Procedure completed
| Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead | LIBE | WEBER Renate (ALDE) |
Legal Basis Treaty on the European Union (after Amsterdam) M 031, Treaty on the European Union (after Amsterdam) M 034-p2c
Activites
- 2009/06/04 Final act published in Official Journal
- #2916
-
2008/12/16
Council Meeting
-
2008/12/16
End of procedure in Parliament
-
2008/12/16
Act adopted by Council after consultation of Parliament
-
2008/09/02
Results of vote in Parliament
- Results of vote in Parliament
-
T6-0384/2008
summary
The European Parliament adopted by 615 votes to 64, with 16 abstentions, the initiative of several Member States to strengthen Eurojust. The report had been tabled for consideration in plenary by Renate WEBER (ALDE, RO) on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs.Above all, the legislative resolution calls on both the Council and the Commission to give priority to dealing with any future proposal to amend this text by urgent procedure, as set out in the Lisbon Treaty and once this treaty enters into force.In concrete, the Parliament intended, above all, to strengthen the ‘data protection’ section of the proposal and to improve Parliament’s scrutiny of Eurojust’s tasks and roles. The main amendments, approved under the consultation procedure, can be summarised as follows:ECC: in terms of Eurojust’s newly created ‘Emergency Coordination Cells’ (ECC), the Parliament considers that these should be contactable via a single contact point; the representative of the ECC should be able to act on a 24 hours/7 days basis.Special investigative measures: due to the lack of a clear and limited definition of ‘special investigative measures’, the Parliament removed the possibility for Eurojust to request that such measures be taken, in order to avoid any abusive interpretation of ‘special investigative measures’. The Parliament considers that all legal investigative methods are provided for by point (i) of article 6 (‘investigation and prosecution of specific acts’). The same can be said for ‘other measures justified for the investigation or prosecution’, which the Parliament also deleted to avoid any abuse.Access to information: the Parliament considers it necessary to limit access to certain information. It points out that the national member of Eurojust can only access registers of his or her Member State and not registers of other Member States.Information exchange: the Parliament specifies the types of information that can be exchanged. Firstly, the competent authorities of the Member States should exchange with Eurojust any information necessary for the performance of its tasks, in accordance with the rules on data protection set out in this Decision. To the information that may be exchanged, the Parliament adds information relating to sexual exploitation of children and child pornography. In an oral amendment proposed by Evelyne GEBHARDT (PES, DE) the plenary also adds other forms of offences where there are factual indications that a criminal organisation or serious crimes are involved. The Parliament also specifies the information that can be exchanged in the framework of judicial cooperation. A list of the types of data that can be exchanged is therefore proposed, including: the DNA profile; photographs; telephone numbers; telephone and e-mail traffic related data excluding the transmission of content data; e-mail accounts; vehicle registration data.An a posteriori reporting system: there are several amendments introduced which deal with situations when national members have used their judicial powers in urgent cases. In order to avoid any abuse of their powers, the Parliament proposes the introduction of an a posteriori reporting system where it should be explained why a national member could not identify a competent national authority in a timely manner. This data should also be included in annual reports of Eurojust.Limit on the transmission of information to third countries: according to the Parliament, the transmission of personal data by Eurojust to certain entities of third States which are not subject to the Council of Europe Convention of 28 January 1981 may be effected only when an adequate and comparable level of data protection is ensured.Data protection: the Parliament strengthened the set of provisions on data protection. It specifies that when processing data, Eurojust may process only the personal data on persons who, under the national legislation of the Member States concerned, are the subject of a criminal investigation or prosecution. The Parliament also considers that it is important to ensure appropriate protection of personal data for all types of personal data filing systems used by Eurojust. In this respect, the Rules of Procedure on the processing and protection of personal data at Eurojust should also apply to structured manual files, in other words, to case-related files that are compiled manually by national members or assistants and are organised in a logical way. Eurojust should also ensure that the content and titles of e-mails are not disclosed in the framework of judicial cooperation.Remedy: the Member States shall provide an adequate judicial remedy where the investigation was carried out at the request of Eurojust on the basis of manifestly insufficient grounds.Parliamentary supervision: the Parliament wishes to be better informed of Eurojust’s activities. It therefore asks that the Joint Supervisory Body submit an annual report to the European Parliament and the Council. At the same time, once every two years the Joint Supervisory Body, together with the respective third State or entity, shall evaluate the implementation of the provisions of the relevant cooperation agreement relating to the protection of the data exchanged. The President of Eurojust, on behalf of the College, shall report every year to the European Parliament and the Council on the activities and management, including budgetary management, of Eurojust (including, for example, information on any criminal policy problems within the Union highlighted as a result of Eurojust's activities or proposals for the improvement of judicial cooperation in criminal matters). Lastly, the Commission shall at regular intervals examine the implementation by the Member States of this Decision and shall submit a report thereon to the European Parliament.
- 2008/09/01 Debate in Parliament
- #2887
-
2008/07/24
Council Meeting
-
2887
summary
The Council agreed on a general approach to a draft Decision on strengthening Eurojust. At its meetings on 18 April and 6 June 2008, the Council had already agreed to a general approach on certain articles related:the composition and tasks of Eurojust,the status of its national members and its staff,on articles concerning the on-call coordination, the exercise of powers of national members of Eurojust, the Eurojust national coordination system,the exchange of information between Member States and national members.
-
2887
summary
- 2008/07/07 Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
-
2008/06/24
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
- #2783
- 2008/06/05 Council Meeting
- #2863
-
2008/04/18
Council Meeting
-
2863
summary
Pending the withdrawal of a parliamentary scrutiny reservation, the Council adopted a general approach on certain aspects of a draft decision strengthening Eurojust.In particular, the Council agreed on the articles of that proposal which relate to:the composition of Eurojust; its tasks; the status of its national members and its staff.Work on the remaining provisions of the instrument will continue at expert level.This proposal was submitted on January 2008 by Slovenia, France, the Czech Republic, Sweden, Spain, Belgium, Poland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Estonia, Austria and Portugal.
-
2863
summary
-
2008/02/21
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
-
2008/02/13
Legislative proposal published
-
05613/2008
summary
PURPOSE: initiative of Belgium, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Spain, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Slovakia and Sweden with a view to strengthen Eurojust and amend Decision 2002/187/JHA.PROPOSED ACT: Council Decision.BACKGROUND: Eurojust was set up by Decision 2002/187/JHA (seeCNS/2000/0817) as a body with legal personality to stimulate and improve coordination and cooperation between competent judicial authorities of the Member States. After more than 5 years, it is time to assess the experience gained by Eurojust and further to enhance its operational effectiveness by taking account of that experience. The time has come to ensure that Eurojust becomes more operational and that the status of national members is approximated.CONTENT: this proposal makes provision for the following:- the setting up of an Emergency Coordination Cell within Eurojust in order to make Eurojust available around the clock and enable it to intervene in urgent cases. The ECC will be composed of one representative per Member State, who may be the national member, his or her deputy, or an assistant entitled to replace the national member. The ECC will be contactable and able to act on an around the clock basis;- Eurojust national coordination systems will set up in Member States to coordinate the work carried out by the national correspondents for Eurojust, the national correspondent for terrorism matters, the national correspondent for the European Judicial Network, other contact points of the European Judicial Network and representatives in the Network for Joint Investigation Teams and of the Networks set up by Decision 2002/494/JHA(war crime networks), Decision 2007/845/JHA (asset recovery offices) and by any forthcoming decision on a contact point network against corruption;- the issues of duplication of efforts and clarification of the division of work between Eurojust and the European Judicial Network need to be resolved, while maintaining the specificity of the European Judicial Network. While maintaining its specificity as a network and its national and operational capacities, the European Judicial Network will be able to draw on the Community budget for operational expenses;- Eurojust's capacity to work with external partners, such as third countries, Europol, OLAF and FRONTEX will be strengthened;- lastly, provision will be made for Eurojust to second liaison magistrates to third countries.
- DG {'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/justice/', 'title': 'Justice'}, FRATTINI Franco
-
05613/2008
summary
Documents
- Legislative proposal published: 05613/2008
- Debate in Council: 2863
- Debate in Council: 2783
- Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A6-0293/2008
- Debate in Council: 2887
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T6-0384/2008
- : Decision 2009/426
- : OJ L 138 04.06.2009, p. 0014
- : Corrigendum to final act 32009D0426R(01)
- : OJ L 341 23.12.2010, p. 0052
| Amendments | Dossier |
| 22 |
2008/0804(CNS)
2008/05/21
LIBE
22 amendments...
Amendment 26 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Recital 5 a (new) (5a) The Commission is invited to draw up a Green Paper on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor.
Amendment 27 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Recital 5 b (new) (5b) If several Member States offer the possibility of an adequate and effective prosecution, the legal system of that Member State which offers the best legal protection to suspects and victims should be responsible for the prosecution.
Amendment 28 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Recital 5 c (new) (5c) The Commission should initiate a procedure for the establishment of a body of European criminal lawyers which could be known as 'Eurorights' and should function as an ombudsman, with the aim of investigating the problems encountered by the defence in the context of European police and judicial cooperation and of putting forward suggestions to resolve those problems.
Amendment 29 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Recital 8 a (new) (8a) It is necessary for the Council to adopt the framework decision on procedural rights as soon as possible in order to lay down certain minimum rules on the availability of legal assistance to individuals in the Member States.
Amendment 30 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Recital 8 b (new) (8b) It is also necessary for the Council to adopt as soon as possible the framework decision on the protection of personal data processed within the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, providing for an adequate level of data protection. The Member States must ensure a level of protection of personal data in their national law at least equal to that provided under the Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data of 28 January 1981 and its Additional Protocol of 8 November 2001 and, in so doing, shall take account of Recommendation No R (87) 15 of 17 September 1987 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to the Member States regulating the use of personal data in the police sector, as well as ensure the protection of data which are not processed automatically.
Amendment 31 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Recital 8 a (new) (8a) It is important to ensure appropriate protection for all types of personal data and for all kinds of personal data filing systems, whether automated or manual, used by Eurojust1. In this respect, the Rules of Procedure on the processing and protection of personal data at Eurojust should apply to automated and structured files as well as to case-related manual files compiled by national members or assistants. _____________ 1 OJ C 68, 19.3.2005, p. 1.
Amendment 32 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Recital 8 b (new) (8b) The rights of the defendant need to be taken into account in determining which Member State is best placed to prosecute or take other law enforcement action.
Amendment 33 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Recital 8 c (new) (8c) Adequate procedural safeguards, both during and after the investigations, , are a necessary condition for mutual recognition of judicial decisions in criminal matters.
Amendment 34 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Recital 8 d (new) (8d) The Member States shall ensure judicial redress when the investigation was carried out at the request of Eurojust based on manifestly insufficient grounds.
Amendment 35 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Article 1 – point 3 Decision 2002/187/JHA Article 5a – paragraph 3 3. When in urgent cases a request for judicial cooperation needs to be executed in several Member States, the competent authority may forward it to the ECC through the representative of its Member State in the ECC. The representative of the Member State concerned in the ECC shall transmit the request to the competent authorities of the relevant Member States for execution. Where
Amendment 36 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Article 1 – point 6 Decision 2002/187/JHA Article 8 - paragraph 1 a (new) 1. If the competent authorities of the Member
Amendment 37 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Article 1 – point 6 Decision 2002/187/JHA Article 8 - paragraph 1 a (new) 1. If the competent authorities of the Member States concerned decide not to comply with a request referred to in Articles 6(1)(a), 6(1)(g), 7(1)(a), 7(2) and 7(3), they shall inform Eurojust of their decision and of the reasons for it. 2. The Member States shall ensure that a decision of the competent national authority may be judicially reviewed if that decision is challenged by Eurojust.
Amendment 38 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Article 1 – point 7 – point c Decision 2002/187/JHA Article 9 – paragraph 4 (b) registers
Amendment 39 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Article 1 – point 8 Decision 2002/187/JHA Article 9a – paragraph 2 – point c Amendment 40 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Article 1 – point 8 Decision 2002/187/JHA Article 9a – paragraph 3 Amendment 41 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Article 1 – point 8 Decision 2002/187/JHA Article 9a – paragraph 3 3. National members may, in urgent cases and where
Amendment 42 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Article 1 – point 11 Decision 2002/187/JHA Article 13 – paragraph 6 – point a (a) large-scale trafficking in drugs;
Amendment 43 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Article 1 – point 11 Decision 2002/187/JHA Article 13 – paragraph 6 - point l (l) other forms of
Amendment 44 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Article 1 – point 12 Decision 2002/187/JHA Article 13a – paragraph -1 (new) -1. Eurojust shall immediately inform the competent authorities of the Member States concerned, including the respective European Judicial Network contact points, when the College decides that a case falls within its competence and Eurojust takes action in respect of it.
Amendment 45 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Article 1 – point 15 – point a Decision 2002/187/JHA Article 15– paragraph 1 "1. When processing data in accordance with Article 14(1), Eurojust may process only the following personal data on persons who, under the national legislation of the Member States concerned, are the subject of a criminal investigation or prosecution for one or more of the types of crime and the offences defined in Article 4
Amendment 46 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Article 1 – point 15 – point a Decision 2002/187/JHA Article 15– paragraph 1 – point l "(l) telephone numbers, (m) vehicle registration data, (n) e-mail accounts, (o) phone and e-mail traffic related data,
Amendment 47 #
Proposal for a decision – amending act Article 1 – point 15 – point b Decision 2002/187/JHA Article 15– paragraph 2 source: PE-405.950
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
| activities/12/docs/1/url |
Old
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2009:138:TOCNew
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:138:SOM:EN:HTML |
| activities/12/docs/3/url |
Old
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2010:341:TOCNew
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:L:2010:341:SOM:EN:HTML |
| activities |
|
| committees |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure |
|