Coopération judiciaire

Durant sa troisième année d'activités, le CEPD a continué à s'investir dans l'implantation d'une culture avancée de la protection des données dans les institutions et organes européens. Depuis 2004, 150 contrôles préalabes de traitements à risques et 25 avis sur des propositions de législation ont été publiés. Le temps est venu pour le CEPD d'élargir ses activités de supervision, de commencer des inspections et de mesurer les résultats.

Avis sur l'initiative de 15 Etats membres en vue de l'adoption de la décision du Conseil relative à l'approfondissement de la coopération transfrontière, notamment en vue de lutter contre le terrorisme et la criminalité transfrontière, JO C 169, 21.07.2007, p. 2

The EDPS presented his opinion on the initiative of 15 Member States to make the Treaty of Prüm applicable throughout the EU. The initiative aims to step up cross-border cooperation, particularly for combating terrorism and cross-border crime. The initiative deals with the exchange of biometric data (DNA and fingerprints) and requires member states to set up DNA databases.

Although data protection plays an important role in this Treaty, the provisions on data protection in this initiative are meant as specific ones, on top of a general framework for data protection, which has still not been adopted. Such a framework is needed to give the citizen enough protection, since this decision will make it much easier to exchange DNA and fingerprint data.

Since the Prüm Treaty has already entered into force in three member states, the 15 Member States that took the initiative intend to limit substantial modifications.. Therefore, the EDPS' suggestions mainly serve to improve the text without modifying the system of information exchange itself.

Deuxième avis sur la proposition de décision-cadre du Conseil relative à la protection des données à caractère personnel traitées dans le cadre de la coopération policière et judiciaire en matière pénale, JO C 91, 26.04.2007, p. 9

The main concern is that the proposal in its current state will lead to an artificial division in data files - between national data and data originating from another Member State. Not only will this lead to burdensome, complex and costly handling, but it will also lead to difficulties for citizens in exercising their rights. A number of other concerns are raised, relating to the lack of special safeguards on sensitive data; possibilities to exchange data with non-law enforcement authorities; the non-requirement of 'adequate protection' guarantees when exchanging data with third countries, etc.

Avis sur la proposition de décision-cadre du Conseil relative à l'échange d'informations en vertu du principe de disponibilité (COM (2005)490 final), JO C 116, 17.05.2006, p. 8