2023/0202(COD) | [ParlTrack]

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)

(1 a) This Regulation should be seen as the first step of a more comprehensive but at the same time targeted GDPR revision, which is hopefully also suggested by the upcoming report on the application of the GDPR in May 2024, as there is an urgent effort of modernizing EU data protection rules as well as streamlining it with the European data strategy (i.e. Data Act, DGA, EHDS).

Amendment 220 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)

(2 a) The procedural law of each Member State should apply to the supervisory authorities insofar as this Regulation does not harmonise a matter. Some procedural elements, such as the horizontal burden of proof of the controller in Article 5(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, are already governed by Union law. In line with the primacy of Union law, supervisory authorities should not apply national procedural law where it is in conflict with this Regulation and Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Cooperation among supervisory authorities should not be limited because of differences in national procedural law.

Amendment 221 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)

(2 a) Supervisory authorities shall make use of all options under applicable national law to allow parties in another Member State to participate in procedures. This may include remote video participation, interpreters or generally available means of communication. (To be added behind Recital 2b(new) as Recital 2c(new).)

Amendment 222 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)

(2 a) Supervisory authorities shall make use of all options under applicable national law to allow parties in another Member State to participate in procedures. This may include remote video conference, or generally available electronic means of communication.

Amendment 223 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)

(2 a) The procedural law of each Member State should apply to the supervisory authorities insofar as this Regulation does not harmonise a matter.

Amendment 224 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4

(4) In order to be admissible a complaint should contain certain specified information about the alleged violation, whether ongoing or past. Therefore, in order to assist complainants in submitting the necessary facts to the supervisory authorities, a complaint form should be provided. The information specified in the form should be required only in cases of cross-border processing in the sense of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, though the form may be used by supervisory authorities for cases that do not concern cross-border processing. The form may be submitted electronically or by post. The submission of the information listed in that form should be a condition for a complaint relating to cross-border processing to be treated as a complaint as referred to in Article 77 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. No additional information should be required for a complaint to be deemed admissible. It should be possible for supervisory authorities to facilitate the submission of complaints in a user-friendly electronic format and bearing in mind the needs of persons with disabilities, as long as the information required from the complainant corresponds to the information required by the form and no additional information is required in order to find the complaint admissible.

Amendment 225 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4

(4) In order to be admissible a complaint should contain certain specified information about current, ongoing or past alleged violations. Therefore, in order to assist complainants in submitting the necessary facts to the supervisory authorities, a complaint form should be provided. The information specified in the form should be required only in cases of cross-border processing in the sense of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, though the form may be used by supervisory authorities for cases that do not concern cross-border processing. The form may be submitted electronically or by post. The submission of the information listed in that form should be a condition for a complaint relating to cross-border processing to be treated as a complaint as referred to in Article 77 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. No additional information should be required for a complaint to be deemed admissible. It should be possible for supervisory authorities to facilitate the submission of complaints in a user-friendly electronic format and bearing in mind the needs of persons with disabilities, as long as the information required from the complainant corresponds to the information required by the form and no additional information is required in order to find the complaint admissible.

Amendment 226 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)

(4 a) The full enforcement of Regulation (EU) 679/2016 requires that not only ongoing violations, but also repetitive or past violations may be subject to a complaint or ex officio procedure. The cessation of an infringement should not lead to the automatic rejection of a complaint.

Amendment 227 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

(6) Each complaint handled by a supervisory authority pursuant to Article 57(1), point (f), of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 is to be investigated with all due diligence to the extent appropriate bearing in mind that every use of powers by the supervisory authority must be ~~appropriate, necessary and proportionate in~~undertaken with a view tof ensuring compliance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679. It falls within the discretion of each competent authority to decide the extent to which a complaint should be investigated. While assessing the extent appropriate of an investigation, supervisory authorities should aim to deliver a satisfactory resolution to the complainant, which ~~may not necessarily require exhaustively investigating all possible legal and factual elements arising from the complaint, but which provides an effective and quick remedy to the complaina~~provides an effective and quick remedy to the complainant. Notwithstanding the necessity of providing a satisfactory resolution to the complainant within a short timeframe, supervisory authorities should investigate to a degree that allows them to satisfy themselves as to whether a complaint is indicative of more serious or systemic infringements. The assessment of the extent of the investigative measures required could be informed by the gravity of the alleged infringement, its systemic or repetitive nature, or the fact, as the case may be, that the complainant also took advantage of her or his rights under Article 79 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 228 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

(6) Each complaint handled by a supervisory authority pursuant to Article 57(1), point (f), of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 is to be investigated with all due diligence to the extent appropriate bearing in mind that every use of powers by the supervisory authority must be appropriate, necessary and proportionate in view of ensuring compliance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679. It falls within the discretion of ~~each~~the competent authority to decide the extent to which a complaint should be investigated, after taking into account the opinions of other authorities involved or at the local level in the Member State responsible for handling the case. While assessing the extent appropriate of an investigation, the lead supervisory authorit~~ies~~y should aim to deliver a satisfactory resolution to the complainant, which may not necessarily require exhaustively investigating all possible legal and factual elements arising from the complaint, but which provides an effective and quick remedy to the complainant. The assessment of the extent of the investigative measures required could be informed by the gravity of the alleged infringement, its systemic or repetitive nature, or the fact, as the case may be, that the complainant also took advantage of her or his rights under Article 79 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 229 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

Amendment 230 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

Amendment 231 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7

(7) The lead supervisory authority should regularly provide the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged with ~~the necessary~~detailed information on the progress of the investigation for the purpose of providing updates to the complainant.

Amendment 232 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9

Amendment 233 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10

(10) In order to guarantee the effective functioning of the cooperation and consistency mechanisms in Chapter VII of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, it is important that cross-border cases are resolved in a timely fashion and in line with the spirit of sincere and effective cooperation that underlies Article 60 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. The lead supervisory authority should exercise its competence within a framework of close cooperation with the other supervisory authorities concerned. Likewise, supervisory authorities concerned should actively engage in the investigation at an early stage in an endeavour to reach a consensus, making full use of the tools provided by Regulation (EU) 2016/679. This provision must be in accordance with the 'one-stop-shop' principles set out in Regulation (EU) 2016/679. All mechanisms are intended to guarantee equality of parties, legal certainty and independence in the issuing of decisions.

Amendment 234 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

(13) In the interest of effective inclusive cooperation between all supervisory authorities concerned and the lead supervisory authority, the comments of concerned supervisory authorities should be ~~concise and~~ worded in sufficiently clear and precise terms to be easily understandable to all supervisory authorities. The legal arguments should be grouped by reference to the part of the summary of key issues to which they relate. The comments of supervisory authorities concerned may be supplemented by additional documents. However, a mere reference in the comments of a supervisory authority concerned to supplementary documents cannot make up for the absence of the essential arguments in law or in fact which should feature in the comments. The basic legal and factual particulars relied on in such documents should be indicated, at least in summary form, coherently and intelligibly in the comment itself.

Amendment 235 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14

Amendment 236 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14

Amendment 237 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14

(14) Cases that do not raise contentious issues do not require extensive discussion between supervisory authorities in order to reach a consensus and could, therefore, be dealt with more quickly. When none of the supervisory authorities concerned raise comments on the summary of key issues, the lead supervisory authority should communicate the ~~preliminary findings provided for in Article 14 within nine months.~~draft decision within three months after the deadline for comments. (This replaces amendment 19.)

Amendment 238 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) Supervisory authorities should avail of all means necessary to achieve a consensus in a spirit of sincere and effective cooperation. Therefore, if there is a divergence in opinion between the supervisory authorities concerned and the lead supervisory authority regarding the scope of a complaint-based investigation, including the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 the infringement of which will be investigated, or where the comments of the supervisory authorities concerned relate to an important change in the complex legal or technological assessment, the concerned authority shcould use the tools provided for under Articles 61 and 62 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In such circumstances, the lead supervisory authority or one of the supervisory authorities concerned should also be able to request an urgent binding decision of the Board without a request under Articles 61 or 62 having been made.

Amendment 239 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) Supervisory authorities should avail of all means necessary to achieve a consensus in a spirit of sincere and effective cooperation. Therefore, if there is a divergence in opinion between the supervisory authorities concerned and the lead supervisory authority regarding the scope of a complaint-based investigation, including the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 the infringement of which will be investigated, or where the comments of the supervisory authorities concerned relate to an important change in the complex legal or technological assessment, the concerned authority should use the tools provided for under Articles 61 and 62 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Supervisory authorities should take all possible measures to ensure that ongoing proceedings are completed as quickly as possible.

Amendment 240 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) If the use of those tools provided for under Articles 61 and 62 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 does not enable the supervisory authorities to reach a consensus on the scope of a complaint- based investigation, the lead supervisory authority or one of the supervisory authorities concerned should request an urgent binding decision ofn the scope from the Board under Article 66(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. For this purpose, the requirement of urgency should be presumed. The lead supervisory authority should draw appropriate conclusions from the urgent binding decision of the Board for the purposes of preliminary findings. The urgent binding decision of the Board cannot pre-empt the outcome of the investigation of the lead supervisory authority or the effectiveness of the rights of the parties under investigation to be heard. In particular, the Board should not extend the scope of the investigation on its own initiative.

Amendment 241 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19

(19) It is necessary to clarify the division of responsibilities between the lead supervisory authority and the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged in the case of rejection of a complaint in a cross-border case. As the point of contact for the complainant during the investigation, the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged should obtain the views of the complainant on the proposed rejection of the complaint and should be responsible for all communications with the complainant. All such communications should be shared with the lead supervisory authority. Since under Article 60(8) and (9) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged has the responsibility of adopting the final decision rejecting the complaint, that supervisory authority should also have the responsibility of preparing the draft decision under Article 60(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 242 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) In order to effectively safeguard the right to good administration and the rights of defence as enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’), including the right of every person to be heard before any individual measure which would affect him or her adversely is taken, it is important to provide for clear rules on the exercise of this right for all parties involved. Every party shall have the right to decline the right to be heard.

Amendment 243 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22

(22) The rules regarding the administrative procedure applied by supervisory authorities when enforcing Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should ensure that the parties under investigation effectively have the opportunity to make known their views on the truth and relevance of the facts, objections and circumstances put forward by the supervisory authority throughout the procedure, thereby enabling them to exercise their rights of defence. The preliminary findings set out the preliminary position on the alleged infringement of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 following investigation. They thus constitute an essential procedural safeguard which ensures that the right to be heard is observed. The parties under investigation should be provided with the documents required to defend themselves effectively and to comment on the allegations made against them, by receiving access to the administrative file. Where, at any stage in an investigation, a submission is made to a lead supervisory authority, which materially changes the lead supervisory authority’s view of a case, parties under investigation should be given an opportunity to respond to this submission before the lead supervisory authority takes its final decision.

Amendment 244 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22

(22) The rules regarding the administrative procedure applied by supervisory authorities when enforcing Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should ensure that the parties under investigation effectively have the opportunity to make known their views on the truth and relevance of the facts, objections and circumstances put forward by the supervisory authority throughout the procedure, thereby enabling them to exercise their rights of defence. The parties under investigation should have access to the documents required to defend themselves effectively and to comment on the allegations made against them. The preliminary findings set out the preliminary position on the alleged infringement of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 following investigation. They thus constitute an essential procedural safeguard which ensures that the right to be heard is observed. The parties under investigation should be provided with the documents required to defend themselves effectively and to comment on the allegations made against them, by receiving access to the administrative file.

Amendment 245 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23

(23) The preliminary findings define the scope of the investigation and therefore the scope of any future final decision (as the case may be, taken on the basis of a binding decision issued by the Board under Article 65(1), point (a) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679) which may be addressed to controllers or processors. The preliminary findings should be couched in terms that, even if succinct, are sufficiently clear to enable the parties under investigation to properly identify the nature of the alleged infringement of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. The obligation of giving the parties under investigation all the information necessary to enable them to properly defend themselves is satisfied if the final decision does not allege that the parties under investigation have committed infringements other than those referred to in the preliminary findings and only takes into consideration facts on which the parties under investigation have had the opportunity of making known their views. The final decision of the lead supervisory authority is not, however, necessarily required to be a replica of the preliminary findings. The lead supervisory authority should be permitted in the final decision to take account of the responses of the parties under investigation to the preliminary findings, and, where applicable, the revised draft decision under Article 60(5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, and the Article 65(1), point (a), decision resolving the dispute between the supervisory authorities. The lead supervisory authority should be able to carry out its own assessment of the facts and the legal qualifications put forward by the parties under investigation in order either to abandon the objections when the supervisory authority finds them to be unfounded or to supplement and redraft its arguments, both in fact and in law, in support of the objections which it maintains. For example, taking account of an argument put forward by a party under investigation during the administrative procedure, without it having been given the opportunity to express an opinion in that respect before the adoption of the final decision, cannot per se constitute an infringement of defence rights.deleted

Amendment 246 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25 a (new)

(25 a) Notwithstanding the fact that the parties under investigation and the complainant are not in the same procedural situation, there are circumstances in which complainants may be in a position to adduce arguments and evidence during an investigation which may help the progress of the investigation. This is particularly the case in circumstances in which a not-for-profit body, organisation or association has lodged a comlaint on behalf of a data subject or on its own initiative under Article 80 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Supervisory authorities should, at their discretion, and bearing in mind the need to progress investigations quickly and efficiently, facilitate the hearing of such complainants at all stages of the investigation, including ex officio investigations, while also maintaining their independence.

Amendment 247 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27

(27) When setting deadlines for parties under investigation and complainants to provide their views on preliminary findings, supervisory authorities should have regard to the complexity of the issues raised in preliminary findings as well as the capacity of the parties under investigation and complainants to respond, in order to ensure that the parties under investigation and complainants have sufficient opportunity to meaningfully provide their views on the issues raised.

Amendment 248 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29

(29) In the interest of the efficient and inclusive conclusion of the dispute resolution procedure, where all supervisory authorities should be in a position to contribute their views and bearing in mind the time constraints during dispute resolution, the form and structure of relevant and reasoned objections should meet certain requirements. Therefore, relevant and reasoned objections ~~should be limited to a prescribed length,~~ should clearly identify the disagreement with the draft decision and should be worded in sufficiently clear, coherent and precise terms.

Amendment 249 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31

(31) When granting access to the ~~administrativ~~joint case file, supervisory authorities should ensure the protection of business secrets and other confidential information. The category of other confidential information includes information other than business secrets, which may be considered as confidential, insofar as its disclosure would significantly harm a controller, a processor or a natural personlegally protected confidential information and the protection of information in the public interest in accordance with the applicable national law. The supervisory authorities should be able to request that parties ~~under investigation~~ that submit or have submitted documents or statements identify confidential information and provide a non-confidential version.

Amendment 250 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31

(31) When granting access to the administrative file, supervisory authorities should ensure the protection of business secrets and other confidential information. The category of other confidential information includes information other than business secrets, which may be considered as confidential, insofar as its disclosure would significantly harm a controller, a processor or a natural personother legally protected confidential information and the protection of information in the public interest in accordance with national law. The supervisory authorities should be able to request that parties ~~under investigation~~ that submit or have submitted documents or statements identify confidential information and provide a non-confidential version.

Amendment 251 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31

(31) When granting access to the administrative file, supervisory authorities should ensure the protection of business secrets and other legally protected confidential information. The category of other confidential information includes information other than business secrets, which may be considered as confidential, insofar as its disclosure would significantly harm a controller, a processor or a natural person and the protection of information in the public interest in accordance with the applicable national law. The supervisory authorities should be able to request that parties under investigation that submit or have submitted documents or statements identify confidential information and provide a non-confidential version.

Amendment 252 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31 a (new)

(31 a) Given that data subjects may bring claims under Article 79 of Regulation (EU) 679/2016 and controllers or processors may have violated the rights of multiple data subjects, evidence from procedures before a supervisory authority regularly need to be used in other procedures to facilitate an efficient procedure and consistent decision making. Considering the need for a mere objective assessment of the amount of non-material damages based on the average data subject, especially civil courts may regularly benefit from relying on established facts or evidence to determine a claim under Article 82 of Regulation (EU) 679/2016.

Amendment 253 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31 a (new)

(31 a) In accordance with national procedural law, evidence obtained before supervisory authorities should facilitate the work of courts and other authorities and thereby aid efficient and consistent decision making. Considering the need for an objective assessment of non- material damages based on the average data subject, civil courts may benefit from relying on established evidence to determine a claim under Article 82 of Regulation (EU) 679/2016, especially when a large number of data subjects are concerned.

Amendment 254 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31 b (new)

(31 b) As the complaints procedure under Article 77 is free and Article 78 of Regulation (EU) 679/2016 allows for a full review of a decision by a supervisory authority, the judicial review shall not be subject to prohibitive legal costs, delays or other limitations. Parties must have a right to an effective remedy in line with Article 47 of the Charter, including a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time, the possibility to be advised, defended and represented, as well as legal aid for those who lack sufficient resources. As a positive decision may be overturned and may result in an adverse effect on the successful party, all parties that are concerned by a decision must be equal parties to procedures under Article 79 of Regulation (EU) 679/2016, unless an appeal is limited to matters that solely concern one party, such as an appeal by a party under investigation against a fine.

Amendment 255 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32

(32) Where business secrets or other confidential information are necessary to prove an infringement, the supervisory authorities should assess for each individual document whether the need to disclose is greater than the harm which might result from disclosure.deleted

Amendment 256 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34

(34) The binding decision of the Board under Article 65(1), point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should concern exclusively matters which led to the triggering of the dispute resolution and be drafted in a way which allows the lead supervisory authority to adopt its final decision on the basis of the decision of the Board ~~while maintaining its discretion~~.

Amendment 257 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – title

Subject matter and scope

Amendment 258 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1

This Regulation lays down procedural rules for the handling of complaints and the conduct of investigations in complaint- based and ex officio cases by supervisory authorities inrelated to the cross-border ~~enforcement of Regulation (EU) 2016/679~~processing in the meaning of Article 4(23) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, as well as related judicial remedies.

Amendment 259 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1

This Regulation lays down procedural rules for the handling of complaints and the conduct of investigations in complaint- based and ex officio cases by supervisory authorities in ~~the~~regard to cross-border ~~enforcement~~processing as defined in Article 4(23) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 260 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Article 26c of this Regulation also applies to cases before a supervisory authority of a single Member State pursuant to the second paragraph of Article 56 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 261 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 b (new)

This Regulation does not preclude Member States from specifying procedural matters not regulated by this Regulation or Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 262 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)

(1) Without prejudice to additional rights under relevant national procedural law, each party shall have at least the right to: (a) have their case handled impartially and fairly, and to be treated equally, even if they are before different supervisory authorities in different jurisdictions (“fair procedure and equality of arms”); (b) be heard before any measure is taken that would adversely affect the party, including before the decision to uphold, fully or partially dismiss, or reject a complaint is adopted (“right to be heard”); (c) have access to the joint case file, except to any internal deliberations (“procedural transparency”); (This replaces amendment 59.) Or. en (To be inserted into Article 2b(new).)

Amendment 263 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 1 a (new)

(1 a) ‘joint case file’ means a dedicated electronic file for any case falling under this regulation, managed by the lead supervisory authority, in which all relevant information, in particular documents, submissions, memos and other information regarding a case, are stored and made remotely accessible to concerned supervisory authorities and parties to the case;

Amendment 264 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 1 b (new)

(1 b) ‘complaint-receiving authority’ means the supervisory authority with which the complaint has been lodged pursuant to Article 4(22)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679;

Amendment 265 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2

(2) ‘summary of key issues’ means the summary to be provided by the lead supervisory authority to supervisory authorities concerned identifying the main relevant factsual and legal issues within the preliminary scope of investigation, and the lead supervisory authority’s views on the case;

Amendment 266 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2

(2) ‘summary of key issues’ means the summary to be provided by the lead supervisory authority ~~to supervisory authorities concerned~~or the complaint- receiving authority, identifying the main relevant facts and the lead supervisory authority’s legal views on the case;

Amendment 267 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)

‘party’ means the party or parties under investigation, the complainant(s) and any third party to the case as defined under national law;

Amendment 268 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 a (new)

Article2a Applicable Procedural Law (1) In addition to, and where not conflicting with this Regulation and subject to the principles of equivalence and effectiveness, the applicable procedural law of a supervisory authority shall govern all direct interactions between that supervisory authority and the parties before it. When applying national procedural law, supervisory authorities shall strive to facilitate the participation of all parties, including parties established or residing in other Member States. (2) Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and this Regulation govern the interaction between supervisory authorities of different Member States within the scope of this Regulation. (3) Any complainant has the right to communicate solely with the supervisory authority with which the complaint has been lodged pursuant to Article 77 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. (4) The procedure according to Chapter VII of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and the procedure according to this Regulation shall not be restricted, delayed or denied based on differences by national procedural laws.

Amendment 269 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 a (new)

Article 2a Common minimum standards of procedure (1) Without prejudice to additional rights under relevant national procedural law, each party shall have at least the right to: (a) have their case handled impartially and fairly, and to be treated equally, even if they are before different supervisory authorities in different jurisdictions (“fair procedure and equality of arms”); (b) be heard before any measure is taken that would adversely affect the party, including before the decision to uphold, fully or partially dismiss or reject a complaint is adopted (“right to be heard”); (c) have access to the joint case file, except to any internal deliberations (“procedural transparency”);

Amendment 270 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 b (new)

Article 2b Procedural Minimum Standards (1) Without prejudice to additional rights under relevant national procedural law, each party shall have at least the right to: (a) have their case handled impartially and fairly, and to be treated equally, even if they are before different supervisory authorities in different jurisdictions (“fair procedure and equality of arms”); (b) be heard before any measure is taken that would adversely affect the party, including before the decision to fully or partially dismiss or reject a complaint is adopted (“right to be heard”); (c) have access to the joint case file, except to any internal deliberations (“procedural transparency”); (2) The lead supervisory authority shall hear the parties when novel issues arise and lead to novel conclusions. (3) On the request of a party or in the public interest, a supervisory authority may limit the rights referred to in paragraph 1 and 2 to protect legally recognised rights of others or to protect the public interest. Any limitation must be proportionate in light of the respective recognised rights of others or the public interest pursued. The party claiming confidentiality shall provide a non- confidential version of any information, applying only strictly proportionate measures, such as redacting specific parts of documents. Supervisory authorities involved in a case, as well as other relevant authorities under Article 7(1a), shall always have access to the confidential version of all information, and may object to redactions that are not strictly proportionate. The lead supervisory authority shall keep records of each access to the joint case file and a list of authorised staff from each supervisory authority. (4) In the interest of efficient procedures, supervisory authorities shall limit the length of submissions and set reasonable deadlines not longer than four weeks, unless exceptional circumstances require a reasonable extension.

Amendment 271 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 c (new)

Article 2c Cooperation between supervisory authorities 1. The lead supervisory authority shall structure, coordinate and manage the case in an efficient and expedient way, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679, this Regulation and any applicable national procedural law, ensuring that Regulation (EU) 2016/679 is fully enforced. 2. The lead supervisory authority shall manage each case in full cooperation with the supervisory authorities concerned, and shall comply with any request of a supervisory authority under this Regulation and Articles 60 to 62 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Concerned supervisory authorities within the meaning of Article 4 (22) Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall have the right to actively contribute to the course of the investigations. The lead supervisory authority shall maintain a list of supervisory authorities concerned for each case in the joint case file. 3. Any supervisory authority which receives relevant information for a case shall provide it to the lead supervisory authority without delay, but no later than one week from the day that it received such information. 4. The lead supervisory authority shall include all documents, submissions, memos and other information regarding the case in a joint case file without delay, but no later than one week from the day in which the lead supervisory authority received such information. Any other concerned supervisory authority and the Board as far as it is involved in the procedure shall have instant remote access to the joint case file. 5. When diverging views arise or are to be expected, for example when a case is considered as contentious under Article 9, the lead supervisory authority shall instantly initiate an exchange with all concerned supervisory authorities with an aim to reach an early consensus or narrow areas of disagreement. The lead supervisory authority shall investigate facts relevant for diverging views. 6. Supervisory authorities shall use their competences under this Regulation and under Chapter VII of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 if diverging views cannot be resolved or in the case of inactivity of another supervisory authority. 7. All written documents by the supervisory authorities shall be provided by electronic means and in a concise, transparent, intelligible and easily accessible form, using clear and plain language.

Amendment 272 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1

1. A complaint ~~on the basis of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 that relates to cross-border processing shall provide the information required in the Form, as set out in the Annex~~subject to this regulation shall comply with the requirements of national procedural law applicable to the supervisory authority with which the complaint has been lodged and shall provide the following minimum information: (a) the name, address and any other available contact details of the complainant, (b) if known, the name, address and any other contact details of the party under investigation, (c) the facts of the case and any evidence available to the complainant, including any available communication relating to the case. No additional information shall be required in order for the complaint to be admissible. In particular, complainants shall not be required to use a national electronic ID or e-government system to submit the complaint.

Amendment 273 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. The complainant shall not be required to contact the party under investigation before submitting a complaint for the complaint to be admissible.

Amendment 274 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. The supervisory authority with which a complaint has been lodged shall, within two weeks, acknowledge receipt of the complaint, and where a complaint does not meet the requirements pursuant to paragraph 1 or other legal requirements, declare the complaint inadmissible and inform the complainant about the missing information.

Amendment 275 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 c (new)

1 c. The supervisory authority shall attribute a case number to the complaint and communicate this information to the complainant.This shall be without prejudice to the assessment of admissibility of the complaint pursuant to paragraph 2(c)(i).

Amendment 276 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2

2. The supervisory authority with which the complaint whas been lodged shall ~~establish whether the complaint relates to cross-border processing.~~ , within three weeks after receipt of the complaint: (a) determine the admissibility of the complaint, (b) establish, by way of a preliminary conclusion, whether the complaint relates to cross-border processing, (c) establish which supervisory authority is the assumed lead supervisory authority under Article 56(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, and whether the case is local in nature pursuant to Article 56(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, (d) draft a summary of key issues, and (e) either (i) transmit the complaint to the assumed lead supervisory authority under Article 56(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and inform the complainant thereof. The assessment of the admissibility of the complaint by the supervisory authority with which the complaint has been lodged shall be binding on the lead supervisory authority; (ii) handle the complaint under Article 56(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679; or (iii) inform the complainant that he or she can resubmit the complaint, naming any missing information.

Amendment 277 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2

2. The supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall ~~establish~~determine, by way of preliminary conclusion, whether the complaint relates to cross-border processing, which supervisory authority is the assumed lead supervisory authority under Article 56(1) GDPR, and whether the case is local in nature pursuant to Article 56(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 278 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2

2. The supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall, in consultation with the lead authority pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and as part of the preliminary investigation, establish whether the complaint relates to cross-border processing.

Amendment 279 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. The lead supervisory authority shall immediately provide the complaint to the party under investigation and demand a reply without undue delay, but no later than three weeks from the day it was informed by the supervisory authority concerned.

Amendment 280 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. The parties or the assumed lead supervisory authority shall raise any objection in relation to the competence of the assumed lead supervisory authority or to the handling of a complaint under Article 56(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 within three weeks from being informed about the transmission of the complaint to the assumed lead supervisory authority or the lack of such a transmission.

Amendment 281 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 c (new)

2 c. Where an objection under paragraph 2b was raised, the supervisory authority with which the complaint has been lodged shall either assume its own competence under Article 55 or 56 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, transfer it to an assumed lead supervisory authority or request a determination by the Board under Article 26a within two weeks.

Amendment 282 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3

~~3. The supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall determine the completeness of the information required by the Form within one month.~~deleted

Amendment 283 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4

4. Upon assessment of the completeness of the information required by the Form, the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall transmit the complaint to the lead supervisory authority.deleted

Amendment 284 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4

Amendment 285 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5

~~5. Where the complainant claims confidentiality when submitting a complaint, the complainant shall also submit a non-confidential version of the complaint.~~deleted

Amendment 286 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5

5. Where the complainant claims confidentiality when submitting a complaint, the complainant shall also submit a non-confidential version of the complaint that the supervisory authority should only disclose if such disclosure is necessary for the parties under investigation to exercise their rights of defence efficiently.

Amendment 287 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5

5. Where the complainant claims confidentiality when submitting a complaint, the complainant shall also submit a non-confidential version of the complaint. The lead authorities must determine in each case and in each specific instance whether a document can be declassified.

Amendment 288 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5

5. Where the complainant claims confidentiality when submitting a complaint, the complainant shall also submit a non-confidential version of the complaint, in accordance with national law.

Amendment 289 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. When the complianant claims confidentiality when submitting a complaint, both the CSAs and the LSA shall have access to the confidential version of the complaint.

Amendment 290 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6

6. The supervisory authority with which a complaint was lodged shall acknowledge receipt of the complaint within one week. This acknowledgement shall be without prejudice to the assessment of admissibility of the complaint pursuant to paragraph 3.deleted

Amendment 291 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

While assessing the extent appropriate to which a complaint should be investigated in each case the supervisory authority shall take into account all relevant circumstances, including all of the following:(Does not affect the English version.)

Amendment 292 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) the gravity of the alleged infringement, its duration and its relevance;

Amendment 293 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

(c a) the complainant’s use of internal complaint mechanism (CM) provided by the parties under investigation.

Amendment 294 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1

1. A complaint may be resolved by amicable settlement between the complainant and the parties under investigation. Where the supervisory authority considers that an amicable settlement to the complaint has been found, it shall communicate the proposed settlement to the complainant. If the complainant does not object to the amicable settlement proposed by the supervisory authority within one month, the complaint shall be deemed withdrawn.. The supervisory authorities may facilitate such a voluntary process. (This replaces amendment 111.)

Amendment 295 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1

A complaint may be resolved by amicable settlement ~~between the complainant and the parties under investigation. Where the supervisory authority considers that~~only where it concerns the data subjects’ rights in the meaning of Chapter III of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and where with the resolution of the dispute by an amicable settlement, to the complaint has been found, it shall communicate the proposed settlement to the complainant. If the complainant does not object to the amicable settlement proposed by the supervisory authority within one month, the complaint shall be deemed withdrawnhe processing which the complaint related to has been terminated or has been adapted in the interest of the complainant. Amicable settlements may not be reached on the basis of payments to the complainant. An amicable settlement in the course of the complaint procedure is without prejudice of the complainant claiming compensation pursuant to Article 82 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 296 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1

A complaint may be resolved by amicable settlement between the complainant and the parties under investigation at any stage of the investigation. The supervisory authority may encourage and facilitate amicable settlements where relevant. Where the supervisory authority considers that an amicable settlement to the complaint has been found, it shall communicate the proposed settlement to the complainant. If the complainant does not object to the amicable settlement proposed by the supervisory authority within one month, the ~~complai~~settlement shall be deemed ~~withdrawn~~accepted.

Amendment 297 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1

A complaint may be resolved by amicable settlement between the complainant and the parties under investigation at any time, where the individual complainant’s rights are the subject of the complaint. Where the supervisory authority considers that an amicable settlement to the complaint has been found, it shall communicate the proposed settlement to the complainant. If the complainant does not object to the amicable settlement proposed by the supervisory authority within one month, the complaint shall be deemed withdrawn.

Amendment 298 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1

A complaint may be resolved by amicable settlement between the complainant and the parties under investigation. A settlement may be reached at any time during the proceedings. Where the supervisory authority considers that an amicable settlement to the complaint has been found, it shall communicate the proposed settlement to the complainant. If the complainant does not object to the amicable settlement proposed by the supervisory authority within one month, the complaint shall be deemed withdrawn.

Amendment 299 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)

An amicable settlement between the complainant and the party under investigation shall be considered to be found where there is explicit agreement. The supervisory authority with which the complaint has been lodged may facilitate such an amicable settlement in the preparatory phase; the lead supervisory authority may facilitate it once a complaint has been transmitted to it. Where an amicable settlement to the complaint has been found, the parties shall communicate the settlement to the lead supervisory authority and the supervisory authority where the complaint has been lodged.

Amendment 300 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)

The complaint-receiving supervisory authority may facilitate an amicable settlement prior to transmitting the complaint to the lead supervisory authority, if appropriate in the view of the circumtances of the case. In such circumstances, the receiving supervisory authority shall communicate the case and outcome to the lead supervisory authority in a timely manner.

Amendment 301 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 b (new)

An amicable settlement does not prevent the lead supervisory authority from conducting an ex officio investigation in the same matter.It shall, in particular, open an ex officio investigation instead, where (a) the party under investigation is a repeat offender, (b) the party under investigation has been the subject of a large number of other amicable settlements, (c) the broad subject matter of the complaint concerns a large number of data subjects other than the complainant;or (d) the exercise of powers is otherwise required to ensure effective, proportionate and dissuasive enforcement of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 302 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 b (new)

The lead supervisory authority may facilitate an amicable settlement after receiving the case, and shall obtain the views of the supervisory authorities concerned on the proposed settlement before finalising it. In such circumstances, the provisions of Article 60 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should apply in full. A failed attempt at amicable settlement by the complaint-receiving supervisory authority does not preclude the lead supervisory authority from facilitating an amicable settlement.

Amendment 303 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 c (new)

The lead supervisory authority shall, within one month after the communication of the amicable settlement under paragraph 1a, submit a draft decision pursuant to Article 60(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 indicating whether (a) the conditions of an amicable settlement under paragraph 1a are fulfilled; (b) to open an ex officio investigation under paragraph 1b.

Amendment 304 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 d (new)

Where none of the other supervisory authorities concerned has objected to the draft decision under paragraph 1a) or the Board confirms the amicable settlement in the procedure under Article 65(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, the complaint shall be deemed withdrawn.

Amendment 305 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 a (new)

Article 5a Request for an ex officio procedure 1. The lead supervisory authority may open an ex officio procedure at any time. 2. Where it considers that Regulation (EU) 2016/679 may be violated, any concerned supervisory authority may request an ex officio procedure by submitting a written request to the lead supervisory authority. Such a request shall contain at least: (a) a declaration to be a concerned supervisory authority; (b) any evidence of the violation; (c) a summary of key issues pursuant to Article 9; 3. Within three weeks, the assumed lead supervisory authority shall: (a) inform the concerned supervisory authority that it has opened an ex officio procedure; (b) inform the concerned supervisory authority that Article 56(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 applies to the case and that in accordance with Article 56(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 the lead supervisory authority does not intend to handle the case itself in line; or (c) reject the request, if it takes the view that it is not the lead supervisory authority or there is no violation of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In the case referred to in point (a) of this paragraph, the concerned supervisory authority may submit to the lead supervisory authority a draft decision pursuant to Article 56(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In the case referred to in point (c) of this paragraph, the concerned supervisory authority may resubmit an amended request for an ex officio procedure, or request a determination on the opening of the procedure by the Board under Article 26a(1). 4. Where the lead supervisory authority opens an ex officio procedure, it shall deliver a draft decision pursuant to Article 60(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 without delay, but not later than nine months from the receipt of the complaint. This period may exceptionally be prolonged by: (a) eight weeks when comments under Article 9(3) are submitted against a summary of key issues or an updated summary of key issues; (b) the period of time between a reference under Article 26a and the decision by the Board; (c) the period of any prolongation permitted by the Board under Article 26a(3). (This replaces amendment 114.)

Amendment 306 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 a (new)

Article 5a Ex officio procedure 1. The lead supervisory authority may join and separate cases, or open ex officio investigations, in accordance with national procedural law, insofar as this does not undermine the rights of the parties or the procedural rules for complaint-based procedures in cases of the same subject matter. 2. Any concerned supervisory authority may request an ex officio procedure by submitting a written request to the lead supervisory authority. Such a request shall contain at least: (a) a declaration to be a concerned supervisory authority (b) a summary of key issues pursuant to Article 9 3. Within three weeks, the assumed lead supervisory authority shall: (a) inform the concerned supervisory authority that it has opened an ex officio procedure.; or (b) inform the concerned supervisory authority that Article 56(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 applies to the case and that in accordance with Article 56(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 the lead supervisory authority does not intend to handle the case itself; or (c) reject the request, if it takes the view that it is not the lead supervisory authority or there is prima facie violation of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In the case referred to in point (a) of this paragraph, the concerned supervisory authority may submit to the lead supervisory authority a draft decision. In the case referred to in point (c) of this paragraph, the concerned supervisory authority may resubmit an amended request for an ex officio procedure, or request a determination on the opening of the procedure by the Board under Article 26a(1).

Amendment 307 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6

1. The supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall be responsible for: (a) translation of complaints and the views of complainants into the language used by the lead supervisory authority for the purposes of the investigation; (b) translation of documents provided by the lead supervisory authority into the language used for communication with the complainant, where it is necessary to provide such documents to the complainant pursuant to this Regulation or Regulation (EU) 2016/679. 2. In its rules of procedure, the Board shall determine the procedure for the translation of comments or relevant and reasoned objections expressed by supervisory authorities concerned in a language other than the language used by the lead supervisory authority for the purposes of the investigation.Article 6 deleted Translations

Amendment 308 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. A supervisory authority may provide automated translations and unofficial translations.

Amendment 309 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – title

Cooperation between supervisory authorities and other relevant authorities

Amendment 310 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2

The provisions in this section concern the relations between supervisory authorities and are not intended to confer rights on individuals or the parties under investigation. The procedure should reflect a spirit of common understanding and trust between the parties. At the same time, the procedure should not violate Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in particular the one-stop-shop dispute resolution architecture and the competences of the leading supervisory authority.

Amendment 311 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Supervisory authorities shall strive to communicate the information obtained in the context of the procedures set out in this Regulation to national and Union supervisory authorities competent in data protection and other areas, including competition, financial services, energy, telecommunications and consumer protection authorities, where the information is deemed relevant to the tasks and duties of those authorities. (This replaces amendment 117.)

Amendment 312 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1

1. The lead supervisory authority shall ~~regularly updat~~provide the other supervisory authorities concerned ~~about~~ withe in~~vestigation and provide the other supervisory authorities concerned, at the earliest convenience, with all relevant information once available~~stant, unrestricted and continuous remote access to the full joint case file, and shall include into the joint case file any documents, submissions, communication, protocols, evidence or other relevant information related to the case within one week of producing or receiving it.

Amendment 313 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1

1. The lead supervisory authority shall ~~regularly updat~~provide the other supervisory authorities concerned ~~about the investigation and provide the other supervisory authorities concerned, at the earliest convenience, with all relevant information once available.~~with instant, unrestricted and continuous remote access to the full joint case file, and shall include into the joint case file any documents, submissions, communication, protocols, evidence or other information related to the case within one week of producing or receiving it. (This replaces amendment 119.)

Amendment 314 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1

1. The lead supervisory authority shall regularly update the other supervisory authorities concerned about the investigation and provide the other supervisory authorities concerned, ~~at the earliest convenience~~without delay, with all relevant information once available.

Amendment 315 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

2. ~~Relevant information within the meaning of Article 60(1) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall~~The lead supervisory authority shall actively provide and notify the other supervisory authorities concerned with relevant information within the meaning of Article 60(1) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, within one week from receiving or producing it. This information shall cover information on major steps in the procedure, includeing, where applicable:

Amendment 316 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Amendment 317 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point i

(i) the views of the complainant on the ~~preliminary findings~~non-confidential version of the preliminary findings, and, if applicable, other aspects of the investigation on which formal submissions in writing have been made by the complainant;

Amendment 318 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1

1. ~~Once~~As soon as the lead supervisory authority , or where a case is transferred from another supervisory authority, that authority, has formed a preliminary view on the main issues in an investigation, it shall draft a summary of key issues that presumably need to be determined to decide the case, for the purpose of cooperation under Article 60(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 319 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1

1. Once the lead supervisory authority has formed a preliminary view on the main issues in an investigation, it shall draft a summary of key issues for the purpose of cooperation under Article 60(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, and provide this summary to the concerned supervisory authorities.

Amendment 320 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) a preliminary identification of the scope of the investigation, in particular the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 ~~concern~~affected by the alleged infringement ~~which will be investigated~~;

Amendment 321 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c

(c) ~~identification of complex~~preliminary legal and technological assessments ~~which are relevant for preliminary orientation of their assessment~~;

Amendment 322 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c

(c) ~~identification of~~preliminary complex legal and technological assessments ~~which are relevant for preliminary orientation of their assessment;~~; (This replaces amendment 135.)

Amendment 323 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)

(d a) an overview of both the replies of all parties under investigation as well as the views of the complainant on to the preliminary findings.

Amendment 324 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. The summary of key issues shall be updated by the lead supervisory authority without undue delay to reflect any factual or legal changes that emerge during the course of the procedure.

Amendment 325 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. The summary of key issues shall be updated by the lead supervisory authority without undue delay to reflect any factual or legal changes that emerge during the course of the procedure. (This replaces amendment 137.)

Amendment 326 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3

3. The supervisory authorities concerned may provide factual or legal comments on the summary of key issues. Such comments must be provided within four weeks of receipt of the summary of key issues or any update.

Amendment 327 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3

Amendment 328 #

4. Comments provided pursuant to paragraph 3 shall meet the following requirements: (a) language used is sufficiently clear and contains precise terms to enable the lead supervisory authority, and, as the case may be, supervisory authorities concerned, to prepare their positions; (b) legal arguments are set out succinctly and grouped by reference to the part of the summary of key issues to which they relate; (c) the comments of the supervisory authority concerned may be supported by documents, which may supplement the comments on specific points.deleted

Amendment 329 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 5

~~5. The Board may specify in its rules of procedure restrictions on the maximum length of comments submitted by supervisory authorities concerned on the summary of key issues.~~deleted

Amendment 330 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 5

~~5. The Board may specify in its rules of procedure restrictions on the maximum length of comments submitted by supervisory authorities concerned on the summary of key issues.~~deleted

Amendment 331 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 6

6. ~~Cases where none of the supervisory authorities concerned provided comments under paragraph 3 of this Article shall be considered~~In non- contentious ~~cases. In such~~ cases, the preliminary findings referred to in Article 14 shall be communicated to the parties under investigation within 9 months of the expiry of the deadline provided for in paragraph 3 of this Article.

Amendment 332 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 6

6. Cases where none of the supervisory authorities concerned provided comments under paragraph 3 of this Article, and where the supervisory authority indicates that it intends to follow European case law, as well as guidelines, recommendations and best practices referred to in paragraph 2(ca), shall be considered non-contentious cases. In such cases, the ~~preliminary findings~~term to issue a draft decision referred to in Article 14(1b) shall be ~~communicated to the parties under investigation within 9 months of the expiry of the deadline provided for in paragraph 3 of this Article.~~reduced to 3 months. (This replaces amendment 141.)

Amendment 333 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 6

6. Cases where none of the supervisory authorities concerned provided comments under paragraph 3 of this Article shall be considered non-contentious cases. In such cases, the preliminary findings referred to in Article 14 shall be communicated to the parties under investigation within 96 months of the expiry of the deadline provided for in paragraph 3 of this Article.

Amendment 334 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 6

6. Cases where none of the supervisory authorities concerned provided comments under paragraph 3 of this Article shall be considered non-contentious cases. In such cases, the preliminary findings referred to in Article 14 shall be communicated to the parties ~~under investigation~~ within 93 months of the expiry of the deadline provided for in paragraph 3 of this Article.

Amendment 335 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1

1. A supervisory authority concerned shall make a request to the lead supervisory authority under Article 61 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Article 62 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or both, where, following the comments of supervisory authorities concerned pursuant to Article 9(3), a supervisory authority concerned disagrees with the assessment of the lead supervisory authority on: (a) the scope of the investigation in complaint-based cases, including the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 concerned by the alleged infringement which will be investigated; (b) preliminary orientation in relation to complex legal assessments identified by the lead supervisory authority pursuant to Article 9(2), point (c); (c) preliminary orientation in relation to complex technological assessments identified by the lead supervisory authority pursuant to Article 9(2), point (c).deleted

Amendment 336 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. ~~A s~~Supervisory authorityies concerned shall make a request to the lead supervisory authority under Article 61 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Article 62 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or both, where, following the comments of supervisory authorities concerned pursuant to Article 9(3), at least two supervisory authorityies concerned disagrees with the assessment of the lead supervisory authority on:

Amendment 337 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. A supervisory authority concerned ~~shall~~may make a request to the lead supervisory authority under Article 61 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Article 62 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or both, where, following the comments of supervisory authorities concerned pursuant to Article 9(3), a supervisory authority concerned disagrees with the assessment of the lead supervisory authority on:

Amendment 338 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

(c a) preliminary identification of potential corrective measure(s)

Amendment 339 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2

~~2. The request under paragraph 1 shall be made within two months of the expiry of the period referred to in Article 9(3).~~deleted

Amendment 340 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3

3. TIn cases not falling under Article 9(6) of this Regulation, the lead supervisory authority shall engage with the supervisory authorities concerned on the basis of their comments on the summary of key issues, and, where applicable, in response to requests under Article 61 and 62 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in an endeavour to reach a consensus. The consensus shall be used as a basis for the lead supervisory authority to continue the investigation and draft the preliminary findings ~~or, where applicable, provide the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged with its reasoning for the purposes of Article 11(2).~~

Amendment 341 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3

Amendment 342 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3

3. The lead supervisory authority shall engage with a serious determined effort with the supervisory authorities concerned on the basis of their comments on the summary of key issues, and, where applicable, in response to requests under Article 61 and 62 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in an endeavour to reach a consensus. The consensus shall be used as a basis for the lead supervisory authority to continue the investigation and draft the preliminary findings or, where applicable, provide the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged with its reasoning for the purposes of Article 11(2).

Amendment 343 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Where, in a complaint-based investigation, there is no consensus between the lead supervisory authority and one or more concerned supervisory authorities on the matters referred to in Article 9(2), the lead supervisory authority or one of the supervisory authorities concerned may also request an urgent binding decision of the Board under Article 66(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 without a request under Article 61 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 or Article 62 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 having been made. In that case, the conditions for requesting an urgent binding decision under Article 66(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall be presumed to be met.

Amendment 344 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4

4. Where, in a complaint-based investigation, ~~there is no~~and if the procedure provided for in paragraph 3 of this Article fails to generate consensus between the lead supervisory authority and one or more concerned supervisory authorities on the matters referred to in Article 9(2), ~~point (b), of this Regulation, the lead~~the lead supervisory authority, or one of the supervisory authorityies concerned, shall request an urgent binding decision of the Board under Article 66(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In that case, the conditions for requesting an urgent binding decision under Article 66(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall be presumed to be met.

Amendment 345 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4

4. Where, ~~in a complaint-based~~ within four weeks after the expiry of the deadlinves~~tigation~~ for comments, there is no consensus between the lead supervisory authority and one or more concerned supervisory authorities on the matters referred to in Article 9(2), point (b), of this Regulation, the lead supervisory authority shall request an urgent binding decision of the Board under Article 66(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In that case, the conditions for requesting an urgent binding decision under Article 66(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall be presumed to be met.the lead supervisory authority or a concerned supervisory authority may request a procedural determination pursuant to Article 26a(1). (This replaces amendment 144.)

Amendment 346 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4

4. Where, ~~in a complaint-based~~ within four weeks after the expiry of the deadlinves~~tigation~~ for comments, there is no consensus between the lead supervisory authority and one or more concerned supervisory authorities on the matters referred to in Article 9(2), point (b), of this Regulation, the lead supervisory authority shall request an urgent binding decision of the Board under Article 66(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In that case, the conditions for requesting an urgent binding decision under Article 66(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall be presumed to be metthe lead supervisory authority or a concerned supervisory authority may request a procedural determination pursuant to Article 26a(1).

Amendment 347 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4

4. Where, in a complaint-based investigation, there is no consensus between the lead supervisory authority and ~~one or more~~at least two concerned supervisory authorities on the matter referred to in Article 9(2), point (b), of this Regulation, the lead supervisory authority shall request an urgent binding decision of the Board under Article 66(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In that case, the conditions for requesting an urgent binding decision under Article 66(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall be presumed to be met.

Amendment 348 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – introductory part

5. When a request~~ing~~ for an urgent binding decision of the Board pursuant to paragraph 4 of this Article has been made, the lead supervisory authority shall provide all of the following:

Amendment 349 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – introductory part

5. When requesting a~~n urgent binding decision of the Board pursuant to paragraph 4 of this Article, the lead~~ procedural determination pursuant to Article 26a(1) of the Board, the requesting supervisory authority shall provide all of the following:

Amendment 350 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – introductory part

5. When requesting a~~n urgent binding decision of the Board pursuant to paragraph 4 of this Article, the lead~~ procedural determination pursuant to Article 26a(1), the requesting supervisory authority shall provide all of the following: (This replaces amendment 145.)

Amendment 351 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – point a

(a) the ~~documents~~relevant information referred to in Article 9(2)~~, points (a) and (b)~~;

Amendment 352 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – point a

(a) the documents referred to in Article 9(2)~~, points (a) and (b)~~;

Amendment 353 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – point a

(a) the documents referred to in Article 9(2)~~, points (a) and (b)~~;

Amendment 354 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – point b

(b) the comments of the supervisory authorityies concerned that disagrees with the lead supervisory authority’s preliminary identification of the scope of the investigation.

Amendment 355 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – point b

(b) the comments of the supervisory authority concerned that disagrees with the lead supervisory authority’s ~~preliminary identification of the scope of the investigation~~factual or legal aspect of the summary of key issues.

Amendment 356 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. The Board may request the lead supervisory authority to provide other documents or information, as it deems appropriate in the particular case.

Amendment 357 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6

6. The Board shall adopt an urgent binding decision on the s~~cope of the investigation on the basis of the comments of the supervisory authorities concerned and the position of the lead supervisory authority on those comments.~~ummary of key issues, in accordance with Article 26a, on the basis of all documents received. (This replaces amendment 148.)

Amendment 358 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6

6. The Board shall adopt an urgent binding decision on the scope of the investigation on the basis of all the documents received; the comments of the supervisory authorities concerned, and the position of the lead supervisory authority on those comments.

Amendment 359 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6

6. The Board shall adopt a~~n urgent binding decision on the scope of the investigation on the basis of the comments~~ procedural determination pursuant to Article 26a(1) on the summary of key issues on the basis of the relevant communication ofn the su~~pervisory authorities concerned and the position of the lead supervisory authority on those com~~mmary of key issues, including the comments and replies and other relevant documents.

Amendment 360 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6

6. The Board shall adopt an urgent binding decision on, strictly limited to the scope of the investigation, on the basis of the comments of the supervisory authorities concerned and the position of the lead supervisory authority on those comments.

Amendment 361 #

Proposal for a regulation
Chapter III – Section 2

~~[...]~~deleted

Amendment 362 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11

Hearing of complainant prior to full or 1. Following the procedure provided for in Article 9 and 10, the lead supervisory authority shall provide the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged with the reasons for its preliminary view that the complaint should be fully or partially rejected. 2. The supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall inform the complainant of the reasons for the intended full or partial rejection of the complaint and set a time-limit within which the complainant may make known her or his views in writing. The time-limit shall be no less than three weeks. The supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall inform the complainant of the consequences of the failure to make her or his views known. 3. If the complainant fails to make known her or his views within the time-limit set by the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged, the complaint shall be deemed to have been withdrawn. 4. The complainant may request access to the non-confidential version of the documents on which the proposed rejection of the complaint is based. 5. If the complainant makes known her or his views within the time-limit set by the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged and the views do not lead to a change in the preliminary view that the complaint should be fully or partially rejected, the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall prepare the draft decision under Article 60(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 which shall be submitted to the other supervisory authorities concerned by the lead supervisory authority pursuant to Article 60(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.Article 11 deleted partial rejection of a complaint

Amendment 363 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1

1. Following the procedure provided for in Article 9 and 10, the lead supervisory authority shall provide the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged and the supervisory authorities concerned with the reasons for its preliminary view that the complaint should be fully or partially rejected, and invite them to submit their views no later than one week following receipt.

Amendment 364 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2

2. The supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall inform the complainant of the reasons for the intended full or partial rejection of the complaint and set a time-limit within which the complainant may make known her or his views in writing. The time-limit shall be no less than three weeks from receipt by the complainant of the notification of intention to reject the complaint partially or in full from the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged. The supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall inform the complainant of the consequences of the failure to make her or his views known.

Amendment 365 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3

3. If the complainant fails to make known her or his views within the time- limit set by the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged, the complaint shall be ~~deemed to have been withdrawn~~closed and a decision adopted in accordance with Article 60(3) and (8) of Regulation (EU)_2016/679.

Amendment 366 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4

4. The complainant may request access to the non-confidential version of the documents on which the proposed rejection of the complaint is based. Consent for this may only be granted after the complainant has signed a confidentiality declaration. At the same time, the supervisory authority of a Member State may withdraw such consent at any time if it has found that the complainant is using the data received for purposes other than those connected with the case, is in any way failing to comply with the confidentiality declaration, or has financial or economic links with a competitor of the respondent.

Amendment 367 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 5

5. If the complainant makes known her or his views within the time-limit set by the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged and the views do not lead to a change in the preliminary view that the complaint should be fully or partially rejected, the lead supervisory authority ~~with which the complaint was lodged~~ shall prepare the draft decision under Article 60(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 which shall be submitted to the other supervisory authorities concerned ~~by the lead supervisory authority~~ pursuant to Article 60(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 368 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12

Revised draft decision fully or partially 1. Where the lead supervisory authority considers that the revised draft decision within the meaning of Article 60(5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 raises elements on which the complainant should have the opportunity to make her or his views known, the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall, prior to the submission of the revised draft decision under Article 60(5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, provide the complainant with the possibility to make her or his views known on such new elements. 2. The supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall set a time- limit within which the complainant may make known her or his views.Article 12 deleted rejecting a complaint

Amendment 369 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13

Decision fully or partially rejecting a When adopting a decision fully or partially rejecting a complaint in accordance with Article 60(8) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall inform the complainant of the judicial remedy available to him or her in accordance with Article 78 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.Article 13 deleted complaint

Amendment 370 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – title

Preliminary ~~finding~~charges and reply

Amendment 371 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1

1. WOnly when the ~~lead supervisory authority intends to submit a draft decision within the meaning of~~issuing of a fine or penalty under Article ~~60(3)~~83 or 84 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 ~~to the other~~is intended by a supervisory authorit~~ies concerned finding an infringement of Regulation (EU) 2016/679,~~ y in line with Article 9(2), point (d), the lead supervisory authority shall draft preliminary ~~finding~~charges.

Amendment 372 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

The preliminary ~~finding~~charges shall present allegations raised in an exhaustive and sufficiently clear way to enable the parties ~~under investigation~~ to take cognisance of the conduct investigated by the lead supervisory authority. In particular, they must set out clearly all the facts, list all the evidence it relies upon and the entire legal assessment raised against the parties under investigation, so that they can express their views on the facts and the legal conclusions the lead supervisory authority ~~intends to draw in the draft decision within the meaning of Article 60(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, and list all the evidence it relies upon~~drew.

Amendment 373 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

The preliminary findings shall indicate the corrective measures that are considered by the lead supervisory authority ~~intends to use~~.

Amendment 374 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3

~~Where the lead supervisory authority intends to impose a fine, it shall list in the preliminary findings~~The preliminary charges shall list the relevant elements on which the lead supervisory authority relies while calculating the fine. In particular, the lead supervisory authority shall list the essential facts and matters of law which may result in the imposition of the fine and the elements listed in Article 83(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, including any aggravating or mitigating factors it will take into account.

Amendment 375 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3

3. The lead supervisory authority shall notify preliminary ~~finding~~charges to each ~~of the parties under investigation~~party that may be subject to the exercise of a corrective power. These shall not be made available to other parties of the procedure. The lead supervisory authority shall inform the concerned supervisory authorities.

Amendment 376 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4

4. The lead supervisory authority shall, when notifying the preliminary findings to the parties under investigation, set a time-limit within which these parties may provide their views in writing. The lead supervisory authority shall not be obliged to take into account written views received after the expiry of that time-limit.deleted

Amendment 377 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4

4. The lead supervisory authority shall, when notifying the preliminary findings to the parties under investigation, set a reasonable and appropriate time- limit within which these parties may provide their views in writing. The lead supervisory authority shall not be obliged to take into account written views received after the expiry of that time-limit. At the same time, the time-limit shall not discriminate against any party.

Amendment 378 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4

4. The lead supervisory authority shall, when notifying the preliminary findings to the parties under investigation, set a proportionate time-limit within which these parties may provide their views in writing. The lead supervisory authority ~~shall not be obliged to take into account written views received~~may receive additional written views from the parties under investigation after the expiry of thatis time- limit. but it shall not be obliged to take it into account.

Amendment 379 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4

4. The lead supervisory authority shall, when notifying the preliminary findings to the parties under investigation, set a time-limit of four weeks within which these parties may provide their views in writing. The lead supervisory authority shall not be obliged to take into account written views received after the expiry of that time-limit.

Amendment 380 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 5

5. When notifying the preliminary findings to the parties under investigation, the lead supervisory authority shall provide those parties with access to the administrative file in accordance with Article 20.deleted

Amendment 381 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6

6. The parties ~~under investigation~~ may, in their written reply to preliminary findings, set out all facts and legal arguments known to them which are relevant to their defence against the allegations of the lead supervisory authority. They shall attach any relevant documents as proof of the facts set out. The lead supervisory authority shall, in its draft decision, deal only with allegations, including the facts and the legal assessment based on those facts, in respect of which the parties ~~under investigation~~ have been given the opportunity to comment. The parties under investigation may reply to preliminary charges within a reasonable time, but not exceeding four weeks.

Amendment 382 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. The term under Article 4(1b) is prolonged by eight weeks if the lead supervisory authority issues preliminary charges in the course of a procedure.

Amendment 383 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 a (new)

Article 14a Minimum Requirement for Decisions 1. Without prejudice to additional requirements under national law, any draft decision or final decision under Article 60(3), (5) or (7) to (9) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall be issued in writing, using a short, concise, transparent, intelligible form and clear and plain language. It shall be drafted in an impartial way, taking into account diverging evidence and views of the parties and at least contain the following elements: (a) the name of the supervisory authority that issued the decision; (b) the date of the decision; (c) an impartial summary of the relevant facts of the case and their source; (d) the legal grounds for the decision; (e) the exercised corrective powers, penalties or other measures; and (f) information on the right of an effective remedy under Article 78 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and any applicable national procedural law. 2. In a case where the legally binding decision must be issued by the supervisory authority with which the complaint has been lodged in accordance with Article 60(8) or (9) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, the lead supervisory authority shall ensure that the decision contains all elements necessary under the applicable national law of the supervisory authority with which the complaint has been lodged. The supervisory authority with which the complaint has been lodged shall assist the lead supervisory authority in drafting the decision. 3. The information provided to the parties under Article 60(7) to (9) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall include a copy of the legally binding decision. 4. Supervisory authorities must publish all legally binding decisions they issue without undue delay, but no later than three months after their adoption, unless the new decisions are not materially departing from previously published decisions. In accordance with applicable national law, supervisory authorities and the Board may redact party names, any other information that may allow the identification of parties and other information that is protected under applicable law.

Amendment 384 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15

Transmission of preliminary findings to 1. Where the lead supervisory authority issues preliminary findings relating to a matter in respect of which it has received a complaint, the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall provide the complainant with a non- confidential version of the preliminary findings and set a time-limit within which the complainant may make known its views in writing. 2. Paragraph 1 shall apply also when a supervisory authority, where appropriate, treats several complaints jointly, splits the complaints in several parts or in any other way exercises its discretion concerning the scope of the investigation as set out in preliminary findings. 3. Where the lead supervisory authority considers that it is necessary for the complainant to be provided with documents included in the administrative file in order for the complainant to effectively make known her or his views on the preliminary findings, the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall provide the complainant with the non-confidential version of such documents when providing the preliminary findings pursuant to paragraph 1. 4. The complainant shall be provided with the non-confidential version of the preliminary findings only for the purpose of the concrete investigation in which the preliminary findings were issued. 5. Before receiving the non-confidential version of preliminary findings and any documents provided pursuant to paragraph 3, the complainant shall send to the lead supervisory authority a confidentiality declaration, where the complainant commits himself or herself not to disclose any information or assessment made in the non-confidential version of preliminary findings or to use those findings for purposes other than the concrete investigation in which those findings were issued.Article 15 deleted complainants

Amendment 385 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1

1. Where the lead supervisory authority issues preliminary findings relating to a matter in respect of which it has received a complaint, the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall provide the complainant with a non-confidential version of the preliminary findings and set a time-limit within which the complainant may make known its views in writing. This time limit shall be proportionate to afford the complainants adequate time to provide their response.

Amendment 386 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1

1. Where the lead supervisory authority issues preliminary findings relating to a matter in respect of which it has received a complaint, the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall provide the complainant with a non-confidential version of the preliminary findings and set a time-limit of four weeks within which the complainant may make known its views in writing, as well as provide any relevant documents or information, if necessary.

Amendment 387 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3

3. ~~Where t~~The lead supervisory authority ~~considers that it is necessary~~should make provision for the complainant to be provided with documents included in the administrative file in order for the complainant to effectively make known her or his views on the preliminary findings~~, t~~. The supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall provide the complainant with the non-confidential version of such documents when providing the preliminary findings pursuant to paragraph 1.

Amendment 388 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5

5. Before ~~receiv~~providing the non- confidential version of preliminary findings and any documents provided pursuant to paragraph 3, the ~~complainant shall send to the lead supervisory authority~~supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall request the complainant to sign a confidentiality declaration, where the complainant commits himself or herself not to disclose any information or assessment made in the non-confidential version of preliminary findings or to use those findings for purposes other than making submission on the concrete investigation in which those findings were issued. Member States shall specify the legal consequences of refusing to sign or to comply with the confidentiality declaration.

Amendment 389 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5

5. Before receiving the non- confidential version of preliminary findings and any documents provided pursuant to paragraph 3, the complainant shall send to the lead supervisory authority a confidentiality declaration, where the complainant commits himself or herself not to disclose any information or assessment made in the non-confidential version of preliminary findings or to use those findings for purposes other than the concrete investigation in which those findings were issued. Any confidential information should be forwarded only after a confidentiality declaration has been signed.

Amendment 390 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5

5. Before receiving the non- confidential version of preliminary findings and any documents provided pursuant to paragraph 3, the complainant shall send to the ~~lead~~complaint-receiving supervisory authority a cnon~~fidentiality~~-disclosure declaration, where the complainant commits himself or herself not to ~~disclose any information or assessment made in the non-confidential version of preliminary findings or to~~ use those findings for purposes other than the concrete investigation in which those findings were issued.

Amendment 391 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 a (new)

Article 15a Minimum requirements for decisions 1. Without prejudice to additional requirements under national law, any draft decision or final decision under Article 60(3), (5) or (7) to (9) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall be issued in writing, using a short, concise, transparent, intelligible form and clear and plain language. It shall be drafted in an impartial way, taking into account diverging evidence and views of the parties and at least contain the following elements: (a) the name of the supervisory authority that issued the decision; (b) the date of the decision; (c) a summary of the relevant facts of the case and their source; (d) the legal grounds for the decision; (e) the corrective powers exercised, penalties levied, or other measures; and (f) information on the right to an effective remedy under Article 78 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and any applicable national procedural law.

Amendment 392 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – title

ASubmission of draft decisions, revised draft decisions and adoption of final decision

Amendment 393 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17

Right to be heard in relation to revised 1. Where the lead supervisory authority considers that the revised draft decision within the meaning of Article 60(5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 raises elements on which the parties under investigation should have the opportunity to make their views known, the lead supervisory authority shall, prior to the submission of the revised draft decision under Article 60(5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, provide the parties under investigation with the possibility to make their views known on such new elements. 2. The lead supervisory authority shall set a time-limit within which the parties under investigation may make known their views.Article 17 deleted draft decision

Amendment 394 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1

1. Where the lead supervisory authority considers that the revised draft decision within the meaning of Article 60(5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 raises elements on which the parties under investigation should have the opportunity to make their views known, the lead supervisory authority shall, prior to the submission of the revised draft decision under Article 60(5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, provide the parties under investigation with the possibility to exercise their right to be heard and to make their views known on such new elements.

Amendment 395 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2

2. The lead supervisory authority shall set a proportionate time-limit within which the parties under investigation may make known their views.

Amendment 396 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18

Relevant and reasoned objections 1. Relevant and reasoned objections within the meaning of Article 4(24) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall: (a) be based exclusively on factual elements included in the draft decision; and (b) not change the scope of the allegations by raising points amounting to identification of additional allegations of infringement of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 or changing the intrinsic nature of the allegations raised. 2. The form and structure of relevant and reasoned objections shall meet all of the following requirements: (a) the length of each relevant and reasoned objection and the position of the lead supervisory authority on any such objection shall not exceed three pages and shall not include annexes. In cases involving particularly complex legal issues, the maximum length may be increased to six pages, except if specific circumstances justifying a longer length are accepted by the Board; (b) the disagreement of the supervisory authority concerned with the draft decision shall be stated at the beginning of the relevant and reasoned objection and shall be worded in sufficiently clear, coherent and precise terms to enable the lead supervisory authority, and as the case may be, supervisory authorities concerned, to prepare their positions and to enable the Board to efficiently resolve the dispute; (c) legal arguments shall be set out and grouped by reference to the operative part of the draft decision to which they relate. Each argument or group of arguments shall generally be preceded by a summary statement.Article 18 deleted

Amendment 397 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19

Content of the administrative file 1. The administrative file in an investigation concerning an alleged infringement of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 consists of all documents which have been obtained, produced and/or assembled by the lead supervisory authority during the investigation. 2. In the course of investigation of an alleged infringement of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, the lead supervisory authority may return to the party from which they have been obtained documents which following a more detailed examination prove to be unrelated to the subject matter of the investigation. Upon return, these documents shall no longer constitute part of the administrative file. 3. The right of access to the administrative file shall not extend to correspondence and exchange of views between the lead supervisory authority and supervisory authorities concerned. The information exchanged between the supervisory authorities for the purpose of the investigation of an individual case are internal documents and shall not be accessible to the parties under investigation or the complainant. 4. Access to relevant and reasoned objections pursuant to Article 60(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall be provided in accordance with Article 24.Article 19 deleted

Amendment 398 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1

1. The administrative file in an investigation concerning an alleged infringement of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 consists of all documents which have been obtained, produced and/or assembled byduring the procedure before the lead supervisory authority ~~during the investigation~~.

Amendment 399 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2

2. In the course of investigation of an alleged infringement of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, the lead supervisory authority ~~may~~shall return to the party from which they have been obtained documents which following a more detailed examination prove to be unrelated to the subject matter of the investigation. Upon return, these documents shall no longer constitute part of the administrative file.

Amendment 400 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3

3. The right of access to the administrative file shall not extend to correspondence and exchange of views between the lead supervisory authority and supervisory authorities concerned. The information exchanged between the supervisory authorities for the purpose of the investigation of an individual case are internal documents and shall not be accessible to the parties under investigation or the complainant. Documents that have a direct bearing on the stability of the respondent's operations and their cybersecurity should be excluded from the right of access.

Amendment 401 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20

Access to the administrative file and use 1. The lead supervisory authority shall grant access to the administrative file to the parties under investigation, enabling them to exercise their right to be heard. Access to the administrative file shall be granted after the lead supervisory authority notifies the preliminary findings to the parties under investigation. 2. The administrative file shall include all documents, inculpatory and exculpatory, including facts and documents which are known to the parties under investigation. 3. The conclusions of the lead supervisory authority in the draft decision under Article 60(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and the final decision under Article 60(7) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 may only rely on documents cited in the preliminary findings or on which the parties under investigation had the opportunity to make their views known. 4. Documents obtained through access to the administrative file pursuant to this Article shall be used only for the purposes of judicial or administrative proceedings for the application of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 in the specific case for which such documents were provided.rticle 20 deleted of documents

Amendment 402 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4

4. Documents obtained by the parties under investigation through access to the administrative file pursuant to this Article shall be used only for the purposes of judicial or administrative proceedings for the application of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 in the specific case for which such documents were provided.

Amendment 403 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21

~~[...]~~deleted

Amendment 404 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1

1. Unless otherwise provided in this Regulation, information collected or obtained by a supervisory authority in cross-border cases under of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, including any document containing such information, shall not be communicated or made accessible by the supervisory authority in so far as it contains business secrets or other confidential information of any person. This provision does does not prohibit the communication and sharing of confidential information between the lead supervisory authority and the supervisory authorities concerned.

Amendment 405 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2

2. Any information collected or obtained by a supervisory authority in cross-border cases under Regulation (EU) 2016/679, including any document containing such information, is excluded from access requests under laws on public access to official documents as long as the proceedings are ongoing. The same exclusion applies to business secrets or other confidential information even after the investigations are concluded.

Amendment 406 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 6 – introductory part

6. The lead supervisory authority may set a proportionate time-limit for parties under investigation and any other party raising a confidentiality claim to:

Amendment 407 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)

(a a) the summary of key issues;

Amendment 408 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3

3. The Board shall ~~within four weeks of receiving the documents listed in paragraph 2 identify retained relevant and reasoned objections.~~ register the submission of a subject-matter to the dispute resolution mechanism within four weeks of gaining access to the joint case file. It shall demand a resubmission of any missing information within another week. When registering the submission, the Board shall list and structure the disputes between supervisory authorities which form the scope of the procedure before the Board, and instantly provide them to the supervisory authorities.

Amendment 409 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3

3. The Board shall within ~~four~~three weeks of receiving all of the documents listed in paragraph 2 identify retained relevant and reasoned objections.

Amendment 410 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. The prohibition provided for in Article 65(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 for supervisory authorities to adopt a decision on the subject matter submitted to the Board during the periods referred to in Article 65(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 65(3) of that Regulation shall also apply during the periods referred in paragraph 3 of this Article.

Amendment 411 #

The Chair of the Board shall register the referral of a subject-matter to dispute resolution under Article 65(1), point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 no later than one week after having received all of the following documents: (a) the draft decision or revised draft decision subject to the relevant and reasoned objections; (b) a summary of the relevant facts; (c) view made in writing by the parties under investigation, as the case may be, pursuant to Articles 14 and 17; (d) views made in writing by complainants, as the case may be, pursuant to Articles 11, 12 and 15; (e) the retained relevant and reasoned objections; (f) the reasons on the basis of which the lead supervisory authority did not follow the retained relevant and reasoned objections.Article 23 deleted Registration in relation to a decision under Article 65(1), point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/679

Amendment 412 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point f

(f) the reasons on the basis of which the lead supervisory authority did not follow the retained relevant and reasoned objections, or rejected them as not relevant or reasoned.

Amendment 413 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Once all documents specified in subsection (1) have been received, the Chair of the Board is empowered to request from the LSA any additional information, documents or clarifications necessary for the EDPB to take a binding decision concerning all of the matters which are the subject of the relevant and reasoned objection(s). The LSA shall provide this additional documentation no later than one week after having received the request.

Amendment 414 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24

Statement of reasons prior to adoption of decision under Article 65(1), point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 1. Prior to adopting the binding decision pursuant to Article 65(1), point (a), of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, the Chair of the Board shall, through the lead supervisory authority, provide the parties under investigation and/or, in the case of full or partial rejection of a complaint, the complainant, with a statement of reasons explaining the reasoning the Board intends to adopt in its decision. Where the Board intends to adopt a binding decision requiring the lead supervisory authority to amend its draft decision or revised draft decision, the Board shall decide whether such statement of reasons should be accompanied by the retained relevant and reasoned objections on the basis of which the Board intends to adopt its decision. 2. The parties under investigation and/or, in the case of full or partial rejection of a complaint, the complainant, shall have one week from receipt of the statement of reasons referred to in paragraph 1 to make their views known. 3. The deadline in paragraph 2 shall be extended by one week where the Board extends the period for adoption of the binding decision in accordance with Article 65(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. 4. The period for adoption of the binding decision of the Board provided for in Article 65(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall not run during the periods provided for in paragraphs 2 and 3.Article 24 deleted

Amendment 415 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2

2. The parties under investigation and/or, in the case of full or partial rejection of a complaint, the complainant, shall have ~~one~~two weeks from receipt of the statement of reasons referred to in paragraph 1 to make their views known.

Amendment 416 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25

Procedure in relation to decision under Article 65(1), point (b), of Regulation 1. When referring a subject-matter to the Board under Article 65(1), point (b), of Regulation 2016/679, the supervisory authority referring the subject-matter regarding the competence for the main establishment shall provide the Board with all of the following documents: (a) a summary of the relevant facts; (b) the assessment of these facts as far as the conditions of Article 56(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 are concerned; (c) views made by the controller or processor whose main establishment is the subject of the referral; (d) the views of other supervisory authorities concerned by the referral; (e) any other document or information the referring supervisory authority considers relevant and necessary in order to find a resolution on the subject-matter. 2. The Chair of the Board shall register the referral no later than one week after having received the documents referred to in paragraph 1.Article 25 deleted (EU) 2016/679

Amendment 417 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

(a a) a description of processing activities, a description of the company's organisation and a description of where decisions are taken;

Amendment 418 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point d

(d) the views of other supervisory authorities concerned by the referral, which may include relevant information or documentation;

Amendment 419 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26

Procedure in relation to decision under Article 65(1), point (c), of Regulation 1. When referring a subject-matter to the Board under Article 65(1), point (c), of Regulation 2016/679, the supervisory authority referring the subject-matter or the Commission shall provide the Board with all of the following documents: (a) a summary of the relevant facts; (b) the opinion, as the case may be, issued by the Board pursuant to Article 64 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679; (c) the views of the supervisory authority referring the subject-matter or the Commission as to whether, as the case may be, a supervisory authority was required to communicate the draft decision to the Board pursuant to Article 64(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or a supervisory authority did not follow an opinion of the Board issued pursuant to Article 64 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. 2. The Chair of the Board shall request the following documents: (a) the views of the supervisory authority alleged to have breached the requirement to communicate a draft decision to the Board or to have failed to follow an opinion of the Board; (b) any other document or information the supervisory authority considers relevant and necessary in order to find a resolution on the subject-matter. If any supervisory authority declares a need to submit its views on the referred subject-matter, it shall submit those views within two weeks of the referral referred to in paragraph 1. 3. The Chair of the Board shall register the referral no later than one week after having received the documents referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2.Article 26 deleted (EU) 2016/679

Amendment 420 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

(a a) views made in writing by the parties under investigation as well as by complainants;

Amendment 421 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) the views of the supervisory authority referring the subject-matter or the Commission as to whether, as the case may be, a supervisory authority was required to communicate the draft decision to the Board pursuant to Article 64(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or a supervisory authority did not follow an opinion of the Board issued pursuant to Article 64 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, to include an explanation of which points were not followed and a reference to the relevant part of the adopted decision.

Amendment 422 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. The Chair of the Board shall inform all supervisory authorities of the referral made to the Board under paragraph 1, so as to allow the supervisory authorities to make their views known.

Amendment 423 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 3

3. The Chair of the Board shall register the referral no later than one week after having received all of the documents referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2.

Amendment 424 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 a (new)

Article 26a Procedural determinations by the Board 1. Without prejudice to Articles 65 and 66 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, supervisory authorities may request from the Board to make a procedural determination on any dispute arising during a cooperation procedure. 2. Where the lead supervisory authority is of the view that it cannot possibly comply with the deadline from Article 4(1b), especially because of the need for exceptionally complex factual investigations, it shall request from the Board a prolongation of up to twelve months. The supervisory authority shall submit a detailed plan of the investigation that demonstrates that despite its compliance with Article 2c(1) the prolongation sought is strictly necessary. 3. Within two weeks, the Board shall determine the matter based on the information before it or it shall reject the application if the requirements under paragraphs 1 and 2 are not fulfilled. Determinations are binding on the supervisory authorities. 4. The Commission shall ensure that the Board secretariat is provided with the necessary human, technical and financial resources, premises and infrastructure for the effective performance of its tasks and exercise of its powers.

Amendment 425 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) a summary of the relevant facts, to include evidence of an infringement of Regulation EU 2016/679, an explanation of the risk of serious and irreparable harm without the adoption of measures, and detail regarding the causal link between the infringement and the risks outlined;

Amendment 426 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) a description of the provisional measure adopted on ~~its own territory~~the territory of the Member State of the supervisory authority requesting the opinion, its duration and the reasons for adopting it, including the justification of the urgent need to act in order to protect the rights and freedoms of data subjects;

Amendment 427 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) a justification of the urgent need for final measures to be adopted ~~on the territory of the Member State of the requesting supervisory authority~~, including an explanation of the exceptional nature of circumstances requiring the adoption of the measures concerned.

Amendment 428 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

(c a) where the requesting authority is not the lead supervisory authority, the views of the lead supervisory authority;

Amendment 429 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new)

(c b) where applicable, the views of the parties under investigation against which provisional measures were taken pursuant to Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 430 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2

2. The urgent opinion of the Board shall be addressed to ~~the~~all supervisory authority that submitted the request. It shall be similar to an opinion within the meaning of Article 64(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and enable the requesting authority to maintain or amend its provisional measure in line with the obligations of Article 64(7) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.ies

Amendment 431 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – title

Urgent binding decisions under Article 66(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679

Amendment 432 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. A request for an urgent binding decision of the Board pursuant to Article 66(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall be made no later than three weeks ~~prior to the expiry~~after the adoption of provisional measures adopted under Articles 61(8), 62(7) or 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. That request shall contain all of the following items:

Amendment 433 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point a

Amendment 434 #

(d) a justification of the urgent need for final measures to be adopted ~~on the territory of the requesting supervisory authority~~, bearing in mind the exceptional nature of circumstances requiring the adoption of the final measure, or proof that a supervisory authority failed to respond to a request under Article 61(3) or 62(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679;

Amendment 435 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point d

(d) a justification of the urgent need for final measures to be adopted ~~on the territory of the requesting supervisory authority~~, bearing in mind the exceptional nature of circumstances requiring the adoption of the final measure, or proof that a supervisory authority failed to respond to a request ~~under~~pursuant to Article 61(38) or 62(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679;

Amendment 436 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point f

(f) where applicable, the views of the ~~local establishment of the parties under investigation against which provisional measures were taken pursuant to Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679~~parties. In case the requesting authority is not the lead supervisory authority, the requesting authority shall grant the right to be heard to the parties under investigation.

Amendment 437 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point f

(f) where applicable, the views of the ~~local establishment of the~~ parties under investigation against which provisional measures were taken pursuant to Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.;

Amendment 438 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point f

(f) ~~where applicable,~~ the views of the local establishment of the parties under investigation against which provisional measures were taken pursuant to Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 439 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)

(f a) where applicable, the views of complainant(s) made in writing.

Amendment 440 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2

2. The urgent decision referred to in paragraph 1 shall be addressed to the supervisory authorit~~y that submitted the request and shall enable the requesting authority to maintain or amend its provisional measure~~ies concerned and shall shall specify the supervisory authorities that will need to adopt measures, if applicable, in light of the urgent opinion or decision of the Board pursuant to Article 66(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 441 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2

2. The urgent binding decision referred to in paragraph 1 shall be addressed to the lead supervisory authority ~~that submitted the request and shall enable the requesting authority to maintain or amend its provisional measure~~and the supervisory authorities that would need to adopt final measures, if applicable, in light of the urgent opinion or decision of the Board pursuant to Article 66(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 442 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3

3. Where the Board adopts an urgent binding decision indicating that final measures should be adopted, the supervisory authority or authorities to which the decision is addressed shall adopt such measures prior to the expiry of the provisional measures adopted under Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 443 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Where the Board adopts an urgent binding decision indicating that final measures should be adopted, the Board shall request a joint assessment carried out by at least 5 experts from the 'Support Pool of Experts' of the EDPB. This joint assessment shall be published together with the urgent binding decision.

Amendment 444 #

4. The supervisory authority that ~~submitted the request referred to in paragraph 1~~is responsible to adopt final measures shall notify its decision on the final measures to the ~~establishment of the controller or processor on the territory of its Member State~~relevant parties under investigation and inform the Board. Where the lead supervisory authority is not the requesting authority, the requesting authority shall inform the parties under investigation against which the provisional measures were adopted, about the Board’s decision and the final measures adopted by the lead supervisory authority. The complaint- receiving supervisory authority shall inform the complainant about the Board’s decision and the final measures adopted by the lead supervisory authority ~~of the final measure~~.

Amendment 445 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 4

4. The supervisory authority that submitted the request referred to in paragraph 1 shall notify its decision on the final measures to the ~~establishment of the~~ controller or processor ~~on the territory of its Member State~~ and inform the Board. Where the lead supervisory authority is not the requesting authority, the requesting authority shall inform the lead supervisory authority of the final measure.

Amendment 446 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 a (new)

Article 28a Mutual recognition and execution of decisions 1. A supervisory authority may request another supervisory authority to enforce a final decision issued under Regulation (EU) 2016/679. 2. The requesting supervisory authority shall: (a) certify that the decision is taken in accordance with its national laws and procedures and Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and constitutes a final decision; (b) certify that it is not reasonably possible to execute the decision in its own territory; (c) includes a copy of the final decision. 3. The requested supervisory authority shall recognize the decision of the requesting supervisory authority, without any further formality being required and the decision shall be deemed to have the same effect as if it had been made by the requested supervisory authority. 4. The requested supervisory authority shall take all necessary measures for execution provided under national law and Regulation (EU) 2016/279 without undue delay and under the same conditions as a decision issued by the requested supervisory authority. 5. Contrary to paragraphs 3 and 4 the requested supervisory shall not execute a request by the requesting supervisory authority if, on the basis of specific and objective evidence: (a) the decision relates to a conduct which is lawful under the law of the requested supervisory authority; (b) the decision has been imposed on a person or entity who under the law of the requested supervisory authority is exempt from liability; (c) the execution of the request would be manifestly contrary to public policy (ordre public) in the Member State of the requested supervisory authority; (d) the execution of the request would entail a manifest breach of relevant fundamental rights and freedoms as set out in the Charter; (e) the request is incomplete or manifestly incorrect or does not correspond to the underlying decision and the request has not been completed or corrected following the consultation of the requesting supervisory authority; (f) the request does not meet the requirements of paragraph 2. 6. In any of the cases referred to in paragraph 5, before deciding not to execute the decision, whether wholly or partially, the requested supervisory authority shall contact the requesting supervisory authority and where appropriate, shall request the requesting supervisory authority to supply any necessary information without undue delay. Any decision not to execute the decision shall be taken without undue delay and shall be notified immediately to the requesting supervisory. 7. If necessary, the requested supervisory authority shall convert the amount of a fine or the amount of money to be paid as included in the decision, into the currency of the State of the requested supervisory authority at the rate of exchange obtaining at the time when the decision was issued by the requesting supervisory authority. 8. Monies obtained from the enforcement of decisions shall accrue according to the laws of the Member State of the requested supervisory authority. 9. Each supervisory authority shall bear its own costs resulting from requests under this Article.

Amendment 447 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 a (new)

Article 28a Remedies against procedural determinations Remedies against procedural determinations by a supervisory authority under national law may only be brought together with the remedy against the final material decision. Deadlines for remedies against procedural determinations under applicable national law are prolonged for the duration of the procedure before the supervisory authority. (To be added as Article 28b.)

Amendment 448 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 a (new)

Amendment 449 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 b (new)

Article 28b Mutual assistance 1. Without prejudice to any other legal basis for mutual assistance, a supervisory authority may request another supervisory authority to exercise its corrective powers under Article 58(2) or enforce a fine under Article 83 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 to give full effect to an enforceable decision. 2. The requesting supervisory authority shall certify that the decision is enforceable according to its national law, that the respondent was heard in accordance with this Regulation and that the requesting authority cannot reasonably and effectively enforce the decision within its own Member State. 3. The requested supervisory authority shall take enforcement action under applicable national law as if the enforceable decision was issued by the requested supervisory authority itself. 4. The requested supervisory authority shall hear the party against whom the decision was issued and refuse to recognise and execute the decision only if: (a) the party against whom the decision was issued was not heard by the requesting supervisory authority in line with this Regulation or national procedural law of the requesting supervisory authority; (b) a decision against the party in respect of the same acts has been delivered in the executing State or in any State other than the issuing State, and, in the latter case, that decision has been executed; (c) the decision relates to a conduct which is lawful under the law of the executing State; (d) the decision has been imposed on a person or entity who under the law of the executing State is exempt from liability or (e) the decision violates the ordre public of the executing State;

Amendment 450 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 b (new)

Article 28b Enforcement Statistics 1. Supervisory authorities shall report the following numbers in their activity report under Article 59 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679: a. the number of ex officio investigations initiated by the supervisory authority; b. the number of ex officio investigations initiated by other supervisory authorities; c. the number of complaints received, including the number that were rejected, dismissed, withdrawn, partly upheld, fully upheld or otherwise closed; d. the number of other interactions with data subjects, controllers or processors; e. the number of legally binding decisions currently on appeal; f. the number and average duration of open and decided procedures under (a) to (d) to date; g. the number of each type of measure taken in accordance with Article 58(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 or applicable national law; h. the number and the amount of fines issued and collected under Article 83 and 84 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 or relevant national law; and i. the annual budget and the number of staff, by training, tasks and organizational units. 2. Supervisory authorities shall publish the activity report for the past year without undue delay, but no later than 30 June. 3. The Board shall make the information of all supervisory authorities in paragraph 1 available to the public no later than 31 July of each year.

Amendment 451 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 c (new)

Article 28c Enforcement Statistics 1. Supervisory authorities shall report the following numbers in their activity report under Article 59 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679: a) the number of ex officio investigations initiated by the supervisory authority; b) the number of ex officio investigations initiated by other supervisory authorities; c) the number of complaints received, including the number that were rejected, dismissed, withdrawn, partly upheld, fully upheld or otherwise decided; d) the number of other interactions with data subjects, controllers or processors; e) the number of legally binding decisions currently on appeal; f) the number and average duration of open and decided procedures under (a) to (d) to date; g) the number of each type of measure taken in accordance with Article 58(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 or applicable national law; h) the number and the overall amount of fines issued and collected under Article 83 and 84 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 or relevant national law; and i) the annual budget and the number of staff, itemized by training, tasks and organizational units. 2. Supervisory authorities must publish the activity report for the past year without undue delay, but no later than 30 June. 3. The Board shall make the information of all supervisory authorities in paragraph 1 available to the public no later than 31 July of each year.

Amendment 452 #

Proposal for a regulation
Chapter VI a (new)

VI a Enforcement

Amendment 453 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 a (new)

By derogation from paragraphs 1 and 2, Articles 2b(1), point(c), 2c(5), 2d(3) and (6), 8(1) and 18(a) shall apply … [six months from the date of the entry into force of this Regulation]. During that period, the lead supervisory authority shall provide all documents in its own file to other supervisory authorities on request by other electronic means.

Amendment 454 #

Part A - 3. Entity whose processing of your personal data infringes Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Provide all information in your possession to facilitate the identification of the entity which is the subject of your complaint, including whether you have contacted the entity prior to your complaint and outline the result of any such actions. If possible, please attach any relevant correspondence between you and the entity. In return, delete the second paragraph of Part B.

source: 757.368

2023/12/15 JURI 230 amendments...

Amendment 100 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9

(9) In order for supervisory authorities to bring a swift end to infringements of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and to deliver a quick resolution for complainants, supervisory authorities should be able to endeavour, where appropriate, to resolve complaints by amicable settlement between the parties. Supervisory authorities should not make the handling of a complaint contingent on participation in an amicable settlement process. Settlements should be able to take the form of a contract between the parties under applicable law, but should bind the authorities. The fact that an individual complaint has been resolved through an amicable settlement does not prevent the competent supervisory authority from pursuing an ex officio case, for example in the case of systemic or repetitive infringements of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 100 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9

Amendment 101 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

(13) In the interest of effective inclusive cooperation between all supervisory authorities concerned and the lead supervisory authority, the comments of concerned supervisory authorities should be concise and worded in sufficiently clear and precise terms to be easily understandable to all supervisory authorities. To ensure that they are coherent and easy to understand, the legal arguments should be grouped by reference to the part of the summary of key issues to which they relate. The comments of supervisory authorities concerned may be supplemented by additional documents. However, a mere reference in the comments of a supervisory authority concerned to supplementary documents cannot make up for the absence of the essential arguments in law or in fact which should feature in the comments. The basic legal and factual particulars relied on in such documents should be indicated, at least in summary form, coherently and intelligibly in the comment itself.

Amendment 101 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

(13) In the interest of effective inclusive cooperation between all supervisory authorities concerned and the lead supervisory authority, the comments of concerned supervisory authorities should be concise and worded in sufficiently clear and precise terms to be easily understandable to all supervisory authorities. To ensure that they are coherent and easy to understand, the legal arguments should be grouped by reference to the part of the summary of key issues to which they relate. The comments of supervisory authorities concerned may be supplemented by additional documents. However, a mere reference in the comments of a supervisory authority concerned to supplementary documents cannot make up for the absence of the essential arguments in law or in fact which should feature in the comments. The basic legal and factual particulars relied on in such documents should be indicated, at least in summary form, coherently and intelligibly in the comment itself.

Amendment 102 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14

(14) Cases that do not raise contentious issues do not require extensive discussion between supervisory authorities in order to reach a consensus and could, therefore, be dealt with more quickly. When none of the supervisory authorities concerned raise comments on the summary of key issues, the lead supervisory authority should ~~communicate~~leave the case to the court or tribunal with jurisdiction in the pre~~liminary findings provided for in Article 14 with~~gion where the matter was referred, trusting the national legislation of the Member State concerned to apply national laws that are in nline ~~months~~with European legislation.

Amendment 102 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14

(14) Cases that do not raise contentious issues do not require extensive discussion between supervisory authorities in order to reach a consensus and could, therefore, be dealt with more quickly. When none of the supervisory authorities concerned raise comments on the summary of key issues, the lead supervisory authority should ~~communicate~~leave the case to the court or tribunal with jurisdiction in the pre~~liminary findings provided for in Article 14 with~~gion where the matter was referred, trusting the national legislation of the Member State concerned to apply national laws that are in nline ~~months~~with European legislation.

Amendment 103 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) If the use of those tools does not enable the supervisory authorities to reach a consensus on the scope of a complaint- based investigation, the lead supervisory authority should request an urgent binding decision of the Board under Article 66(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 or of a court with jurisdiction in the region where the complaint was made. For this purpose, the requirement of urgency should be presumed. The lead supervisory authority should draw appropriate conclusions from the urgent binding decision of the Board for the purposes of preliminary findings. The urgent binding decision of the Board cannot pre-empt the outcome of the investigation of the lead supervisory authority or the effectiveness of the rights of the parties under investigation to be heard. In particular, the Board should ~~not~~ extend the scope of the investigation oin ~~its own initiative~~order to ensure a lawful and transparent analysis process for the complainant.

Amendment 103 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

Amendment 104 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) To enable the complainant to exercise her or his right to an effective judicial remedy under Article 78 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, the ~~supervisory authority fully or partially rejecting a~~handling of any complaint should ~~do so by means of~~always lead to a decision which may be challenged before a national court.

Amendment 104 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

Amendment 105 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

Amendment 105 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

Amendment 106 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22

Amendment 106 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22

Amendment 107 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23

Amendment 107 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23

Amendment 108 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26

(26) The complainants should be given the possibility to submit in writing views on the preliminary findings. However, they should not have access to business secrets or other confidential information belonging to other parties involved in the proceedings. Complainants should not be entitled to have generalised access to the administrative file. This restriction is necessary to prevent accidental disclosure of confidential information and to protect the integrity of the decision-making process.

Amendment 108 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26

Amendment 109 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27

(27) When setting deadlines for parties under investigation and complainants to provide their views on preliminary findings, supervisory authorities should have regard to the complexity of the issues raised in preliminary findings, as well as the capacity of the parties under investigation and complainants to respond, in order to ensure that the parties under investigation and complainants have sufficient opportunity to meaningfully provide their views on the issues raised.

Amendment 109 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27

(27) When setting deadlines for parties under investigation and complainants to provide their views on preliminary findings, supervisory authorities should have regard to the complexity of the issues raised in preliminary findings, as well as the capacity of the parties under investigation and complainants to respond, in order to ensure that the parties under investigation and complainants have sufficient opportunity to meaningfully provide their views on the issues raised.

Amendment 110 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27

(27) When setting deadlines ~~for parties under investigation and complainant~~and limiting the length of submissions for parties to provide their views on preliminary findings, supervisory authorities should have regard to the complexity of the issues raised in preliminary findings, in order to ensure that the parties ~~under investigation and complainants~~ have sufficient opportunity to meaningfully provide their views on the issues raised. This should however not lead to undue long procedures.

Amendment 110 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27

Amendment 111 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31

(31) When granting access to the administrative file, supervisory authorities should ensure the protection of business secrets and other confidential information. The category of other confidential information includes information other than business secrets, which may be considered as confidential, insofar as its disclosure would significantly harm a controller, a processor or a natural personlegally protected confidential information and the protection of information in the public interest in accordance with national law. The supervisory authorities should be able to request that parties ~~under investigation~~ that submit or have submitted documents or statements identify confidential information and provide a non-confidential version.

Amendment 111 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31

(31) When granting access to the administrative file, supervisory authorities should ensure the protection of business secrets and other confidential information. The category of other confidential information includes information other than business secrets, which may be considered as confidential, insofar as its disclosure would significantly harm a controller, a processor or a natural personlegally protected confidential information and the protection of information in the public interest in accordance with national law. The supervisory authorities should be able to request that parties ~~under investigation~~ that submit or have submitted documents or statements identify confidential information and provide a non-confidential version.

Amendment 112 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – title

Subject matter and scope

Amendment 112 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – title

Subject matter and scope

Amendment 113 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1

This Regulation lays down procedural rules for the handling of complaints and the conduct of investigations in complaint- based and ex officio cases by supervisory authorities inrelated to the cross-border ~~enforcement~~processing in the meaning of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 113 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1

This Regulation lays down procedural rules for the handling of complaints and the conduct of investigations in complaint- based and ex officio cases by supervisory authorities inrelated to the cross-border ~~enforcement~~processing in the meaning of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 114 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)

This Regulation applies to cases under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 related to such cross-border processing, whenever supervisory authorities of more than one Member State are taking part in the case, as well as related judicial remedies.

Amendment 114 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Amendment 115 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 b (new)

Article 26c of this Regulation also applies to cases before a supervisory authority of a single Member State.

Amendment 115 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 b (new)

Article 26c of this Regulation also applies to cases before a supervisory authority of a single Member State.

Amendment 116 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 c (new)

This Regulation does not preclude Member States from specifying procedural matters not regulated by this Regulation or Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 116 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 c (new)

This Regulation does not preclude Member States from specifying procedural matters not regulated by this Regulation or Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 117 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 1

(1) within the meaning of this Regulation, ‘parties under investigation’ ~~mean~~includes the controller(s) and/or processor(s) investigated for alleged infringement of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 related to cross- border processing. However, this definition is not exhaustive and may also include other parties who are being investigated, such as a representative;

Amendment 117 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 1

Amendment 118 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 a (new)

(2a) ‘party’ means the party or parties under investigation, the complainant(s) and any third party to the case as defined under national law;

Amendment 118 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 a (new)

(2a) ‘party’ means the party or parties under investigation, the complainant(s) and any third party to the case as defined under national law;

Amendment 119 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 a (new)

Article2a Common minimum standards of procedure (1) Without prejudice to additional rights under relevant national procedural law, each party shall have at least the right to: (a) have their case handled impartially and fairly, and to be treated equally, even if they are before different supervisory authorities in different jurisdictions (“fair procedure and equality of arms”); (b) be heard before any measure is taken that would adversely affect the party, including before the decision to uphold, fully or partially dismiss or reject a complaint is adopted (“right to be heard”); (c) have access to the joint case file, except to any internal deliberations (“procedural transparency”);

Amendment 119 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 a (new)

Article2a Common minimum standards of procedure (1) Without prejudice to additional rights under relevant national procedural law, each party shall have at least the right to: (a) have their case handled impartially and fairly, and to be treated equally, even if they are before different supervisory authorities in different jurisdictions (“fair procedure and equality of arms”); (b) be heard before any measure is taken that would adversely affect the party, including before the decision to uphold, fully or partially dismiss or reject a complaint is adopted (“right to be heard”); (c) have access to the joint case file, except to any internal deliberations (“procedural transparency”);

Amendment 120 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3

3. The supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall determine the completeness of the information required by the Form within ~~one month~~three months, in accordance with the principle of procedural autonomy of Member States.

Amendment 120 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3

Amendment 121 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5

Amendment 121 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5

Amendment 122 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5

5. Where the complainant claims confidentiality when submitting a complaint, the complainant shall ~~also submit~~provide a non-confidential version of the complaint alongside the confidential version.

Amendment 122 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5

Amendment 123 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6

Amendment 123 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6

Amendment 124 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

(ca) the complainant’s use of internal complaint mechanism (CM) provided by the parties under investigation.

Amendment 124 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

(ca) the complainant’s use of internal complaint mechanism (CM) provided by the parties under investigation.

Amendment 125 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1

A complaint may be resolved by amicable settlement between the complainant and the parties under investigation. Where the supervisory authority considers that an amicable settlement to the complaint has been found, it shall communicate the proposed settlement to the complainant. If the complainant does not object to the amicable settlement proposed by the supervisory authority within one month, the complaint shall be deemed withdrawnonly where it concerns the data subjects’ rights and where with the resolution of the dispute by an amicable settlement, the processing which the complaint related to is no longer taking place.

Amendment 125 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1

Amendment 126 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1

A complaint may be resolved by amicable settlement between the complainant and the parties under investigation at any stage of the investigation. The supervisory authority may encourage and facilitate amicable settlements where relevant.. Where the supervisory authority considers that an amicable settlement to the complaint has been found, it shall communicate the proposed settlement to the complainant. If the complainant does not object to the amicable settlement proposed by the supervisory authority within one month, the complaint shall be deemed ~~withdrawn~~accepted.

Amendment 126 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1

A complaint may be resolved by amicable settlement between the complainant and the parties under investigation at any stage of the investigation. The supervisory authority may encourage and facilitate amicable settlements where relevant.. Where the supervisory authority considers that an amicable settlement to the complaint has been found, it shall communicate the proposed settlement to the complainant. If the complainant does not object to the amicable settlement proposed by the supervisory authority within one month, the complaint shall be deemed ~~withdrawn~~accepted.

Amendment 127 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1

A complaint may be resolved by amicable settlement between the complainant and the parties under investigation. Where the supervisory authority considers that an amicable settlement to the complaint has been found, it shall communicate the proposed settlement to the complainant. If the complainant does not object to the amicable settlement proposed by the supervisory authority within one month after the proposed settlement is communicated, the complaint shall be deemed withdrawn.

Amendment 127 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1

A complaint may be resolved by amicable settlement between the complainant and the parties under investigation. Where the supervisory authority considers that an amicable settlement to the complaint has been found, it shall communicate the proposed settlement to the complainant. If the complainant does not object to the amicable settlement proposed by the supervisory authority within one month after the proposed settlement is communicated, the complaint shall be deemed withdrawn.

Amendment 128 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1

A complaint may be resolved by amicable settlement between the complainant and the parties under investigation, including in ex officio cases. Where the supervisory authority considers that an amicable settlement to the complaint has been found, it shall communicate the proposed settlement to the complainant. If the complainant does not object to the amicable settlement proposed by the supervisory authority within one month, the complaint shall be deemed withdrawn.

Amendment 128 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1

Amendment 129 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)

An amicable settlement between the complainant and the party under investigation shall be considered to be found where there is explicit agreement. The supervisory authority with which the complaint has been lodged may facilitate such an amicable settlement in the preparatory phase; the lead supervisory authority may facilitate it once a complaint has been transmitted to it. Where an amicable settlement to the complaint has been found, the parties shall communicate the settlement to the supervisory authority, and . the complaint shall be deemed withdrawn.

Amendment 129 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)

An amicable settlement between the complainant and the party under investigation shall be considered to be found where there is explicit agreement. The supervisory authority with which the complaint has been lodged may facilitate such an amicable settlement in the preparatory phase; the lead supervisory authority may facilitate it once a complaint has been transmitted to it. Where an amicable settlement to the complaint has been found, the parties shall communicate the settlement to the supervisory authority, and . the complaint shall be deemed withdrawn.

Amendment 130 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)

A complaint may be resolved by amicable settlement at any stage of the procedure.

Amendment 130 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)

A complaint may be resolved by amicable settlement at any stage of the procedure.

Amendment 131 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 b (new)

The supervisory authority is not bound by the amicable settlement. It shall in particular open an ex officio investigation instead, where (a) the party under investigation is a repeat offender, (b) the party under investigation has been the subject of a large number of other amicable settlements, (c) the broad subject matter of the complaint concerns a large number of data subjects other than the complainant; or (d) the consequence of the processing which has been subject to the complaint is of long duration or serious nature.

Amendment 131 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 b (new)

Amendment 132 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 a (new)

Article 5a Request for an ex officio procedure 1. The lead supervisory authority may open an ex officio procedure at any time. 2. Where it considers that Regulation (EU) 2016/679 may be violated, any concerned supervisory authority may request an ex officio procedure by submitting a written request to the lead supervisory authority. Such a request shall contain at least: (a) a declaration to be a concerned supervisory authority; (b) any evidence of the violation; (c) a summary of key issues pursuant to Article 9; 3. Within three weeks, the assumed lead supervisory authority shall: (a) inform the concerned supervisory authority that it has opened an ex officio procedure.; (b) inform the concerned supervisory authority that Article 56(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 applies to the case and that in accordance with Article 56(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 the lead supervisory authority does not intend to handle the case itself in line; or (c) reject the request, if it takes the view that it is not the lead supervisory authority or there is no violation of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In the case referred to in point (a) of this paragraph, the concerned supervisory authority may submit to the lead supervisory authority a draft decision pursuant to Article 56(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In the case referred to in point (c) of this paragraph, the concerned supervisory authority may resubmit an amended request for an ex officio procedure, or request a determination on the opening of the procedure by the Board under Article 26a(1).

Amendment 132 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 a (new)

Article 5a Request for an ex officio procedure 1. The lead supervisory authority may open an ex officio procedure at any time. 2. Where it considers that Regulation (EU) 2016/679 may be violated, any concerned supervisory authority may request an ex officio procedure by submitting a written request to the lead supervisory authority. Such a request shall contain at least: (a) a declaration to be a concerned supervisory authority; (b) any evidence of the violation; (c) a summary of key issues pursuant to Article 9; 3. Within three weeks, the assumed lead supervisory authority shall: (a) inform the concerned supervisory authority that it has opened an ex officio procedure.; (b) inform the concerned supervisory authority that Article 56(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 applies to the case and that in accordance with Article 56(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 the lead supervisory authority does not intend to handle the case itself in line; or (c) reject the request, if it takes the view that it is not the lead supervisory authority or there is no violation of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In the case referred to in point (a) of this paragraph, the concerned supervisory authority may submit to the lead supervisory authority a draft decision pursuant to Article 56(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In the case referred to in point (c) of this paragraph, the concerned supervisory authority may resubmit an amended request for an ex officio procedure, or request a determination on the opening of the procedure by the Board under Article 26a(1).

Amendment 133 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) translation of complaints and the views of complainants into ~~the~~a language ~~used by the lead~~of international communication, preferably English, or into the working language agreed on between the supervisory authorityies concerned, for the purposes of the investigation;

Amendment 133 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a

Amendment 134 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) translation of documents provided by the lead supervisory authority into ~~the~~a language ~~used for communication with the complainant~~of international communication, preferably English, or into the working language agreed on between the supervisory authorities concerned, where it is necessary to provide such documents to the complainant pursuant to this Regulation or Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 134 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b

Amendment 135 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. A supervisory authority may provide automated translations and unofficial translations.

Amendment 135 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. A supervisory authority may provide automated translations and unofficial translations.

Amendment 136 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point i

(i) the views of the complainant on the preliminary findings, in cases where national legislation makes provision for this measure;

Amendment 136 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point i

(i) the views of the complainant on the preliminary findings, in cases where national legislation makes provision for this measure;

Amendment 137 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

2. The summary of key issues shall include ~~all of the following elements:~~the main relevant facts and a preliminary identification of the scope of the investigation, in particular the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 concerned by the alleged infringement which will be investigated.

Amendment 137 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Amendment 138 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a

~~(a) the main relevant facts;~~deleted

Amendment 138 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a

~~(a) the main relevant facts;~~deleted

Amendment 139 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)

(aa) the response of the parties under investigation to the preliminary findings;

Amendment 139 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)

(aa) the response of the parties under investigation to the preliminary findings;

Amendment 140 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b

~~(b) a preliminary identification of the scope of the investigation, in particular the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 concerned by the alleged infringement which will be investiga~~deleted;

Amendment 140 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b

~~(b) a preliminary identification of the scope of the investigation, in particular the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 concerned by the alleged infringement which will be investiga~~deleted;

Amendment 141 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c

~~(c) identification of complex legal and technological assessments which are relevant for preliminary orientation of their assessment;~~deleted

Amendment 141 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c

~~(c) identification of complex legal and technological assessments which are relevant for preliminary orientation of their assessment;~~deleted

Amendment 142 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point d

~~(d) preliminary identification of potential corrective measure(s).~~deleted

Amendment 142 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point d

~~(d) preliminary identification of potential corrective measure(s).~~deleted

Amendment 143 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)

(da) an overview of both, the replies of all parties under investigation as well as the views of the complainant on to the preliminary findings.

Amendment 143 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)

(da) an overview of both, the replies of all parties under investigation as well as the views of the complainant on to the preliminary findings.

Amendment 144 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3

3. The supervisory authorities concerned may provide comments on the summary of key issues. Such comments must be provided within four weeks of receipt of the summary of key issues, in accordance with Article 60 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 144 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3

Amendment 145 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4

Amendment 145 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4

Amendment 146 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 6

Amendment 146 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 6

Amendment 147 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Amendment 147 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Amendment 148 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2

~~2. The request under paragraph 1 shall be made within two months of the expiry of the period referred to in Article 9(3).~~deleted

Amendment 148 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2

~~2. The request under paragraph 1 shall be made within two months of the expiry of the period referred to in Article 9(3).~~deleted

Amendment 149 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3

Amendment 149 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3

Amendment 150 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – point a

(a) the documents referred to in Article 9(2)~~, points (a) and (b)~~;

Amendment 150 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – point a

(a) the documents referred to in Article 9(2)~~, points (a) and (b)~~;

Amendment 151 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – point b

(b) the comments of the supervisory authorityies concerned that disagrees with the lead supervisory authority’s preliminary identification of the scope of the investigation.

Amendment 151 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – point b

(b) the comments of the supervisory authorityies concerned that disagrees with the lead supervisory authority’s preliminary identification of the scope of the investigation.

Amendment 152 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6

Amendment 152 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6

Amendment 153 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2

2. The supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall inform the complainant of the reasons for the intended full or partial rejection of the complaint and set a time-limit of at least three weeks, but not more than six weeks, within which the complainant may make known her or his views in writing. ~~The time-limit shall be no less than three weeks.~~ The supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall inform the complainant of the consequences of the failure to make her or his views known.

Amendment 153 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2

2. The supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall inform the complainant of the reasons for the intended full or partial rejection of the complaint and set a time-limit of at least three weeks, but not more than six weeks, within which the complainant may make known her or his views in writing. ~~The time-limit shall be no less than three weeks.~~ The supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall inform the complainant of the consequences of the failure to make her or his views known.

Amendment 154 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4

4. The complainant may request access to the non-confidential version of the documents on which the proposed rejection of the complaint is based. In this context, the following are defined:

Amendment 154 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4

4. The complainant may request access to the non-confidential version of the documents on which the proposed rejection of the complaint is based. In this context, the following are defined:

Amendment 155 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. ‘Confidential version of documents’ means documents containing confidential or sensitive information which may be legally privileged under the applicable laws and data protection rules.

Amendment 155 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. ‘Confidential version of documents’ means documents containing confidential or sensitive information which may be legally privileged under the applicable laws and data protection rules.

Amendment 156 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. ‘Non-confidential version of documents’ means a version of documents from which confidential or sensitive information has been redacted and which can be provided to the complainant without contravening laws or data protection rules.

Amendment 156 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4 b (new)

Amendment 157 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 5

5. If the complainant makes known her or his views within the time-limit set by the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged and the views do not lead to a change in the preliminary view that the complaint should be fully or partially rejected under Article 60(8) or Article 60(9) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, as applicable, the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall prepare the draft decision under Article 60(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 which shall be submitted to the other supervisory authorities concerned by the lead supervisory authority pursuant to Article 60(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 157 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 5

5. If the complainant makes known her or his views within the time-limit set by the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged and the views do not lead to a change in the preliminary view that the complaint should be fully or partially rejected under Article 60(8) or Article 60(9) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, as applicable, the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall prepare the draft decision under Article 60(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 which shall be submitted to the other supervisory authorities concerned by the lead supervisory authority pursuant to Article 60(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 158 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2

2. The supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall set a maximum time-limit within which the complainant may make known her or his views and which cannot exceed 30 days from receipt of details of the grounds for the intended full or partial rejection of the complaint.

Amendment 158 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2

Amendment 159 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3

~~3. The lead supervisory authority shall notify preliminary findings to each of the parties under investigation.~~deleted

Amendment 159 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3

~~3. The lead supervisory authority shall notify preliminary findings to each of the parties under investigation.~~deleted

Amendment 160 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4

Amendment 160 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4

Amendment 161 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4

4. The lead supervisory authority shall, when notifying the preliminary findings to the parties under investigation, set a time-limit within which these parties may provide their views in writing. That time-limit must be reasonable and proportionate and take into account the results of the investigations. The lead supervisory authority shall not be obliged to take into account written views received after the expiry of that time-limit.

Amendment 161 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4

4. The lead supervisory authority shall, when notifying the preliminary findings to the parties under investigation, set a time-limit within which these parties may provide their views in writing. That time-limit must be reasonable and proportionate and take into account the results of the investigations. The lead supervisory authority shall not be obliged to take into account written views received after the expiry of that time-limit.

Amendment 162 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4

4. The lead supervisory authority shall, when notifying the preliminary findings to the parties under investigation, set a proportionate time-limit within which these parties may provide their views in writing. The lead supervisory authority ~~shall not be obliged to take into account written views received~~may receive additional written views from the parties under investigation after the expiry of thatis time- limit but it shall not be obliged to take it into account.

Amendment 162 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4

4. The lead supervisory authority shall, when notifying the preliminary findings to the parties under investigation, set a proportionate time-limit within which these parties may provide their views in writing. The lead supervisory authority ~~shall not be obliged to take into account written views received~~may receive additional written views from the parties under investigation after the expiry of thatis time- limit but it shall not be obliged to take it into account.

Amendment 163 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 5

Amendment 163 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 5

Amendment 164 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6

6. The parties under investigation may, in their written reply to preliminary findings, set out all facts and legal arguments known to them which are relevant to their defence against the allegations of the lead supervisory authority. They shall attach any relevant documents as proof of the facts set out. The lead supervisory authority shall, in its draft decision, deal only with allegations, including the facts and the legal assessment based on those facts, in respect of which the parties under investigation have been given the opportunity to comment.deleted

Amendment 164 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6

Amendment 165 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1

1. Where the lead supervisory authority issues preliminary findings relating to a matter in respect of which it has received a complaint, the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall provide the complainant with a non-confidential version of the preliminary findings and set a time-limit within which the complainant may make known its views in writing. The non- confidential version must be made available to the complainant within 30 days following receipt of the preliminary findings.

Amendment 165 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1

1. Where the lead supervisory authority issues preliminary findings relating to a matter in respect of which it has received a complaint, the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall provide the complainant with a non-confidential version of the preliminary findings and set a time-limit within which the complainant may make known its views in writing. The non- confidential version must be made available to the complainant within 30 days following receipt of the preliminary findings.

Amendment 166 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1

Amendment 166 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1

Amendment 167 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4

4. The complainant shall be provided with the non-confidential version of the preliminary findings ~~only~~ for the purpose of the ~~concrete investigation in which the preliminary findings were issued~~investigation concerning her or his specific complaint in which the preliminary findings were issued. The non- confidential version shall be provided in order to facilitate the complainant’s participation in the investigation procedure and to enable her or him to put forward her or his views and arguments adequately within that investigation.

Amendment 167 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4

Amendment 168 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5

Amendment 168 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5

Amendment 169 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5

5. Before receiving the non- confidential version of preliminary findings and any documents provided pursuant to paragraph 3, the complainant shall send to the lead supervisory authority a confidentiality declaration, where the complainant commits himself or herself not to disclose any information or assessment made in the non-confidential version of preliminary findings or to use those findings for purposes other than the concrete investigation in which those findings were issued. Breaches of this undertaking may incur legal consequences or penalties under the applicable legislation.

Amendment 169 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5

5. Before receiving the non- confidential version of preliminary findings and any documents provided pursuant to paragraph 3, the complainant shall send to the lead supervisory authority a confidentiality declaration, where the complainant commits himself or herself not to disclose any information or assessment made in the non-confidential version of preliminary findings or to use those findings for purposes other than the concrete investigation in which those findings were issued. Breaches of this undertaking may incur legal consequences or penalties under the applicable legislation.

Amendment 170 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17

Article 17 Right to be heard in relation to revised draft decision 1. Where the lead supervisory authority considers that the revised draft decision within the meaning of Article 60(5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 raises elements on which the parties under investigation should have the opportunity to make their views known, the lead supervisory authority shall, prior to the submission of the revised draft decision under Article 60(5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, provide the parties under investigation with the possibility to make their views known on such new elements. 2. The lead supervisory authority shall set a time-limit within which the parties under investigation may make known their views.deleted

Amendment 170 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17

Amendment 171 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1

Amendment 171 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1

Amendment 172 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2

2. The lead supervisory authority shall set a time-limit within which the parties under investigation may make known their views. That time-limit must be reasonable and proportionate and take into account the results of the investigations.

Amendment 172 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2

Amendment 173 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2

2. The lead supervisory authority shall set a proportionate time-limit within which the parties under investigation may make known their views.

Amendment 173 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2

2. The lead supervisory authority shall set a proportionate time-limit within which the parties under investigation may make known their views.

Amendment 174 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2

Amendment 174 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2

Amendment 175 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2

Amendment 175 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2

Amendment 176 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 6 – introductory part

6. The lead supervisory authority may set a proportionate and reasonable time- limit for parties under investigation and any other party raising a confidentiality claim to:

Amendment 176 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 6 – introductory part

6. The lead supervisory authority may set a proportionate and reasonable time- limit for parties under investigation and any other party raising a confidentiality claim to:

Amendment 177 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 6 – introductory part

6. The lead supervisory authority may set a proportionate time-limit for parties under investigation and any other party raising a confidentiality claim to:

Amendment 177 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 6 – introductory part

6. The lead supervisory authority may set a proportionate time-limit for parties under investigation and any other party raising a confidentiality claim to:

Amendment 178 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – title

Referral to dispute resolution under Article 65(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679

Amendment 178 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – title

Referral to dispute resolution under Article 65(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679

Amendment 179 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1

1. If the lead supervisory authority does not follow the relevant and reasoned objections or is of the opinion that the objections are not relevant or reasoned, it shall submit the subject-matter to the dispute resolution mechanism set out in Article 65 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, within four weeks from the receipt of all relevant and reasoned objections.

Amendment 179 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1

Amendment 180 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)

(aa) the summary of key issues;

Amendment 180 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)

(aa) the summary of key issues;

Amendment 181 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) a summary of the relevant facts, including the description of processing activities, the description of the company's organisation and the description of where decisions are taken;

Amendment 181 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) a summary of the relevant facts, including the description of processing activities, the description of the company's organisation and the description of where decisions are taken;

Amendment 182 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point f

(f) the relevant and reasoned objections which were not followed by the lead supervisory authority , and the objections that the lead supervisory authority has rejected as being neither relevant nor reasoned ;

Amendment 182 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point f

Amendment 183 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point g

(g) the reasons on the basis of which the lead supervisory authority did not follow the ~~relevant and reasoned~~ objections or considered the objections not to be relevant or reasoned.

Amendment 183 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point g

(g) the reasons on the basis of which the lead supervisory authority did not follow the ~~relevant and reasoned~~ objections or considered the objections not to be relevant or reasoned.

Amendment 184 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)

(ga) access to the joint case file.

Amendment 184 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)

(ga) access to the joint case file.

Amendment 185 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3

3. The Board shall ~~within four weeks of receiving the documents listed in paragraph 2 identify retained relevant and reasoned objection~~register the submission of a subject-matter to the dispute resolution mechanism within two weeks of receiving the documents listed in paragraph 2 or it shall demand a resubmission that includes any missing information within another week. When registering the submission, the Board shall list and structure the disputes between supervisory authorities which form the scope of the procedure before the Board, and instantly provide them to the supervisory authorities..

Amendment 185 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3

Amendment 186 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. The supervisory authorities concerned may, within two weeks after having been provided with the submission pursuant to paragraph 3, submit any relevant information that they have on that case, including but not limited to, facts and documentation that underlie their objection.

Amendment 186 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Amendment 187 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. The “referral of the subject- matter” pursuant to Article 65(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall mean the moment when all of the documents referred to in Article 2(2) are available and translated.[A1] Justification: EDPB para 101.

Amendment 187 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 b (new)

Amendment 188 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 c (new)

3c. The prohibition provided for in Article 65(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 for supervisory authorities to adopt a decision on the subject matter submitted to the Board during the periods referred to in Article 65(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 65(3) of that Regulation shall also apply during the periods referred in paragraph 3 of this Article.

Amendment 188 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 c (new)

Amendment 189 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

(aa) views made in writing by the parties under investigation as well as by complainants;

Amendment 189 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

(aa) views made in writing by the parties under investigation as well as by complainants;

Amendment 190 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 a (new)

Article 26a Right to an effective judicial remedy against a supervisory authority 1. Without prejudice to existing remedies under Article 78 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and any other administrative or non-judicial remedy, each party to the procedure shall have the right to an effective judicial remedy: (a) where the supervisory authority with which the complaint has been lodged does not use its powers to ensure that another supervisory authority progresses the procedure; (b) where a lead supervisory authority does not comply with deadlines as provided for in Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and this Regulation; or (c) where a supervisory authority does not comply with a binding decision of the Board. 2. Any party to the procedure or a not-for- profit body under Article 80(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 may bring an action under paragraph 1, point (c) independently of an infringement of the rights of a data subject.

Amendment 190 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 a (new)

Amendment 191 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point f

(f) ~~where applicable,~~ the views of the local establishment of the parties under investigation against which provisional measures were taken pursuant to Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 191 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point f

(f) ~~where applicable,~~ the views of the local establishment of the parties under investigation against which provisional measures were taken pursuant to Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 192 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Where the Board adopts an urgent binding decision indicating that final measures should be adopted, the Board shall request a joint assessment carried out by at least five experts from the 'Support Pool of Experts' of the EDPB. This joint assessment shall be published together with the urgent binding decision.

Amendment 192 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Amendment 193 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 a (new)

Article28a Mutual recognition and execution of decisions 1. A supervisory authority may request another supervisory authority to enforce a final decision issued under Regulation (EU) 2016/679. 2. The requesting supervisory authority shall: (a) certify that the decision is taken in accordance with its national laws and procedures and Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and constitutes a final decision; (b) certify that it is not reasonably possible to execute the decision in its own territory; (c) includes a copy of the final decision. 3. The requested supervisory authority shall recognize the decision of the requesting supervisory authority, without any further formality being required and the decision shall be deemed to have the same effect as if it had been made by the requested supervisory authority. 4. The requested supervisory authority shall take all necessary measures for execution provided under national law and Regulation (EU) 2016/279 without undue delay and under the same conditions as a decision issued by the requested supervisory authority. 5. Contrary to paragraphs 3 and 4 the requested supervisory shall not execute a request by the requesting supervisory authority if, on the basis of specific and objective evidence: (a) the decision relates to a conduct which is lawful under the law of the requested supervisory authority; (b) the decision has been imposed on a person or entity who under the law of the requested supervisory authority is exempt from liability; (c) the execution of the request would be manifestly contrary to public policy (ordre public) in the Member State of the requested supervisory authority; (d) the execution of the request would entail a manifest breach of relevant fundamental rights and freedoms as set out in the Charter; (e) the request is incomplete or manifestly incorrect or does not correspond to the underlying decision and the request has not been completed or corrected following the consultation of the requesting supervisory authority; (f) the request does not meet the requirements of paragraph 2. 6. In any of the cases referred to in paragraph 5, before deciding not to execute the decision, whether wholly or partially, the requested supervisory authority shall contact the requesting supervisory authority and where appropriate, shall request the requesting supervisory authority to supply any necessary information without undue delay. Any decision not to execute the decision shall be taken without undue delay and shall be notified immediately to the requesting supervisory. 7. If necessary, the requested supervisory authority shall convert the amount of a fine or the amount of money to be paid as included in the decision, into the currency of the State of the requested supervisory authority at the rate of exchange obtaining at the time when the decision was issued by the requesting supervisory authority. 8. Monies obtained from the enforcement of decisions shall accrue according to the laws of the Member State of the requested supervisory authority. 9. Each supervisory authority shall bear its own costs resulting from requests under this Article.

Amendment 193 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 a (new)

Article28a Mutual recognition and execution of decisions 1. A supervisory authority may request another supervisory authority to enforce a final decision issued under Regulation (EU) 2016/679. 2. The requesting supervisory authority shall: (a) certify that the decision is taken in accordance with its national laws and procedures and Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and constitutes a final decision; (b) certify that it is not reasonably possible to execute the decision in its own territory; (c) includes a copy of the final decision. 3. The requested supervisory authority shall recognize the decision of the requesting supervisory authority, without any further formality being required and the decision shall be deemed to have the same effect as if it had been made by the requested supervisory authority. 4. The requested supervisory authority shall take all necessary measures for execution provided under national law and Regulation (EU) 2016/279 without undue delay and under the same conditions as a decision issued by the requested supervisory authority. 5. Contrary to paragraphs 3 and 4 the requested supervisory shall not execute a request by the requesting supervisory authority if, on the basis of specific and objective evidence: (a) the decision relates to a conduct which is lawful under the law of the requested supervisory authority; (b) the decision has been imposed on a person or entity who under the law of the requested supervisory authority is exempt from liability; (c) the execution of the request would be manifestly contrary to public policy (ordre public) in the Member State of the requested supervisory authority; (d) the execution of the request would entail a manifest breach of relevant fundamental rights and freedoms as set out in the Charter; (e) the request is incomplete or manifestly incorrect or does not correspond to the underlying decision and the request has not been completed or corrected following the consultation of the requesting supervisory authority; (f) the request does not meet the requirements of paragraph 2. 6. In any of the cases referred to in paragraph 5, before deciding not to execute the decision, whether wholly or partially, the requested supervisory authority shall contact the requesting supervisory authority and where appropriate, shall request the requesting supervisory authority to supply any necessary information without undue delay. Any decision not to execute the decision shall be taken without undue delay and shall be notified immediately to the requesting supervisory. 7. If necessary, the requested supervisory authority shall convert the amount of a fine or the amount of money to be paid as included in the decision, into the currency of the State of the requested supervisory authority at the rate of exchange obtaining at the time when the decision was issued by the requesting supervisory authority. 8. Monies obtained from the enforcement of decisions shall accrue according to the laws of the Member State of the requested supervisory authority. 9. Each supervisory authority shall bear its own costs resulting from requests under this Article.

Amendment 194 #

Proposal for a regulation
Chapter VI a (new)

VIa Enforcement

Amendment 194 #

Proposal for a regulation
Chapter VI a (new)

VIa Enforcement

Amendment 195 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 a (new)

Article 30a Evaluation and review The Commission shall evaluate and review this Regulation as part of its reports to the European Parliament and to the Council under Article 97 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment 195 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 a (new)

Amendment 196 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – title

Entry into force and application

Amendment 196 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – title

Entry into force and application

Amendment 197 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 a (new)

It shall apply from … [one year from the date of entry into force of this Regulation].

Amendment 197 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 a (new)

It shall apply from … [one year from the date of entry into force of this Regulation].

Amendment 198 #

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – title

Amendment 198 #

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – title

Amendment 84 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)

(1a) This Regulation should be seen as the first step of a targeted GDPR revision, to be announced in the upcoming report on the application of the GDPR in May 2024, and as an urgent effort of modernizing EU data protection rules and streamlining them with the European data strategy (i.e. Data Act, DGA, EHDS).

Amendment 84 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)

Amendment 85 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2

(2) In order to provide for the smooth and effective functioning of the cooperation and dispute resolution mechanism provided for in Articles 60 and 65 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, it is necessary to lay down rules concerning the conduct of proceedings by the supervisory authorities in cross-border cases, and by the Board during dispute resolution, including the handling of cross-border complaints. It is also necessary for this reason to lay down rules concerning the exercise of the right to be heard by the parties under investigation prior to the adoption of decisions by supervisory authorities and, as the case may be, by the Board. This Regulation thereby aims at protecting the right to good administration as enshrined in Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’). To achieve this objective, when applying provisions of this Regulation, all data protection authorities should act in an impartial and independent manner and in accordance with the rule of law, as enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union.

Amendment 85 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2

Amendment 86 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)

(2a) This Regulation and Chapter VII of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 only govern certain elements of the cooperation procedure, when supervisory authorities of more than one Member State participate in the procedure. This Regulation does not apply when a party lodges a complaint directly with a lead supervisory authority in another Member State.

Amendment 86 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)

Amendment 87 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)

(2a) Supervisory authorities shall make use of all options under applicable national law to allow parties in another Member State to participate in procedures. This may include remote video conference, or generally available electronic means of communication.

Amendment 87 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)

(2a) Supervisory authorities shall make use of all options under applicable national law to allow parties in another Member State to participate in procedures. This may include remote video conference, or generally available electronic means of communication.

Amendment 88 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 b (new)

(2b) The procedural law of each Member State should apply to the supervisory authorities insofar as this Regulation does not harmonise a matter. In line with the primacy of Union law, supervisory authorities should not apply national procedural law where it is in conflict with this Regulation and Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Cooperation among supervisory authorities should not be limited because of differences in national procedural law.

Amendment 88 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 b (new)

Amendment 89 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3

(3) Complaints are an essential source of information for detecting infringements of data protection rules. Defining clear and efficient procedures for the handling of complaints in cross-border cases is necessary since the complaint may be dealt with by a supervisory authority other than the one to which the complaint was lodged. To this end, it is recommended that an efficient mechanism for communication between supervisory authorities be created so as to facilitate rapid and secure sharing of information necessary to resolve complaints in accordance with data protection rules.

Amendment 89 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3

Amendment 90 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4

Amendment 90 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4

Amendment 91 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5

(5) Supervisory authorities are obliged to decide on complaints within a reasonable timeframe. What is a reasonable timeframe depends on the circumstances of each case and, in particular, its context, the various procedural steps followed by the lead supervisory authority, the conduct of the parties in the course of the procedure and the complexity of the case. Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and Articles 41 and 47 of the Charter require a reasonable overall duration of procedures. Given that this includes judicial remedies under Article 78 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, procedures before supervisory authorities should typically not take more than nine months, unless exceptional circumstances arise. This Regulation foresees prolongations for delays or disruptions that are outside of the control of the lead supervisory authority.

Amendment 91 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5

Amendment 92 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)

(5a) The direct interaction between Member States’ supervisory authorities and the parties is governed by national procedural law, insofar as Regulation (EU) 2016/679, this Regulation or Union law do not take primacy. In the case of indirect interaction of a lead supervisory authority with a party via another supervisory authority, the latter authority’s procedural law should apply to any direct interaction with the party. In line with Article 56(6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, a complainant has the right to solely communicate with the supervisory authority with which the complaint has been lodged. This does not prevent the complainant to directly communicate with another supervisory authority, including the lead supervisory authority, which may be more efficient.

Amendment 92 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)

Amendment 93 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 b (new)

(5b) Article 6 of the ECHR and Article 47 of the Charter require that fair procedures are public. Article 42 of the Charter and the law of many Member States foresee the right of access to public documents and the transparency of actions of authorities. However, it should be possible to apply, in accordance with national procedural law applicable to the supervisory authority that the party directly interacts with, strictly necessary and proportionate limitations in relation to the disclosure or the further use of legally protected information, such as personal data or trade secrets protected under Directive (EU) 2016/943. This could include the internal deliberations and decision-making of the authority. The least intrusive measures, such as limitation of the use of information or blackening of information should be applied. Parties should always be informed that information was withheld from them, and why.

Amendment 93 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 b (new)

Amendment 94 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 c (new)

(5c) The lead supervisory authority manages the case in line with this Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and its national procedural law, while fully cooperating with other supervisory authorities. Other supervisory authorities should provide any relevant information and their views to the lead supervisory authority. The lead supervisory authority should structure the case in an efficient and expedient way taking full account of the views of other supervisory authorities.

Amendment 94 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 c (new)

Amendment 95 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 d (new)

(5d) Supervisory authorities may also start additional procedures, for example in the case of systemic or repetitive infringements. This should however, not lead to any interference with the rights of the parties. Complaints procedures should not be delayed and the right of parties to be heard should not be limited when a supervisory authority opens an ex officio procedure into the same matter.

Amendment 95 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 d (new)

Amendment 96 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 e (new)

(5e) Each supervisory authority should define one or more languages that it accepts for incoming information by other supervisory authorities. An additional joint “cooperation language” should be defined which all supervisory authorities must accept for incoming or outgoing information. In case of judicial remedies, the supervisory authority against which a judicial remedy is brought should have the duty to translate all relevant documents to the accepted languages.

Amendment 96 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 e (new)

Amendment 97 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

(6) Each complaint handled by a supervisory authority pursuant to Article 57(1), point (f), of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 is to be investigated with all due diligence to the extent appropriate bearing in mind that every use of powers by the supervisory authority must be appropriate, necessary and proportionate in view of ensuring compliance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679. ~~It falls within the discretion of each competent authority to decide the extent to which a complaint should be investigated.~~ While assessing the extent appropriate of an investigation, supervisory authorities should aim to deliver a satisfactory resolution to the complainant, which ~~may not necessarily require exhaustively~~requires investigating all ~~possible~~relevant legal and factual elements arising from the complaint, but which provides an effective and quick remedy to the complainant. The assessment of the extent of the investigative measures required could be informed by the gravity of the alleged infringement, its systemic or repetitive nature,to ensure that a decision can be jointly taken and an effective and quick remedy to the complainant can be quickly delivered. Planning the procedure is important to ensure a quick result. Supervisory authorities should not refer to the rights under Article 79 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 as a reason to limit the investigation of a complaint. To ensure compliance with Article 47 orf the ~~fact, as the case may be, that the complainant also took advantage of her or his rights under Article 79 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679~~Charter, the handling of a complain should always lead to an appealable decision. Unless a complaint is withdrawn, it should not be possible for complaints to be closed or otherwise terminated without a decision.

Amendment 97 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

(6) Each complaint handled by a supervisory authority pursuant to Article 57(1), point (f), of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 is to be investigated with all due diligence to the extent appropriate bearing in mind that every use of powers by the supervisory authority must be appropriate, necessary and proportionate in view of ensuring compliance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679. ~~It falls within the discretion of each competent authority to decide the extent to which a complaint should be investigated.~~ While assessing the extent appropriate of an investigation, supervisory authorities should aim to deliver a satisfactory resolution to the complainant, which ~~may not necessarily require exhaustively~~requires investigating all ~~possible~~relevant legal and factual elements arising from the complaint, but which provides an effective and quick remedy to the complainant. The assessment of the extent of the investigative measures required could be informed by the gravity of the alleged infringement, its systemic or repetitive nature,to ensure that a decision can be jointly taken and an effective and quick remedy to the complainant can be quickly delivered. Planning the procedure is important to ensure a quick result. Supervisory authorities should not refer to the rights under Article 79 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 as a reason to limit the investigation of a complaint. To ensure compliance with Article 47 orf the ~~fact, as the case may be, that the complainant also took advantage of her or his rights under Article 79 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679~~Charter, the handling of a complain should always lead to an appealable decision. Unless a complaint is withdrawn, it should not be possible for complaints to be closed or otherwise terminated without a decision.

Amendment 98 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

Amendment 98 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

Amendment 99 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7

(7) The lead supervisory authority should regularly provide the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged with ~~the necessary~~all information on the progress of the investigation for the purpose of providing updates to the complainant. Defining clear and efficient procedures for the handling of complaints in cross- border cases is also necessary, since the complaint may be dealt with by a supervisory authority other than the one to which the complaint was lodged.

Amendment 99 #