2023/0202(COD) General Data Protection Regulation: additional procedural rules relating to the enforcement of the Regulation
Lead committee dossier:
Progress: Awaiting Parliament's position in 1st reading
| Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead | LIBE |
GREGOROVÁ Markéta ( Verts/ALE)
|
VOSS Axel ( PPE),
VIGENIN Kristian ( S&D),
OZDOBA Jacek ( ECR),
MCNAMARA Michael ( RE),
DEMIREL Özlem ( GUE/NGL)
|
| Former Responsible Committee | LIBE |
LAGODINSKY Sergey ( Verts/ALE)
|
|
| Committee Opinion | EMPL | ||
| Committee Opinion | ITRE | ||
| Committee Opinion | IMCO | ||
| Committee Opinion | JURI | ||
| Former Committee Opinion | EMPL | ||
| Former Committee Opinion | ITRE | ||
| Former Committee Opinion | IMCO | ||
| Former Committee Opinion | JURI |
GARCÍA DEL BLANCO Ibán ( S&D)
|
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
TFEU 016-p2
Legal Basis:
TFEU 016-p2Subjects
Events
2024/09/30
EP - GREGOROVÁ Markéta (Verts/ALE) appointed as rapporteur in LIBE
2024/04/10
EP - Decision by Parliament, 1st reading
Details
The European Parliament adopted by 329 votes to 213, with 79 abstentions, amendments to the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down additional procedural rules relating to the enforcement of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
The matter was referred back to the committee responsible for inter-institutional negotiations.
Subject matter and scope
Complaints are an essential source of information for detecting infringements of data protection rules. To this end, it is recommended that an efficient mechanism for communication between supervisory authorities should be created to facilitate rapid and secure sharing of information necessary to resolve complaints in accordance with data protection rules.
Members stated that the proposed 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 whenever supervisory authorities of more than one Member State are involved in the case, as well as procedural rules on related judicial remedies.
Applicable procedural law
In addition to this regulation, and provided that it is not in conflict with this Regulation, the procedural law applicable before a supervisory authority should govern all direct interactions between that supervisory authority and the parties before it. Member States may specify procedural issues not covered by the Regulation.
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.
Common procedural standards
The amended text stipulates that each party should have at least the following rights:
- to 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 ”);
- to be heard before any measure is taken that would adversely affect them, including before the decision to uphold, or to fully or partially reject a complaint is adopted (“ right to be heard ”);
- to have access to the joint case file, except to any internal deliberations of the supervisory authority or deliberations between those authorities (“ procedural transparency ”).
The lead supervisory authority should inform and hear the parties at appropriate stages of the procedure, in order to allow them to effectively express their views on all factual findings and legal conclusions made by the lead supervisory authority.
Use of languages and translations
Each supervisory authority should define one or more languages that it accepts for incoming information by other supervisory authorities. Members proposed that 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.
Cross-border complaints
A complaint subject to this Regulation should provide the information required in the template, as set out in the Annex. No additional information should be required in order for the complaint to be admissible. The information can be provided by any means the authority accepts, including by not using the template.
The supervisory authority with which a complaint has been lodged should, within two weeks, acknowledge receipt and admissibility of the complaint, or, where a complaint does not meet the requirements, declare the complaint inadmissible and inform the complainant about the missing information.
Handling of complaints
The supervisory authority with which the complaint has been lodged should, within three weeks after acknowledging the admissibility of the complaint: (a) establish, by way of a preliminary conclusion, whether the complaint relates to cross-border processing of personal data of the complainant; (b) establish which supervisory authority is the assumed lead supervisory authority. The handling of a complaint should always lead to a legally binding decision that is subject to an effective legal remedy.
Amicable settlement
A claim may be settled amicably between the claimant and the party under investigation at any stage of the proceedings. Amicable settlements are limited to cases of data subject rights, requiring the explicit agreement of the complainant, while not preventing ex-officio investigations of a supervisory authority for larger scale infringements of the GDPR.
Cooperation with other relevant authorities
The lead supervisory authority should provide the other supervisory authorities concerned with instant, remote access to a joint case file that holds all relevant documents of the case, including all internal or confidential information, as well as a translation of all documents to the cooperation language. The competent supervisory authority should provide the parties with remote access to the joint case file, but may restrict this right of access under certain circumstances.
Summary of key aspects
The supervisory authority with which a complaint has been lodged or which requests an ex-officio action may provide the lead supervisory authority with a summary of key issues setting out its preliminary view on the main issues in an investigation. The summary of key issues should 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.
Remedies against procedural determinations
A new article has been introduced stating that remedies against procedural determinations by a supervisory authority under national law should 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.
Documents
2024/04/10
EP - Matter referred back to the committee responsible
2024/03/06
IE_HOUSES-OF-OIREACHTAS - Contribution
Documents
2024/02/20
EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading
Details
The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs adopted the report by Sergey LAGODINSKY (Greens/EFA, DE) on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down additional procedural rules relating to the enforcement of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
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 should be created to facilitate rapid and secure sharing of information necessary to resolve complaints in accordance with data protection rules.
Overall, this report consolidates and expands on the provisions on general procedural rules in order for the right to be heard, translations, confidentiality, and the sincere cooperation of authorities to always apply, not only in the case of complaints or for dispute resolution among authorities.
The committee responsible recommended that the European Parliament's position adopted at first reading under the ordinary legislative procedure should amend the proposal as follows:
Subject matter and scope
The proposed 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 whenever supervisory authorities of more than one Member State are involved in the case, as well as procedural rules on related judicial remedies.
Applicable procedural law
In addition to this proposal, and provided that it is not in conflict with this Regulation, the procedural law applicable before a supervisory authority should govern all direct interactions between that supervisory authority and the parties before it.
Common procedural standards
The amended text stipulates that each party should have at least the following rights:
- to 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”);
- to be heard before any measure is taken that would adversely affect them, including before the decision to uphold, or to fully or partially reject a complaint is adopted (“right to be heard”);
- to have access to the joint case file, except to any internal deliberations of the supervisory authority or deliberations between those authorities (“procedural transparency”).
Use of languages and translations
Members added a new article concerning the cooperation language to be used. The Board should determine one language that should be accepted by all supervisory authorities during the cooperation between authorities.
The lead supervisory authority should provide submissions into the joint case file in the original language and should provide translations into the cooperation language.
Cross-border complaints
A complaint subject to this Regulation should provide the information required in the template , as set out in the Annex. No additional information should be required in order for the complaint to be admissible. The information can be provided by any means the authority accepts, including by not using the template.
The supervisory authority with which a complaint has been lodged should, within two weeks, acknowledge receipt and admissibility of the complaint, or, where a complaint does not meet the requirements, declare the complaint inadmissible and inform the complainant about the missing information.
Handling of complaints
The handling of a complaint should always lead to a legally binding decision that is subject to an effective legal remedy.
Amicable settlement
Amicable settlements are limited to cases of data subject rights, requiring the explicit agreement of the complainant, while not preventing ex-officio investigations of a supervisory authority for larger scale infringements of the GDPR.
Cooperation with other relevant authorities
The lead supervisory authority should provide the other supervisory authorities concerned with instant, unrestricted and continuous remote access to the full joint case file, and should include in the joint case file all relevant information, in particular documents, submissions, memos and other information related to the case within one week from producing or receiving them.
Remedies against procedural determinations
A new article has been introduced stating that remedies against procedural determinations by a supervisory authority under national law should 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.
Entry into force and application
The amended text lays down a transitional period of one year to allow for the necessary changes to the Internal Market Information System used by the authorities, and the Rules of Procedure of the Board, as well as possible amendments of national laws.
Documents
2023/12/13
ESC - Economic and Social Committee: opinion, report
Documents
2023/11/16
EP - GARCÍA DEL BLANCO Ibán (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in JURI
2023/10/12
DE_BUNDESRAT - Contribution
Documents
2023/07/18
EP - LAGODINSKY Sergey (Verts/ALE) appointed as rapporteur in LIBE
2023/07/13
EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading
2023/07/04
EC - Legislative proposal published
Details
PURPOSE: to lay down additional procedural rules relating to the enforcement of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation or GDPR).
PROPOSED ACT: Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council.
ROLE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: the European Parliament decides in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure and on an equal footing with the Council.
BACKGROUND: in its report following two years of the application of the GDPR, the Commission noted that further progress was needed to make the handling of cross-border cases more efficient and harmonised across the EU. The report noted important differences in national administrative procedures and interpretations of concepts in the GDPR cooperation mechanism.
Procedural differences applied by data protection authorities (DPAs) hinder the smooth and effective functioning of the GDPR’s cooperation and dispute resolution mechanisms in cross-border cases. These differences also have important consequences for the rights of the parties under investigation and complainants (as data subjects).
In its resolution on the Commission’s 2020 report on the GDPR, the European Parliament highlighted the need to clarify the position of complainants in the case of cross-border complaints.
The proposal aims to tackle problems in the following areas:
- Complaints : DPAs have varying interpretations on requirements for the form of a complaint, the involvement of complainants in the procedure, and the rejection of complaints. The differences mean that the treatment of complaints and the involvement of complainants varies depending on where the complaint is lodged, or which DPA is the lead DPA for a given case. As a result, they delay the conclusion of the investigation and the delivery of a remedy for the data subject in cross-border cases. In its resolution on the Commission’s 2020 report on the GDPR, the European Parliament highlighted the need to clarify the position of complainants in the case of cross-border complaints.
- Procedural rights of parties under investigation : the procedural rights of parties under investigation, such as the extent of the right to be heard and the right of access to the file, vary substantially across the Member States. The extent to which parties are heard, the timing of the hearing, and the documents that are provided to parties to enable them to exercise their right to be heard are elements on which Member States take varying approaches.
- Cooperation and dispute resolution : experience in the enforcement of the GDPR in cross-border cases shows that there is insufficient cooperation between DPAs prior to the submission of a draft decision by the lead DPA. Lack of sufficient cooperation and consensus-building on key issues in the investigation at this early stage has resulted in the submission of numerous cases to dispute resolution.
The proposal aims to address these issues by specifying procedural rules for certain stages of the investigation process in cross-border cases, thereby supporting the smooth functioning of the GDPR cooperation and dispute resolution mechanisms.
CONTENT: the proposed regulation aims to address the disparity in procedural approaches followed by DPAs, by harmonising certain aspects of the administrative procedure applied by DPAs when implementing the GDPR. It establishes procedural rules for the handling of complaints and the conduct of investigations , both complaint-based and ex officio, carried out by supervisory authorities in the cross-border application of the RGPD. Its main elements are as follows:
Form of complaints and position of complainants
The proposal:
- provides a form specifying the information required for all complaints under Article 77 GDPR concerning cross-border processing and specifies procedural rules for the involvement of complainants in the procedure, including their right to make their views known;
- specifies procedural rules for the rejection of complaints in cross-border cases and clarifies the roles of the lead DPA and the DPA with which the complaint was lodged in such cases. It recognises the importance and the legality of amicable settlement of complaint-based cases.
Targeted harmonisation of procedural rights in cross-border cases
The proposal provides the parties under investigation with the right to be heard at key stages in the procedure , including during dispute resolution by the Board, and clarifies the content of the administrative file and the parties’ rights of access to the file. The proposal thereby strengthens the parties’ rights of defence and ensures consistent observance of these rights regardless of which DPA is leading the investigation.
Cooperation and dispute resolution
The proposal:
- equips DPAs with the tools necessary to achieve consensus by giving added substance to the requirement for DPAs to cooperate and to share “relevant information”;
- establishes a framework for all DPAs to meaningfully impact a cross-border case by providing their views early in the investigation procedure and making use of all tools provided by the GDPR;
- entrusts the European Data Protection Board with the role of resolving disagreement by adopting an urgent binding decision in the event of disagreement between DPAs on the key issue of the scope of the investigation in complaint-based cases;
- lays down detailed requirements for the form and structure of relevant and reasoned objections raised by DPAs concerned, thereby facilitating the effective participation of all DPAs and the targeted and swift resolution of the case;
- facilitates the swift completion of the dispute resolution procedure for the parties under investigation and data subjects by laying down procedural deadlines for the dispute resolution procedure, specifies the information to be provided by the lead DPA when submitting the matter to dispute resolution, and clarifies the role of all actors involved in dispute resolution.
Documents
Documents
- Decision by Parliament, 1st reading: T9-0187/2024
- Contribution: COM(2023)0348
- Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading: A9-0045/2024
- Economic and Social Committee: opinion, report: CES3796/2023
- Contribution: COM(2023)0348
- Legislative proposal published: COM(2023)0348
- Legislative proposal published: EUR-Lex
- Economic and Social Committee: opinion, report: CES3796/2023
- Contribution: COM(2023)0348
- Contribution: COM(2023)0348
Votes
A9-0045/2024 – Sergey Lagodinsky – Commission proposal #
2024/04/10 Outcome: +: 329, -: 213, 0: 79
Renew
The Left
NI
ID| Amendments | Dossier |
| 466 |
2023/0202(COD)
2023/12/14
LIBE
236 amendments...
Amendment 219 #
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
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
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
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
Amendment 229 #
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
Amendment 230 #
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
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
Amendment 232 #
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 endeavour, where appropriate, to resolve complaints by amicable settlement. 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 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
Amendment 235 #
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.
Amendment 236 #
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
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
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
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
Amendment 240 #
Proposal for a regulation Recital 16 (16) If the use of th
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.
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
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.
Amendment 245 #
Proposal for a regulation Recital 23 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,
Amendment 249 #
Proposal for a regulation Recital 31 (31) When granting access to the
Amendment 250 #
Proposal for a regulation Recital 31 (31) When granting access to the administrative file, supervisory authorities should ensure the protection of business
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
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 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
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
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
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) 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 fact
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
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) 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
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
Amendment 277 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – paragraph 2 2. The supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall
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 Amendment 283 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – paragraph 4 Amendment 284 #
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, unless an amicable settlement as provided for in Article 5 has been reached.
Amendment 285 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – paragraph 5 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.
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 Amendment 291 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 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
Amendment 295 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 1 A complaint may be resolved by amicable settlement
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
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) Amendment 307 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 6 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
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
Amendment 313 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 8 – paragraph 1 1. The lead supervisory authority shall
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,
Amendment 315 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part 2.
Amendment 316 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part 2.
Amendment 317 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point i (i) the views of the complainant on the
Amendment 318 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 9 – paragraph 1 1.
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
Amendment 321 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c (c)
Amendment 322 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c (c)
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 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
Amendment 328 #
Amendment 329 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 9 – paragraph 5 Amendment 330 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 9 – paragraph 5 Amendment 331 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 9 – paragraph 6 6.
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
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
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
Amendment 335 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 1 Amendment 336 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1.
Amendment 337 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. A supervisory authority concerned
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 Amendment 340 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 3 3.
Amendment 341 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 3 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)
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,
Amendment 345 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 4 4. Where,
Amendment 346 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 4 4. Where,
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
Amendment 348 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 5 – introductory part 5. When a request
Amendment 349 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 5 – introductory part 5. When requesting a
Amendment 350 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 5 – introductory part 5. When requesting a
Amendment 351 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 5 – point a (a) the
Amendment 352 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 5 – point a (a) the documents referred to in Article 9(2)
Amendment 353 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 5 – point a (a) the documents referred to in Article 9(2)
Amendment 354 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 5 – point b (b) the comments of the supervisory authorit
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
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
Amendment 358 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 6 6. The Board shall adopt an urgent binding decision on the scope of the
Amendment 359 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 6 6. The Board shall adopt a
Amendment 360 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 6 6. The Board shall adopt an urgent binding decision
Amendment 362 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 11 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
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
Amendment 368 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 12 Amendment 369 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 13 Amendment 371 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 14 – paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 372 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 The preliminary
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
Amendment 374 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 375 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 14 – paragraph 3 3. The lead supervisory authority shall notify preliminary
Amendment 376 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 14 – paragraph 4 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
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 Amendment 381 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 14 – paragraph 6 6. The parties
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) Amendment 384 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 15 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
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.
Amendment 388 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 15 – paragraph 5 5. Before
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
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 Amendment 393 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 17 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 Amendment 397 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 19 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
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
Amendment 400 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 19 – paragraph 3 3. The right of access to the administrative file shall not extend to
Amendment 401 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 20 A
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 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
Amendment 409 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 22 – paragraph 3 3. The Board shall within
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 #
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
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 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
Amendment 416 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 25 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 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) 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
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
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
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
Amendment 433 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 28 – 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 434 #
(d) a justification of the urgent need for final measures to be adopted
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
Amendment 436 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point f (f) where applicable, the views of the
Amendment 437 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point f (f) where applicable, the views of the
Amendment 438 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point f (f)
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
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
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
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
Amendment 446 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 28 a (new) 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) 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.
Amendment 449 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 28 b (new) Amendment 450 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 28 b (new) 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 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 (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 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
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
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
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
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
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
Amendment 105 #
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 105 #
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 106 #
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 106 #
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 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 (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 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
Amendment 110 #
Proposal for a regulation Recital 27 (27) When setting deadlines
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
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
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
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
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) 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 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’
Amendment 117 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 1 (1) within the meaning of this Regulation, ‘parties under investigation’
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
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
Amendment 121 #
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 121 #
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 122 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – paragraph 5 5. Where the complainant claims confidentiality when submitting a complaint, the complainant shall
Amendment 122 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – paragraph 5 5. Where the complainant claims confidentiality when submitting a complaint, the complainant shall
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
Amendment 125 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 1 A complaint may be resolved by amicable settlement
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
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
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 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 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) 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 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
Amendment 133 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) translation of complaints and the views of complainants into
Amendment 134 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) translation of documents provided by the lead supervisory authority into
Amendment 134 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) translation of documents provided by the lead supervisory authority into
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
Amendment 137 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part 2. The summary of key issues shall include
Amendment 138 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a Amendment 138 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a 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 Amendment 140 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b Amendment 141 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c Amendment 141 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c Amendment 142 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point d Amendment 142 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point d 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 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 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 6.
Amendment 146 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 9 – paragraph 6 6.
Amendment 147 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1.
Amendment 147 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1.
Amendment 148 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 2 Amendment 148 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 2 Amendment 149 #
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 149 #
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 150 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 5 – point a (a) the documents referred to in Article 9(2)
Amendment 150 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 5 – point a (a) the documents referred to in Article 9(2)
Amendment 151 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 5 – point b (b) the comments of the supervisory authorit
Amendment 151 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 5 – point b (b) the comments of the supervisory authorit
Amendment 152 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 6 6. The Board shall adopt an urgent binding decision
Amendment 152 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 10 – paragraph 6 6. The Board shall adopt an urgent binding decision
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.
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.
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) 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 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 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 159 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 14 – paragraph 3 Amendment 159 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 14 – paragraph 3 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
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
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 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 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 166 #
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 167 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 15 – paragraph 4 4. The complainant shall be provided with the non-confidential version of the preliminary findings
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
Amendment 168 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 15 – paragraph 5 5. Before
Amendment 168 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 15 – paragraph 5 5. Before
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 Amendment 170 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 17 Amendment 171 #
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 171 #
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 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 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 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 2. In the course of investigation of an alleged infringement of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, the lead supervisory authority
Amendment 174 #
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
Amendment 175 #
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 175 #
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 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 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 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 (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 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
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
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
Amendment 185 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 22 – paragraph 3 3. The Board shall
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) 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 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) 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 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) 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 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) 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 191 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point f (f)
Amendment 191 #
Proposal for a regulation Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point f (f)
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) 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 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 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) 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 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 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 Section B.
Amendment 198 #
Proposal for a regulation Annex I – title 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 Section B.
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) (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 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 (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 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) (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 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) (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 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 (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 90 #
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 90 #
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 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 (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 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) (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 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) (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 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) (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 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) (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 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) (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 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.
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.
Amendment 98 #
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
Amendment 98 #
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
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
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
source: 757.872
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
2024-11-01Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0/shadows/2 |
|
2024-10-30Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0/shadows |
|
2024-10-29Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0/shadows |
|
2024-10-28Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0/shadows |
|
2024-10-27Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0/shadows |
|
2024-10-26Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0/shadows |
|
2024-10-25Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0/shadows |
|
2024-10-24Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0/shadows |
|
2024-10-23Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0/shadows |
|
2024-10-22Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0/shadows |
|
2024-10-21Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0/shadows |
|
2024-10-20Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0/shadows |
|
2024-10-19Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0/shadows |
|
2024-10-18Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0/shadows |
|
2024-10-13Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0/rapporteur |
|
2024-07-11Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/4/opinion |
False
|
2024-07-10Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/4/opinion |
False
|
2024-07-09Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/4/opinion |
False
|
2024-07-08Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/4/opinion |
False
|
2024-07-02Show (26) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1/opinion |
False
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2/opinion |
False
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3/opinion |
False
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4/rapporteur |
|
| committees/5 |
|
| committees/6 |
|
| committees/7 |
|
| committees/8 |
|
| committees/9 |
|
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/2 |
|
| docs/3 |
|
| events/2 |
|
| events/3 |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/10/00248
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/9/12468
|
2024-07-01Show (26) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1/opinion |
False
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2/opinion |
False
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3/opinion |
False
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4/rapporteur |
|
| committees/5 |
|
| committees/6 |
|
| committees/7 |
|
| committees/8 |
|
| committees/9 |
|
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/2 |
|
| docs/3 |
|
| events/2 |
|
| events/3 |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/10/00248
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/9/12468
|
2024-07-01Show (26) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1/opinion |
False
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2/opinion |
False
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3/opinion |
False
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4/rapporteur |
|
| committees/5 |
|
| committees/6 |
|
| committees/7 |
|
| committees/8 |
|
| committees/9 |
|
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/2 |
|
| docs/3 |
|
| events/2 |
|
| events/3 |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/10/00248
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/9/12468
|
2024-06-30Show (26) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1/opinion |
False
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2/opinion |
False
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3/opinion |
False
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4/rapporteur |
|
| committees/5 |
|
| committees/6 |
|
| committees/7 |
|
| committees/8 |
|
| committees/9 |
|
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/2 |
|
| docs/3 |
|
| events/2 |
|
| events/3 |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/10/00248
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/9/12468
|
2024-06-29Show (26) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1/opinion |
False
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2/opinion |
False
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3/opinion |
False
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4/rapporteur |
|
| committees/5 |
|
| committees/6 |
|
| committees/7 |
|
| committees/8 |
|
| committees/9 |
|
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/2 |
|
| docs/3 |
|
| events/2 |
|
| events/3 |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/10/00248
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/9/12468
|
2024-06-28Show (26) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1/opinion |
False
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2/opinion |
False
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3/opinion |
False
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4/rapporteur |
|
| committees/5 |
|
| committees/6 |
|
| committees/7 |
|
| committees/8 |
|
| committees/9 |
|
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/2 |
|
| docs/3 |
|
| events/2 |
|
| events/3 |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/10/00248
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/9/12468
|
2024-06-27Show (26) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1/opinion |
False
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2/opinion |
False
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3/opinion |
False
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4/rapporteur |
|
| committees/5 |
|
| committees/6 |
|
| committees/7 |
|
| committees/8 |
|
| committees/9 |
|
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/2 |
|
| docs/3 |
|
| events/2 |
|
| events/3 |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/10/00248
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/9/12468
|
2024-06-26Show (26) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1/opinion |
False
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2/opinion |
False
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3/opinion |
False
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4/rapporteur |
|
| committees/5 |
|
| committees/6 |
|
| committees/7 |
|
| committees/8 |
|
| committees/9 |
|
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/2 |
|
| docs/3 |
|
| events/2 |
|
| events/3 |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/10/00248
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/9/12468
|
2024-06-25Show (26) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1/opinion |
False
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2/opinion |
False
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3/opinion |
False
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4/rapporteur |
|
| committees/5 |
|
| committees/6 |
|
| committees/7 |
|
| committees/8 |
|
| committees/9 |
|
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/2 |
|
| docs/3 |
|
| events/2 |
|
| events/3 |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/10/00248
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/9/12468
|
2024-06-24Show (27) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1/opinion |
False
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2/opinion |
False
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3/opinion |
False
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4/rapporteur |
|
| committees/5 |
|
| committees/6 |
|
| committees/7 |
|
| committees/8 |
|
| committees/9 |
|
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/2 |
|
| docs/3 |
|
| events/2 |
|
| events/3 |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/10/00248
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/9/12468
|
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament's position in 1st readingNew
Awaiting committee decision |
2024-06-23Show (27) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1/opinion |
False
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2/opinion |
False
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3/opinion |
False
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4/rapporteur |
|
| committees/5 |
|
| committees/6 |
|
| committees/7 |
|
| committees/8 |
|
| committees/9 |
|
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/2 |
|
| docs/3 |
|
| events/2 |
|
| events/3 |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/10/00248
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/9/12468
|
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament's position in 1st readingNew
Awaiting committee decision |
2024-06-22Show (27) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1/opinion |
False
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2/opinion |
False
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3/opinion |
False
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4/rapporteur |
|
| committees/5 |
|
| committees/6 |
|
| committees/7 |
|
| committees/8 |
|
| committees/9 |
|
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/2 |
|
| docs/3 |
|
| events/2 |
|
| events/3 |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/10/00248
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee/0 |
LIBE/9/12468
|
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament's position in 1st readingNew
Awaiting committee decision |
2024-04-26Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/4 |
|
| events/5/summary |
|
2024-04-25Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/4 |
|
| events/5/summary |
|
2024-04-17Show (4) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/4 |
|
| events/5 |
|
| events/6 |
|
| forecasts |
|
2024-04-16Show (4) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/4 |
|
| events/5 |
|
| events/6 |
|
| forecasts |
|
2024-04-15Show (4) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/4 |
|
| events/5 |
|
| events/6 |
|
| forecasts |
|
2024-04-13Show (4) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/4 |
|
| events/5 |
|
| events/6 |
|
| forecasts |
|
2024-04-12Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| forecasts |
|
2024-03-27Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/5 |
|
2024-03-15Show (3) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/4 |
|
| events/4/summary |
|
| forecasts/0 |
|
2024-03-14Show (3) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/4 |
|
| events/4/summary |
|
| forecasts/0 |
|
2024-03-13Show (3) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/4 |
|
| events/4/summary |
|
| forecasts/0 |
|
2024-03-12Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/4 |
|
| events/4/summary |
|
2024-03-11Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/4 |
|
| events/4/summary |
|
2024-03-10Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/4 |
|
| events/4/summary |
|
2024-03-09Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/4 |
|
| events/4/summary |
|
2024-03-08Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/4 |
|
| events/4/summary |
|
2024-03-06Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/4 |
|
| events/4/docs |
|
2024-03-01Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/4 |
|
2024-02-29Show (4) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/1 |
|
| events/4 |
|
| forecasts/1 |
|
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament's position in 1st reading |
2024-02-16Show (3) Changes | Timetravel
| events/2 |
|
| events/3 |
|
| forecasts |
|
2024-02-01Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/2 |
|
2024-01-26Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| links |
|
2024-01-24Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0/shadows/2/name |
Old
TOOM YanaNew
TOOM Jana |
2024-01-04Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/1 |
|
2023-11-24Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/4/rapporteur |
|
2023-11-17Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/0 |
|
2023-11-08Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| commission |
|
2023-10-29Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/0/date |
Old
2023-10-04T00:00:00New
2023-10-05T00:00:00 |
| docs/1/date |
Old
2023-10-11T00:00:00New
2023-10-12T00:00:00 |
2023-10-24Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/1 |
|
2023-10-07Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/0 |
|
2023-09-21Show (4) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
| committees/1 |
Old
New
|
| committees/2 |
Old
New
|
| committees/4 |
Old
New
|
2023-09-01Show (6) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
Old
New
|
| committees/2 |
Old
New
|
| committees/3 |
Old
New
|
| committees/4 |
Old
New
|
2023-07-28Show (3) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3/opinion |
False
|
| committees/4 |
|
2023-07-22Show (5) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/1/opinion |
False
|
| committees/2/opinion |
False
|
| committees/3 |
Old
New
|
| committees/4 |
Old
New
|
| events/0/summary |
|
2023-07-14Show (3) Changes
| events/1 |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
|
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Preparatory phase in ParliamentNew
Awaiting committee decision |