Activites

• 2008/08/06 Final act published in Official Journal
  • Decision 2008/615
  • OJ L 210 06.08.2008, p. 0001
• #2881
• 2008/06/23 Council Meeting
• 2008/06/23 End of procedure in Parliament
• 2008/06/23 Act adopted by Council after consultation of Parliament
• #2783
• 2008/06/05 Council Meeting
  • 2783 summary

    The Council reached a general approach on a decision laying down the necessary administrative and technical provisions for the implementation of a decision on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime (the "Prum decision").The "Prum decision", agreed by the Council in June 2007, is designed to improve the exchange of information between the authorities responsible for the prevention and investigation of criminal offences.To this end, the decision contains rules in the following areas:on the conditions and procedure for the automated transfer of DNA profiles, dactyloscopic data and certain national vehicle registration data;on the conditions for the supply of data in connection with major events with a crossborder dimension;on the conditions for the supply of information in order to prevent terrorist offences;on the conditions and procedure for stepping up cross-border police cooperation through various measures.The implementing decision establishes those common provisions which are indispensable for administrative and technical implementation of the forms of cooperation set out in the Prum decision, especially for automated exchange of DNA data, dactyloscopic data and vehicle registration data

• #2838
• 2007/12/06 Council Meeting
  • 2838
• #2827
• 2007/11/08 Council Meeting
  • 2827
• #2807
• 2007/06/12 Council Meeting
• 2007/06/07 Results of vote in Parliament
  • Results of vote in Parliament
  • T6-0228/2007 summary

    The European Parliament adopted a resolution drafted by Fausto CORREIA (PES, PT) and amended the initiative by 15 Member States on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime. The amendments were made to ensure that the supplying of data is not made automatically but only when necessary and proportionate, and based on particular circumstances that give reasons to believe that criminal offences will be committed. The main amendments were as follows:- following the opinion of the Legal Affairs Committee, Parliament felt that the legal basis should be changed so that the proposed decision (whose legal basis is Article 34(2)(c) of the TEU) would become a framework decision based on Article 34(2)(b). This would mean that it would be binding upon the Member States and would entail approximation of their laws and regulations;- Parliament introduced an amendment to ensure that data collected under this Decision will not be transferred or made available to a third country or to any international organisation. This article is particularly relevant taking into account recent transatlantic disagreements regarding data exchange in the frame of security and fight against terrorism (PNR, cooperation on CIA extraordinary renditions);- By means of this Framework Decision, the Member States intend to step up cross-border cooperation in matters covered by Title VI of the EU Treaty, particularly the exchange of information between agencies responsible for the prevention and investigation of criminal offences as listed in Article 2 of Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States as well as in Articles 1 to 4 of Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA on combating terrorism;- Parliament inserted definitions for several terms, including “criminal offences”, “terrorist offences” and “processing of personal data”. It defined "personal data" as any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person ('data subject'); an "identifiable person" means a person who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identification number or to one or more factors specific to his physical or physiological identity;- a new article provided for Member States to make a clear distinction between the personal data of various categories of persons (e.g. those suspected of having committed or taken part in a criminal offence, those convicted of a criminal offence, those who have been the victim of a criminal offence, etc.); - a new article states that the collection of cellular material for a particular individual who is suspected of having committed such a criminal offence, shall take place only on the basis of national law and only for a specific purpose and shall meet the requirements of necessity and proportionality;  - special categories of data concerning racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, party or trade union membership, sexual orientation or health shall be processed only if absolutely necessary and proportionate for the purpose of a specific case and in compliance with specific safeguards;- a new Article states that Member States shall adopt suitable measures to ensure the full implementation of the provisions of Chapter 6 (General Provisions on Data Protection) and shall lay down effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions to be imposed in the event of infringement, notably of those provisions aimed at ensuring the confidentiality and security of personal data processing; - the supplying of data in connection with major events with a cross-border dimension should be done only when necessary and proportionate and based on particular circumstances that give reason to believe that criminal offences will be committed;- personal data may be processed only for the purposes specified. The data supplied shall be deleted without delay once the purposes specified have been achieved or can no longer be achieved, and in any event after no more than two years from the date of supply.  Recorded data in general will be kept for three years, rather than two years;- Parliament incorporated into the proposal two articles of the Prüm Convention (signed between Belgium, Germany, Spain, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Austria). These dealt with "measures in the event of imminent danger" and "cooperation on request", with the aim of ensuring more efficient police cooperation in border areas. In urgent situations, officers from one Member State may, without the prior consent of another Member State cross the border between the two States so that, within an area of the host Member State's territory close to the border and in compliance with the host Member State's national law, they may take any provisional measures necessary to avert an imminent danger to the physical integrity of individuals. In that case, officers will immediately inform the host Member State of their presence. It will be the host Member State who will assume responsibility for the measures taken by the officers crossing the border;- officers from a seconding Member State who are involved in a joint operation in another Member State's territory shall wear their own national uniforms. A common distinctive sign must be carried by all members of the joint operation. The host Member State must deliver an accreditation document to the seconding Member States" officers, including the name, rank and a digitised photograph of the officer;- the Council shall carry out an evaluation of the administrative, technical and financial application and implementation of the Framework Decision every two years. The modalities of the automated searching and comparison of DNA and dactyloscopic data shall be evaluated six months after the date on which the Framework Decision takes effect. For vehicle registration data, this first evaluation shall take place three months after that date. Evaluation reports shall be transmitted to the European Parliament and the Commission.

• 2007/06/06 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
• 2007/05/24 Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
  • A6-0207/2007
• 2007/05/21 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
• 2007/03/13 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
• 2007/02/27 Legislative proposal published
  • 06566/2007 summary

    PURPOSE: to combat terrorism and cross-border crimes by facilitating and strengthening cross-border cooperation through the exchange of information between agencies responsible for the prevention and the investigation of criminal offences (integration into the EU legal framework of the parts of the Prüm Treaty relating to police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters (the so-called third pillar), with the exception of the provision relating to cross-border police intervention in the event of imminent danger (Article 48)).PROPOSED ACT: Initiative of Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, Spain, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Austria, Slovenia, Slovakia, Italy, Finland, Portugal,Romania and Sweden for a Council Decision.BACKGROUND: For effective international cooperation in the field of combating terrorism and cross-border crime, it is of fundamental importance that precise information may be exchanged swiftly and efficiently. The aim is to introduce procedures for promoting fast, efficient and inexpensive means of data exchange. For the joint use of data those procedures should be subject to accountability and incorporate appropriate guarantees as to the accuracy and security of the data during transmission and storage as well as procedures for recording data exchange and restrictions on the use of information exchanged. These requirements are satisfied by the Prüm Treaty of 27 May 2005 between Belgium, Germany, Spain, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Austria on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism, cross-border crime and illegal migration. In order that the substantive requirements of the Hague Programme can be fulfilled for all Member States and that its targets in terms of timescale can be achieved, the essential parts of the Prüm Treaty need to be made applicable to all Member States. This Council Decision should therefore be based on the main provisions of the Prüm Treaty.CONTENT: the aim and content of the document, according to the preamble, clearly states that one of the goals of the European Union is to give citizens a high degree of security in the area of freedom, security and justice by developing common procedures among the Member States in the field of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters. It points out that precise information for an effective international cooperation needs procedures in the Member States for "promoting fast, efficient and inexpensive means of data exchange.The preamble goes on to explain the need for a "hit/no hit" system to enable searching Member States to access data from other Member States' national DNA analysis files and automatic dactyloscopic identification systems. Member States are to have access rights to each other's DNA analysis files. All this should be achieved by networking national databases. It is further intended that this should allow close cooperation between police authorities, including joint security operations and cross-border intervention. The preamble further refers to guaranteeing the right to privacy and the protection of personal data. Since prior checks cannot be carried out in this regard in the case of cross-border on-line access to data bases, post hoc monitoring is to be carried out. A recital makes it clear that it will be for Member States to provide for efficient implementation of all data protection rules contained in this Decision.To this end, this proposed Decision contains rules in the following areas:Chapter 2: provisions on the conditions and procedure for the automated transfer of DNA profiles, dactyloscopic data and certain national vehicle registration data. All sections refer to "national contact points" competent for the supply of data and governed by the applicable national law.Chapter 3: provisions on the conditions for the supply of data in connection with major events with a cross-border dimension. This chapter makes it clear that the supply of non-personal data must be permitted under the supplying of the Member State's national law.Chapter 4: provisions on the conditions for the supply of information in order to prevent terrorist offences. It states that the supplying Member State imposes the conditions on the use made of the data by the receiving Member State - which will be bound by them - in compliance with national law.Chapter 5: provisions on the conditions and procedure for stepping up border police cooperation through various measures. This chapter deals with other forms of cooperation, such as joint operations, for which it is necessary to refer to what Member States' law permits and, for the rules of civil liability, to the law of the Member State in whose territory they are operating.Chapter 6: sets out the general provisions on data protection and makes it plain that each Member State is to guarantee a level of protection "in its national law" at least equal to that resulting from the Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of Individuals.

  • DG {'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/justice/', 'title': 'Justice'}, BARROT Jacques

Documents

• Legislative proposal published: 06566/2007
• Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A6-0207/2007
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T6-0228/2007
• Debate in Council: 2827
• Debate in Council: 2838
• Debate in Council: 2783
• : Decision 2008/615
• : OJ L 210 06.08.2008, p. 0001

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)