7. JSB opinion on the draft agreement
between Europol and Eurojust
| (24565)
Document 03/23
| The Joint Supervisory Body of Europol: Opinion of the JSB in respect of the draft agreement to be signed between Europol and Eurojust.
|
| Legal base | Articles 10(4), 18 and 42(1) of the Europol Convention, and the Act of the Management Board of Europol of 15 October laying down the rules governing Europol's external relations with EU-related bodies, and Article 26 (1) of the Council Decision of 28 February 2002 setting up Eurojust; information; unanimity.
|
| Document originated | 19 May 2003
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 29 May 2003
|
| Department | Home Office |
| Basis of consideration | EM of 11 June 2003
|
| Previous Committee Report | None; but see (23967): HC 63-v (2002-03), paragraph 12 (18 December 2002)
|
| To be discussed in Council | No date set
|
| Committee's assessment | Legally and politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Not cleared; further information requested
|
Background
7.1 In December, we considered the draft agreement between Europol
and Eurojust[14]. We
decided not to clear it until we had the opinions from the Joint
Supervisory Bodies (JSBs) of both organisations.[15]
The document
7.2 The opinion of the Europol JSB has now been deposited. The
JSB emphasises that it can give only a provisional opinion at
this stage since it has not been given a final draft of the agreement,
and since it has not yet been able to consult the Eurojust JSB,
which has only just begun to operate. The opinion is limited to
the provisions concerning the transmission of personal data.
These are contained in Article 5 in Chapter 2 (Consultation
and Co-operation) and Articles 7-12 in Chapter 3 (Processing
of Information).
7.3 The JSB identifies a number of concerns. Some relate to areas
of the text which require clarification. Others relate to areas
where the JSB considers that standard provisions in the agreements
between Europol and third States should be inserted into the draft
agreement with Eurojust. Others again point up inconsistencies
between the instruments setting up the two organisations which
result in inconsistencies in the draft agreement.
7.4 In addition, the JSB makes a number of specific points:
- it asks about the precise legal basis underlying Article 5
(1), which provides that Eurojust can request Europol to open
an Analysis Work File to support its tasks;
- it draws special attention to the fact that there is no legal
basis to allow Eurojust to process data before they are included
in a data file or deleted (the Europol Convention is to be amended
to allow Europol to do this);
- it suggests an amendment to allow each party to review the
need to retain data according to their own regulations, and to
provide that, if the storage of data transmitted from one of the
parties exceeds three years, the need for continued storage should
be reviewed annually.
7.5 The opinion concludes that "from a data protection perspective
there are clear obstacles for the Management Board to approve
the concluding of the agreement in its present form". The
JSB asks the Management Board to provide it with a new draft of
the text taking its opinion into account as well as any amendments
introduced by the Eurojust JSB or the Council. The Europol JSB
will then state its final opinion.
The Government's view
7.6 The then Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Home
Office (Mr Bob Ainsworth) told us:
"The Government considers that the agreement allowing for
close co-operation and exchanges of information between Europol
and Eurojust is of great importance in the fight against serious
and organised cross-border crime… The Government also attaches
great importance [to] the need for adequate data protection safeguards
to be provided for in this agreement, and therefore values the
independent and expert advice of the JSB."
7.7 The Minister supported the JSB's wish to see the final text
before stating its final position. He reported that the JSB's
opinion was considered by the Europol Management Board at its
May meeting, where it was agreed that Europol would hold another
meeting with Eurojust representatives on the text. A Europol
JSB representative would be invited to ensure that its concerns
were taken into account. The Minister supported this approach.
7.8 Finally, the Minister told us:
"We will send the Committees the final opinion of the Europol
JSB and also the opinion of the Eurojust JSB when they are received.
The Government will not endorse the agreement between Europol
and Eurojust until these have been obtained and we are satisfied
the outstanding concerns have been adequately addressed…
"We expect this agreement to be forwarded for final approval
at the Justice and Home Affairs Council in October at the very
earliest, and certainly not before further negotiations are completed
and opinions have been obtained from both the Europol and Eurojust
JSBs."
Conclusion
7.9 We welcome the Government's continued assurance that it
will not endorse this agreement until it is satisfied that the
JSB's concerns have been satisfactorily addressed.
7.10 Besides the opinions, we ask the Minister to ensure that
the final text of the draft agreement is also deposited.
7.11 We will not clear this interim opinion until we receive
the final opinion.
14 See headnote. Back
15
The Joint Supervisory Bodies (JSBs) monitor the activities of
Europol and Eurojust in relation to data protection issues. Back
| 
