The Schengen Information System (SIS) is an interconnection of national files accumulating data provided and consulted by the authorities of the Schengen States. A Schengen visa may be denied if the applicant is a person for whom an alert has been issued in the SIS for the purposes of refusing entry, even if the alert was entered by a State which is not the one with which the visa application was lodged. Entry in the Schengen area may also be denied to a person who is exempted from the visa requirement, but for whom an alert has been issued.
Data on persons may be stored for a maximum of 10 years and must result from a decision taken by the competent authorities in the Schengen State issuing the alert. Such a decision may arise in the case of a person who was subject to measures based on a violation of national regulations on the entry or residence of aliens or in the case of a person who committed a serious offence in the alerting State.
In its judgement of 31 January 2006, the Court of Justice of the European Communities has ruled that a Schengen visa may not be denied to a national of a third country who is the spouse of a EU national on the sole ground that he or she is a person for whom an alert was entered in the Schengen Information System, without first verifying if the presence of this person constituted a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting the fundamental interests of society.
Any person may have access to data entered in the SIS which relate to them. Any person invoking that right may contact the Schengen country of their choice. Access shall be exercised in accordance with the law of the State before which the right is invoked. The relevant national control authority should be contacted with that regard (see table on the right-hand side).
Besides, the European Parliament and the Council have created an independent supervisory authority, called the European Data Protection Supervisor. This body is responsible for monitoring the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and related entities.
Only the Schengen State which issued the alert shall be authorised to modify, add to, correct or delete data which it has entered. However any person may have factually inaccurate data relating to them corrected or unlawfully stored data relating to them deleted. To this end, the national control authority should be contacted.
If an amicable settlement cannot be reached, the person concerned may refer the matter to the courts or the competent authority of the State which has issued the alert, in order to correct, delete information or obtain compensation in connection with an inaccurate alert.
The existence of an alert does not prevent from appealing against the decision denying the visa. In that case, the authority or the judge to whom the matter is referred will be able to assess whether the alert was justified or adequate with regard to the visa denial, even if the alert was issued by a State which is not the one that has refused the visa.
