6 Protocol
amending the Europol Convention
| (a)
(24006)
13254/2/02
—
(b)
(24387)
7496/03
—
(c)
(24388)
13254/5/02
—
|
Initiative of the Kingdom of Denmark with a view to adopting a Council Act drawing up, on the basis of Article 43(1) of the Convention on the establishment of a European Police Office (Europol Convention), of a Protocol amending that Convention.
Initiative of the Kingdom of Denmark with a view to adopting a Council Act drawing up, on the basis of Article 43(1) of the Convention on the establishment of a European Police Office (Europol Convention), of a Protocol amending that Convention: Opinion of the Europol Supervisory Body.
Initiative of the Kingdom of Denmark with a view to adopting a Council Act drawing up, on the basis of Article 43(1) of the Convention on the establishment of a European Police Office (Europol Convention), of a Protocol amending that Convention.
|
| Legal base | Article 43(1) Europol Convention; consultation; unanimity
|
| Documents originated: | (b) 20 March 2003)
(c) 19 December 2002
|
| Deposited in Parliament | (b) and (c) 27 March 2003
|
| Department | Home Office
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 10 April 2003
|
| Previous Committee Report | (a)HC 63-ix (2002-03), paragraph 6 (22 January 2003)
|
| To be discussed in Council | June 2003
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | (a)and (b) Cleared
(c) Not cleared; further information awaited
|
Background
6.1 The proposed Protocol, which Member States will need to adopt
according to their respective constitutional requirements, puts
forward a number of changes which the Danish Presidency considered
needed to be made to the Europol Convention. We have scrutinised
several versions of the proposal, and an opinion from the Joint
Supervisory Body (JSB)[10]
on it.[11] When we last
considered document (a) , we decided to keep it under scrutiny
until we received a further opinion from the JSB.
6.2 Our sister Committee in the House of Lords has produced a
report on the proposal,[12]
which is due to be debated in the House of Lords on 3 June.
The documents
6.3 The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Home Office
(Mr Bob Ainsworth) has now deposited the JSB opinion (document
(b)). He has also deposited the latest text of the proposal (document
(c)), on which the Justice and Home Affairs Council reached a
general approach at its December meeting, subject to consideration
of the European Parliament's opinion, receipt of the further opinion
of the JSB and parliamentary scrutiny reserves from two Member
States, including the UK.
Document (c)
6.4 Although document (c) has not previously been deposited, the
Minister told us about the differences between it and the earlier
version in his letter of 10 January, on which we reported on 22
January.[13] We therefore
concentrate below on document (b) —the JSB opinion.
Document (b): the JSB opinion
6.5 The JSB welcomes several of the amendments to the text since
it published its first opinion. It states that the proposed Protocol
is in general in compliance with data protection standards. However,
it notes a number of continuing concerns as outlined below.
Access to the Europol Information System by authorities other
than the national units.
6.6 The JSB repeats its earlier observation that access to query
the information system should be limited to those competent authorities
that have a legal task in preventing and combating serious international
crime. However, it welcomes the proposal to publish the list of
designated authorities in the Official Journal of the European
Communities.
Analytical files
6.7 The JSB considers that it should have "pro-active control"
concerning the opening of analytical files, and greater involvement
with regard to arrangements to be made with third parties involved
in analysis work.
Transmission of data to third states and bodies
6.8 Although the JSB is content with the provision allowing departure
from the rules on the transmission of Europol data to third countries
in exceptional cases, it reiterates its objection to the derogation
which would allow Europol to transmit personal data to third states
and bodies in specific cases as long as it was explicitly authorised
by the Member State which supplied the data. Given the general
rule, it cannot see the need for such a special rule and urges
the Council to reconsider this amendment.
Data retention
6.9 The JSB also urges the Council to reconsider the extension
of the time limit for data storage from three to five years. It
agrees that the three-year limit may be too short; but suggests
that the present system should be changed. A provision for retention
periods should be developed in relation to a whole data file as
an entity, rather than simply to the personal data held within
it. The JSB has put forward its own amendment along these lines,
advocating the retention of data files for a period of up to three
years. When strictly necessary, the Director of Europol could
order the continuation of the file for a new period of three years,
following a procedure to ensure that both the Management Board
and the JSB were informed of the decision.
The Government's view
6.10 The Minister reminds us that it was the UK which pressed
the Presidency to request a further opinion from the JSB. He tells
us that, in general terms, the Government finds document (c) helpful,
and notes the welcome to several of the amendments as well as
the reservations and recommendations in respect of some draft
Articles. With regard to the latter, he says:
"We broadly support the JSB's views on these Articles, and
believe they merit further discussion, in particular with Europol
on the operational practicality of the proposals. Clearly it is
necessary to strike a balance between the need to improve the
flexibility and effectiveness of Europol's working arrangements
with the need to ensure adequate safeguards to protect the storage,
processing and use of personal data. We will update the Committees
at the earliest possible opportunity on the outcome of further
discussions on this, and will keep them informed on how the Presidency
intends to take forward the proposed amendments in the light of
the JSB's opinion."
Conclusion
6.11 We thank the Minister for his Explanatory
Memorandum, and for undertaking to keep us informed of the outcome
of further discussions. We are pleased to learn that he broadly
supports the JSB opinion, and hope that he will press the Presidency
to take full account of it.
6.12 We clear documents (a) and (b), but
will keep document (c) under scrutiny until we hear from the Minister
again.
10 The Joint Supervisory Body monitors the activities
of Europol in relation to data protection issues. Back
11
(24007) 13688/02; see HC 63-v (2002-03), paragraph 6 (18 December
2002). Back
12
Europol's role in fighting crime: Flfth Report from the Select
Committee on the European Union, HL 43 (2002-03). Back
13
See headnote to this paragraph. Back
| 
