Next event: Committee decision to enter into interinstitutional negotiations confirmed by plenary (Rule 71) 2020/12/16 more...
- Committee decision to enter into interinstitutional negotiations announced in plenary (Rule 71) 2020/12/14
- Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading 2020/12/11
- Vote in committee, 1st reading 2020/12/07
- Committee decision to open interinstitutional negotiations with report adopted in committee 2020/12/07
- Amendments tabled in committee 2019/12/09
- Amendments tabled in committee 2019/12/09
- Document attached to the procedure 2019/11/06
- Committee draft report 2019/10/24
- Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading 2019/10/21
- SIPPEL Birgit (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in LIBE 2019/09/04
- Council Meeting 2018/12/07
- Contribution 2018/11/13
- Debate in Council 2018/10/12
- Council Meeting 2018/10/12
- Contribution 2018/09/12
- Contribution 2018/08/16
- Contribution 2018/07/22
- Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading 2018/05/31
Progress: Awaiting Parliament's position in 1st reading
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | LIBE | SIPPEL Birgit ( S&D) | MELO Nuno ( EPP), KÖRNER Moritz ( Renew), LAGODINSKY Sergey ( Verts/ALE), TARDINO Annalisa ( ID), JAKI Patryk ( ECR), ERNST Cornelia ( GUE/NGL) |
Former Responsible Committee | LIBE | ||
Committee Opinion | IMCO | ||
Former Committee Opinion | IMCO |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
TFEU 082-p1
Legal Basis:
TFEU 082-p1Subjects
Events
The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs adopted the report by Birgit SIPPEL (S&D, DE) on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on European Production and Preservation Orders for electronic evidence in criminal matters.
As a reminder, the Commission proposed two instruments, this proposal for a Regulation on European Production and Preservation Orders for electronic evidence in criminal matters and a proposal for a Directive laying down harmonised rules on the appointment of legal representatives for the purpose of gathering evidence in criminal proceedings.
The committee recommended that the European Parliament’s position adopted at first reading under the ordinary legislative procedure should amend the Commission proposal.
Subject matter
The proposed Regulation aims to lay down the rules under which an authority of a Member State, in a criminal proceeding, may order a service provider offering services in the Union and established or, if not established, legally represented in another Member State to produce or preserve electronic information that may serve as evidence, regardless of the location of data.
Authorities of the Member States should not issue domestic orders with extraterritorial effects for the production or preservation of electronic information that could be requested on the basis of this Regulation. The issuing of a European Production or Preservation Order could also be requested on behalf of a suspected or accused person, within the framework of applicable defence rights in accordance with national criminal procedures.
Scope
Members stipulated that this Regulation should apply to Member States and service providers, offering services in one or more Member States bound by this Regulation and established or legally represented in one of these Member States.
This Regulation should not apply to proceedings initiated by the issuing authority for the purpose of providing mutual legal assistance to another Member State or a third country.
Conditions for issuing European Preservation and Production Orders
The European Preservation and Production Orders may be issued if they are necessary and proportionate. They should only be issued if they could have been ordered under the same conditions in a similar domestic case in the issuing State, where there are sufficient reasons to believe that a crime has been committed, where it is grave enough to justify the cross-border preservation of the data and where the requested information is relevant for that investigation.
If the issuing authority has reasons to believe that data requested is protected by immunities and privileges granted under the law of the Member State where the service provider is addressed, or its preservation may impact fundamental interests of that Member State such as national security and defence, the issuing authority should seek clarification before issuing the European Preservation Order, including by consulting the competent authorities of the Member State concerned, either directly or via Eurojust or the European Judicial Network in criminal matters.
Where the issuing authority finds that the requested data is protected by such immunities and privileges or its preservation would impact fundamental interests of the other Member State, the issuing authority should not issue the European Preservation Order.
Common European exchange system
The Commission should establish a common European exchange system with secure channels for the handling of authorised cross-border communication, authentication and transmission of the Orders and of the requested data between the competent authorities and service providers.
Execution of an EPOC for subscriber data and IP addresses for the sole purpose of identifying a person
An EPOC for subscriber data and IP addresses, for the sole purpose of identifying a person, should be addressed directly and simultaneously: (i) to the main establishment of the service provider or, where applicable, where its legal representative is established; and (ii) to the executing authority.
Upon receipt of an EPOC for subscriber data or IP addresses for the sole purpose of identifying a person, the service provider should ensure that the requested data is transmitted to the issuing authority at the latest within 10 days upon receipt of the EPOC and within 16 hours in emergency cases.
PURPOSE: to lay down the rules on the European Production and Preservation Orders under which a service provider offering services in the Union may be compelled to produce or preserve electronic evidence.
PROPOSED ACT: Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council.
ROLE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: the European Parliament decides in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure on an equal footing with the Council.
BACKGROUND: social media, webmail, messaging services and applications connect hundreds of millions of users to one another and generate significant benefits. However, they can also be misused as tools to commit crimes , including serious crimes such as terrorist attacks. When that happens, these services and apps are often the only place where investigators can find leads to determine who committed a crime and obtain evidence that can be used in court.
The Council Conclusions of 9 June 2016 underlined the increasing importance of electronic evidence in criminal proceedings, and of protecting cyberspace from abuse and criminal activities for the benefit of economies and societies.
The current EU legal framework consists of Union cooperation instruments in criminal matters, inter alia, the Directive 2014/41/EU regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters (EIO Directive), and the Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Member States of the European Union,
The European Parliament, in its resolution on the fight against cybercrime of 3 October 2017, highlighted the challenges that the currently fragmented legal framework can create for service providers seeking to comply with law enforcement requests and calling on the Commission to put forward a Union legal framework for electronic evidence, including safeguards for the rights and freedoms of all concerned
By introducing European Production Orders and European Preservation Orders, the proposal makes it easier to secure and gather electronic evidence for criminal proceedings stored or held by service providers in another jurisdiction. The new instrument will not replace the EIO for obtaining electronic evidence but provides an additional tool for authorities. There may be situations, for example when several investigative measures need to be carried out in the executing Member State, where the EIO may be the preferred choice for public authorities. Creating a new instrument for electronic evidence is a better alternative than amending the EIO Directive because of the specific challenges inherent in obtaining electronic evidence which do not affect the other investigative measures covered by the EIO Directive.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT: four main policy options were considered besides the baseline scenario of taking no action. The preferred solution is a legislative instrument for a European Production Order and measures to improve access to databases that provide subscriber information.
CONTENT: the proposed Regulation introduces binding European Production and Preservation Orders. Both Orders need to be issued or validated by a judicial authority of a Member State. Such Orders may only be issued if a similar measure is available for the same criminal offence in a comparable domestic situation in the issuing State. Both Orders can be served on providers of electronic communication services, social networks, online marketplaces, other hosting service providers and providers of internet infrastructure such as IP address and domain name registries, or on their legal representatives.
European Production Order : this will allow a judicial authority in one Member State to request electronic data that are necessary as evidence in criminal investigations or criminal proceedings (such as emails, text or messages in apps) directly from a service provider offering services in the Union and established or represented in another Member State, regardless of the location of data.
The proposal introduces mandatory deadlines for addressees. The normal deadline is 10 days, while authorities may set a shorter deadline where justified. Moreover, in emergency cases , defined as a situation where there is an imminent threat to life or physical integrity of a person or to a critical infrastructure, the deadline is 6 hours (as compared to 120 days for the existing European Investigation Order or 10 months for a Mutual Legal Assistance procedure).
European Production Orders to produce transactional or content data (as opposed to subscriber and access data) may only be issued for criminal offences punishable in the issuing State by a custodial sentence of a maximum of at least 3 years , or for specific cyber-dependent, cyber-enabled or terrorism-related crimes.
European Preservation Order : this will allow a judicial authority in one Member State to oblige a service provider offering services in the Union and established or represented in another Member State to prevent data from being deleted and preserve specific data to enable the authority to request this information later via mutual legal assistance, a European Investigation Order or a European Production Order.
The European Preservation Order only allows preserving data that is already stored at the time of receipt of the Order, not the access to data at a future point in time after the receipt of the Order.
Safeguards: the proposal sets out procedural safeguards as well as rules on data protection. A judicial authority must validate Orders. Personal data covered by this proposal may only be processed in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (the General Data Protection Regulation) and Regulation (EU) 2016/680 (Data Protection Directive for Police and Criminal Justice Authorities).
For the serving and execution of orders under this instrument, authorities should rely on the legal representative designated by the service providers. The Commission has presented a proposal to ensure that such legal representatives are effectively designated.
Documents
- Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading: A9-0256/2020
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE644.802
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE644.870
- Document attached to the procedure: N9-0023/2020
- Document attached to the procedure: OJ C 032 31.01.2020, p. 0011-0013
- Committee draft report: PE642.987
- Contribution: COM(2018)0225
- Debate in Council: 3641
- Contribution: COM(2018)0225
- Contribution: COM(2018)0225
- Contribution: COM(2018)0225
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: SWD(2018)0118
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: SWD(2018)0119
- Legislative proposal published: COM(2018)0225
- Legislative proposal published: EUR-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex SWD(2018)0118
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex SWD(2018)0119
- Committee draft report: PE642.987
- Document attached to the procedure: N9-0023/2020 OJ C 032 31.01.2020, p. 0011-0013
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE644.802
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE644.870
- Contribution: COM(2018)0225
- Contribution: COM(2018)0225
- Contribution: COM(2018)0225
- Contribution: COM(2018)0225
Activities
- Cornelia ERNST
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Seán KELLY
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Miapetra KUMPULA-NATRI
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Nuno MELO
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Jiří POSPÍŠIL
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Birgit SIPPEL
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Sergey LAGODINSKY
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Michal ŠIMEČKA
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Annalisa TARDINO
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Mick WALLACE
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Moritz KÖRNER
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Beata MAZUREK
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Marc ANGEL
Plenary Speeches (0)
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
docs/6/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2018)0225New
https://connectfolx.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2018)0225 |
docs/7/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2018)0225New
https://connectfolx.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2018)0225 |
docs/8/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2018)0225New
https://connectfolx.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2018)0225 |
docs/9/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2018)0225New
https://connectfolx.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2018)0225 |
procedure/Legislative priorities/0 |
|
docs/0 |
|
docs/6 |
|
docs/6/date |
Old
2018-07-23T00:00:00New
2018-07-22T00:00:00 |
docs/7 |
|
docs/7 |
|
docs/7/date |
Old
2018-08-17T00:00:00New
2018-08-16T00:00:00 |
docs/8 |
|
docs/8 |
|
docs/8/date |
Old
2018-09-13T00:00:00New
2018-09-12T00:00:00 |
docs/9 |
|
docs/9 |
|
docs/9/date |
Old
2018-11-14T00:00:00New
2018-11-13T00:00:00 |
docs/10 |
|
events/0 |
|
committees/1/rapporteur |
|
docs/0 |
|
events/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
events/1/body |
EP
|
events/3/body |
EP
|
events/4/body |
EP
|
events/6/body |
EP
|
committees/0/shadows/5 |
|
docs/2/docs/0/url |
Old
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE642.987New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/LIBE-PR-642987_EN.html |
docs/4/docs/0/url |
Old
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE644.802New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/LIBE-AM-644802_EN.html |
docs/5/docs/0/url |
Old
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE644.870New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/LIBE-AM-644870_EN.html |
events/1 |
|
events/1 |
|
events/3 |
|
events/3 |
|
events/4 |
|
events/4 |
|
events/6 |
|
events/6 |
|
procedure/title |
Old
European production and preservation orders for electronic evidence in criminal mattersNew
Electronic evidence regulation: European production and preservation orders for electronic evidence in criminal matters |
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
events/6 |
|
events/7 |
|
events/8 |
|
procedure/Legislative priorities |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament's position in 1st reading |
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1/rapporteur/0/mepref |
96932
|
events/4 |
|
events/5 |
|
docs/3 |
|
docs/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE642.987New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE642.987 |
docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE644.802New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE644.802 |
docs/4/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE644.870New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE644.870 |
docs/2/docs/0/url |
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE642.987
|
docs/3 |
|
docs/4 |
|
events/3 |
|
docs/2/date |
Old
2019-10-29T00:00:00New
2019-10-24T00:00:00 |
docs/2 |
|
committees/0/shadows |
|
committees/2/opinion |
False
|
committees/0/rapporteur |
|
committees/0/date |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2/date |
|
committees/3/date |
|
activities |
|
commission |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/3 |
|
council |
|
docs |
|
events |
|
links |
|
other |
|
otherinst |
|
procedure/Mandatory consultation of other institutions |
European Economic and Social Committee
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
LIBE/8/12854New
|
procedure/other_consulted_institutions |
European Economic and Social Committee
|
procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
activities/1 |
|
committees/1/shadows |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
LIBE/8/12854
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Preparatory phase in ParliamentNew
Awaiting committee decision |
activities/0/docs/0/text |
|
committees/1/date |
2018-05-24T00:00:00
|
committees/1/rapporteur |
|
procedure/Mandatory consultation of other institutions |
European Economic and Social Committee
|
activities |
|
committees |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure |
|