Print

Opinions Prior Check and Prior Consultations

Some of the procedures that EU institutions put in place pose risks to the data protection rights and freedoms of individuals.

Under the old legal framework (Regulation (EC) 45/2001), EU institutions were obliged to notify us before putting in place risky data processing operations.

In general, our prior checking Opinions were public.

Regulation 2018/1725 builds on the old Regulation and mirrors the General Data Protection Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR) that applies to most organisations processing personal data in the Member States. Compared to the previous rules, Regulation 2018/1725 aligns documentation obligations more closely to the risks caused by processing personal data. This means for example that the documentation requirements for a EUI’s newsletter subscription will be lower than for a system using ‘intelligent CCTV’ covering publicly accessible space or a database profiling travellers for screening purposes.

Depending on the process at hand, EU institutions processing personal data ('controllers') may not have to go through all the steps below (these steps are described in the Accountability on the ground toolkit): 
• Generate basic documentation (called ‘records’) for all processes; 
• Check if the process is likely to result in high risks to the people whose data are processed and consult the DPO if it appears to do so; 
• If the EU institution needs to do a data protection impact assessment (DPIA), they analyse those risks in more detail and develop specific safeguards/controls to manage them; 
• If the results of the DPIA still indicate high residual data protection risks, the EU institution has to file a prior consultation with the EDPS (see Articles 40 and 90 of Regulation 2018/1725 respectively for administrative and operational personal data).

Article 39 of Regulation 2016/794 on Europol provides for an ad hoc prior consultation mechanism for new type of processing of operational data, namely data processed by Europol to support the Member States in preventing and combating serious crime and terrorism. Similarly, Article 72 of Regulation 2017/1939 on the European Public Prosecutor Office (EPPO) provides a specific prior consultation mechanism for the processing of operational data, namely data processed in the context of criminal investigations and prosecutions undertaken by the EPPO. Regulation 2018/1725, including the standard prior consultation mechanism, applies to Europol's and EPPO's processing of administrative data, which includes data on staff and visitors, for example.

Where an EU institution is unsure whether to notify us a data processing operation for prior consultation, their DPO can consult us for advice to confirm.

As for the old prior checking Opinions, in general the prior consultation Opinions are public, but we may delete sensitive elements where necessary, related to security for example. Some opinions, which are by nature sensitive, in particular in the police and justice area, may not be published. For the sake of transparency, these Opinions are summarised in our Annual Report.

Filters

4
Oct
2007

Harassment - Court of Justice

Opinion of 4 October 2007 on the notification for prior checking regarding the "harassment procedure" (Dossier 2007-440)
La Cour de justice a instauré une politique en matière de respect de la dignité de la personne au travail afin de prévenir le harcèlement sexuel et moral sur le lieu de travail et de mettre en place une structure et des procédures permettant de traiter les cas présumés. La politique prévoit deux types de procédures : une procédure formelle et une procédure informelle. L'analyse du CEPD porte exclusivement sur la procédure informelle; l'analyse de la procédure formelle entrera dans le cadre plus général de l'enquête administrative. Le CEPD s'est déclaré satisfait du traitement proposé qui ne paraît pas entraîner de violations des dispositions du règlement 45/2001.

Available languages: English, French
4
Oct
2007

External investigations - OLAF

Opinion of 4 October 2007 on five notifications for prior checking on external investigations (Cases 2007-47, 2007-48, 2007-49, 2007-50, 2007-72)

The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) conducts external investigations outside the Community organs. Those investigations are performed for the purpose of detecting fraud or other irregular conduct of legal and natural persons affecting the financial interests of the European Communities. OLAF carries out on-the-spot inspections and checks on economic operators in the Member States and in third countries, and is empowered to request oral information, to ask any person for information and to make written requests for information. OLAF collects personal data of individuals during external investigations, uses those data for the assessment of the behaviour of the individual(s) concerned and further transfers or stores those data.

 

After analysing the data processing activities, the EDPS made a number of recommendations to OLAF.  These concern for example: ensuring the right of access and rectification as a main rule to data subjects, and that any restriction on those rights should meet a necessity test and be applied only on a case-by-case basis; respecting the confidentiality of whistleblowers and informants; drafting of standard letters/clauses with including the appropriate information to the data subjects.

Available languages: English, French
4
Oct
2007

Early Warning System - OLAF

Opinion of 4 October 2007 on a notification for prior checking on the Early Warning System (Case 2007-243)

The purpose of the Early Warning System (EWS) is to ensure the circulation of restricted information concerning third parties who could represent a threat to the Communities' financial interests and reputation or to any other fund administered by the Communities, with respect to which the Commission has a reasonable chance of entering, or has already entered, a contractual/conventional relationship with them.

As regards OLAF's function in the EWS, one has to differentiate between two separate roles:

  • OLAF in its capacity as an investigative body may provide information leading to W1a and b flagging under Article 2(1) and (2) of the EWS Decision and W2a and W3b flagging under Article 3 and 4 of the EWS Decision.
  • Like other DGs of the European Commission OLAF is eligible to initiate different flaggings not covered by its capacity as an investigative body. These flaggings are not analysed in the present opinion. OLAF's relation to the EWS as a 'normal Directorate-General' of the European Commission has already been prior checked by the EDPS. Access to the warnings also does not fall within the scope of this opinion.
The main recommendations issued by the EDPS in the framework of his opinion relating to the EWS of OLAF are dealing with quality of data and information given to data subjects.
Available languages: English, French
3
Oct
2007

Certification procedure - Court of Justice

Opinion of 3 October 2007 on the notification for prior checking regarding the "certification procedure" dosser (Case 2007-434)

The Court of Justice adopted arrangements for implementing the certification procedure by decision of the Court's Administrative Committee of 15 June 2005. Article 45a of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities (hereinafter "the Staff Regulations"), as amended by Regulation No 723/2004, enables officials in function group AST to be appointed to a post in function group AD on condition that, firstly, they have been selected by the institution to take part in a training programme, secondly, they have completed the training programme and, thirdly, they have passed examinations demonstrating that they have successfully taken part in the training programme.
 

The main recommendations made by the EDPS in the context of his opinion on the certification procedure concern the storage of data and the information supplied to data subjects.

Available languages: English, French