105 Amendments of Miriam DALLI related to 2016/0409(COD)
Amendment 171 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) It is necessary to specify the objectives of SIS, its technical architecture and its financing, to lay down rules concerning its end-to-end operation and use and to define responsibilities, the categories of data to be entered into the system, the purposes for which the data are to be entered, the criteria for their entry, rules on the deletion of alerts, the authorities authorised to access the data, the use of biometric identifiers and further rules on data protection and data processing.
Amendment 175 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) It is necessary to maintainfor the co-legislators to approve the maintenance of a manual setting out the detailed rules for the exchange of certain supplementary information concerning the action called for by alerts. National authorities in each Member State (the SIRENE Bureaux), should ensure the exchange of this information.
Amendment 183 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Member States should make the necessary technical arrangement so that each time the end-users are entitled to carry out a search in a national police or immigration database they alsre also entitled to search SIS in parallel in accordance with Article 4 of Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council45 . This should help ensure that SIS functions as the main compensatory measure in the area without internal border controls and better address the cross-border dimension of criminality and the mobility of criminals. _________________ 45 Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and on the free movement of such data and repealing Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA, OJ L 119, 4.5.2016 (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 89).
Amendment 188 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) This Regulation should set out the conditions for use of dactylographic data and facial images for identification purposes. The use of facial images for identification purposes in SIS should also help to ensure consistency in border control procedures where the identification and the verification of identity are required by the use of fingerprints and facial images. Searching with dactylographic data should be mandatory only if there is any doubt concerning the identity of a person identity of the person cannot be ascertained by any other means. Facial images for identification purposes should only be used in the context of regular border controls in self-service kiosks and electronic gates.
Amendment 192 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The introduction of an automated fingerprint identification service within SIS complements the existing Prüm mechanism on mutual cross-border online access to designated national DNA databases and automated fingerprint identification systems46 . .The Prüm mechanism enables interconnectivity of national fingerprint identification systems whereby a Member State can launch a request to ascertain if the perpetrator of a crime whose fingerprints have been found, is known in any other Member State. The Prüm mechanism verifies if the owner of the fingerprints are known in one point in time therefore if the perpetrator becomes known in any of the Member States later on he or she will not necessarily be captured. The SIS fingerprint search allows an active search of the perpetrator. Therefore, it should be possible to upload the fingerprints of an unknown perpetrator into SIS, provided that the owner of the fingerprints can be identified to a high degree of probability as the perpetrator of a serious crime or act of terrorism. This is in particular the case if fingerprints are found on the weapon or on any object used for the offencere is evidence to show that the owner of the fingerprints is the perpetrator of a serious crime or act of terrorism. The mere presence of the fingerprints at the crime scene should not be considered as indicating a high degree of probabilityevidence that the fingerprints are those of the perpetrator. A further precondition for the creation of such alert should be that the identity of the perpetrator cannot be established via any other national, European or international databases. Should such fingerprint search lead to a potential match the Member State should carry out further checks with their fingerprints, possibly with the involvement of fingerprint experts to establish whether he or she is the owner of the prints stored in SIS, and should establish the identity of the person. The procedures should be subject of national law. An identification as the owner of an "unknown wanted person" in SIS may substantially contribute to the investigation and it may lead to an arrest provided that all conditions for an arrest are met. _________________ 46 Council Decision 2008/615/JHA of 23 June 2008 on the stepping up of cross- border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime (OJ L 210, 6.8.2008, p.1); and Council Decision 2008/616/JHA of 23 June 2008 on the implementation of Decision 2008/615/JHA on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime (OJ L 210, 6.8.2008, p. 12).
Amendment 194 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Fingerprints found at a crime scene should be allowed to be checked against the fingerprints stored in SIS if it can be established to a high degree of probabilitythere is evidence to show that they belong to the perpetrator of the a serious crime or terrorist offence. Serious crimes should be those offences, for which there is automatic surrender to the Requesting Member State, as listed in Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA47 and ‘terrorist offence’ should be those offences under national law referred to in Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA48 .set out in Articles 3, 4, 12 and 14 of Directive (EU) 2017/541 on combating terrorism48 _________________ 47 Council Framework Decision (2002/584/JHA) of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States (OJ L 190, 18.07.2002, p. 1). 48 Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism (OJ L 164, 22.6.2002, p. 3).
Amendment 200 #
(20) It should be possible, in a narrow band of clearly defined cases, to add a DNA profile in cases where dactylographic data are not available, and which should only be accessible to authorised users. DNA profiles should facilitate the identification of missing persons in need of protection and particularly missing children, including by allowing the use of DNA profiles of parents or siblings to enable identification. DNA data should not contain references to racial origin or health information.
Amendment 207 #
(23) SIS should contain alerts on missing persons to ensure their protection or to prevent threats to public security. Issuing an alert in SIS for children at risk of abduction (i.e. in order to prevent a future harm that has not yet taken place as in the case of children who are at risk of parental abduction) should be limited, therefore it is appropriate to provide for strict and appropriate safeguards. In cases of children, these alerts and the corresponding procedures should serve the best interests of the child having regard to Article 24 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child of 20 November 1989.
Amendment 216 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) AWithout prejudice to the rights of suspects and accused persons, in particular, to their right to have access to a lawyer in accordance with Directive 2013/48/EU1a, a new action should be included for cases of suspected terrorism and serious crime, allowing for a person who is suspected to have committed a serious crime or where there is a reason to believe that he or she will commit a serious crime, to be stopped and questioned in order to supply the most detailed information to the issuing Member State. This new action should not amount either to searching the person or to his or her arrest. It should supply, however, sufficient information to decide about further actions. Serious crime should be the offences listed in Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHAose offences, for which there is automatic surrender to the requesting Member State as listed in Council Framework Decision2002/584/JHA1b the offences listed in Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA. _________________ 1a Directive 2013/48/EU on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceeding sand in European arrest warrant proceedings, and on the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty 1bCouncil Framework Decision (2002/584/JHA) of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States (0J L 190, 18.07.2002, p. 1).
Amendment 220 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) Alerts should not be kept in SIS longer than the time required to fulfil the purposes for which they were issued. In order to reduce the administrative burden on the different authorities involved in processing data on individuals for different purposes, it is appropriate to align the retention period of alerts on persons with the retention periods envisaged for return and illegal stay purposes. Moreover,t is therefore necessary to maintain a review of the necessity of an alert after a period of three years. It is already the case that Member States may and do regularly extend the expiry date of alerts on persons if the required action could not be taken within the original time period. Therefore, the retention period for alerts on persons should be a maximum of five years. As a general principle, alerts on persons should be automatically deleted from SIS as soon as they are no longer necessary, or after a period of fivthree years, except for alerts issued for the purposes of discreet, specific and inquiry checks. These should be deleted after one year. Alerts on objects entered for discreet checks, inquiry checks or specific checks should be automatically deleted from the SIS after a period of one year, as they are always related to persons. Alerts on objects for seizure or use as evidence in criminal proceedings should be automatically deleted from SIS after a period of five years, as after such a period the likelihood of finding them is very low and their economic value is nsignificantly diminished. Alerts on issued and blank identification documents should be kept for 10 years, as the validity period of documents is 10 years at the time of issuance. Decisions to keep alerts on persons should be based on a comprehensive individual assessment. Member States should review alerts on persons within the defined period and keep statistics about the number of alerts on persons for which the retention period has been extended.
Amendment 223 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Entering and extending the expiry date of a SIS alert should be subject to the necessary proportionality requirement, examining whether a concrete case is adequate, relevant and important enough to insert an alert in SIS. Offences pursuant to Articles 13, 24, 312 and 14 of Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHADirective (EU) 2017/54 on combating terrorism50 constitute a very serious threat to public security and integrity of life of individuals and to society, and these offences are extremely difficult to prevent, detect and investigate in an area without internal border controls where potential offenders circulate freely. Where a person or object is sought in relation to these offences, it is always necessary to create the corresponding alert in SIS on persons sought for a criminal judicial procedure, on persons or objects subject to a discreet, inquiry and specific check as well as on objects for seizure, as no other means would be as effective in relation to that purpose. _________________ 50 Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism (OJ L 164, 22.6.2002, p. 3).
Amendment 225 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) It is necessary to provide clarityrules concerning the deletion of alerts. An alert should be kept only for the time required to achieve the purpose for which it was entered. Considering the diverging practices of Member States concerning the definition of the point in time when an alert fulfils its purpose, it is appropriate to set out detailed criteria for each alert category to determine when it should be deleted from SIS.
Amendment 229 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) Data processed in SIS in application of this Regulation should not be transferred or made available to third countries or to international organisations. However, it is appropriate to strengthen cooperation between the European Union and Interpol by promoting an efficient exchange of data on missing and or stolen passport data. Where personal data is transferred from SIS to Interpol, these personal data should be subject to an adequate level of protection, guaranteed by an agreement, providing strict safeguards and conditions.
Amendment 232 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) The provisions of Directive (EU) 2016/680, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 should be further specified in this Regulation where necessary. With regard to processing of personal data by Europol, Regulation (EU) 2016/794 on the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement cooperation (Europol Regulation)54 applies. _________________ 54Regulation (EU) 2016/794 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2016 on the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) and replacing and repealing Council Decisions 2009/371/JHA, 2009/934/JHA, 2009/935/JHA, 2009/936/JHA and 2009/968/JHA (OJ L 135, 25.5.2016, p. 53).
Amendment 235 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) The national independent supervisory authorities should monitor the lawfulness of the processing of personal data by the Member States in relation to this Regulation and should be granted sufficient resources to carry out this task. The rights of data subjects for access, rectification and erasure of their personal data stored in SIS, and subsequent remedies before national courtthe number of cases brought before national courts and subsequent remedies as well as the mutual recognition of judgments should be set out. Therefore, it is appropriate to require annual statistics from Member States.
Amendment 237 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) Regulation (EU) 2016/794 (Europol Regulation) provides that Europol supports and strengthens actions carried out by the competent authorities of Member States and their cooperation in combating terrorism and serious crime and provides analysis and threat assessments. The extension of Europol's access rights to the SIS alerts on missing persons should further improve Europol's capacity to provide national law enforcement authorities with comprehensive operational and analytical products concerning trafficking in human beings and child sexual exploitation, including online. This would contribute to better prevention of these criminal offences, the protection of potential victims and to the investigation of perpetrators. Europol's European Cybercrime Centre would also benefit from new Europol access to SIS alerts on missing persons, including in cases of travelling sex offenders and child sexual abuse online, where perpetrators often claim that they have access to children or can get access to children who might have been registered as missing. Furthermore, since Europol's European Migrant Smuggling Centre plays a major strategic role in countering the facilitation of irregular migration, it should obtain access to alerts on persons who are refused entry or stay within the territory of a Member State either on criminal grounds or because of non-compliance with visa and stay conditions.
Amendment 239 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
Amendment 243 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) Regulation (EU) 2016/1624 of the European Parliament and of the Council56 provides for the purpose of this Regulation, that the host Member State is to authorise the members of the European Border and Coast Guard teams or teams of staff involved in return-related tasks, deployed by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, to consult European databases, where this consultation is necessary for fulfilling operational aims specified in the operational plan on border checks, border surveillance and return. Other relevant Union agencies, in particular the European Asylum Support Office and Europol, may also deploy experts as part of migration management support teams, who are not members of the staff of those Union agencies. The objective of the deployment of the European Border and Coast Guard teams, teams of staff involved in return- related tasks and the migration management support team is to provide for technical and operational reinforcement to the requesting Member States, especially to those facing disproportionate migratory challenges. Fulfilling the tasks assigned to the European Border and Coast Guard teams, teams of staff involved in return- related tasks and the migration management support team necessitates access to SIS via a technical interface of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency connecting to Central SIS. In cases where searches carried out by the team or the teams of staff in SIS reveal the existence of an alert issued by a Member State, the member of the team or the staff cannot take the required action unless authorised to do so by the host Member State. Therefore it should inform the Member States concerned allowing for follow up of the case. _________________ 56Regulation (EU) 2016/1624 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 September 2016 on the European Border and Coast Guard and amending Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Regulation (EC) No 863/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Council Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004 and Council Decision 2005/267/EC (OJ L 251 of 16.9.2016, p. 1).
Amendment 247 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) In accordance with Commission proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS)57 the ETIAS Central Unit of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency willmay have to perform verifications in SIS via ETIAS in order to perform thean assessment of the applications for travel authorisation which require, inter alia, to ascertain if the third country national applying for a travel authorisation is subject of a SIS alert. To this endherefore, should the ETIAS Regulation be adopted, the ETIAS Central Unit within the European Border and Coast Guard Agency should also have access to SIS to the extent necessary to carry out its mandate, namely to all alert categories on persons and alerts on blank and issued personal identification documents. _________________ 57 COM (2016)731 final.
Amendment 248 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) Owing to their technical nature, level of detail and need for regular updating, certain aspects of SIS cannot be covered exhaustively by the provisions of this Regulation. These include, for example, technical rules on entering data, updating, deleting and searching data, data quality and search rules related to biometric identifiers, rules on compatibility and priority of alerts, the adding of flags, links between alerts, specifying new object categories within the technical and electronic equipment category, setting the expiry date of alerts within the maximum time limit and the exchange of supplementary information. Implementing powers in respect of those aspects should therefore be conferred to the Commission. Technical rules on searching alerts should take into account the smooth operation of national applications.
Amendment 249 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49 a (new)
Recital 49 a (new)
(49 a) In order to ensure the proper functioning of both the SIS itself and the SIRENE Bureaux, responsible for the exchange of supplementary information on alerts, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission for the adoption of the SIRENE Manual.
Amendment 251 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In particular, this Regulation seekshould fully respect the protection of personal data in accordance with Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights while seeking to ensure a safe environment for all persons residing on the territory of the European Union and special protection for children who could be victim of trafficking or parental abduction while fully respecting the protection of personal data.
Amendment 254 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) ‘alert’ means a set of data, including where appropriate, biometric identifiers as referred to in Article 22 and in Article 40, entered in SIS allowing the competent authorities to identify a person or an object with a view to taking specific action;
Amendment 260 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) ‘processing of personal data’ means any operation or set of operations which is performed on personal data or on sets of personal data, whether or not by automated means, such as collection, recording, logging, organisation, structuring, storage, adaptation or alteration, retrieval, consultation, use, disclosure by transmission, dissemination or otherwise making available, alignment or combination, restriction, erasure or destruction;
Amendment 263 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point m
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point m
(m) ‘serious crime’ means offences listed in Article 2(1) and (2) of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 200271 ; , where those offences are punishable, in the issuing Member State, by a judicial decision executing a custodial sentence or detention order for a maximum period of at least three years; _________________ 71 Council Framework Decision (2002/584/JHA) of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States (OJ L 190, 18.07.2002, p. 1).
Amendment 266 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point n
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point n
(n) ‘terrorist offences’ means offences under national law referred to in Articles 1- 4 of Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA of 13 June 200272 . _________________ 72 Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism (OJ L 164, 22.6.2002, p. 3).3, 4, 12 and 14 of Directive (EU) 2017/541
Amendment 271 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Supplementary information shall be used only for the purpose for which it was transmitted in accordance with Article 61 unless prior consent is obtained from the issuing Member State.
Amendment 279 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Article 8 – paragraph 4
4. Detailed rules for the exchange of supplementary information shall be adopted by means of implementing measures in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 72(2) The Commission shall be empowered to adopt a delegated act in accordance with Article 71a concerning the formadoption of a manual - called the ‘SIRENE Manual’ - containing detailed rules for the exchange of supplementary information.
Amendment 280 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure, by means of the services provided by CS-SIS, that data stored in the national copy are, by means of automatic updates referred to in Article 4(4), identical to and consistent with the SIS database, and that a search in its national copy, which will be established voluntarily by the Member State, produces a result equivalent to that of a search in the SIS database. EIn so far as this is possible, end-users shall receive the data required to perform their tasks, in particular all data required, where necessary, all available data which would allow for the identification of the data subject and to takeallow the required action to be taken.
Amendment 286 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. The recordlogs shall show, in particular, the history of the alert, the date and time of the data processing activity, the data used to perform a search, a reference to the data transmittprocessed and the names of both the competent authority and the person responsible for processing the data.
Amendment 287 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3
Article 12 – paragraph 3
3. If the search is carried out with dactylographic data or facial image in accordance with Articles 40, 41 and 42 the logs shall show, in particular, the type of data used to perform a search, a reference to the type of data transmittprocessed and the names of both the competent authority and the person responsible for processing the data.
Amendment 288 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4
Article 12 – paragraph 4
4. The logs may be used only for the purpose referred to in paragraph 1 and shall be deleted at the earliest one year, and at the latest three years,two years after their creation.
Amendment 292 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that each authority entitled to access SIS data takes the measures necessary to comply with this Regulation and cooperates, where necessary, with the national supervisory authority.
Amendment 294 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Before being authorised to process data stored in SIS and periodically after access to SIS data has been granted, the staff of the authorities having a right to access SIS shall receive appropriate training about data security, data protection rules and the procedures on data processing as set out in the SIRENE Manual. The staff shall be informed of any relevant criminal offences and penalties laid down in accordance with Article 66a.
Amendment 301 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
2. The logs shall show, in particular, the history of the alerts, the date and time of the data transmittprocessed, the type of data used to perform searches, the reference to the type of data transmittprocessed and the name of the competent authority responsible for processing the data.
Amendment 302 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 3
Article 18 – paragraph 3
3. If the search is carried out with dactylographic data or facial image in accordance with Articles 40, 41 and 42 the logs shall show, in particular, the type of data used to perform the search, a reference to the type data transmittprocessed and the names of both the competent authority and the person responsible for processing the data.
Amendment 304 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 4
Article 18 – paragraph 4
4. The logs may only be used for the purposes mentioned in paragraph 1 and shall be deleted at the earliest one year, and at the latest three years,two years after their creation. The logs which include the history of alerts shall be erased after one to threetwo years after deletion of the alerts.
Amendment 307 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Amendment 314 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point j
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point j
(j) whether the person concerned is armed, violent, has escaped or is involved in an activity as referred to in Articles 13, 2 , 34, 12 and 14 of Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHADirective (EU) 2017/541 on combating terrorism;
Amendment 317 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point x
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point x
(x) relevant DNA profiles subject to Article 22(1)(b) of this Regulationwhere permitted in accordance with Article 22(1)(b) and Article 32(2)(a) and (c), relevant DNA profiles;
Amendment 322 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2
Article 21 – paragraph 2
2. Where a person or an object is sought by a Member State as a suspect, or an object is sought, in relation to an offence that falls under Articles 1 to 4 of Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA3,4, 12 and 14 of Directive (EU) 2017/541 on combating terrorism, the Member State shall, in all circumstances, create the corresponding alert under either Article 34, 36 or 38 as appropriate.
Amendment 332 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) Photographs, facial images, and dactylographic data and DNA profiles shall only be entered following a quality check to ascertain the fulfilment of a minimum data quality standard.
Amendment 335 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) A DNA profile may only be added to alerts only in the situations provided for in Article 32(2)(a) and (c), only following a quality check to ascertain the profile fulfils a minimum data quality standard, and only where photographs, facial images or dactylographic data suitable for identification are not available. The DNA profiles of persons who are direct ascendants, descendants or siblings of the alert subject may be added to the alert provided that those persons concerned gives explicit consent. TWhe racial origin of the person shall not be included in the DNA profilere a DNA profile is added to an alert, that profile should contain the minimum information strictly necessary for the identification of the missing person and, in all event, shall always exclude the racial origin and health information of that person.
Amendment 338 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 2
2. Quality standards shall be established for the storage of the data referred to under paragraph 1(a) and (b) of this Article and Article 40. The specification of these standards shall be laid down by means of implementing measures and updated in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 72(2).
Amendment 347 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
2. Where available, allnd provided that the conditions for entering such data have been met, the other data listed in Article 20(3) shall also be entered.
Amendment 351 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1
Article 24 – paragraph 1
1. Where a Member State considers that to give effect to an alert entered in accordance with Articles 26, 32, 36 and 3640 is incompatible with its national law, its international obligations or essential national interests, it may subsequently require that a flag be added to the alert to the effect that the action to be taken on the basis of the alert will not be taken in its territory. The flag shall be added by the SIRENE Bureau of the issuing Member State.
Amendment 353 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 4
Article 26 – paragraph 4
4. The issuing Member State may, in the case of an ongoing search operation and following the authorisation of the relevant judicial authority of the issuing Member State, temporarily make an existing alert for arrest issued under Article 26 of this Regulation unavailable for searching to the effect that the alert shall not be searchable by the end-user and will only be accessible to the SIRENE Bureaux. This functionality shall be used for a period not exceeding 48 hours. If operationally necessary, however, it may be extended by further periods of 4872 hours. Member States shall keep statistics about the number of alerts where this functionality has been used.
Amendment 358 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – point a – point ii
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – point a – point ii
(ii) in order to prevent a threats to public security;
Amendment 370 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3
Article 32 – paragraph 3
3. Paragraph 2(a) shall apply in particularonly to children and to persons who have to be interned following a decision by a competent authority.
Amendment 375 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 4
Article 32 – paragraph 4
4. An entry for an alert on a child referred to in paragraph 2(c) shall be entered at the request of therequested by a competent judicial authority of the Member State that has jurisdiction in matters of parental responsibility in accordance with Council Regulation No 2201/200374 where a concrete and apparent risk exists that the child may be unlawfully and imminently removed from the Member State where that competent judicial authority is situated.1a In Member States which are party to the Hague Convention of 19 October 1996 on Jurisdiction, Applicable law, Recognition, Enforcement and Cooperation in Respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children and where Council Regulation No 2201/2003 does not apply, the provisions of the Hague Convention are applicable. _________________ 741aCouncil Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 (OJ L 338, 23.12.2003, p. 1).
Amendment 382 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 6
Article 32 – paragraph 6
6. Four months before a child who is the subject of an alert under this Article reaches adulthood, CS-SIS shall automatically notify the issuing Member State that the reason for request and the action to be taken have to be updated or the alert shas toll be deleted.
Amendment 385 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. Where a person as referred to in Article 32 is located, the competent authorities shall, subject to paragraph 2, communicate his or her whereabouts to the Member State issuing the alert. In the case of missing children or children who need to be placed under protection the executing Member State shall consult immediately the issuing Member State in order to agree without delayin 12 hours on the measures to be taken in order to safeguard the best interest of the child. The competent authorities may, in the cases referred to in Article 32(2)(a) and (c), move the person to a safe place in order to prevent him or her from continuing his journey, if so authorised by national law.
Amendment 391 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 36 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) where there is a clear indicationevidence that a person intends to commit or is committing a serious crime, in particular then offences referred to in Article 2(2) of the Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA where that offence is punishable, in the issuing Member State, by a judicial decisions executing a custodial sentence or detention order for maximum period of at least three years;
Amendment 393 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 36 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) where the information referred to in Article 37(1) is necessary for the execution of a criminal sentence of a person convicted of a serious crime, in particular then offences referred to in Article 2(2) of the Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA where that offence is punishable, in the issuing Member State, by a judicial decisions executing a custodial sentence or detention order for a maximum period of at least three years; or
Amendment 395 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 36 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) where an overall assessment of a person, in particular on the basis of past criminal offences, gives reason to believe that that person may also commit serious crimes in the future, in particular the, in the future, commit an offences referred to in Article 2(2) of the Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA, where that offence is punishable, in the issuing Member State, by a judicial decisions executing a custodial sentence or detention order for a maximum period of at least three years.
Amendment 396 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 3
Article 36 – paragraph 3
3. In addition, an alert may be issued in accordance with national law, at the request of the authorities responsible for national security, where there is a concrete indicationclear evidence that the information referred to in Article 37(1) is necessary in order to prevent a serious threat by the person concerned or other serious threats to internal or external national security. The Member State issuing the alert pursuant to this paragraph shall inform the other Member States thereof. Each Member State shall determine to which authorities this information shall be transmitted.
Amendment 398 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 4
Article 36 – paragraph 4
4. Where there is a clear indicationevidence that vehicles, boats, aircraft and containers are connected with the serious crimes referred to in paragraph 2 or the serious threats referred to in paragraph 3, alerts on those vehicles, boats, aircraft and containers may be issued.
Amendment 399 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 5
Article 36 – paragraph 5
5. Where there is a clear indicationevidence that blank official documents or issued identity documents are connected with the serious crimes referred to in paragraph 2 or the serious threats referred to in paragraph 3, alerts on those documents, regardless of the identity of the original holder of the identity document, if any, may be issued. The technical rules necessary for entering, updating, deleting and searching the data referred to in this paragraph shall be laid down and developed by means of implementing measures in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 72(2).
Amendment 405 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 4
Article 37 – paragraph 4
4. Depending on the operational circumstances and in accordance with national law, and without prejudice to the rights of suspects and accused persons to have access to a lawyer in accordance with Directive2013/48/EU1a, an inquiry check shall comprise a more in-depth check and a questioning of the person. Where inquiry checks are not authorised by the law of a Member State, they shall be replaced by discreet checks in that Member State. _________________ 1a Directive 2013/48/EU on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and in European arrest warrant proceedings, and on the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty
Amendment 406 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 5
Article 37 – paragraph 5
5. During specific checks, persons, vehicles, boats, aircraft, containers and objects carried, may be searched in accordance with national law for the purposes referred to in Article 36. Searches shall be carried out in accordance with national law. Where specific checks are not authorised by the law of a Member State, they shall be replaced by inquirydiscreet checks in that Member State.
Amendment 409 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 3
Article 38 – paragraph 3
3. The definition ofCommission shall be empowered to adopt a delegated act in accordance with Article 70b to define new sub- categories of object under paragraph 2(n) and t. The technical rules necessary for entering, updating, deleting and searching the data referred to in paragraph 2 shall be laid down and developed by means of implementing measures in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 72(2).
Amendment 418 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1
Article 40 – paragraph 1
Dactylographic data may be entered in SIS, not related to persons who are subject of the alerts. These dactylographic data shall be either complete or incomplete sets of fingerprints or palm prints discovered at the scenes of crimes under investigation, of serious crime ands or terrorist offence and whs undere it can be established to a high degree of probability that they belong to the perpetrator of the offence. The dactylographic data in this category shall be stored as “unknown suspect or wanted person” provided that the competent authoritiesnvestigation and where there is other evidence that the dactylographic data belong to the perpetrator of the offence. If the competent authority of the issuing Member State cannot establish the identity of the personsuspect by using any other national, European or international database.relevant data base, the dactylographic data in this category may be stored as “unknown suspect or wanted person”
Amendment 426 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1
Article 42 – paragraph 1
1. PWhere such data is contained within an alert in the SIS, either photographs, facial images, dactylographic data andor DNA profiles shall be retrieved from SIS to verify the identity of a person who has been located as a result of an alphanumeric search made in SIS.
Amendment 427 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1
Article 42 – paragraph 1
1. PWhere such data is contained within an alert in the SIS, either photographs, facial images, dactylographic data andor DNA profiles shall be retrieved from SIS to verify the identity of a person who has been located as a result of an alphanumeric search made in SIS.
Amendment 436 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 3
Article 42 – paragraph 3
3. Dactylographic data stored in SIS in relation to alerts issued pursuant to Articles 26, 34(1) b) and d) and Article 36 may also be searched by using complete or incomplete sets of fingerprints or palm prints discovered at the scenes of crimserious crimes or terrorist offences under investigation, and where it can be established to a high degree of probability that they belong to the perpetrator of the offence provided that the competent authorities are unable to establish the identity of the person by using any other national, European or international database.
Amendment 437 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 4
Article 42 – paragraph 4
Amendment 446 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) examining the conditions and taking decisions related to the entry and stay of third-country nationals on the territory of the Member States, including on residence permits and long-stay visas, and to the return of third-country nationals, insofar as these authorities do not constitute "determining authorities" as defined in Article 2(f) of Directive 2013/32/EU, and where relevant providing advice in accordance with Regulation (EU) 377/2004.
Amendment 448 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The serviccompetent authorities in the Member States responsible for issuing registration certificates for vehicles, as referred to in Council Directive 1999/37/EC75 , shall have access only to the following data entered into SIS in accordance with Article 38(2)(a), (b), (c) and (l) of this Regulation for the sole purpose of checking whether vehicles presented to them for registration have been stolen, misappropriated or lost or are sought as evidence in criminal proceedings: _________________ 75 Council Directive 1999/37 of 29 April 1999 on the registration of documents for vehicles (OJ L 138, 1.6.1999, p. 57).
Amendment 449 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Access to those data by the serviccompetent authorities responsible for issuing registration certificates for vehicles shall be governed by the national law of that Member State.
Amendment 450 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 2
Article 44 – paragraph 2
Amendment 451 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 3
Article 44 – paragraph 3
Amendment 453 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The serviccompetent authorities in the Member States responsible for issuing registration certificates or ensuring traffic management for boats, including boat engines and aircraft shall have access only to the following data entered into SIS in accordance with Article 38(2) of this Regulation for the sole purpose of checking whether boats, including boat engines; aircraft or containers presented to them for registration or subject of traffic management have been stolen, misappropriated or lost or are sought as evidence in criminal proceedings:
Amendment 455 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 456 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 2
Article 45 – paragraph 2
Amendment 457 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 3
Article 45 – paragraph 3
Amendment 467 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 7
Article 46 – paragraph 7
7. Any copies, as referred to in paragraph 6, which lead to off-line databases may be retained for a period not exceeding 48 hours. That period may be extended in an emergency until the emergency comes to an end. EuropolWhere Europol creates an off-line database with SIS data, it shall report any such extensionsa database to the European Data Protection Supervisor.
Amendment 471 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1
Article 48 – paragraph 1
1. In accordance with Article 40(8) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1624, the host Member State shall authorise members of the European Border and Coast Guard teams or teams of staff involved in return- related tasks as well as the members of the migration management support teams shall, within their mandate, have the right to access and search data entered in SIS within their mandateto consult the SIS where that is necessary for fulfilling operational aims specified in the operational plan on border checks, border surveillance and return.
Amendment 472 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 2
Article 48 – paragraph 2
2. Members of the European Border and Coast Guard teams or teams of staff involved in return-related tasks as well asand the members of the migration management support teams shall access and search data entered in SIS in accordance with paragraph 1 via the technical interface set up and maintained by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency as referred to in Article 49(1).
Amendment 474 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 3
Article 48 – paragraph 3
3. Where a search by a member of the European Border and Coast Guard teams or teams of staff involved in return-related tasks or by a member of the migration management support team reveals the existence of an alert in SIS, the issuing Member State shall be informed thereof. In accordance with Article 40 of Regulation (EU) 2016/1624, members of the teams may only act in response to an alert in SIS under instructions from and, as a general rule, in the presence of border guards or staff involved in return-related tasks of the host Member State in which they are operating. The host Member State may authorise members of the teams to act on its behalf.
Amendment 475 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 4
Article 48 – paragraph 4
4. Every instance of access and every search made by a member of the European Border and Coast Guard teams or teams of staff involved in return-related tasks or by a member of the migration management support team shall be logged in accordance with the provisions of Article 12 and every use made by them of data accessed by them shall be logged.
Amendment 476 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 5
Article 48 – paragraph 5
5. Access to data entered in SIS shall be limited to a member of the European Border and Coast Guard teams or teams of staff involved in return-related tasks or by a member of the migration management support team and shall not be extended to any other team members.
Amendment 478 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 1
Article 49 – paragraph 1
1. For the purposes of Article 48(1) and paragraph 2 of this Article the European Border and Coast Guard Agency shall set up and maintain a technical interface which allows a direct connection to Central SISDuly authorised staff of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency shall have access to the statistical data contained in the central repository referred to in Article 54(6) for the purpose of carrying out risk analyses and vulnerability assessments as referred to in Articles 11 and 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/1624, for the purpose of analysing the threats that may affect the functioning or security of the external borders, have the right to access and search data entered in SIS, in accordance with Articles 24 and 27.
Amendment 480 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 2
Article 49 – paragraph 2
2. The European Border and Coast Guard Agency shall,In so far as it is necessary for the purpose of performing itsany tasks conferred on it by the Regulation establishing a European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS), the ETIAS Central Unit within the European Border and Coast Guard Agency shall have the right to access and search data entered in SIS, in accordance with Articles 26, 32, 34, 36 and 38(2) (j) and (k).
Amendment 482 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 3
Article 49 – paragraph 3
Amendment 486 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 5
Article 49 – paragraph 5
Amendment 490 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 2
Article 51 – paragraph 2
2. A Member State issuing an alert shall, within fivthree years of its entry into SIS, review the need to retain it. Alerts issued for the purposes of Article 36 of this Regulation shall be kept for a maximum period of one year.
Amendment 494 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 5
Article 51 – paragraph 5
5. IAs soon cases where it becomes clear to staff in the SIRENE Bureau, who are responsible for coordinating and verifying of data quality, that an alert on a person or an object has achieved its purpose and should be deleted from SIS, the staff shall notify the authority which created the alert to bring this issue to the attention of the authority. The authority shall have 30seven calendar days from the receipt of thisat notification to indicate that the alert has been or shall be deleted or shall state reasons for the retention of the alert. If the 30seven-day period expires without such a reply, the alert shall be deleted by the staff of the SIRENE Bureau. SIRENE Bureaux shall report any recurring issues in this area to their national supervisory authority.
Amendment 499 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 1
Article 52 – paragraph 1
1. Alerts for arrest for surrender or extradition purposes pursuant to Article 26 shall be deleted once the person has been surrendered or extradited to the competent authorities of the issuing Member State. They mayshall also be deleted where the judicial decision on which the alert was based has been revoked by the competent judicial authority according to national law.
Amendment 507 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 52 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Where a hit has been achieved in a Member State and the address details were forwarded to the issuing Member State and a subsequent hit in that Member State reveals the same address details the hit shall be logged in the executing Member State but neither the address details nor supplementary shall be resent to the issuing Member State. In such cases the executing Member State shall inform the issuing Member State of the repeated hits and the issuing Member State shall considerarry out a comprehensive individual assessment on the need to maintain the alert.
Amendment 511 #
(b a) once the check has been carried out by an executing Member State
Amendment 515 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 6
Article 52 – paragraph 6
6. Alerts on unknown wanted persons pursuant to Article 40 shall be deleted in accordance with the following rulesupon:
Amendment 516 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 8 a (new)
Article 52 – paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. a decision to delete by the competent authority of the issuing Member State
Amendment 518 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 3
Article 53 – paragraph 3
3. Technical copies, as referred to in paragraph 2, which lead to off-line databases may be retained for a period not exceeding 48 hours. That period may be extended in the event of an emergency until the emergency comes to an end.
Amendment 522 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 7
Article 53 – paragraph 7
7. Any use of data which does not comply with paragraphs 1 to 6 shall be considered as misuse under the national law of each Member State. Any such misuse of data shall be subject to sanction in accordance with Article 66a
Amendment 530 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 3
Article 56 – paragraph 3
3. Where a Member State other than that which issued an alert has evidence suggesting that an item of data is factually incorrect or has been unlawfully stored, it shall, through the exchange of supplementary information, inform the issuing Member State at the earliest opportunity and not later than 10two working days after the said evidence has come to its attention. The issuing Member State shall check the communication and, if necessary, correct or delete the item in question without delay.in seven working days from the notification
Amendment 534 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 4
Article 56 – paragraph 4
4. Where the Member States are unable to reach agreement within twoone months of the time when the evidence first came to light, as described in paragraph 3, the Member State which did not issue the alert shall submit the matter to the European Data Protection Supervisor and the national supervisory authorities concerned for a decision.
Amendment 536 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 5
Article 56 – paragraph 5
5. The Member States shall exchange supplementary information where a person complains that he or she is not the person wanted by an alert. Where the outcome of the check shows that there are in fact two different persons the complainant shall be informed of the measures laid down in Article 59. and of his or her right to redress in accordance with Article 66(1)
Amendment 538 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 3
Article 57 – paragraph 3
3. Not later than 72 hours after having become aware of a security incident, Member States shall notify the Commission, the Agency and the national supervisory authority of securitythat incidents. The Agency shall notify the Commission and the European data Protection Supervisor of security incidents.
Amendment 540 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 57 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Where a security incident is caused by the misuse of data, Member States, Europol, Eurojust and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency shall ensure that sanctions may be imposed in accordance with Article 66a.
Amendment 545 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 59 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. For the purpose of this Article, and subject to the explicit consent of the person whose identity was misused, only the following personal data may be entered and further processed in SIS :;
Amendment 549 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 5
Article 59 – paragraph 5
5. The data referred to in paragraph 3 shall be deleted as soon as this is requested by the person whose identity was misused or at the same time as the corresponding alert or earlier where the person so requests.is deleted
Amendment 565 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 66 a (new)
Article 66 a (new)
Article 66 a Sanctions Member States shall ensure that any wrongful entry of data into SIS, misuse of data entered into SIS, or exchange of supplementary information contrary to this Regulation is subject to sanctions under national law. Such sanctions shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Europol, Eurojust and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency shall ensure that any misuse of data entered into SIS by their staff or members of their teams accessing SIS under their authority is subject to sanctions which shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.
Amendment 581 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 3
Article 71 – paragraph 3
3. The Agency shall produce, daily, monthly and annual statistics showing the number of records per category of alert, the annual number of hits per category of alert, how many times SIS was searched and how many times SIS was accessed for the purpose of entering, updating or deleting an alert in total and for each Member State. The statistics produced shall not contain any personal data. The annual statistical report shall be published. The Agency shall also provide annual statistics on the use of the functionality on making an alert issued under pursuant to Article 26 of this Regulation temporarily non-searchable, in total and for each Member State, including any extensions to the retention period of 48 hours.
Amendment 583 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 4
Article 71 – paragraph 4
4. Member States as well as Europol, Eurojust and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency shall provide the Agency and the Commission with the information necessary to draft the reports referred to in paragraphs 3, 7 and 8. This information shall include separate statistics on the number of searches carried out by, or on behalf of, by the servicby the competent authorities in the Member States responsible for issuing vehicle registration certificates and the serviccompetent authorities in the Member States responsible for issuing registration certificates or ensuring traffic management for boats, including boat engines; aircraft and containers. The statistics shall also show the number of hits per category of alert.
Amendment 593 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 a (new)
Article 71 a (new)
Article 71 a Exercise of the delegation 1. The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the conditions laid down in this Article. 2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 8(4), 12(7), 32(5), 42(4), 51(3) and 75(2a) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from ... [the date of entry into force of this Regulation]. 3. The delegation of power referred to in Articles 8(4), 12(7), 32(5), 42(4), 51(3) and 75(2a) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force. 4.Before adopting a delegated act, the Commission shall consult experts designated by each Member State in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April2016 on Better Law-Making. 5. As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council. 6. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Articles 8(4), 12(7), 32(5), 42(4), 51(3) and 75(2a) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of two months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council