Activities of Dragoş TUDORACHE related to 2021/0393(COD)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1727 of the European Parliament and the Council and Council Decision 2005/671/JHA, as regards the digital information exchange in terrorism cases
Amendments (28)
Amendment 47 #
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, structured 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 50 #
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, at the earliest possible stage, sufficient information to enable Eurojust to cross- check this data.
Amendment 55 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10 a) New competencies of sharing, storing and cross-checking data will significantly increase the amount of data processed at Eurojust for which reason additional financial, human and technical resources should be foreseen.
Amendment 63 #
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 data. 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 test should be applied by the competent authorities and Eurojust in each casethose data should be transmitted only in cases where it is necessary for the identification of the data subject.
Amendment 64 #
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. A case should be considered to be referred to a judicial authority when, for instance, the authority is informed of an ongoing investigation, approves or orders an investigation measure, or decides to prosecute, depending on the applicable national law. If the competent national authorities are already aware of cross-links, they should inform Eurojust accordingly.
Amendment 69 #
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 early and to ensure time limits are respected, the competent national authorities should update the information provided regularly. Such updates should include new information relating to the person under investigation, developments in the proceedings and judicial decisions such as pre-trial detention or opening of the court proceedings and judicial cooperation requests or identified links with other jurisdictions.
Amendment 72 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Given the sensitive nature of judicial proceedings against suspects of terrorist offences, it is not always possible for the competent national authorities to share the information on terrorist offences at the earliest stage. Such derogations from the obligation to provide information should remain an exception. When considering a derogation, the fact that the information provided is covered by Union law on protection of personal data and that Eurojust is obligated to treat it accordingly should be taken into account while also ensuring the confidentiality of the judicial proceedings.
Amendment 79 #
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 link detection while taking, as a rule, full advantage of pre-existing and already-in- place national and Union level mechanisms for comparing biometric data.
Amendment 83 #
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 the use and availability of electronic communication, transnational collaboration between terrorist offenders has increased significantly. TWherefore, terrorist offences should be considered per se transnational in their nature, ifn a case is referred to a judicial body, the international nature of a terrorist offense might, however, not be discovered. Through cross-checking, Eurojust might be able to identify the transnational nature of a terrorist offense. That is why prosecution of terrorist offences require, as allowed for in Article 85 TFEU, coordination and collaboration among prosecuting agencies or a prosecution on common bases. Information on terrorism cases should therefore be exchanged with Eurojust, unless the specific circumstances of the case do not clearly indicates a purely national character.
Amendment 92 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Investigations and prosecutions in terrorism cases are often 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 establish potential links, it is necessary to adequately extend the time limits for storeing the data on any previous investigations, not only on convictions and 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. 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. However, when the competent national authority determines that the processing of the data of acquitted or non-prosecuted persons is not required, including because of the particularities of the case or the grounds for the acquittal or non-prosecution, that data should be deleted after the decision on acquittal or non-prosecution becomes final.
Amendment 94 #
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 ensure adequate safeguards and security measures for the protection of data and fundamental rights through the updated technical setup and strict internal rules.
Amendment 100 #
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. in compliance with the applicable data protection rules;
Amendment 101 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 21 – paragraph 10
Article 21 – paragraph 10
(b) paragraph 10 is deleted;replaced by the following: 10. Where information referred to in this Article has previously been provided to Eurojust in accordance with other provisions of this Regulation, the competent national authority shall not be required to provide such information.
Amendment 103 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 21a – paragraph 1
Article 21a – paragraph 1
1. The competent national authorities shall inform their national members of any ongoing or concluded criminal investigations supervised by judicial authorities, prosecutions, court proceedings and court decisions on terrorist offences as soon as judicial authorities are involvedt the earliest possible stage, in accordance with national law.
Amendment 107 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 21a – paragraph 3
Article 21a – paragraph 3
3. The information transmitted in accordance with paragraph 1 shall include the operational personal data and non- personal data listed in Annex III. However, personal data referred to in Annex III, point d, shall only be included if such data is held by or may be shared with the relevant national authorities under applicable national law and if its transmission is required to accurately identify a person referred to in Article 27(5).
Amendment 109 #
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. That obligation shall not apply, however, where the sharing 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 114 #
2. Where exchange of information in accordance with paragraph 1 is not possible due to the unavailability of the decentralised IT system or due to exceptional circumstances, it shall be carried out by the swiftest, most appropriate alternative means. Member States and Eurojust shall ensure that the alternative means of communication are reliable and provide an equivalent level of security and data protection.
Amendment 115 #
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 in accordance with Articles 21 and 21a to Eurojust in a semi-automated manner from national registers and in a structured way determined by Eurojustthe European Commission, in consultation with Eurojust, by means of an implementing act, pursuant to Articles 22b and 22c. In particular, that implementing act shall determine the format of and necessary safeguards with respect to transmission of data referred to in Annex III, point d.
Amendment 120 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 23 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 23 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. The case management system may be connected to the JIT Collaboration Platform for the purposes of carrying out its specific tasks under this Regulation and other applicable Union law.
Amendment 125 #
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 129 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 24 – paragraph 3
Article 24 – paragraph 3
3. The national member shall indicate and justify, in general or specific terms, any restrictions on the further handling, access and transfer of the information if a cross- link referred to in Article 23(2), point (c), has been identified.
Amendment 131 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. In so far as they are connected to the case management system, pPersons referred to in Article 20(3) points (a), (b) and (c), shall only have access to:
Amendment 132 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 25 – paragraph 1– point a
Article 25 – paragraph 1– point a
(a) data controlled by the national member of their Member State, unless the national member, who has decided to introduce the data in the case management system, expressly denied such access;
Amendment 133 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 25 – paragraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 2
2. The national member shall, within the limitations provided for in paragraph 1 of this Article, decide on the extent of access, which is granted in their Member State to the persons referred to in Article 20(3) in so far as they are connected to the case management system, points (a), (b) and (c).
Amendment 134 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
3. Each Member State shall decide, after consultation with its national member, on the extent of access, which is granted in that Member State to the persons referred to in Article 20(3) in so far as they are connected to the case management system, points (a), (b) and(c).
Amendment 137 #
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
Unless the competent national authority decides otherwise, on a case-by-case basis, 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).;
Amendment 142 #
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) 5 years after the date on which the judicial decision of the last of the Member States concerned by the investigation or prosecution became final, 3 years in case of an acquittal.indictment withdrawal, an acquittal or final decision of non-prosecution;
Amendment 146 #
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 1
Article 54a – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
3. Liaison prosecutors seconded to Eurojust shall be granted access to the case management system for the secure exchange of data but Eurojust remains liable for the personal data processing.