What is the Schengen Information System (SIS)?
The Schengen Information System (SIS) is the largest European wanted-persons database. It is used by the police and border authorities of all Schengen states and contains alerts for tracing persons, for refusal of entry and for tracing objects. The second-generation SIS (SIS II) went into operation on 9 April 2013; since 7 March 2023 the renewed SIS has been running on the basis of Regulations (EU) 2018/1860–1862. The central system is operated by the EU agency eu-LISA (technical site in Strasbourg).
For those affected, an SIS alert means severe restrictions: at every border or police check within the Schengen area the entry becomes visible. Depending on the type of alert, this can lead to immediate arrest, refusal of entry or the seizure of documents. The effects on freedom of movement, working life and private life are often serious.
Types of SIS alert
The SIS has various alert categories. They are governed by three regulations: Regulation (EU) 2018/1862 (police and judicial cooperation), Regulation (EU) 2018/1861 (refusal of entry and stay) and Regulation (EU) 2018/1860 (return). Each category has its own legal basis and legal consequences.
Article 26: Alert for arrest for surrender or extradition purposes
This alert is the most severe form. It is entered on the basis of a European Arrest Warrant or an international arrest warrant and, when the person is encountered, leads to immediate arrest. The issuing state requests surrender or extradition.
Article 24 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1861: Alert for refusal of entry and stay
This alert is directed against third-country nationals and has the effect that the affected person is denied access to the Schengen area or is turned away on entry. It is frequently issued by national immigration authorities — for instance after a deportation or in cases of security concerns.
Article 32: Alert on missing and vulnerable persons
Missing persons — in particular minors or vulnerable adults — are made the subject of an alert in order to establish their whereabouts. The aim is to determine the place of residence and, where appropriate, to take the person into protective custody.
Article 36: Alert for discreet or specific checks
In this category the affected person is not arrested but is checked discreetly when encountered. The authorities gather information on travel routes, companions and whereabouts. As a rule, the affected person learns nothing of this surveillance.
Legal protection against SIS alerts
European and German law grant those affected various avenues of legal protection against unjustified or erroneous SIS entries. The legal protection is, however, complex, since several legal orders and authorities may be involved.
Right of access
Every person has the right to request information on whether they are the subject of an SIS alert (Article 67 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1862; for refusal-of-entry alerts, Article 53 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1861). In Germany the point of contact is the Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) in its capacity as the national SIRENE bureau. The request for information can be addressed to the BKA without any particular form.
The BKA discloses whether an alert exists, what data is stored and which state issued the alert. In certain cases the information may be refused or restricted on security grounds — for instance in the case of discreet checks under Article 36.
Application for deletion at the issuing state
As a rule, only the state that entered the alert can arrange for the deletion of an SIS alert. The affected person must therefore turn to the competent authority of the issuing state — either directly or through the SIRENE bureau of their own state of residence.
The authority of the issuing state examines whether the conditions for maintaining the alert are still met. Where this is not the case — for instance because the underlying arrest warrant has been revoked or the alert is erroneous — the deletion must take place.
Objection and administrative action in Germany
If the BKA refuses to provide information or rejects the deletion, the affected person can lodge an objection and subsequently bring an administrative action before the Administrative Court of Wiesbaden. In addition, the Federal Commissioner for Data Protection (BfDI) can be called upon as a supervisory authority.
In the case of SIS alerts issued by other Schengen states, legal protection is more difficult. The affected person can turn to the data protection supervisory authority of the issuing state or apply to the competent national judicial authority for a review of the alert.
Consultation procedure between SIRENE bureaus
A particularly effective instrument is the consultation procedure between the SIRENE bureaus. Where one Schengen state finds that an alert issued by another state is erroneous or disproportionate, it can initiate a consultation procedure. In practice, the SIRENE bureau of the BKA can call on the issuing state to review the alert and, where appropriate, to delete it.
Typical case scenarios
In my practice certain scenarios recur regularly.
Politically motivated alerts
Some states use SIS alerts to pursue political dissidents, journalists or business people. Alerts from Turkey, Russia or certain Balkan states in particular are frequently connected with politically motivated criminal proceedings. In these cases, deletion can be achieved by invoking the prohibition of political persecution and the ECHR.
Outdated alerts
Not infrequently, SIS alerts remain in place even though the underlying arrest warrant was revoked long ago, the criminal proceedings were discontinued or the sentence was served. Here there is a clear entitlement to deletion — the alert has become unlawful and must be removed without delay.
Erroneous personal data
Mix-ups and erroneous data occur in the SIS. Where an uninvolved person is affected on account of identical or similar personal details, that person has an entitlement to rectification. In urgent cases, an immediate flag on the alert (a so-called flag) can be obtained through the SIRENE bureau, which prevents an arrest.
The interplay of SIS and Interpol
SIS alerts and Interpol notices (Red Notices, diffusions) frequently exist in parallel. A requesting state enters a person both in the SIS and via Interpol in order to ensure the most seamless search possible. For the defense this means that a comprehensive strategy is required: deleting the SIS alert on its own is not sufficient where an Interpol Red Notice remains in place in parallel — and vice versa.
I therefore generally pursue a dual strategy: simultaneous applications to delete the SIS alert at the BKA or the competent foreign authority and to delete the Interpol notice at the CCF (Commission for the Control of INTERPOL's Files) in Lyon.
Deadlines and storage period
SIS alerts for arrest (Article 26) are, as a rule, maintained for as long as is necessary for the underlying purpose. Alerts for refusal of entry (Article 24 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1861) are generally reviewed within three years — five years where the underlying national decision remains valid for longer; after an individual assessment, an extension is possible. The issuing state is obliged to review the alert regularly and to delete it once the conditions cease to apply.
Why me?
The deletion of an SIS alert requires sound knowledge of European police and data protection law as well as of the procedures at the BKA, the SIRENE bureaus and foreign authorities. I have successfully secured numerous SIS deletions — both by administrative means and before the courts. I coordinate the proceedings in Germany and in the issuing state and always pursue an overall strategy that takes parallel Interpol proceedings into account.