Core Curriculum for Border Guard Training

COUNCIL OF Brussels, 8 May 2003 THE EUROPEAN UNION P U BLI C

8285/2/03 REV 2

LIMITE

FRONT 38 COMIX 232

NOTE from: Austrian and Swedish delegations to: Strategic Committee on Immigration, Frontiers and Asylum Subject: REPORT - Core curriculum for border guard training

Delegations will find attached the final report of the Project on core curriculum for border guard training.

______

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 1 DG H I EN

Conseil UE ANNEX

Implementation of the Plan for the Management of the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union

"CORE CURRICULUM" PROJECT

Final Report

1. Objective of the project

The Seville European Council of 21-22 June 2002 decided on the elaboration of a core curriculum for border guard training (conclusion No 32) on the basis of the Plan for the management of the external borders of the Member States of the European Union (see 10019/02 FRONT 58 COMIX 398).

Item 39 of the Plan for the management stipulates the following: "A common standard for border guard training is needed."

Items 102 and 103 foresee the following: "With the aim of gradually reducing quantitative and qualitative disparities that are likely to generate security distortions at the external borders, following measures are to be taken in the short-term: • Establishment of a common syllabus for the training of border guard officers and their mid-level management, • Organisation of regular advanced training courses, • Special attention to be paid to language training,

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 2 ANNEX DG H I EN • Basic knowledge of the tasks and the legal status of the border guard officers of other member countries, • Training for border guard officers with respect to the rights of and the protection of asylum seekers.”

Item 104 finally mentions : "The external borders practitioners Common Unit could be given the task of designing a common core curriculum for training border guards, based on the national training institute network and giving recommendations, standards and rules to the Member States for efficient and coherent recruitment.”

On the basis of the conclusion of the Seville European Council, both Sweden and Austria volunteered to tackle the question of enhanced cooperation in the training sector and submitted a joint project proposal to set up a Common Core Curriculum together with an implementation proposal. The project proposal was adopted by the "Common Unit of Border Guard Practitioners" (SCIFA+) at its meeting on 22 July 2002.

2. Brief description of the project

From the very beginning on, it was clear among the project team that the expected results should not only be elaborated on the basis of common facts available within the border management units, but that scientific guidance should also be striven for. Therefore, the implementation of the entire project was accompanied by the Institute for Conflict Research and the Institute for Sociology of Law and Criminology in Vienna.

Content of the core curriculum (see Annex 3)

The study group, consisting of the participants listed under point 3, agreed upon the content of eight main training fields:

• Human resources development • International legislation • National legislation • Operational training

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 3 ANNEX DG H I EN • Criminalistics/Criminology • Information technology • Applied working methods • Administration.

For each of these training fields, a time frame of training lessons, training method and level of competence to be achieved are recommended - differentiating between three categories of officers due to the differing structures of the national border services.

The three different levels of officers are as follows:

First-level officer = border guard not authorised to take coercive measures Second-level officer = border guard authorised to take coercive measures Mid-level officer = leader of a border guard team, with the right to make decisions on behalf of and for his team.

Implementation proposal

Regarding the proposal for implementation, see point 4 below.

3. Participating Member States, candidate countries and observers

Apart from the submission of national curricula and replies to the questionnaires, the following Member States of the European Union and Schengen partner States participated in the study group workshops: Austria, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom.

The following acceding and candidate countries also participated in the study group workshops: Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovenia and Turkey.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 4 ANNEX DG H I EN The elaboration of the core curriculum and its implementation proposal was also accompanied by the following observers : European Commission, DCAF, UNHCR, CEPOL and MEPA.

4. Phases of implementation

4.1 Project steps taken

According to the project plan adopted by SCIFA+, the following steps were taken:

• distribution of questionnaires on the possible structure of a future core curriculum and call for the submission of the respective national curricula of the Member States, including Norway and Iceland, in October 2002 (feedback rate: 87%); • evaluation of the replies and setting-up of a first draft core curriculum in December 2002 and January 2003; • study visits to France, Germany, the United Kingdom and Poland taking place in February 2003 in order to clarify questions outstanding regarding issues concerning training standards and organisational matters; • the final report was drafted during two study group meetings in Austria and Sweden with the participation of the Member States, Schengen partner States, the acceding and candidate countries, the European Commission, CEPOL, MEPA, DCAF and the UNHCR, in March and April 2003.

4.2 Proposal for the implementation of the Core Curriculum

Regarding the implementation proposal, further steps according to the necessary decisions of the proper fora for both the legal and the practical implementations are to be taken:

4.2.1 National implementation

The core curriculum is to be implemented independently by each country on its own.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 5 ANNEX DG H I EN 4.2.2 Legal implementation

Irrespective of the national responsibility for the implementation of the core curriculum, the delegates participating in the study group meetings agreed upon that the core curriculum shall be binding.

Since border control has its legal basis in the first pillar and - at least partly - in several fields of the operational cooperation in the third pillar, a discussion should take place in the proper fora on the correct legal basis and legal form.

The delegates participating in the study group meetings agreed upon that this could be done in the course of the re-codification of the Common Manual, which is to receive the status of a regulation. The pertinent initiative for this solution would have to be taken by the European Commission.

4.2.3 Practical implementation at European level

Pursuant to Article 7 of the Schengen Convention, the contracting parties assist each other with a view to the effective implementation of checks and surveillance and promote standard basic and further training of officers manning checkpoints.

To close the gap between national responsibility and the aim of the core curriculum to reach a practical common training standard at European level, agreement was reached between all participants that this should be guaranteed by specific Quality Assurance Measures (QAM):

• ADVICE (to provide the possibility to consult experts for advice, an "experts' hotline" should be established during the implementation process). • SYSTEM MONITORING (therefore, training objectives are to be defined and operationalised, scores are to be defined, data should be collected by the Member States themselves; the whole data material has to be anonymised for the analysis and interpretation of the data material; on this basis, a report should be prepared - and if necessary - modification procedures, training activities or other adequate measures should be proposed; the best practices or methods should be published in an anonymised way; thus, each country would be enabled to judge its status as well as its development; at the same time, fields of problems concerning the implementation and the need for action can be identified as well).

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 6 ANNEX DG H I EN • ADAPTATION (if goals are not reached and if procedures are identified for failure, the improvement of the content, of the teaching method or of the evaluation method - to be done on the basis of common agreement between all partners - could be necessary). • MULTIPLIER TRAINING (multiplier training is one possibility to reach a uniform training standard).

4.2.3.1 Organisational structure

Apart from Quality Assurance Measures, the study group also had to decide upon the proposal for the "organisational structure" for the implementation of the core curriculum.

There were two main approaches for the decision upon the organisational structure:

• a Central European Border Service Academy, • a Common Integrated Unit.

Taking into account the several disadvantages of a Central European Border Service Academy (lack of infrastructure, available staff and logistics in the Member States were not used, linguistic difficulties, enormous travelling costs), common agreement was reached between all partners that all training activities concerning basic training of the three categories of officers shall, as a rule, be organised and carried out by Member States at national level in their own responsibility and - for the performance of the supplementary tasks mentioned above (advice, system monitoring, adaptation and multiplier training) - a Common Integrated Unit (CIU) , composed of experts of all participating countries and supported by National Management Teams (NMT), responsible for the national implementation of the core curriculum, should be implemented.

The tasks of the National Management Team would be:

• to implement the core curriculum; • to assure quality in its own country; • to collect data material and to report it to the CIU; • to implement agreements; • to cooperate with and support the CIU.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 7 ANNEX DG H I EN The tasks of the Common Integrated Unit would be:

• to provide advice; • to do additional data collection; • to analyse and interpret the data material; • to disseminate best practices/ideas/experiences; • to coordinate multiplier training.

4.2.3.2 Structure of the CIU

The Common Integrated Unit itself consists of the International Management Unit composed of the national experts of all participating Member States and of other relevant institutions, and a small Administration Unit , exclusively for the administrative support of the International Management Unit.

4.2.3.3 Location of the CIU

The Common Integrated Unit could be founded in the form of an ad hoc centre according to the Plan for the management for the external borders of the Member States of the European Union (see 10019/02 FRONT 58 COMIX 398). In the course of the proceedings, the Common Integrated Unit should follow the decisions made as regards all ad hoc centres.

On the other hand, the CIU could also be located within an already existing institution at European level. Both solutions have advantages and disadvantages. A decision on which to choose is yet to be taken.

4.2.3.4 Relation between the CIU and SCIFA+

The form of coordination between the Common Integrated Unit and SCIFA+ depends upon where the CIU is located. If SCIFA+ chooses to establish an ad hoc centre for training as part of a network, this ad hoc centre would be submitted under the guidelines for ad hoc centres which are to be set up by SCIFA+, including inter alia cooperation and coordination with other ad hoc centres of the network or regular reports to SCIFA+.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 8 ANNEX DG H I EN If SCIFA+, on the other hand, chooses to place the Common Integrated Unit within an already existing institution within the European Union, the form of coordination would have to be agreed upon between SCIFA+ and the chosen institution.

4.2.3.5 Relation between the CIU and the CWG "Schengen Evaluation"

In points 24 and 25 of the Plan for the management at the external borders (see 10019/02 FRONT 58 COMIX 398), it is laid down:

"(24) The Working Party "Schengen Evaluation" has been given a remit covering precise matters. Under this remit, the manner in which checks and surveillance are carried out at external borders can be evaluated for all Member States, as can practice when issuing visas, police and judicial cooperation at internal borders, and use of the SIS. This evaluation mechanism serves two distinct purposes: • to evaluate if new Member States fulfil the conditions laid down in order to apply the Schengen acquis; • to check that Member States implement the Schengen acquis properly. (25) In the case of Member States applying the Schengen acquis, the evaluation missions produce a report. However, all the logical conclusions cannot be drawn from such report, for instance as regards penalties or operational and financial aid to one or more Member States. Nonetheless, this mechanism resulting from the Working Party "Schengen Evaluation" does give a starting point for strengthening the external borders evaluation function in terms of internal security."

Contrary to the mandate of - and the methods applied in - the CWG "Schengen Evaluation", the evaluation task of the Common Integrated Unit (to be done constantly and jointly between all partners involved in the CIU) would mainly serve the purpose to provide up-to-date data of the core curriculum itself.

From the results of this evaluation process, difficulties and needs for update of the content could be explored, time frames and method could be adapted accordingly and the level of competence to be achieved could be jointly defined.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 9 ANNEX DG H I EN

5. Overall financial costs of the project and percentage of EU financing

The project was co-financed to a percentage of 66,01% by the European Commission under the ARGO programme. The calculated total costs of the project were 401.555 ⁄:

265.085 ⁄ are held by the European Commission, 92.888 ⁄ by Austria, and 61.500 ⁄ by Sweden.

Due to the fact that the time limit for the project was reduced to 10 April 2003, one of the planned international workshops had to be cancelled. Consequently, the total costs will be essentially reduced. The actual total costs will be defined after the settlement of accounts, which will be done in the coming weeks.

6. Evaluation of the project by EUROPOL or other authorities

In addition to the external expertise in the drafting process (the implementation of the entire project was accompanied by the Institute for Conflict Research and the Institute for Sociology of Law and Criminology in Vienna), both the draft core curriculum and the implementation proposal were evaluated by the delegates of the Member States, the acceding and candidate countries, the European Commission, CEPOL, MEPA, DCAF and UNHCR in the frame of two study group meetings that took place in Austria and in Sweden in March and April 2003. Thus, wide agreement between all partners later to be affected by the implementation could be guaranteed and eventual needs expressed by them could be taken on board throughout the whole exercise. The only reservation announced concerned the proposed obligatory English language training.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 10 ANNEX DG H I EN

7. Added value of the project on an operational basis (i.e. how did it contribute in an effective way)

When referring to the added value, two items need to be mentioned:

Added value in the field of common training standards was - to a certain extent - already achieved by the common exercises (questionnaires, study visits and workshops), since - for the first time in the recent past - a joint undertaking to achieve the common standards in Art. 6 par. 1 of the Schengen Implementing Convention was conducted.

Added value as regards practical implementation on a European operational level will only be possible when the appropriate decisions as regards the proposal for both the legal and the practical implementations as mentioned above under point 4, are made.

8. Conclusions (on an operational, legal, political and economical basis) contributing to further planning of the long-term objectives as set out by the Plan for the management of EU external borders

As already mentioned, item 39 of the Plan for the management of the external border stipulates that "a common standard for border guard training is needed" .

With the results achieved during the common exercise, a clear set of conclusions and recommendations and a set of rules on how to implement the curriculum in a binding manner that still provides for a partnership approach between all participating countries, is on the table.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 11 ANNEX DG H I EN

9. Extent to which the project influenced the methodology and efficiency of work carried out by national authorities

The core curriculum is to be implemented independently by each Member State. It defines content, time frames, method and level of competence to be achieved.

While a certain degree of influence on the methodology can already be expected from the results of the exercise where substantial discussions on the need for common standards were undertaken, future influence will largely depend on the implementation of the proposal. With the implementation of supplementary Quality Assurance Measures under the guidance of the Common Integrated Unit mentioned above in point 4 and the organisation of regular meetings on the evaluation and update of the curriculum, positive influence on the methodology and efficiency in the field of training for border guard officers carried out by national authorities can certainly be guaranteed.

10. Extent to which the project contribu ted to creating a conviction among national authorities that it forms part of an overall EU external borders' management system

It is obvious that the full practical implementation of the core curriculum is bound to create a conviction among the national responsible authorities for border guard training. As agreed between all partners involved, the International Management Unit (as the essential part of the Common Integrated Unit where national experts contribute with their experience to the guidance through the implementation process and the further development of the core curriculum) is seen as an ideal tool to provide for a partnership approach towards the accomplishment of an overall EU external borders management system with common standards in training and formation.

______

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 12 ANNEX DG H I EN

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 13 ANNEX DG H I EN 1. INTRODUCTION...... 16

1.1. PREFACE ...... 16

1.2. MANDATE ...... 17

2. PROJECT ORGANISATION AND PROCEDURE ...... 19

2.1. ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE AUSTRIAN -SWEDISH PROJECT TEAM ...... 19

2.2. HOW TO PROCEED ...... 19 2.2.1. Project plan ...... 19 2.2.2. Methods ...... 20 2.2.2.1. Collection of National Curricula of the Member States ...... 20 2.2.2.2. Study Visits ...... 21 2.2.2.3. Study Group Meetings (workshops) ...... 21 2.2.3. Evaluation Criteria ...... 21

2.3. SCIENTIFIC SUPPORT AND GUIDANCE ...... 24

2.4. FUNDAMENTAL EVALUATION RESULTS ...... 24 2.4.1. Data Material ...... 24 2.4.2. Organisational Structures of the National Border Services ...... 24 2.4.3. National Border Service Training Models ...... 25 2.4.4. Effects of the Evaluation Results upon the Structure of the Core Curriculum 25

3. CORE CURRICULUM...... 26

3.1. STRUCTURE OF THE CORE CURRICULUM ...... 26

3.2. DEFINITION ...... 27

3.3. REMARKS ...... 29

4. IMPLEMENTATION ...... 30

4.1. INTRODUCTION ...... 30

4.2. LEGAL IMPLEMENTATION ...... 30 4.2.1. "Cornerstone" Article 7 of the Schengen Convention ...... 30 4.2.2. Jurisdiction ...... 31 4.2.3. The Implementation Process ...... 31 4.2.4 Conclusion ...... 32

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 14 ANNEX DG H I EN 4.3. ORGANISATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION ...... 33 4.3.1. General Remarks ...... 33 4.3.2. Legal Integration ...... 34 4.3.3.1. European Level ...... 35 4.3.3.2. National Level ...... 36

4.4. QUALITY ASSURANCE MEASURES ...... 36 4.4.1. Advice ...... 36 4.4.2. System-Monitoring ...... 36 4.4.3. Adaptation ...... 37 4.4.4. Multiplier Training ...... 37

4. 5. EVALUATION ...... 37 4.5.1. General Remarks ...... 37 4.5.2. Evaluation Parameter ...... 39 4.5.2.1. Definition of Qualification Objectives ...... 39 4.5.2.2. Qualification/Rating ...... 39 4.5.2.3. Data Collection ...... 39 4.5.2.4. Data Analysis and Interpretation ...... 40 Annex 1 – Common Integrated Unit ...... 41 Annex 2 - Timetable ...... 43 Annex 3 –Core Curriculum ...... 44

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 15 ANNEX DG H I EN

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Preface

The external borders of the European Union play a key role in securing the area of freedom, security and justice. The control and surveillance of external borders contribute to the management of migration flows and to the prevention of and fight against crime in general. They are also fundamental in the fight against illegal immigration. Already the founding fathers of the Schengen Implementing Convention realised that common training and formation of the relevant personnel should be striven for.

Since then, experience such as the Schengen evaluations and discussions within the former Schengen and present EU Council Working Parties has again proved the need for this training.

After the European Council in Tampere, which agreed on a programme to establish an "area of freedom, security and justice", it was especially the European Council in Seville that again particularly underlined the need for common training as a prerequisite for common and compulsory standards in border management.

In accordance with the decisions of the SCIFA+ meeting in Elsinore (22-23 July 2002), a team of Austrian and Swedish experts has now undertaken the task of assessing the current training availability among the EU Member States, the candidate countries as well as Norway and Iceland, has tried to find similarities and differences, and has elaborated a core curriculum together with a proposal for its implementation.

By way of conclusion, the project team would like to express its gratitude to all experts involved. It was largely due to their effective and diligent cooperation that the goal mentioned above was achieved in time.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 16 ANNEX DG H I EN

1.2. Mandate

In view of the above, the Seville European Council of 21 and 22 June 2002, decided on the elaboration of a core curriculum for border guard training (Conclusion No 32). This decision is based on the plan of the Council (Justice and Home Affairs) of 13 June 2002, which states:

"The External borders practitioners common unit could be given the task of designing a common core curriculum for training border guards, based on the national training institute network and giving recommendations, standards and rules to the Member States for efficient and coherent recruitment." (see 10019/02 FRONT 58 COMIX 398).

The European Parliament too suggests in its decision regarding the Commission's communication to the Council:

Motion for a Resolution:

"Towards integrated management of the external borders of the Member States of the European Union" (COM (2002)233–C5-0505/2002-2002/2212(INI)):

The European Parliament...

7. calls on the Council at long last to implement the joint training and retraining schemes provided for in Article 7 of the Convention applying the Schengen Agreement; 8. welcomes the Council's proposal that a common syllabus be drawn up for the training and re-training of border guards; 9. proposes that a European Staff College be established with the training provided there creating a multiplier effect so that Europe-wide standards may be guaranteed; 10. Calls on the Commission to fund with immediate effect projects for the establishment of uniform training standards and operational standards by means of the ARGO programme..."

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 17 ANNEX DG H I EN Following the abovementioned conclusion of the Seville European Council, at its meeting on 22 July 2002 the SCIFA+ (heads of the border services of the European Union) adopted the Austrian and Swedish joint proposal for a project, elaborating a common core curriculum for border guard training and developing an implementation proposal.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 18 ANNEX DG H I EN

2. PROJECT ORGANISATION and PROCEDURE

2.1. Organisational structure of the Austrian-Swedish project team

For the management of the project, an Austrian-Swedish core team was established on 28 August 2002.

The terms of reference for the project provided for a core curriculum and an implementation proposal to be framed. The preparation of a core curriculum was carried out jointly by the project partners, Austria and Sweden, while the implementation proposals have only been coordinated with Sweden, as this task had been assigned to Austria as project leader. This explains the different structure of the two teams.

2.2. How to proceed

2.2.1. Project plan

Following the abovementioned conclusion of the Seville European Council, at its meeting of 22 July 2002 the SCIFA+ (heads of the border services of the European Union) adopted the Austrian and Swedish joint proposal for a project, which contained the following key components:

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 19 ANNEX DG H I EN - The request for a contact person in each Member State, Schengen partner State and candidate country in October 2002. - The distribution of a questionnaire on a model of a core curriculum and a request for the national curricula of the Member States in October 2002, the receipt of replies in November 2002 and evaluation of replies in December 2002 and January 2003. - Study visits to France, Germany, Poland and the United Kingdom in February 2003. - Workshops with all Member States, Schengen partner States and candidate countries in March and April 2003. - Presentation of the common core curriculum for the Thessaloniki European Council on 20-21 June 2003.

2.2.2. Methods

The following methods have been employed in the elaboration of the core curriculum:

Ù collection of national curricula of the Member States Ù questionnaires Ù study visit Ù study group meeting (workshops).

2.2.2.1. Collection of national curricula of the Member States

Training and teaching content was evaluated through questionnaires requesting all Member States of the European Union to forward national curricula. The questionnaires had been prepared by the Austrian-Swedish project team and endorsed by the Institute for Sociology of Law and Criminology to ensure conformity with scientific standards.

Evaluation itself had been carried out on the basis of pre-defined criteria. These criteria, listed under 2.2.3 had been drawn up by the project team, and scientific support was provided by the Institute for Sociology of Law and Criminology and the Institute of Conflict Research.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 20 ANNEX DG H I EN 2.2.2.2. Study visits

Furthermore, study visits had been paid to Poland, Germany, the United Kingdom and France. The main purpose was to clarify questions outstanding with respect to the data transmitted, to discuss certain curriculum contents, to attain better understanding in relation to cooperation between the different national organisations involved in border control, and to clarify the possibilities of including aspects not yet taken into account by the above-mentioned States.

2.2.2.3. Study group meetings (workshops)

In the study group meetings, all participating countries (Member States, candidate countries, Norway and Iceland) had the opportunity to actively design the core curriculum. The interim results were presented in several sub-groups in order to discuss and adapt the core curriculum. The results of the sub-groups were summarised in the plenary, and a final result presented.

2.2.3. Evaluation criteria

Criteria were laid down prior to the evaluation of the present training status in the individual Member State. These criteria were to help decide whether national training content was to be included in the core curriculum. After critical discussion and analysis of the performance to be expected from a border guard officer, the following criteria were defined:

1) Quality

This criterion depends on the quality standard applied to training contents by the individual Member State. If under 'quality standard' "knowledge" or "ability to apply" or "ability for critical reflection and discussion" was indicated (see definitions under 3.2), then that content was included in the core curriculum. Since different "ratings" with respect to the respective training contents had been anticipated (these assumptions were confirmed in the course of the evaluation activities), another criterion, namely "fulfilment of tasks", was defined. This definition takes into account the different types of tasks and forms of organisation by including the different scopes of tasks into beforementioned explanation.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 21 ANNEX DG H I EN 2) Task fulfilment

Certain training contents are absolutely necessary for fulfilling tasks. Each curriculum content was examined according to the criteria listed below, in order to determine whether this was absolutely necessary for fulfilling the relevant tasks. These tasks present those activities which each border guard officers has to fulfil in any event. It was taken into account that, depending on the qualification category of the officer concerned (1st, 2nd, mid-level), requirements and the tasks to be fulfilled differ.

However, in any case, the tasks of a border guard officer comprise:

1. enforcement measures/sanctions (not 1 st level) 2. control activities 3. investigation activities 4. administration internal/external 5. operations equipment and methods 6. personality development (only mid-level - management qualities).

Explanations:

1. Enforcement measures/sanctions a. Refusal of entry b. Return to country of departure c. Filing of charges (Penal Code/Administration) d. Collateral/fines e. Recording (take fingerprints and photographs) f. Coercive measures g. Use of firearms

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 22 ANNEX DG H I EN 1. Control activities a. Document checks (Doku-Box) b. Hollow space examination (human beings, property, motor vehicles) c. Person control d. Motor-vehicle control (traffic) e. Border surveillance (green/blue) f. Tactics, self-protection g. Illegal immigration h. Traffic in stolen vehicles i. Narcotics

2. Investigation activities: a. Search (wanted persons/property database) b. Interrogation c. Evidence collection d. Tactics, self-protection

3. Administration internal/external a. Asylum proceedings b. Administration internal c. Cooperation with other agencies and institutions

4. Special operations equipment and methods a. Use of technology (Doku-Box, thermal image devices, night vision, EDP, etc.)

5. Personality development a. applied psychology b. communication - language skills

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 23 ANNEX DG H I EN

2.3. Scientific support and guidance

A contract for scientific validation and guidance through the project was concluded with the Institute for Sociology of Law and Criminology and the Institute of Conflict Research in Vienna in order to corroborate the results presented by the project team and to make sure the process fulfilled scientific criteria. The main reason for doing so was to determine whether the development of the core curriculum was scientifically acceptable. Such scientific validation, however, did not include reviewing the contents of the core curriculum, as the contents were to be selected by the project participants.

In terms of the procedure applied, this means that the core team examined, and where necessary adapted, the methods of obtaining data (i.e. collecting curricula of all EU and Schengen Member States and collocating information based on questionnaires), the evaluation (criteria definition as well as criteria-related evaluation process), and also the formal requirements for the core curriculum.

2.4. Fundamental evaluation results

2.4.1. Data material

Questionnaires and a request to forward the national curriculum were sent out to all 15 EU Member States, plus Iceland and Norway. It has to be borne in mind that Luxembourg is not taking part in the project. In total, we had an 81% (13 out of 16 participating countries) feedback.

2.4.2. Organisational structures of the national border services

The completed questionnaires and curricula forwarded to the project team confirmed the assumption that in the EU and Schengen area, individual border services differ greatly in terms of organisation and philosophy. In some countries, the border service is a separate organisation, exclusively responsible for border surveillance and control, while in others several authorities are involved, each responsible for different tasks, and in some countries there are certain regional differences, e.g. similar or identical tasks are performed by several organisations. Hence, training content has been specifically adapted to the respective needs.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 24 ANNEX DG H I EN

2.4.3. National border service training models

In some States, officers undergo a complete general law enforcement training and in the course of the initial practical phase, or in an additional separate training module, undergo border-specific training. In other countries, the officers are trained right from the beginning for border service only; at times segmentation goes so far that only those sectors are taught which the officer needs to know in the position assigned to him/her by the employer, or in some cases just comprehensive border guard training is provided. As a result, training duration and training costs vary. The differing approaches are closely related to the differing tasks the individual border service organisations have to perform.

2.4.4. Effects of the evaluation results upon the structure of the core curriculum

Given the different demands and methods resulting from the differing organisation and training models, we were looking for a flexible approach for the core curriculum. Flexibility appeared to be the only way of ensuring (1) that the national implementation of the contents of the core curriculum was made possible in a simple manner, and (2) that the agreed contents and objectives would in fact be reached. The core curriculum was designed as a modular system to allow these modules to be integrated into each national curriculum, independent of the prevailing organisation or training model. In other words, only those modules are to be integrated that refer to border specific activities actually to be carried out by the border guard service concerned. For instance, if a border guard service has no authority to conduct criminal investigations, the modules "Criminalistics" and "Criminal Law" need not be implemented.

Furthermore, by drawing up three curricula, taking into account the qualification category of the border guard officer (1st level, 2nd level, mid-level), it has been ensured that only those modules for which there is actual demand at national level will be implemented. Only a few countries employ civilian employees without any law-enforcement powers whatsoever. In those countries where border control and border surveillance is carried out exclusively by uniformed officers with enforcement powers, there is no obligation to have this part of the core curriculum implemented.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 25 ANNEX DG H I EN

3. CORE CURRICULUM

3.1. Structure of the core curriculum

The core curriculum is designed for all border guards of the European Union and of the Schengen partner States. It consists of three parts, one for first-level officers, one for second-level officers and one for mid-level officers. The core curriculum constitutes a minimum requirement at European level, which means that all States must implement the content included, but also that they are free to expand the content or timeframe according to their national needs.

As long as it is guaranteed that each content is recognisable for evaluation purposes, each country is free to integrate into its national curriculum as it sees fit.

For the effective implementation of the core curriculum, modules are taken as a basis. Each module consists of different contents, with corresponding timeframes, methods and quality standards.

The timeframe currently suggested is the result of an evaluation of the input from each participating country and is to be considered a starting-point for the time being. It will also be a tool for future development of the quality standard and the legal implementation (to be coordinated by the common unit). Once quality standards have been developed, they will enjoy priority, will be fixed and cannot be changed unilaterally. When this has happened, flexibility in regards to the timeframe will be given and it will be possible to have the recommended minimum time covered by other modules as long as the training content is adhered to.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 26 ANNEX DG H I EN

3.2. Definition

For the purpose of the common core curriculum and its implementation, the following definitions were agreed upon:

Border guard (see 10019/02 FRONT 58 COMIX 398)

Public official deployed either at a land, maritime or air border crossing point or along the land or maritime border or in the immediate vicinity of the latter, who enjoys the prerogatives of public authorities needed to exercise one or more of the following functions:

• Carry out checks or surveillance at external borders. • Take at external borders the preventive or enforcement measures needed to ensure compliance with European Community regulations, the internal security of the common area of freedom of movement, law and order or national security. • Conduct investigations into facts observed in the course of checks or surveillance at external borders.

Checks at external borders (see 10019/02 FRONT 58 COMIX 398)

All operations carried out by official authorities in the Member States at border crossing points to ensure, pursuant to Article 6 of the Schengen Convention, that persons, their vehicle and the objects in their possession can be permitted to enter or leave the common area of freedom of movement.

Surveillance at external borders (see 10019/02 FRONT 58 COMIX 398)

All activities and operations carried out by official authorities in the Member States at external land, maritime and air borders to prevent, pursuant to Article 6 of the Schengen Convention, persons from circumventing the official border crossing points in order to evade checks and illegally enter the common area of freedom of movement.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 27 ANNEX DG H I EN First-, second- and mid-level officer

• First-level officer = Border guard without the right to take coercive measures. • Second-level officer = Border guard with the right to take coercive measures. • Mid-level officer = Leader of a border guard group, with the right to take decisions on behalf of his group.

Mid-level officers:

Countries where mid-level officers are also recruited from outside the border-control organisation have to make sure that these persons have adequate knowledge equalling that of a second-level officer; otherwise personnel recruited this way must undergo training with respect to the contents concerned.

Lesson

1 lesson = 40-50 minutes

Teaching methods

• Theoretical = reading, lectures, personal study, etc. • Practical = seminars, case studies, role play, IT training, etc. • Operational training = study visits, field training, etc.

Each country is free to choose any of the methods proposed in each module.

Level of competence

• Information • Knowledge • Ability to apply • Ability for critical reflection and discussion

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 28 ANNEX DG H I EN

3.3. Remarks

France will only accept language training (English) on a voluntary basis for second-level officers and mid-level officers.

Greece expressed a reservation on obligatory language-training (English) for first-level officers dealing only with border surveillance.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 29 ANNEX DG H I EN

4. IMPLEMENTATION

4.1. Introduction

Bearing in mind the idea enshrined in Article 7 of the Schengen Convention according to which the contracting parties assist each other with a view to the effective implementation of checks and surveillance and promote standard basic and further training of officers manning checkpoints, several principles have to be observed when implementing the common core curriculum.

a. Pursuant to the objective of national border services, the core curriculum is to be implemented independently by each country on its own. b. Measures for advice, coordination and control as well as quality assurance (advice, evaluation, adaptation, knowledge transfer to multipliers) are to be taken at European level, helping to achieve the common goals linked to the introduction of a European core curriculum. c. As all these measures will inevitably require a legal basis, relevant legislation will have to be created at European level for the implementation of standard basic and further training.

4.2. Legal implementation

4.2.1. Article 7 of the Schengen Convention as the cornerstone

The Schengen Agreements and the regulations based thereon were integrated into the framework of the European Union by the Treaty of Amsterdam, under Protocol No 2 annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty establishing the European Community.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 30 ANNEX DG H I EN 4.2.2. Jurisdiction

Upon transfer of the Schengen Acquis, legal bases had to be determined for those provisions still in effect, pursuant to the relevant provisions of the Treaties. On the one hand, these legal bases stem from the EC Treaty, which is the Community law of the first pillar, on the other hand, they are part of the EU Treaty, in other words, Union law of the third pillar.

When the Treaty of Amsterdam came into force, the visa policy, for which the Maastricht Treaty had already laid down a Community competence, and also the asylum and immigration sectors and the other policies concerning the free movement of persons were integrated into the TEC (Title IV).

All those aspects, which form the basis of external border control (to be executed in compliance with uniform standards), definitely fall under Community law. However, there are other aspects of border control which relate to police cooperation and the fight against cross-border crime. In this regard, border control and cooperation form a useful tool that should be utilised fully at European level.

4.2.3. The implementation process

Since border control has its legal basis in the first pillar and operational cooperation has its legal basis - at least partly - in the third pillar, a discussion will take place in the proper fora on the correct legal basis and legal form before any decision can be taken on the subject. The various alternatives available are presented below.

For implementation in the first pillar, there are the following forms of legal action in the TEC:

a. Regulations b. Directives c. Decisions d. Recommendations and Opinions

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 31 ANNEX DG H I EN While a regulation is of general application, binding in its entirety, and directly applicable in all Member States, a directive would be binding - as to the result to be achieved - upon each Member State to which it is addressed, but would leave to the national authorities the choice of forms and methods.

One has to bear in mind that, as a rule, Community law comes into being as a result of mutual consultation between several institutions and other bodies (the Commission, the European Parliament and the Council), and the right of initiative rests with the European Commission.

For implementation in the third pillar, there are the following forms of legal action in the TEU:

a. Common position b. Framework decision c. Decision d. Convention

Common positions define the approach of the Union to a particular matter. A framework decision can be compared to a directive, but does not entail direct effect. A decision is binding on the Member States but does not entail direct effect. Conventions constitute recommendations to the Member States for adoption in accordance with their constitutional requirements.

Moreover, there are other possibilities, such as taking a decision to incorporate the core curriculum in a handbook or best practices.

4.2.4 Conclusion

Another aspect to be considered is that there are already uniform rules to effect border control. In order to avoid discrepancies between the provisions on how to perform border control (= the Common Manual) and the regulations to achieve standard basic and further training (= joint core curriculum), it appears advisable to create a link-up. This might be done in the course of the updating (re-codification) of the Manual, which is to acquire the status of a Regulation. Thus, the core curriculum could be declared binding (annexed to the Manual and established as "Best Practice"). The relevant initiative would have to taken by the European Commission.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 32 ANNEX DG H I EN

4.3. Implementation at organisational level

4.3.1. General remarks

Clear conditions, taking into account the results of the individual European authorities, to be implemented by a central advisory, coordinating and controlling unit, have to be formulated in order to introduce the common core curriculum aiming at providing a common minimum standard of basic and further training.

There are two main approaches: The first one would be a "Central European Border Service Academy". This solution would have several disadvantages - a huge demand in personnel, infrastructure and budget. The reasons are, firstly, that no infrastructure exists yet and therefore it would take a long lead time before first activities take place. Secondly, available logistic and staff resources would remain unused, which in turn would lead to an additional blocking of EU budgetary resources. And even if there was a "Central European Border Service Academy" where all the border guard officers would have to undergo training, it would involve huge travel costs, linguistic difficulties and limited opportunities for taking into consideration the differences in national legislation and execution of the tasks. These are the main reasons why the project has not favoured this solution.

The alternative consists in a "Common Integrated Unit for Border Guard Training", which would have only advisory, coordinating and guiding tasks. The different training activities should be performed by the national training centres (already in place) which possess the special know-how for the required training. The advantages are that the existing national infrastructure and available human resources can be made use of, greatly reducing the budgetary needs and the implementation phase.

Participating States would have the opportunity to be represented and contribute to this unit to attain maximum integration of all national needs and interests and to ensure swift transfer of best practices. The integration of all participating countries in this unit would ensure that the border service know-how of all the participating States is made available, bringing about closer cooperation between all Member States on the one hand and taking their individual needs into account on the other hand. The result would be a quicker response to training requirements.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 33 ANNEX DG H I EN

Finally, national management teams have to be appointed at national level which would be responsible for the implementation at immediate operational level.

4.3.2. Legal integration

In view of the ongoing discussion regarding the installation of ad hoc centres (see SCIFA+ meetings of 28.01.2003 and 19.02.2003) or the use of present institutions, the issue of legal integration of the common integrated unit should become part of this overall decision.

4.3.3. Organisational structure

The structure and tasks of this "Common Integrated Unit for Border Guard Training" remain independent of where it might be located.

The Common Integrated Unit would consist of two parts:

AdministrationAdministration Unit InternationalInternational ManagementManagement Unit

• Administration Unit: A coordinating and managing organisational unit with permanent staff. The personnel should be provided by the authority to which the unit is attached. Main task: administrative support and preparation of proposals and drafts for the International Management Unit.

• International Management Unit

• Advice An international team of experts from different sectors (border service, education, evaluation) contributing on a permanent basis. Main tasks: guidance through the implementation process and coordination of training courses

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 34 ANNEX DG H I EN • Monitoring Alternating experts from the participating countries. Main tasks: evaluation and monitoring tasks

The tasks of the unit are described below (Annex 1).

4.3.3.1. European level

The work at European level should be harmonising the training tasks at national level.

- Principal decisions on pre-conditions and coordination of objectives and measures at the level of participating countries, taking into account the results of the work of the relevant European bodies; - Principal decisions on monitoring at national level; - Decision on the draft evaluation report; - Publication of the evaluation report; - Recommendations on amendments; - Provision of advice on the implementation of the core curriculum; - Coordination/guidance of the implementation process; - Coordination of training activities for border service using national and international training facilities (such as CEPOL, MEPA, NBPA, AEPC, national police and law enforcement academies), especially by preparing a "training catalogue" in cooperation with the participating States; - Organising follow-up training courses (train-the-trainer; mid-level and higher level officers); - In isolated cases, further data collection at national level; - Data analysis and interpretation; - Best practice analysis in matters related to border service training; - Quality assurance with regard to implementation, implementation instruments (teaching methods, etc.) and training contents by means of further developments based on the evaluation results and proposals for suitable follow-up training; - Dissemination of ideas and experience; - Control of the implementation of recommendations.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 35 ANNEX DG H I EN 4.3.3.2. National level

Each country would decide on the composition of the National Management Team independently.

Tasks:

- Implementation at national level; - Quality assurance at national level (within the pre-defined framework objectives); - Data collection at national level and preparation of a report on the results; - Supporting the Common Integrated Unit by accepting mandated tasks; - Ensuring implementation of agreements with the Common Integrated Unit; - Cooperation with the Common Integrated Unit through mutual support in the implementation, evaluation and control, and through joint interpretation of national evaluation results taking into account cultural differences and teaching methods.

4.4. Quality assurance measures

One of the most important tasks at European level is to safeguard the required quality in implementing the core curriculum through a number of measures. The cornerstones of the quality assurance system are provision of suitable advice, introduction of system monitoring, the tailor- made adaptation of the core curriculum, and ensuring knowledge transfer through the training of multipliers.

4.4.1. Advice

Provide the possibility of consulting experts for advice ("Hotline") in the course of incorporating the core curriculum into national training.

4.4.2. System monitoring

Periodic monitoring, analysis and statement of the objectives achieved by means of parameters and subsequent evaluation of the data obtained with respect to standards.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 36 ANNEX DG H I EN Purpose: Assessment of the status and development of a system (in concrete terms, the introduction of the core curriculum in the individual countries) and identification of the sectors where problems occur and thus the need to take action.

Procedure for system monitoring

- Determination and interpretation of operational (measurable) objectives ("operationalisation"); - Formulating orientation standards (qualification profiles), e.g. desired attitudes, cross- curricular capabilities, social/emotional state; - Data collection (as a rule National Management Team; also Monitoring Team); - Data analysis and interpretation; - Preparation of a report on the anonymised results; - Passing on experience, case-related counselling to modify procedures.

4.4.3. Adaptation

Adaptation of the contents of the core curriculum as a consequence of the evaluation results.

4.4.4. Multiplier training

This measure is meant to contribute to reaching a uniform training standard, as it provides for a "Train the trainer" programme, as well as training and advanced training of senior officers at management level (see abovementioned EP Committee decision).

4. 5. Evaluation

4.5.1. General remarks

When drafting an international evaluation report, data on having reached common training standards are to be:

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 37 ANNEX DG H I EN - anonymised, - structured, - analysed (sums overview, mean value(s), acquired knowledge), - interpreted (strengths, improvement potential), - correlated, and - presented in graph form.

The aim of the entire curriculum, like best practice strategy, is to take advantage of synergies and by means of bench-marking make it possible to publish the best results in the individual categories and the best total result, in each case anonymised, in order to allow comparisons. Rankings should not be made in order to avoid demotivation.

There is also provision for informing each country separately of its own results apart from abovementioned data, provided an assessment has been made by the International Management Unit.

In addition, the reasons for the best results (best practice: comparative analysis of prior processes), e.g. teaching methods, special implementation instruments, etc., should be described to enable one's each country to modify its own teaching methods, etc., by comparing them with the other countries.

In the event of failure to attain the set objective (i.e. not having reached the stipulated standards), a cause analysis should be made in evaluation at national level or in the international comparison.

Subsequently, modifications of procedures so far identified as a cause for failing to reach the goal are to be developed and decided by the Monitoring Team in cooperation with the National Management Team of the country concerned (e.g. modification of the curriculum, developing teaching aids, standardised examination methods, teaching method/training for instructors, etc.).

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 38 ANNEX DG H I EN 4.5.2. Evaluation parameter

4.5.2.1. Definition of qualification objectives

Formulating operational objectives is one of the prerequisites for establishing whether the goals set have been achieved, and is thus of considerable significance for the evaluation quality. Therefore, it is important to apply measurement criteria to the objectives in question to be able at any stage to make a discernible "audit" by means of quantitative and qualitative data.

4.5.2.2. Qualification/Rating

Apart from the actual objective, a rating system is also needed and "grades" need to be defined. A "Minimum Qualification Grade" presents the stipulated minimum standard for certain criteria and the total result respectively. In other words, in terms of quantitative data, a certain score to be achieved (e.g. rank 2 of 4 possible ranks). With regard to qualitative data, a wording should be found to precisely describe competence requirement for a given parameter/indicator.

The rating system (operationalisation, i.e. setting up measurability criteria; putting into practice) is effected at the level of the International Management Unit, in cooperation with national experts.

4.5.2.3. Data collection

Data collection is done at national level, as a rule by each National Management Team. The Monitoring Team will carry out additional data collection on site (case studies). The selection of the data to be collected and quality parameters or indicators to monitor the achievement of the objectives result from the objectives agreed upon.

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 39 ANNEX DG H I EN Possible quality parameter and/or orientation standards :

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT ° training content (as ° Support of social development, ° attitudes, mind sets, states compared to the demands ° achievement of learning goals, of mind, acquired of the core curriculum) ° sustainability of educational knowledge (theory) processes (manifest acquisition ° acquired skills (practice) of knowledge and skills) ° complex, cross-subject competencies; ° effects of the introduction of the core curriculum

Primary sources of information:

- National data collection - Data collection by the Monitoring Team

Additional sources of information :

- Success statistics (incl. e.g. drop-out rates); - Performance determination (performance assessments, exam results); - Case studies; - Surveys (e.g. on perception of learning environment, e.g. periodically [student, teacher]; representative studies [population] or career advances); - Assessments at the end of the training cycles (by assessment institution, possibly in consultation with private companies or national authorities).

4.5.2.4. Data analysis and interpretation

- Criteria-related analysis (comparison with valid contents of the core curriculum); - Dissemination-oriented analysis (international comparison); - Strength/weakness profiles (national; additionally: general, anonymised summary of strengths and weaknesses of the Member States focused on); - Deriving priorities for control purposes (functions as early-warning system allowing desired progress to be monitored and undesirable developments to be detected in time).

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 40 ANNEX DG H I EN Annex 1 - Common Integrated Unit

Tasks – Common Integrated Unit for Border Guard Training

1. Guidance through the implementation process 1.1. Heading the implementation process 1.2. Supporting the implementation process 1.1.1 Providing expert knowledge 1.1.2 Development of new evaluation instruments 1.1.3 Modification of contents 1.1.4 Transfer of views and experiences 1.3. Monitoring the implementation process 1.3.1 Observance of formal rules

2. Evaluation activities 2.1. Collection of data at national level 2.2. Asking for national monitoring reports 2.3. Processing of data 2.3.1. Anonymising 2.3.2. Structuring 2.3.3. Analysing (sums overview, mean value(s) ∅, acquired knowledge) 2.3.4. Interpreting (strengths, improvement potential) 2.3.5. Correlating, and 2.3.6. Presentation in graphical form

3. Coordination of training courses 3.1. Preparation of a "Training Catalogue" 3.1.1. Compilation of national training resources 3.1.2. Publication of all training opportunities in all participating States

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 41 ANNEX 1 TO ANNEX DG H I EN 3.2. Link-up of training demand and supply 3.2.1. Contact with national training facilities 3.2.2. Contact with operational units responsible for basic and further training (incl. other facilities) 3.3. Providing and carrying out "Train-the-trainer" programmes 3.4. Contact with external training facilities

4. Preparation of an evaluation report 4.1. Collocation of 4.1.1. Data 4.1.2. Diagrams 4.2. Drafting recommendations 4.2.2. National level 4.2.3. International level (several States)

5. Steering/Control of the implementation of recommendations

6. Provide advisory service 6.1. Permanently 6.2. On request

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 42 ANNEX 1 TO ANNEX DG H I EN Annex 2 - Timetable

Subject Overview

Module First level Second level Mid-level lessons lessons lessons Development of border control 3 6 Politics and policies of the EU 4 4 Applied psychology 6 16 30 Interviewing skills 4 4 Sociology 15 15 15 Professional ethics 5 15 5 Human rights 8 8 10 Language training 15 25 25 International provisions 10 20 15 concerning border service Administrative law 25 40 20 Penal law 20 15 Constitutional law 8 5 Border service provisions 40 15 Tactical procedure 10 32 16 Technical equipment 8 8 Weapons training 40 10 Physical training 28 12 First aid 4 4 Crime investigation tactics 29 25 Document examination 32 40 5 Forensic methods 8 Organised crime 15 15 IT 22 22 5 Land border control 6 6 Airport control 6 6 Sea border control 6 6 Coop./coord. with other auth. 12 20

Lessons 189 477 263 Weeks 4,725 11,92 6,575

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 43 ANNEX 2 TO ANNEX DG H I EN Annex 3 - Core Curriculum

First-level officer

Methods: TH = theoretical Level of competence: BI = be informed P = practical HK = have knowledge OT = operational training AA = Ability to apply CR = critical reflection

Human resources development

Development of border control Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Development of border 3 lessons TH, P BI control

Politics and policies of the European Union

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Structure of the political 4 lessons TH, P BI system, institutions, European Constitution, cooperation EC/ER/EP; EUROPOL and Council working groups

Applied psychology

Content Time method Level of Remarks frame competence behaviour analysis / 6 lessons TH, P AA Interdisciplinary conflict management

Interviewing skills

Content Time method Level of Remarks frame competence Information gathering, 4 lessons TH, P AA Interdisciplinary asylum-related interviewing

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 44 ANNEX 3 TO ANNEX DG H I EN Sociology

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Dealing with cultural 15 lessons P, OT AA differences/background

Professional ethics

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Relations with people, 5 lessons TH, P HK Interdisciplinary professional ethics

Human rights

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Principles of human 8 lessons TH, P AA Interdisciplinary rights; Xenophobia and racism; ECHR, 1951 Refugee Convention

Language training

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence English 15 lessons P, TH, OT AA a) pass test or b)complete the module

International legislation

Provisions concerning border service

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Dublin Convention; 10 lessons TH, P HK Schengen Convention; Common Manual; Schengen Catalogue; CCI, Chicago Convention concerning carriers' responsibilities

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 45 ANNEX 3 TO ANNEX DG H I EN National legislation

Administrative law

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Border service 25 lessons TH, P AA legislation, asylum law, aliens law;

Operational training

Tactical procedures

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Self-defence 4 lessons TH, P AA 6 lessons TH, P AA see EUROPOL Profile analysis; analytical risk analysis guidelines

Technical equipment

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Telecommunication 8 lessons TH, P AA equipment/Border- specific technical equipment

First aid

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence First aid 4 lessons TH, P AA

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 46 ANNEX 3 TO ANNEX DG H I EN Criminalistics

Document examination

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Knowledge of 32 TH, P, OT AA Interdisciplinary; authentic and lessons in accordance falsified/counterfeit with national documents and the regulations examination method

Information technology

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Basic IT training 8 lessons TH, P AA Interdisciplinary Border-specific IT 10 lessons TH, P AA Interdisciplinary training SIS 4 lessons TH, P AA Interdisciplinary

Applied working methods

Airport control

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Pre-arrival checks, 6 lessons TH, P, OT AA transit regulations, ticketing, gate checks

Land border control

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Inspection/searching 6 lessons TH, P, OT AA methods

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 47 ANNEX 3 TO ANNEX DG H I EN

Sea border control

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Control of vessels 6 lessons TH, P, OT AA (Passenger, merchant, leisure, cruise ships)

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 48 ANNEX 3 TO ANNEX DG H I EN

Second-level officer

Methods: TH = theoretical Level of competence: BI = be informed P = practical HK = have knowledge OT = operational training AA = Ability to apply CR = critical reflection

Human resources development

Development of border control

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Development of 6 lessons TH, P BI border control; information about other border services' systems

Politics and policies of the European Union

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Structure of the 4 lessons TH, P BI political system, institutions, European Constitution, cooperation EC/ER/EP; EUROPOL and Council working groups

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 49 ANNEX 3 TO ANNEX DG H I EN

Applied psychology

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Conflict 16 lessons TH, P AA Interdisciplinary management, self- management, stress/aggression management Interviewing skills

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Information 4 lessons TH, P AA Interdisciplinary gathering, credibility assessment, asylum-related interviewing,

Sociology

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Dealing with cultural 15 lessons TH, P, OT AA differences/ background

Professional ethics

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Relations with people, 15 lessons TH, P AA Interdisciplinary professional ethics

Human rights

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Principles of human 8 lessons TH, P AA Interdisciplinary rights; ECHR; 1951 Refugee Convention, Xenophobia and racism,

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 50 ANNEX 3 TO ANNEX DG H I EN

Language training

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence English 25 lessons OT AA a) pass test alternatively: b) complete this module

International legislation

International provisions concerning border service

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Dublin Convention; 20 lessons TH, P AA Schengen Convention; Common Manual; Schengen Catalogue; CCI, Chicago Convention concerning carriers' responsibilities

National legislation

Administrative law

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Border police 40 lessons TH; P AA legislation, asylum law, aliens law; aliens employment law administrative process

Penal law

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Border-related penal 20 lessons TH, P AA Interdisciplinary code and Code of Criminal Procedure

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 51 ANNEX 3 TO ANNEX DG H I EN

Constitutional law

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Tasks and function of 8 lessons TH, P BI the State; legislation, execution and justice

Border service provisions

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Coercive measures and 40 lessons TH; P AA Interdisciplinary law enforcement

Operational training

Tactical procedure

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Self-defence techniques 8 lessons TH, P AA and using physical force Profile analysis/ 8 lessons TH, P AA threat/risk assessment Situation training 16 lessons TH, P, OT AA Interdisciplinary

Technical equipment

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Telecommunication 8 lessons TH, P AA equipment Border-specific technical equipment

Weapons training

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Weapons training 40 lessons OT AA In accordance with national legislation

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 52 ANNEX 3 TO ANNEX DG H I EN Physical training

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Physical training 2 lessons P AA Time frame is an per week average rate

First aid

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence First aid 4 lessons TH, P AA

Criminalistics

Crime investigation tactics

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Modus operandi, 4 lessons TH, P AA motive, alibi Investigation methods 20 lessons TH, P, OT AA (interrogation techniques, CSI, intelligence gathering) Contents of border- 5 lessons TH, P, OT AA Interdisciplinary specific information systems (SIS, EURODAC, etc.)

Document examination

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Knowledge of authentic 40 lessons TH, P, OT AA Interdisciplinary and falsified/counterfeit documents and the examination methods

Forensic methods

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Finger-printing 4 lessons TH, P, OT AA Crime scene working 4 lessons TH, P, OT AA methods

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 53 ANNEX 3 TO ANNEX DG H I EN

Organised crime

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Organised crime 15 lessons TH, P AA (drug and car smuggling; trafficking in human beings; smuggling human beings, cooperation with other agencies on issues of national security)

Information technology

Applied working methods

Airport control

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Pre-arrival checks, 6 lessons TH, P, OT AA transit regulations, ticketing, gate checks

Land border control

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Inspection/searching 6 lessons TH, P, OT AA methods

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 54 ANNEX 3 TO ANNEX DG H I EN

Sea border control

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Control of vessels 6 lessons TH, P, OT AA (passenger, merchant, leisure, cruise ships)

Administration

Cooperation and coordination with other authorities

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Communication with 8 lessons TH, P AA Communication other agencies/ in writing, authorities reports, inquiries, completing forms Reporting procedures 4 lessons TH, P, OT AA Interdisciplinary

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 55 ANNEX 3 TO ANNEX DG H I EN

Mid-level officer

Methods: TH = theoretical Level of competence: BI = be informed P = teamwork HK = have knowledge OT = practical AA = Ability to apply CR = critical reflection

Human resources development

Applied psychology

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Leadership skills 15 lessons TH, P AA Conflict management, 15 lessons TH, P CR self-management, stress/aggression management, motivation; drug/alcohol addiction

Sociology

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Dealing with 15 lessons TH, P, OT CR multicultural differences/ background, mass- media society

Professional ethics

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Professional ethics 5 lessons TH, P CR Interdisciplinary

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 56 ANNEX 3 TO ANNEX DG H I EN

Human rights

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Principles of human 10 lessons TH, P CR Interdisciplinary rights, ECHR, 1951 Refugee Convention, Xenophobia and racism

Language training

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence English 25 OT AA a) pass a test lessons alternatively: b) complete this module

International legislation

International provisions concerning border service

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Dublin Convention; 15 lessons TH, P CR Schengen Convention; Common Manual; Schengen Catalogue, CCI, Chicago Convention concerning carriers' responsibilities

National legislation

Administrative law

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Border police 20 lessons TH; P CR legislation, asylum law, aliens law; administrative process

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 57 ANNEX 3 TO ANNEX DG H I EN

Penal law

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Border-related penal 15 lessons TH, P CR Interdisciplinary code and code of criminal procedure

Constitutional law

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Tasks and function of 5 lessons P HK the State; legislation, execution and justice

Border service provisions

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Coercive measures and 15 lessons TH; P CR Interdisciplinary law enforcement

Operational training

Tactical procedure

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Profile analysis/ 16 lessons TH, P AA threat/risk assessment

Weapons training

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Weapons training 10 lessons TH, P, OT AA In accordance with national legislation and regulations

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 58 ANNEX 3 TO ANNEX DG H I EN

Physical training

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Physical training 2 lessons P AA Time frame is an per week average rate

Criminalistics

Crime investigation tactics

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Investigation methods 20 lessons TH, P AA Contents of border- 5 lessons TH, P AA Interdisciplinary specific information systems (SIS, EURODAC, etc.)

Document examination

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Authentic or falsified/ 5 lessons TH, P AA Interdisciplinary counterfeit documents and examination methods

Organised crime

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Organised crime 15 lessons TH, P AA (drug and car smuggling; trafficking human beings; smuggling in human beings, cooperation with other agencies on issues of national security)

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 59 ANNEX 3 TO ANNEX DG H I EN

Information technology

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Border-specific IT 5 lessons TH, P AA Interdisciplinary training includes SIS, EURODAC

Administration

Cooperation and coordination with other authorities

Content Time Method Level of Remarks frame competence Communication with 12 lessons TH, P AA Interdisciplinary authorities Reporting procedures 8 lessons TH, P AA Interdisciplinary

______

8285/2/03 REV 2 EB/av 60 ANNEX 3 TO ANNEX DG H I EN