Activities of Beata KEMPA related to 2023/0202(COD)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT 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
Amendments (16)
Amendment 228 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
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 eachthe competent authority to decide the extent to which a complaint should be investigated, after taking into account the opinions of other authorities involved or at the local level in the Member State responsible for handling the case. While assessing the extent appropriate of an investigation, the lead supervisory authoritiesy should aim to deliver a satisfactory resolution to the complainant, which may not necessarily require exhaustively investigating all possible legal and factual elements arising from the complaint, but which provides an effective and quick remedy to the complainant. The assessment of the extent of the investigative measures required could be informed by the gravity of the alleged infringement, its systemic or repetitive nature, or the fact, as the case may be, that the complainant also took advantage of her or his rights under Article 79 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 233 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
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 235 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
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, tThe lead supervisory authority should communicate the preliminary findings provided for in Article 14 within nine months.
Amendment 239 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Supervisory authorities should avail of all means necessary to achieve a consensus in a spirit of sincere and effective cooperation. Therefore, if there is a divergence in opinion between the supervisory authorities concerned and the lead supervisory authority regarding the scope of a complaint-based investigation, including the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 the infringement of which will be investigated, or where the comments of the supervisory authorities concerned relate to an important change in the complex legal or technological assessment, the concerned authority should use the tools provided for under Articles 61 and 62 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Supervisory authorities should take all possible measures to ensure that ongoing proceedings are completed as quickly as possible.
Amendment 244 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) The rules regarding the administrative procedure applied by supervisory authorities when enforcing Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should ensure that the parties under investigation effectively have the opportunity to make known their views on the truth and relevance of the facts, objections and circumstances put forward by the supervisory authority throughout the procedure, thereby enabling them to exercise their rights of defence. The parties under investigation should have access to the documents required to defend themselves effectively and to comment on the allegations made against them. The preliminary findings set out the preliminary position on the alleged infringement of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 following investigation. They thus constitute an essential procedural safeguard which ensures that the right to be heard is observed. The parties under investigation should be provided with the documents required to defend themselves effectively and to comment on the allegations made against them, by receiving access to the administrative file.
Amendment 255 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
Amendment 278 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
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 287 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5
Article 3 – paragraph 5
5. Where the complainant claims confidentiality when submitting a complaint, the complainant shall also submit a non-confidential version of the complaint. The lead authorities must determine in each case and in each specific instance whether a document can be declassified.
Amendment 291 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Amendment 292 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the gravity of the alleged infringement, its duration and its relevance;
Amendment 298 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
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 310 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
The provisions in this section concern the relations between supervisory authorities and are not intended to confer rights on individuals or the parties under investigation. The procedure should reflect a spirit of common understanding and trust between the parties. At the same time, the procedure should not violate Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in particular the one-stop-shop dispute resolution architecture and the competences of the leading supervisory authority.
Amendment 366 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4
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 377 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4
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 389 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5
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 400 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3
Article 19 – paragraph 3
3. The right of access to the administrative file shall not extend to correspondence and exchange of views between the lead supervisory authority and supervisory authorities concerned. The information exchanged between the supervisory authorities for the purpose of the investigation of an individual case are internal documents and shall not be accessible to the parties under investigation or the complainant. Documents that have a direct bearing on the stability of the respondent's operations and their cybersecurity should be excluded from the right of access.