    },
    {
      "title": "Regulation (EC) No 810/2009—Visa Code",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32009R0810"
    },
    {
      "title": "Treaty on European Union—Article 17",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ%3AC%3A2008%3A115%3A0013%3A0045%3Aen%3APDF"
    },
    {
      "title": "Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/treaty/tfeu_2016/oj/eng"
    },
    {
      "title": "Selection of major judgments 2022",
      "url": "https://curia.europa.eu/site/upload/docs/application/pdf/2025-09/en-_selection_des_grands_arrets_2022.pdf"
    },
    {
      "title": "Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/CS/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A12016E%2FPRO%2F22"
    },
    {
      "title": "Council document 6566/20 on cooperation with third-country partners",
      "url": "https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-6566-2020-INIT/en/pdf"
    },
    {
      "title": "Regulation — EU — 2024/1717 — EN",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1717/oj"
    },
    {
      "title": "Travel documents for EU nationals",
      "url": "https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/entry-exit/eu-citizen/index_en.htm"
    },
    {
      "title": "Travel documents for non-EU nationals",
      "url": "https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/entry-exit/non-eu-nationals/index_en.htm"
    },
    {
      "title": "Free movement and residence",
      "url": "https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/eu-citizenship-and-democracy/free-movement-and-residence_en?prefLang=el"
    },
    {
      "title": "Directive — 2004/38 — EN",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=celex%3A32004L0038"
    },
    {
      "title": "Workers — residence rights",
      "url": "https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/residence/residence-rights/workers/index_en.htm"
    },
    {
      "title": "Already in the EU?",
      "url": "https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/migration-and-asylum/eu-immigration-portal/already-eu_en?prefLang=sv"
    },
    {
      "title": "What category do I fit into?",
      "url": "https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/migration-and-asylum/eu-immigration-portal/what-category-do-i-fit_en?prefLang=fi"
    },
    {
      "title": "Schengen Borders Code, Regulation (EU) 2016/399",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX%3A32016R0399"
    },
    {
      "title": "Practical Handbook for Border Guards",
      "url": "https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2022-11/Practical%20handbook%20for%20border%20guards_en.pdf"
    },
    {
      "title": "Entry Conditions for the Schengen area for a short stay",
      "url": "https://dofi.ibz.be/sites/default/files/2025-10/Entry%20conditions%20for%20Schengen%20area.pdf"
    },
    {
      "title": "Border crossing",
      "url": "https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/schengen/border-crossing_en?prefLang=hr"
    },
    {
      "title": "Regulation (EU) 2017/458",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=celex%3A32017R0458"
    },
    {
      "title": "Effective management of external borders",
      "url": "https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/schengen/effective-management-external-borders_en"
    },
    {
      "title": "Frontex",
      "url": "https://www.frontex.europa.eu/?g=i"
    },
    {
      "title": "Regulation (EC) No 1931/2006, consolidated text",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2006/1931/2012-01-19/eng"
    },
    {
      "title": "Regulation (EU) No 656/2014",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/?uri=celex%3A32014R0656"
    },
    {
      "title": "Regulation (EU) No 656/2014",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32014R0656"
    },
    {
      "title": "Regulation (EU) 2018/1806",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2018/1806/oj/eng"
    },
    {
      "title": "Visa Code, consolidated version of 2 February 2020",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2009/810/2020-02-02/eng"
    },
    {
      "title": "Visa Code, consolidated version of 28 June 2024",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A02009R0810-20240628"
    },
    {
      "title": "Visa Code, Article 25",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?qid=1720029435317&uri=CELEX%3A02009R0810-20240611"
    },
    {
      "title": "User manual for the short-stay Schengen calculator",
      "url": "https://ec.europa.eu/assets/home/visa-calculator/docs/short_stay_schengen_calculator_user_manual_en.pdf"
    },
    {
      "title": "Applying for a Schengen visa",
      "url": "https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/schengen/visa-policy/applying-schengen-visa_en?prefLang=el"
    },
    {
      "title": "Visa Code, consolidated text of 2 February 2020",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX%3A02009R0810-20200202"
    },
    {
      "title": "Visa Code, consolidated version of 11 June 2024",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A02009R0810-20240611"
    },
    {
      "title": "Visa Information System",
      "url": "https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/schengen/visa-information-system_en"
    },
    {
      "title": "Visa Code, consolidated text of 12 April 2016",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX%3A02009R0810-20160412"
    },
    {
      "title": "Council Recommendation (EU) 2022/915 of 9 June 2022 on operational law enforcement cooperation",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reco/2022/915/oj/eng"
    },
    {
      "title": "Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX%3A42000A0922%2802%29"
    },
    {
      "title": "Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement — Article 41",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A42000A0922%2802%29"
    },
    {
      "title": "Judgment of the Court of 9 March 2006, Van Esbroeck, C-436/04",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A62004CJ0436"
    },
    {
      "title": "Europol History",
      "url": "https://www.europol.europa.eu/about-europol/history"
    },
    {
      "title": "Is Europol a European FBI?",
      "url": "https://www.europol.europa.eu/faq/europol-european-fbi"
    },
    {
      "title": "Eurojust legal framework",
      "url": "https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/about-us/organisation/eurojust-legal-framework"
    },
    {
      "title": "Judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European Arrest Warrant",
      "url": "https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2004_2009/documents/dt/580/580970/580970en.pdf"
    },
    {
      "title": "Alerts and data in SIS",
      "url": "https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/schengen/schengen-information-system/alerts-and-data-sis_en"
    },
    {
      "title": "Questions and answers",
      "url": "https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/schengen/schengen-information-system/questions-and-answers_en"
    },
    {
      "title": "What is SIS and how does it work?",
      "url": "https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/schengen/schengen-information-system/what-sis-and-how-does-it-work_en"
    },
    {
      "title": "New Eurodac enters into operation",
      "url": "https://www.eulisa.europa.eu/index.php/news-and-events/news/new-eurodac-enters-operation"
    },
    {
      "title": "Eurodac",
      "url": "https://www.eulisa.europa.eu/activities/large-scale-it-systems/eurodac"
    },
    {
      "title": "What is the EES?",
      "url": "https://www.travel-europe.europa.eu/en/ees/what-is-the-ees"
    },
    {
      "title": "The Entry/Exit System will become fully operational on 10 April 2026",
      "url": "https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/news/entryexit-system-will-become-fully-operational-10-april-2026-2026-03-30_en"
    },
    {
      "title": "Regulation (EU) 2018/1240, consolidated version of 12 June 2026",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2018/1240/2026-06-12/eng"
    },
    {
      "title": "Frequently asked questions — ETIAS",
      "url": "https://travel-europe.europa.eu/etias/faq"
    },
    {
      "title": "Interoperability between EU information systems in the field of freedom, security and justice",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=legissum%3A4400468"
    },
    {
      "title": "Regulation - 2022/922 - EN - EUR-Lex",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/922/oj/eng"
    },
    {
      "title": "Council Regulation (EU) 2022/922 of 9 June 2022",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/LSU/?uri=CELEX%3A32022R0922"
    },
    {
      "title": "Schengen Evaluation and Monitoring",
      "url": "https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/schengen/schengen-area/schengen-governance/schengen-evaluation-and-monitoring_en"
    },
    {
      "title": "Council document ST 8860/2023",
      "url": "https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-8860-2023-INIT/en/pdf"
    },
    {
      "title": "Schengen Cycle",
      "url": "https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/schengen/schengen-area/schengen-governance/schengen-cycle_en"
    },
    {
      "title": "2026 State of Schengen Report",
      "url": "https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/document/download/0cfbbb5e-0e62-43b6-9b36-ab22bb55a7ce_en?filename=2026+State+of+Schengen+Report_0.pdf"
    },
    {
      "title": "Commission report shows Schengen area continues to be resilient and ready for future challenges",
      "url": "https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/news/commission-report-shows-schengen-area-continues-be-resilient-and-ready-future-challenges-2026-05-18_en?prefLang=es"
    },
    {
      "title": "Temporary Reintroduction of Border Control",
      "url": "https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/schengen/schengen-area/temporary-reintroduction-border-control_en?prefLang=sl"
    },
    {
      "title": "EUR-Lex — Consolidated Schengen Borders Code, 10 July 2024",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1727362500490&uri=CELEX%3A02016R0399-20240710"
    },
    {
      "title": "EUR-Lex — Back to Schengen: A Roadmap, COM(2016) 120 final",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1780517521601&uri=CELEX%3A52016DC0120"
    },
    {
      "title": "Special report: Free movement of people in times of COVID-19",
      "url": "https://op.europa.eu/webpub/eca/special-reports/free-movement-13-2022/en/index.html"
    },
    {
      "title": "Back to Schengen — A Roadmap",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A52016DC0120"
    },
    {
      "title": "Schengen Borders Code — consolidated text of 6 October 2016",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/399/2016-10-06/eng"
    },
    {
      "title": "Regulation (EU) 2024/1351 on asylum and migration management",
      "url": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1351/2024-05-22/eng"
    },
    {
      "title": "Judgment in Joined Cases C-368/20 and C-369/20 — Press Release No 64/22",
      "url": "https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2022-04/cp220064en.pdf"
    },
    {
      "title": "Judgment in Case C-143/22, ADDE and Others — Press Release No 145/23",
      "url": "https://curia.europa.eu/site/upload/docs/application/pdf/2023-09/cp230145en.pdf"
    },
    {
      "title": "Supervising the entry into operations of the Entry/Exit System",
      "url": "https://www.edps.europa.eu/press-publications/press-news/press-releases/2025/supervising-entry-operations-entryexit-system"
    }
  ],
  "license": "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"
}