31 Amendments of Saskia BRICMONT related to 2021/0393(COD)
Amendment 42 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4 a) This Regulation respects fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised by Article 6 TEU and the Charter, by international law and international agreements to which the Union or all the Member States are party, including the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and in Member States' constitutions, in their respective fields of application. Such rights and principles include, in particular, the right to liberty and security, the respect for private and family life, the protection of personal data, the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial, the presumption of innocence and the right to defence, the principles of legality and proportionality, as well as the right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings for the same criminal offence.
Amendment 45 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) To combat terrorism effectively, efficient exchange of information for investigation or prosecution of terrorist offences between competent authorities and Union agencies is crucial. It is essential to have the most complete and updated information possible. The persistence of the terrorist threat and the complexity of the phenomenon raise the need for an ever greater exchange of information.
Amendment 51 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) In order to enable Eurojust to identify cross-links between cross-border judicial proceedings against suspects of terrorist offences as well as cross-links between judicial proceedings against suspects of terrorist offences and information processed at Eurojust relating to other cases of serious crimes, it is essential that Eurojust receives sufficient information to enable Eurojust to cross- check this datafrom the competent authorities the information that is necessary to identify these cross-links.
Amendment 54 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The competent authorities need to know exactly what kind of information they have to transmit to Eurojust, at what stage of the national criminal proceedings and in which cases, in order to provide such data. This is expected to increase the quality and relevance of the information Eurojust receives significantly.
Amendment 57 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council34 is the reference point for national authorities to define terrorist offences as implemented in national law. Information provided to Eurojust for the purpose of this Regulation should be strictly related to crimes of terrorism and serious organised crimes, as exhaustively listed in Directive (EU) 2017/541. Information provided to Eurojust should therefore not relate to criminal proceedings initiated on the basis of extended or political definitions of terrorism or organised crime, or to criminal proceedings initiated for politically-motivated purposes or in manifest breach of fundamental rights. _________________ 34 Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 2005/671/JHA (OJ L 88, 31.3.2017, p. 6).
Amendment 58 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) For the identification of cross-links between terrorism investigations and judicial proceedings against suspects of terrorist offences, reliable identification data is crucial. Due to the uncertainties regarding alphanumerical data especially for third country nationals, it should be possible to exchange biometric dataprovide to Eurojust biometric data, provided such data has been collected in accordance with national law in the context of criminal proceedings and in full respect of the procedural rights set out in Directives 2010/64/EU1a, 2012/13/EU1b, 2013/48/EU1c, 2016/3431d, 2016/8001e and 2016/19191f of the European Parliament and of the Council. Due to the sensitive nature of biometric data and the impact processing of biometric data has on the respect for private and family life and the protection of personal data, as enshrined in Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, a strict necessity and proportionality test should be applied by the competent authorities and Eurojust in each case. _________________ 1a Directive 2010/64/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings (OJ L 280, 26.10.2010, p. 1). 1b Directive 2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 on the right to information in criminal proceedings (OJ L 142, 1.6.2012, p. 1). 1c Directive 2013/48/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and in European arrest warrant proceedings, and on the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty (OJ L 294, 6.11.2013, p. 1). 1d Directive (EU) 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings (OJ L 65, 11.3.2016, p. 1). 1e Directive (EU) 2016/800 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2016 on procedural safeguards for children who are suspects or accused persons in criminal proceedings (OJ L 132, 21.5.2016, p. 1). 1f Directive (EU) 2016/1919 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2016 on legal aid for suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings and for requested persons in European arrest warrant proceedings (OJ L 297, 4.11.2016, p. 1).
Amendment 65 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) As information about existing cross-links to other judicial proceedings is most useful at an early stage of the investigation, it is necessary that the competent authorities provide information to Eurojust as soon as judicial authorities are involvedthe case is referred to a judicial authority in accordance with national law. Depending on the national law, the moment at which a case is considered to be referred to a judicial authority is when the authority is informed of an ongoing investigation or authorises or orders an investigation. If the competent national authorities are already aware of cross-links between criminal proceedings, they should inform Eurojust accordingly.
Amendment 68 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) In order to ensure the accuracy of the data in the European Judicial Counter- Terrorism Register, to identify cross-links earlyor clear suspects as early as possible in an investigation and to ensure time limits are respected, the competent national authorities should provide update thed information provided regularlywhenever it emerges. Such updates should include new information relating to the person under investigation, judicial decisions such as pre-trial detention or, opening of the court proceedings and, judicial cooperation requests or identified links with other jurisdictions as well as not guilty verdicts and acquittals.
Amendment 75 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) For the purposes of exchanging and processing sensitive datapersonal data related to suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings between competent national authorities and Eurojust and for protecting such data, which by nature is sensitive, against unauthorised disclosure and cyber attacks, and without prejudice to future technological developments, secure communication channels, such as the secure communication connections referred to in Article 9 of Council Decision 2008/976/JHA35 or the decentralised IT system as defined in Regulation (EU) […/…] of the European Parliament and of the Council36 [Regulation on the digitalisation of judicial cooperation] should be used. In order to exchange data securely and protect the integrity of the communication and data exchange, the case management system should be connected to such secure communication systems and meet high cybersecurity standards. _________________ 35 Council Decision 2008/976/JHA of 16 December 2008 on the European Judicial Network (OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 130). 36 Regulation (EU) […/…] of the European Parliament and of the Council on the digitalisation of judicial cooperation and access to justice in civil, commercial and criminal law cases (OJ L…).
Amendment 78 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The transmission of unstructured data makes manual intervention necessary, creates additional administrative burden, and reduces the quality of the results of cross-checking. Therefore, national competent authorities should transmit the data in a structured manner while respecting minimal interoperability requirements as defined in the European Interoperability Framework39 . In addition, the transfer of data should be automated as much as possible to lessen the administrative burden of national authorities and to ensure the necessary data is provided regularly and quickly. Transfer of sensitive data related to suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings should not be fully automated, but subject to a transmission mode which is, at least partly, human controlled. For the purpose of data transfers under this Regulation, human control in the transmission mode should entail the verification of the quality and quantity of data to be transferred and of the transfers of data having been authorised by competent national authorities as well as the verification of necessity and proportionality requirements. The national authorities competent for the transfer of information should be responsible for the accuracy and legality of the acquisition of the information provided to Eurojust. _________________ 39 https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/collection/nifo- national-interoperability-framework- observatory/european-interoperability- framework.
Amendment 80 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) A modernized case management system is necessary for Eurojust to process the sensitive personal data securely. The new system needs to integrate and enable the functionalities of the European Judicial Counter-Terrorism Register and improve the capacities of Eurojust regarding linkthe detection of cross links.
Amendment 81 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) It is important to maintain the control and responsibility of the national members for the data, which they receive from the national competent authorities. No operational personal data should be shared with another Member State by default. Operational personal data should only be shared by national members in as far as national competent authorities authorise the exchange of data after carrying out a necessity and proportionality assessment in each individual case. In order to digitalise and speed up the follow up on potential links while ensuring full control over the data, handling codes should be introduced.
Amendment 85 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Terrorist activities often affect two or more Member States. Terrorism already had a strong transnational component in the past. However, with tThe use and availability of electronic communication, can increase transnational collaboration between terrorist offenders has increased significantly. Therefore, terrorist offences should be considered per se transnational in their nature, if the specific circumstances of the case do not clearly indicate a purely national character.
Amendment 89 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Investigations and prosecutions in terrorism cases are oftencould be impeded by the lack of information exchange between national investigation and prosecution authorities. In order to be able to cross check new terrorist investigations also with previous investigations and establishidentify potential links, it ismight be necessary to store the data on any previous investigations, not only on convictions and and convictions related to terrorist cases. It should be possible to extend the time limits for storing data in the European Judicial Counter-Terrorism Register. However, it is necessary to ensure that such data is processed for prosecution purposes only on a case by case basis to the extent that such extension is necessary and proportionate for the purpose of ongoing operational activities. Data on previous investigations and convictions should be retained and processed for purposed related to cross- checking links with other investigations and prosecutions only. Information on previous investigations or prosecution related to persons who are not guilty, acquitted or otherwise rehabilitated should not be stored beyond the time that is necessary to perform the cross-checking and should be deleted if links between judicial proceedings are not identified. The information may not be used for anything else but identifying links with ongoing investigations and prosecutions and for the support of those investigations and prosecutions.
Amendment 95 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) While Regulation (EU) 2018/1727 provides a legal basis for the cooperation and exchange of data with third countries, it does not contain any rules on the formal and technical aspects of the cooperation with third country liaison prosecutors seconded to Eurojust, in particular their access to the case management system. In the interest of legal certainty, Regulation (EU) 2018/1727 should provide an explicit legal basis for the cooperation between Eurojust and the third country liaison prosecutors and their access to the Eurojust case management system. Eurojust should ensureimplement adequate safeguards and security measures for the protection of data and fundamental rights through the technical setup and internal rules.
Amendment 96 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) In the interest of clarity, tThe relationship between the exchange of information between national competent authorities on terrorism cases with Eurojust under Decision 2005/671/JHA and Regulation (EU) 2018/1727 should be clarified. Therefore, the relevant provisions should be deleted from Decision 2005/671/JHA and be added to Regulation (EU) 2018/1727.
Amendment 97 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Regulation (EU) 20178/1727 is amended as follows:
Amendment 99 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 20 – paragraph 2a
Article 20 – paragraph 2a
2a. Each Member State shall designate a competent national authority as Eurojust national correspondent for terrorism matters. This national correspondent for terrorism matters shall be a judicial or other competent authority. Where the national legal system requires, more than one authority can be designated. The national correspondent for terrorism matters shall have access to all relevant information in accordance with Article 21a(1). It shall be competent to collect such information and to send it to Eurojust.information about investigations and prosecution of terrorist offences, including those which ended in an acquittal or which were concluded in another way, judicial decisions such as pre-trial detention or opening of court proceedings, and judicial cooperation requests or identified links with other jurisdictions, to send such information to Eurojust and to carry out necessity and proportionality assessments. Before sending information to Eurojust, the national correspondent shall obtain the authorisation from the responsible national authority to verify the quality and quantity of information to be transferred, and to assess the necessity and proportionality of the transfers of information, where the responsible national authority is different from the national correspondent;
Amendment 106 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 21a – paragraph 2
Article 21a – paragraph 2
2. Terrorist offences for the purpose of this Article are offences referred to in Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council*. The obligation referred to in paragraph 1 shall apply to all terrorist offences regardless of whether there is a known link to another Member State or third country, unless the caseThe obligation referred to in paragraph 1 shall not apply to terrorist offences that, due to itstheir specific circumstances, clearly affects only one Member State.
Amendment 110 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 21a – paragraph 4
Article 21a – paragraph 4
4. The competent national authorities shall inform their national member without delay about any relevant changes in the national proceedings without delay, and not later than 10 days after the occurrence of the relevant change.
Amendment 112 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 21a – paragraph 5
Article 21a – paragraph 5
5. Paragraph 1 shall not apply where the sharing or updating of information would jeopardise current investigations or the safety of an individual, or when it would be contrary to essential interests of the security of the Member State concerned.
Amendment 116 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 22a – paragraph 3
Article 22a – paragraph 3
3. The competent national authorities shall transmit the information to Eurojust in accordance with Articles 21 and 21a to Eurojust in a semi-automated manner, subject to human control, from national registers and in a structured way determined by Eurojust. Operational personal data shall only be transmitted to the extent that that transmission is necessary and proportionate and subject to authorisation by competent national authorities on a case-by-case basis.
Amendment 122 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 23 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
4. In the performance of their duties, national members may process personal data on the individual cases, on which they are working, in accordance with this Regulation or other applicable instruments. Information on previous investigations and convictions related to terrorist cases may be processed by national members, on a case by case basis, to the extent that such processing is necessary and proportionate to the purpose of identifying links with ongoing investigations and prosecutions and for the support of those investigations and prosecutions.
Amendment 123 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 23 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
They shall allow the Data Protection Officer to have access to the personal data processed in the case management system. The Data Protection Officer shall be informed by the national member of the processing of operational personal data for the purposes indicated under paragraph 2 of this article.
Amendment 126 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
The national members may, however, temporarily store and analyse personal data for the purpose of determining whether such data are relevant to Eurojust’s tasks and can be included in the operational datacase management system. That data may be held for up to three months.
Amendment 127 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 24 – paragraph 2
Article 24 – paragraph 2
2. The national member shall decide, on a case-by-case basis, whether to keep access to the information restricted or to give access to it or to parts of it to other national members, to liaison prosecutors seconded to Eurojust, to authorised Eurojust staff or to any other person working on behalf of Eurojust who has received the necessary authorisation from the Administrative Director. Decisions by the national members to give access to information transmitted in accordance with Articles 21 and 21a to other national members, to liaisons prosecutors seconded to Eurojust, to authorised Eurojust staff or to any other person working on behalf of Eurojust, shall be made on a case by case basis, and access shall only be given to the extent such access is necessary and proportionate to the purpose of identifying links with ongoing investigations and prosecutions and for the support of those investigations and prosecutions. The decision to disclose information shall be communicated to the competent national authority and shall be included in the case file. Unless such communication would jeopardise the investigation or prosecution, the decision of the national member to disclose information shall also be communicated to the suspects and to accused persons.
Amendment 136 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 27 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 27 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Eurojust may continue to process the operational personal data referred to in point (a) of the first subparagraph also after the proceedings have been concluded under the national law of the Member State concerned, even in case of an acquittal. Where the proceedings did not result in a conviction, processing of personal data may only take place in order to identify links with other ongoing or concluded investigations and prosecutions as referred to in Article 23(2), point (c).; If links between judicial proceedings are not identified, information related to a person which is acquitted or to proceedings that ended on grounds that do not imply that person's guilt should be removed.
Amendment 141 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 29 – paragraph 1a – point b
Article 29 – paragraph 1a – point b
(b) 52 years after the date on which the judicial decision of the last of the Member States concerned by the investigation or prosecution became final, 31 years in case of an acquittal. or a final decision of non- prosecution; where the investigation or prosecution has resulted in a final verdict of not guilty or acquittal, operational personal data in relation to that investigation shall be removed”;
Amendment 144 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point b
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
If operational personal data referred to in Article 27(4) are stored for a period exceeding five yearstwo years, or for a period exceeding one year in case of an acquittal or a final decision of non-prosecution, the EDPS shall be informed thereof.
Amendment 147 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 54a – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 4
Article 54a – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 4
The College shall lay down the detailed conditions of access. and processing of data included in the case management system by the liaison prosecutors. In accordance with Articles 45 and 46, Eurojust is liable for the personal data processing by the liaison prosecutors;
Amendment 149 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Annex III – point d – indent 2
Annex III – point d – indent 2
— photographs. that have been collected in accordance with national law during criminal proceedings.