A System Under Strain
When the European Union’s Entry and Exit System — known as the EES — came into force in October 2025, it was billed as a modernising leap: replacing manual passport stamps with electronic biometric registration for all non-EU nationals crossing into the 29-country Schengen Area. Within weeks, the gap between ambition and operational reality had become impossible to ignore.
The system requires third-country nationals to submit fingerprints and facial photographs at the point of first entry. On subsequent visits, border officials verify the stored biometric data rather than collecting it anew — a process that, in theory, accelerates crossings over time. In practice, the initial registration phase overwhelmed infrastructure at major European airports, producing queues of several hours at passport control. Passengers reported missing return flights.
The warnings had come early. Airlines, airport operators, and border authorities had repeatedly signalled to the European Commission in Brussels that the technical and logistical groundwork was not in place. Those warnings did not produce a delay.
A Grace Period That Ran Out
Over the summer of 2026, member states were granted a partial reprieve: they could suspend digital checks in exceptional circumstances to manage passenger flow. That accommodation expired on 6 September. The deadline’s arrival sharpened the political temperature considerably.
Ryanair’s Chief Operating Officer, Neal McMahon, publicly described the EES rollout as a “shambles from start to finish,” and called on the Commission to extend the derogation until April 2027. “Airlines, airports and border authorities repeatedly warned Brussels that the rollout was not ready, that it would increase processing times and that it would create excessive queues for passengers,” McMahon said. “Those warnings were ignored, with EU citizens the ones delayed and disrupted.”
The carrier’s frustration reflected a broader industry consensus, though the Commission’s public posture remained measured.
Nine Countries Granted Further Latitude
The Commission has since confirmed that nine member states face persistent operational challenges significant enough to warrant continued flexibility in implementation. Those states are France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Greece, Malta, Portugal, Italy, and Switzerland. Each has been permitted to defer full compliance with EES biometric scanning requirements while technical deficiencies are addressed.
A Commission spokesperson, speaking to The i Paper, characterised the relationship with these states as one of “close and constructive contact.” The spokesperson added: “We have asked them to further intensify their operational preparedness, including the necessary technical, organisational and communication measures, with a view to ensuring that remaining challenges are fully addressed by the end of the year.”
The Commission’s stated deadline is the end of 2026.
How the System Is Designed to Work
Under the EES framework, most travellers from outside the EU — formally designated third-country nationals — must register passport details and biometric data on their first entry into the Schengen Area. That data, comprising fingerprints and a facial scan, is retained for subsequent visits, at which point only verification is required rather than fresh registration.
Border officials also conduct supplementary checks covering accommodation arrangements, available funds, travel insurance, and return tickets. Children are not exempt from the system, though those under twelve are not required to provide fingerprints; facial scans remain mandatory across all age groups.
For travellers departing from the United Kingdom, checks are conducted at three dual British-French border locations — Dover, St Pancras International, and Folkestone — meaning passengers processed there are not subjected to a second round of checks upon arrival on the European mainland.
Who Falls Outside the System’s Reach
For all others entering the Schengen Area, the system’s reach is comprehensive — provided, that is, the infrastructure can be made to function as designed.
An Accountability Gap in Plain Sight
The EES episode illustrates a recurring pattern in large-scale EU technology deployments: ambitious timelines set at the political level, persistent technical shortfalls flagged by operational stakeholders, and a rollout that proceeds regardless. The human cost — measured in hours lost at border queues and, in some documented cases, in missed flights — falls on individual travellers rather than on the institutions that set the schedule.
Whether the nine states granted flexibility will meet the Commission’s end-of-year target remains an open question. The Commission has framed the situation as one of managed progress. The evidence from the past year suggests that the gap between Brussels’ projections and border-level reality has consistently been wider than official communications acknowledged.