Hi all, I've read another post on this forum about recent issues with obtaining a schengen visa appointment. I've suffered this myself and am also frustrated at the new rules by schengen member country's embassies for spouses of EU nationals applying for a schengen visa (to cut a long story short, you now have to apply in person and in case of the French embassy, also have to go with your EU national spouse). Plus the whole process of actually obtaining an appointment for applying for a schengen visa is a nightmare (and costly!).
Not many people are aware, but the EU actually gives non-EU nationals married to EU nationals similar rights of free travel as their EU national spouses. The European Commision also requires all member states to issue schengen visas to non-EU national spouses of EU nationals "
WITHOUT UNDUE FORMALITIES" (clearly the recent rule change is actually introducing more 'undue formalities' rather than minimising it so in a way, the embassies are actually breaching the rules set out by the EC)- for more information see the European Commission web site:
http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/fsj/fr ... try_en.htm
I have decided to take action and am sending the following letter to the Director General at the EC. If I get enough support from others in my position, I will also approach my local MEP and start a petition for a rule change for spouses of EU nationals applying for a schengen visa. Letter follows (apologies for length of letter, but you don't have to read it if you don't want to!). Please guys, I need your support on this - if anything the new rules not only discriminate against us spouses of EU nationals, but it's also breaching the rights given to our EU national spouses by the European charter!!
Directorate General - Justice, Freedom and Security
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
DG Justice,
Freedom and Security
B-1049
BRUSSELS
23rd April 2007
Dear Sir Or Madam:
I am writing in relation to Regulation (EC) No 539/2001) – travel rights for non-EU Nationals.
The regulation clearly defines that:
Citizens of third countries may enter and travel within the territory of the Member States applying the Schengen provisions for a period of up to three months, provided they fulfil the entry conditions laid down in the Schengen acquis, now integrated into the EU. These conditions include: the possession of a valid travel document, and of a visa if required; being able to demonstrate the purpose of the journey and the possession of sufficient means of subsistence for the period of stay and for the return. Furthermore, third-country nationals shall not be listed in the Schengen information system for the purpose of refusing entry and they shall not be considered to be a threat to public policy or national security for all Schengen States.
The rights of non-EU nationals legally residing in the territory of a Member State to travel within the European Union are also outlined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. The charter asserts the right of every European citizen to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States. It adds that these rights may be granted to third-country nationals.
The regulation further defines that:
If the family members are not EU nationals, the EU Member State(s) to or through which travel is intended may require an entry visa, depending on their nationality. This visa should be granted free of charge and without undue formalities by the competent consulate authorities. These freedoms apply to non-EU national family members only when they accompany or join an EU citizen.
When travelling alone, family members who are not nationals of an EU Member State are not entitled to the visa arrangements mentioned above. Non-EU nationals who wish to travel alone within the EU have to comply with the normal visa requirements for their nationality.
As a non-EU national spouse of a British Citizen, the conditions of Regulation (EC) No 539/2001) clearly apply to me. However, recently, individual embassies in the United Kingdom, representing several major Schengen member countries have introduced, what I would class as “undue formalitiesâ€