Commission Decision of 4 March 2008 adopting the SIRENE Manual and other implementing measures for the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) (notified under document number C(2008) 774) (Only the Bulgarian, Czech, Dutch, Estonian, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hungarian, Italian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Maltese, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Slovak, Slovenian, Spanish and Swedish texts are authentic) (2008/333/EC)

2.2. Multiple Alerts (Article 34(6) of the SIS II Regulation and 49(6) of the SIS II Decision)

Several alerts issued by different countries for the same subjects may sometimes occur. It is essential that this does not cause confusion to end-users, and that it is clear to them what measures must be taken when seeking to enter an alert and which procedure shall be followed when a hit occurs. Procedures shall therefore be established for detecting multiple alerts, as shall a priority mechanism for entering them into the SIS II.

This calls for:

• checks before entering an alert, in order to determine whether the subject is already in the SIS II,

• consultation with the other Member States, when the entry of an alert causes multiple alerts that are incompatible.

2.2.1. Compatibility of alerts and order of priority

Only one alert per Member State may be entered into the SIS II for any one person or object.

Therefore, wherever possible and necessary, second and subsequent alerts on the same person or object shall be kept available at national level so that they can be introduced when the first alert expires or is deleted.

Several Member States may enter an alert on the same person or object if the alerts are compatible.

Alerts for arrest (Article 26 of the SIS II Decision) are compatible with alerts for refusal of entry (Article 24 of the SIS II Regulation), alerts on missing persons (Article 32 of the SIS II Decision) and alerts for a judicial procedure (Article 34 of the SIS II Decision). They are not compatible with alerts for checks (Article 36 of the SIS II Decision).

Alerts for refusal of entry are compatible with alerts for arrest. They are not compatible with alerts on missing persons, alerts for checks or alerts for a judicial procedure.

Alerts on missing persons are compatible with alerts for arrest and alerts for a judicial procedure. They are not compatible with alerts for refusal of entry and alerts for checks.

Alerts for a judicial procedure are compatible with alerts for arrest and alerts for missing persons. They are not compatible with alerts for checks or alerts for refusal of entry.

Alerts for checks are not compatible with alerts for arrest, alerts for refusal of entry, alerts on missing persons or alerts for a judicial procedure.

Within alerts for checks, alerts issued for ‘discreet checks’ are incompatible with those for ‘specific checks’.

Different categories of alerts on objects are not compatible with each other (see the table on compatibility below).

The order of priority for alerts on persons shall be as follows:

• arrest with a view to surrender or extradition (Article 26 of the SIS II Decision),

• refusing entry or stay in the Schengen territory (Article 24 of the SIS II Regulation),

• placing under protection (Article 32 of the SIS II Decision),

• specific checks (Article 36 of the SIS II Decision),

• discreet checks (Article 36 of the SIS II Decision),

• communicating whereabouts (Articles 32 and 34 of the Decision).

The order of priority for alerts on objects shall be as follows:

• use as evidence (Article 38 of Decision),

• seizure (Article 38 of Decision),

• specific check (Article 36 of Decision),

• discreet check (Article 36 of Decision).

Departures from this order of priority may be made after consultation between the Member States if essential national interests are at stake.

Table of compatibility of alerts on persons

Order of importance	Alert for arrest	Alert for refusal of entry	Alert on missing person (protection)	Alert for specific check	Alert for discreet check	Alert on missing person (whereabouts)	Alert for judicial procedure
Alert for arrest	yes	yes	yes	no	no	yes	yes
Alert for refusal of entry	yes	yes	no	no	no	no	no
Alert on missing person (protection)	yes	no	yes	no	no	yes	yes
Alert for specific check	no	no	no	yes	no	no	no
Alert for discreet check	no	no	no	no	yes	no	no
Alert on missing person (whereabouts)	yes	no	yes	no	no	yes	yes
Alert for judicial procedure	yes	no	yes	no	no	yes	yes

Table of compatibility for alerts on objects

Order of importance	Alert for use as evidence	Alert for seizure	Alert for specific check	Alert for discreet check
Alert for use as evidence	yes	yes	no	no
Alert for seizure	yes	yes	no	no
Alert for specific check	no	no	yes	no
Alert for discreet check	no	no	no	yes

2.2.2. Checking for multiple alerts

While dealing with potential multiple alerts, care shall be taken to distinguish accurately between persons or objects that have similar characteristics. Consultation and cooperation between the SIRENE Bureaux is therefore essential, and each Member State shall establish appropriate technical procedures to detect such cases before an entry is made.

The following procedure shall apply:

(a)

if processing a request for entering a new alert reveals that there is already a person or an object in the SIS II with the same identity description elements a more detailed check shall be run before the new alert is entered;

(b)

in case of alerts on persons, if necessary, the SIRENE Bureau shall contact the SIRENE Bureau of the issuing Member State to clarify whether the alert relates to the same person (E form);

(c)

if the check reveals that the details are identical and could relate to the same person or object, the SIRENE Bureau shall apply the procedure for entering multiple alerts. If the outcome of the check is that the details relate to two different persons or objects, the SIRENE Bureau shall approve the request for entering the new alert.

The following identity elements shall be compared when establishing the existence of multiple alerts on a person:

• surname,

• forename,

• date of birth,

• sex,

• national identity document number,

• forenames and surnames of parents,

• place of birth,

• fingerprints,

• photographs.

The following identity elements shall be compared when establishing the existence of multiple alerts on a vehicle:

• the VIN number,

• the registration number, and country of registration,

• the make,

• the type.

If, when entering a new alert, it is found that the same VIN number and/or registration plate number already exist in the SIS II, it shall be assumed that there are potential multiple alerts on the same vehicle. However, this method of verification is only effective where the description elements used are the same; therefore, the comparison is not always possible.

The SIRENE Bureau shall draw the national users’ attention to the problems which may arise where only one of the numbers has been compared. A positive response does not automatically mean that there is a hit; and a negative response does not mean that there is not an alert on the vehicle.

For other objects, the most appropriate fields for identifying multiple alerts are the mandatory fields, all of which shall be used for automatic comparison by the system.

2.2.3. Entering multiple alerts

If a request for an alert conflicts with an alert issued by the same Member State, the national SIRENE Bureau shall ensure that only one alert exists in the SIS II in accordance with national procedure.

If the alerts are issued by different Member States, the following procedure shall apply:

(a)

if the alerts are compatible, the SIRENE Bureaux do not need to consult one another;

(b)

if the alerts are not compatible, or if there is any doubt as to their compatibility, the SIRENE Bureaux shall consult one another using an E form so that ultimately only one alert is entered;

(c)

alerts for arrest shall be entered immediately without awaiting the result of any consultation with other Member States;

(d)

if an alert that is incompatible with existing alerts is given priority as the outcome of consultation, the Member States that entered the other alerts shall delete them when the new alert is entered. Any disputes shall be settled by Member States via SIRENE Bureaux. If agreement cannot be reached on the basis of the list of priorities established, the oldest alert shall be left in the SIS II;

(e)

Member States who were not able to enter an alert may subscribe to be notified by the CS-SIS about the deletion of the alert;

(f)

the SIRENE Bureau of the Member State that was not able to enter the alert may request that the SIRENE Bureau of the Member State that entered the alert informs it of a hit on this alert.

(1)

This text is identical to the text in the Annex to Commission Decision 2008/334/JHA (see page 41 of this Official Journal).