Henvendelse af 17/7-13 fra kommissær Viviane Reding til Folketingets formand vedr. lovpakke om Eurojust

1/1
Til:
Dato:
Udvalgets medlemmer
25. juli 2013
Henvendelse fra kommissær Viviane Reding til Folketingets formand
I brev til Folketingets formand informerer kommissær Viviane Reding om, at
Europa-Kommissionen den 17. juli 2013 har vedtaget en lovgivningspakke,
der opretter en Europæisk Anklagemyndighed og reformerer Eurojust. Pakken
omfatter:
 En meddelelse om oprettelsen af anklagemyndigheden og justeringer
i Eurojust
 En forordning om oprettelse af en Europæisk Anklagemyndighed
 En forordning om Eurojust
 En meddelelse med justeringer af OLAF’s procedurer
Forslagene indebærer blandt andet øget parlamentarisk kontrol, idet de natio-
nale parlamenter og Europa-Parlamentet fremover vil blive involveret i evalue-
ring af Eurojust’ arbejde, og Den Europæiske Anklagemyndighed årligt vil
skulle afgive rapport om sine aktiviteter til de nationale parlamenter og Euro-
pa-parlamentet.
Forslagene er omfattet af det danske retsforbehold. Danmark deltager såle-
des ikke vedtagelse af dem og er ikke efterfølgende bundet af de vedtagne
retsakter. Forslagene foreligger endnu ikke på dansk.
Europaudvalget 2013
KOM (2013) 0532 Bilag 1
Offentligt


EN EN
EUROPEAN
COMMISSION
Brussels, 17.7.2013
COM(2013) 535 final
2013/0256 (COD)
Proposal for a
REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
on the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust)
Europaudvalget 2013
KOM (2013) 0532 Bilag 1
Offentligt
EN 2 EN
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM
1. CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL
Eurojust was set up by Council Decision 2002/187/JHA1
to reinforce the fight against serious
organised crime in the European Union. Ever since, Eurojust has facilitated coordination and
cooperation between national investigative and prosecutorial authorities in dealing with cases
affecting various Member States. It has helped to build mutual trust and to bridge the EU's
wide variety of legal systems and traditions. By rapidly solving legal problems, and
identifying competent authorities in other countries, Eurojust has facilitated the execution of
requests for cooperation and mutual recognition instruments. These years have witnessed the
continued growth of the organisation into what is now a central player in judicial cooperation
in criminal matters.
The fight against organised crime and the disruption of criminal organisations remain a daily
challenge. Regretfully, the past decade has seen an explosion of cross-border crime. Drug
trafficking, trafficking in human beings, terrorism and cybercrime, including child
pornography are some examples. A common feature of all these areas of crime is that they are
committed across borders by highly mobile and flexible groups operating in multiple
jurisdictions and criminal sectors. Combatting them effectively therefore requires a
coordinated pan-european response.
The increased cross-border dimension of crime as well as its diversification into multi-crime
activities make it more difficult for single Member States to detect and tackle cross-border
crime, and in particular organised crime. In this context, Eurojust's role in improving judicial
cooperation and coordination between competent judicial authorities of Member States and
assisting investigations involving third countries remains crucial.
Under the Lisbon Treaty, new possibilities to enhance Eurojust's efficiency in tackling these
forms of criminality have been introduced. Article 85 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the
EU (TFEU) explicitly recognises Eurojust's mission of supporting and strenghtening
coordination and cooperation between national investigating and prosecuting authorities in
relation to serious crime affecting two or more Member States or requiring a prosecution on
common bases. It is therefore important to ensure that the best possible use is made of
Eurojust and that obstacles to its efficient functioning are removed.2
In 2008 a wide reform of the Eurojust Decision was put into place in order to strengthen
Eurojust.3
The transposition deadline was 4 June 2011. The correct implementation of the
Decision as amended is important, but should not prevent progress in addressing new
challenges and improving Eurojust's functioning whilst maintaining those aspects that
strengthened its operational effectiveness.
Article 85 TFEU also provides for Eurojust's structure, operation, field of action and tasks to
be determined by regulations adopted in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure. It
also requires that they determine arrangements for involving the European Parliament and
national Parliaments in the evaluation of Eurojust's activities.
1
Council Decision of 28 February 2002 setting up Eurojust with a view to reinforcing the fight against
serious crime and amended by Council Decision 2003/659/JHA and by Council Decision
2009/426/JHA of 16 December 2008 on the strengthening of Eurojust. OJ L 063, 6.3.2002, p. 1.
2
Enhanced police cooperation and assistance in preventing and combating serious crime is addressed by
the draft proposal for a new Europol Regulation.
3
Council Decision 2009/426/JHA of 16.12.2008, OJ L 138, 4.6.2009, p. 14.
EN 3 EN
In addition, following the Commission Communication "European agencies: the way
forward"4
, the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission agreed to launch an
inter-institutional dialogue in order to improve the coherence, effectiveness and work of
decentralised agencies, leading to the creation of an Inter-Institutional Working Group
(IIWG) in March 2009. It addressed a number of key issues, including the role and position of
the agencies in the EU's institutional landscape, their creation, structure and operation,
funding, budgetary, supervision and management issues.
This work led to the Common Approach on EU decentralised agencies, endorsed by the
European Parliament, the Council and the Commission in July 2012, which is destined to be
taken into account in the context of all their future decisions concerning EU decentralised
agencies, following a case by case analysis.
This proposal for a Regulation takes all these elements into consideration and provides a
single and renovated legal framework for a new Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation
(Eurojust) which is the legal successor of Eurojust as established by Council Decision
2002/187/JHA.
Whilst maintaining those elements that have proved efficient in the management and
operation of Eurojust, the Regulation modernises its legal framework and streamlines its
functioning and structure in line with the Lisbon Treaty and the requirements of the Common
Approach, as far as its nature allows.
Since the proposal for this Regulation is adopted at the same time as the proposal for a
Regulation establishing the European Public Prosecutor's Office, provisions have been
included to ensure that this Office is set up from Eurojust as required under Article 86 TFEU,
and that Eurojust can support it.
2. RESULTS OF CONSULTATIONS WITH INTERESTED PARTIES
In order to prepare this Regulation, the Commission has consulted specialist stakeholders on a
number of occasions. The objective of the proposal is, largely, to use the opportunity offered
by the Lisbon Treaty to modernise Eurojust by giving it an improved management structure
that reduces the administrative burden currently placed on the College and allows it to focus
on its core mission.
On 18 October 2012 the Commission organised a consultative meeting with Member State
experts, representatives of the Council Secretariat, the European Parliament and Eurojust to
discuss issues related to a possible reform under Article 85 TFUE. The issues included
strengthened governance, parliamentary involvement at European and national level and
possible additional powers, as well as links with the development of the European Public
Prosecutor's Office (EPPO). The meeting generally supported improving Eurojust's
governance structure and efficiency.
Eurojust has also participated directly in the consultation process and provided its input
through contributions and meetings with the Commission. In addition, discussions on the
reform have taken place in the framework of different Seminars such as the Strategic Seminar
"Eurojust and the Lisbon Treaty. Towards more effective action" (Bruges 20-22 September
2010) and the Eurojust-ERA Conference “10 Years of Eurojust: Operational Achievements
and Future Challenges”, which took place in The Hague on 12 and 13 November 2012. In
addition, Eurojust's future was discussed at the special informal meeting of the Council at the
occasion of Eurojust's tenth anniversary, in February 2012.
4
See COM(2008) 135
EN 4 EN
The views of stakeholders were also collected through the "Study on the strengthening of
Eurojust"5
, ordered by the Commission, which provided a good overview of the existing
issues and presented several policy alternatives to address these.
3. PROPOSAL
3.1. The legal basis
Article 85 TFEU provides the legal basis for the proposal. It prescribes the use of a
Regulation.
3.2. Subsidiarity and proportionality
There is a need for EU action because the measures foreseen have an intrinsic EU dimension,
as they imply the creation of an entity whose mission is to support and strengthen
coordination and cooperation between national judicial authorities in relation to serious crime
affecting two or more Member States or requiring a prosecution on common bases. This
objective can only be achieved at Union level, in accordance with the subsidiarity principle.
In accordance with the principle of proportionality, this Regulation does not go beyond what
is necessary in order to achieve this objective.
3.3. Explanation of the proposal by chapters
The main objectives of the proposals are:
• to increase Eurojust's efficiency through providing it with a new governance
structure;
• to improve Eurojust's operational effectiveness through homogeneously defining the
status and powers of National Members;
• to provide for a role for the European Parliament and national Parliaments in the
evaluation of Eurojust's activities in line with the Lisbon Treaty;
• to bring Eurojust's legal framework in line with the Common Approach, whilst fully
respecting its special role regarding the coordination of on-going criminal
investigations;
• to ensure that Eurojust can cooperate closely with the European Public Prosecutor's
Office, once this is established.
3.3.1. Chapter I Objectives and tasks
This chapter regulates the setting up of the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice
Cooperation (Eurojust) as the legal successor of Eurojust as established by Council Decision
2002/187/JHA. It also defines its tasks and competence. The latter is autonomously defined in
the draft Regulation by means of an Annex.
3.3.2. Chapter II: Structure and organisation of Eurojust
This chapter contains some of the main elements of the reform.
Section II is devoted to Eurojust's national members. The reform maintains their link to their
Member State of origin but at the same time explicitly lists the operational powers they shall
all have. This will allow them to cooperate with each other and with national authorities in a
more effective way.
5
"Study on the Strengthening of Eurojust" conducted by GHK.
EN 5 EN
Sections III, IV and V set up the new structure of Eurojust by respectively regulating the
College, the Executive Board and the Administrative Director. Eurojust's governance is
improved by clearly distinguishing between two compositions of the College, depending on
whether it exercises operational or management functions. The former refer to the core
business of Eurojust in supporting and coordinating national investigations. The latter are
related for example to the adoption of the agency's work programme, annual budget or the
Annual report. A new organ, the Executive Board, is set up to prepare the College's
management decisions and to directly assume some administrative tasks. The Commission is
represented in the College when it exercises its management functions and in the Executive
Board. Finally, the appointment procedure, responsibilities and tasks of the Administrative
Director are clearly spelled out.
This introduces a double degree of governance as foreseen in the Common Approach whilst
maintaining Eurojust's special nature and safeguarding its independence. It is also cost-
effective, and contributes to Eurojust's efficiency, as national members will be assisted in
budgetary and administrative matters, which will allow them to focus on their operational
tasks.
3.3.3. Chapter III: Operational matters
This chapter maintains existing mechanisms for the operational effectiveness of Eurojust,
including the On-call Coordination (OCC), the Eurojust National Coordination System
(ENCS), the exchanges of information and follow-up to Eurojust's requests. The architecture
of the Eurojust Case Management System remains the same.
3.3.4. Chapter IV: Processing of Information
This chapter contains a reference to Regulation 45/20016
as the applicable regime for the
processing of all personal data at Eurojust. In addition, the Regulation particularises and
complements Regulation 45/2001 as far as operational personal data are concerned, respecting
the specificity of judicial cooperation activities while taking into account the need for
consistency and compatibility with the relevant data protection principles. Restrictions on the
processing of personal data continue to be possible.
The chapter also aligns the provisions on the rights of the data subjects with Regulation
45/2001 and takes into account the standards of protection foreseen in the data protection
reform package, adopted by the Commission in January 2012. Furthermore, the chapter
foresees an important change in the supervision mechanism. It establishes the responsibilities
of the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) as regards the monitoring of all personal
data processing at Eurojust. The EDPS will take over the tasks of the Joint Supervisory Body
established under the Eurojust Council Decision.
3.3.5. Chapter V: Relations with partners
This chapter reflects the importance of partnership and cooperation between Eurojust and
other EU institutions, bodies and agencies in the fight against crime. This includes firstly the
relations with the Secretariats of the European Judicial Network, the Joint Investigation
Teams Expert Network and the Genocide Network, which are hosted by Eurojust. It also
includes a specific provision on relations with the European Public Prosecutor's Office.
Secondly, cooperation with Europol is particularly important, especially as regards its role in
supplying information to Eurojust in line with Article 85 TFEU. A specific provision has been
introduced to spell out the privileged relationship between the two agencies in order to
increase their effectiveness in combating serious forms of international crime within their
6
OJ, L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1.
EN 6 EN
competence. This includes a mechanism for cross-checking of their respective information
systems and the ensuing exchange of data. Practical details will be settled by means of an
agreement.
Links with third countries are very frequently detected in serious and organised crime cases,
which makes close cooperation with such countries crucial. The Lisbon Treaty has changed
the way in which the European Union conducts its external relations, and these changes also
affect the agencies. As a consequence, agencies will no longer be able to negotiate
international agreements themselves – such agreements will have to be established in
accordance with Article 218 TFEU. However, Eurojust will be able to conclude working
arrangements to enhance cooperation with competent authorities of third countries, including
by exchanging information. The validity of pre-existing international agreements is
maintained.
3.3.6. Chapter VI Financial provisions
These provisions aim to modernise Eurojust's budget, its establishment and implementation,
presentation of accounts and discharge provisions.
3.3.7. Chapter VII Staff provisions
These provisions reflect the principles of the Common Approach while respecting Eurojust's
specificities. Eurojust's hybrid nature and the importance of the operational link between
national desks and their Member States of origin explain that salaries and emoluments of such
staff are borne by the Member States. Eurojust's Administrative Director is still appointed by
the College of Eurojust but on the basis of a shortlist drawn up by the Commission, following
an open and transparent selection procedure. This respects the autonomy of the agency whilst
guaranteeing a rigorous evaluation of candidates. A similar procedure is foreseen for
dismissal of the Administrative Director.
3.3.8. Chapter VIII Evaluation and Reporting
This chapter aligns Eurojust's legal framework with the increased democratic legitimacy of
Eurojust required by the Lisbon Treaty. It spells out the involvement of the European
Parliament and national parliaments in the evaluation of Eurojust's activities. This is done in a
cost-effective way, on the basis of Eurojust's Annual Report, whilst preserving Eurojust's
operational independence. A periodic overall evaluation of Eurojust in line with the Common
Approach is also provided.
3.3.9. Chapter IX General and final provisions
This chapter contains provisions to align the Eurojust Regulation with the Common
Approach, as well as those related to the entry into force of the Regulation.
4. BUDGETARY IMPLICATION
There are no cost implications of the governance reform ("management board" back to back
with the College) and there are no new tasks foreseen for Eurojust in this proposal, other than
supporting the European Public Prosecutor's Office, which will be done on a zero cost basis.
EN 7 EN
2013/0256 (COD)
Proposal for a
REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
on the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust)
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 85
thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national Parliaments,
After consulting the European Data Protection Supervisor,
Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure,
Whereas:
(1) Eurojust was set up by Council Decision 2002/187/JHA7
as a body of the European Union
with legal personality to stimulate and to improve coordination and cooperation between
competent judicial authorities of the Member States, particularly in relation to serious
organised crime. Council Decision 2003/659/JHA8
and Council Decision 2009/426/JHA9
on
the strengthening of Eurojust amended Eurojust's legal framework.
(2) Article 85 of the Treaty provides for Eurojust to be governed by a regulation, adopted in
accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure. It also requires determining
arrangements for involving the European Parliament and national Parliaments in the
evaluation of Eurojust's activities.
(3) Article 85 of the Treaty also provides that Eurojust's mission shall be to support and
strengthen coordination and cooperation between national investigating and prosecuting
authorities in relation to serious crime affecting two or more Member States or requiring a
prosecution on common bases, on the basis of operations conducted and information
supplied by the Member States' authorities and by Europol.
(4) Since the European Public Prosecutor's Office should be established from Eurojust, this
Regulation includes the provisions necessary to regulate the relations between Eurojust and
the European Public Prosecutor's Office.
(5) Whilst the European Public Prosecutor's Office should have exclusive competence to
investigate and prosecute crimes affecting the Union's financial interests, Eurojust should be
able to support national authorities when they are investigating and prosecuting these forms
of crime in accordance with the Regulation establishing the European Public Prosecutor's
Office.
(6) In order for Eurojust to fulfil its mission and develop all its potential in the fight against
serious cross-border crime, its operational functions should be strengthened by reducing the
administrative workload of national members, and its European dimension enhanced
through the Commission's participation in the management of the agency and the increased
7
OJ L 63, 6.3.2002, p. 1.
8
OJ L 245, 29.9.2003, p. 44.
9
OJ L 138, 4.6.2009, p.14.
EN 8 EN
involvement of the European Parliament and national Parliaments in the evaluation of its
activities.
(7) Therefore, Council Decision 2002/187/JHA should be repealed and replaced by this
Regulation determining arrangements for parliamentary involvement, modernising its
structure and simplifying Eurojust's current legal framework, whilst maintaining those
elements that have proven to be efficient in its operation.
(8) This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in
particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
(9) The forms of serious crime affecting two or more Member States for which Eurojust is
competent should be laid down. In addition, cases which do not involve two or more
Member States, but which require a prosecution on common bases, should be defined. Such
cases should include investigations and prosecutions affecting only one Member State and a
third State, as well as cases affecting only one Member State and the Union.
(10) When exercising its operational functions in relation to concrete criminal cases, at the
request of competent authorities of Member States or on its own initiative, Eurojust should
act either through one or more of the national members or as a College.
(11) To ensure Eurojust can appropriately support and coordinate cross-border investigations, it
is necessary that all national members have the same operational powers in order to
cooperate between themselves and with national authorities in a more effective way.
National members should be granted those powers that allow Eurojust to appropriately
achieve its mission. These powers should include accessing relevant information in national
public registers, issuing and executing mutual assistance and recognition requests, directly
contacting and exchanging information with competent authorities, participating in joint
investigation teams and, in agreement with the competent national authority or in case of
urgency, ordering investigative measures and controlled deliveries.
(12) It is necessary to provide Eurojust with an administrative and management structure that
allows it to perform its tasks more effectively and respects the principles applicable to Union
agencies whilst maintaining Eurojust's special characteristics and safeguarding its
independence in the exercise of its operational functions. To this end, the functions of the
national members, the College and the Administrative Director should be clarified and an
Executive Board established.
(13) Provisions should be laid down to clearly distinguish between the operational and the
management functions of the College, reducing the administrative burden on national
members to the minimum so that the focus is put on Eurojust's operational work. The
management tasks of the College should include in particular the adoption of Eurojust's
work programmes, budget, annual activity report, appropriate financial rules, and working
arrangements with partners. It should exercise the power of appointing authority towards
staff of the agency including the Administrative Director.
(14) To improve Eurojust's governance and streamline procedures, an Executive Board should be
established to assist the College in its management functions and to allow for streamlined
decision-making on non-operational and strategic issues.
(15) The Commission should be represented in the College when it exercises its management
functions and in the Executive Board, to ensure non-operational supervision and strategic
guidance of Eurojust.
(16) In order to ensure an efficient day-to-day administration of Eurojust, the Administrative
Director should be its legal representative and manager, accountable to the College and the
Executive Board. The Administrative Director should prepare and implement the decisions
of the College and the Executive Board.
EN 9 EN
(17) The setting up of an On-Call Coordination (OCC) within Eurojust is necessary to make
Eurojust available around the clock and to enable it to intervene in urgent cases. It should be
the responsibility of each Member State to ensure that their representatives in the OCC are
able to act on a 24-hour/7-day basis.
(18) Eurojust national coordination systems should be set up in the Member States to coordinate
the work carried out by the national correspondents for Eurojust, the national correspondent
for Eurojust for terrorism matters, the national correspondent for the European Judicial
Network and up to three other contact points, as well as representatives in the Network for
Joint Investigation Teams and of the networks set up by Council Decision 2002/494/JHA of
13 June 2002 setting up a European network of contact points in respect of persons
responsible for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes10
, Council Decision
2007/845/JHA of 6 December 2007 concerning cooperation between Asset Recovery
Offices of the Member States in the field of tracing and identification of proceeds from, or
other property related to crime11
and by Council Decision 2008/852/JHA of 24 October
2008 on a contact-point network against corruption12
.
(19) For the purposes of stimulating and strengthening coordination and cooperation between
national investigating and prosecuting authorities it is crucial that Eurojust receives relevant
information from national authorities necessary for the performance of its tasks. To this end,
national competent authorities should inform their national members of the setting up and
results of joint investigation teams, of cases under the competence of Eurojust directly
involving at least three Member States and for which requests or decisions on judicial
cooperation have been transmitted to at least two Member States, as well as, under certain
circumstances, information on conflicts of jurisdiction, controlled deliveries and repeated
difficulties in judicial cooperation.
(20) Whilst the processing of personal data at Eurojust falls under the scope of Regulation (EC)
45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the
protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community
institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data13
, the processing of personal
data by the Member State's authorities and the transfer of such data to Eurojust are covered
by the Council of Europe Convention 108 [to be replaced by the relevant Directive in force
at the moment of adoption].
(21) When Eurojust transfers personal data to an authority of a third country or to an international
organisation or Interpol by virtue of an international agreement concluded pursuant to
Article 218 of the Treaty the adequate safeguards adduced with respect to the protection of
privacy and fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals have to ensure that the data
protection provisions of this Regulation are complied with.
(22) Eurojust should be authorised to process certain personal data on persons who, under the
national legislation of the Member States concerned, are suspected of having committed or
having taken part in a criminal offence in respect of which Eurojust is competent, or who
have been convicted of such an offence. It is not intended that Eurojust carry out an
automated comparison of DNA profiles or fingerprints.
(23) Eurojust should be given the opportunity to extend the deadlines for storage of personal
data, subject to observance of the purpose limitation principle applicable to processing of
personal data in the context of all activities of Eurojust, in order to achieve its objectives.
Such decisions should be taken following careful consideration of all interests at stake,
including those of the data subjects. Any extension of deadlines for processing personal
10
OJ L 167, 26.6.2002, p.1
11
OJ L 332, 18.12.2007, p.103.
12
OJ L 301, 12.11.2008, p.38.
13
OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1
EN 10 EN
data, where prosecution is statute barred in all Member States concerned, should be decided
only where there is a specific need to provide assistance under this Regulation.
(24) Eurojust should maintain privileged relations with the European Judicial Network based on
consultation and complementarity. This Regulation should help clarify the respective roles
of Eurojust and the European Judicial Network and their mutual relations, while maintaining
the specificity of the European Judicial Network.
(25) Eurojust should maintain cooperative relations with other Union bodies and agencies, with
the European Public Prosecutor's Office, with the competent authorities of third countries as
well as with international organisations, to the extent required for the accomplishment of its
tasks.
(26) To enhance operational cooperation between Eurojust and Europol, and particularly to
establish links between data already in the possession of either body, Eurojust should enable
Europol to have access to and be able to search against data available at Eurojust.
(27) Eurojust should be able to exchange personal data with other Union bodies to the extent
necessary for the accomplishment of its tasks.
(28) Provision should be made for Eurojust to post liaison magistrates to third countries in order
to achieve objectives similar to those assigned to liaison magistrates seconded by the
Member States on the basis of Council Joint Action 96/277/JHA of 22 April 1996
concerning a framework for the exchange of liaison magistrates to improve judicial
cooperation between the Member States of the European Union14
.
(29) Provision should be made for Eurojust to coordinate the execution of requests for judicial
cooperation issued by a third country when they relate to a single investigation and require
execution in at least two Member States.
(30) To guarantee the full autonomy and independence of Eurojust, it should be granted an
autonomous budget, with revenue coming essentially from a contribution from the budget of
the Union, except as regards the salaries and emoluments of the national members and
assisting persons, which are borne by their Member State of origin. The Union budgetary
procedure should be applicable as far as the Union contribution and other subsidies
chargeable to the general budget of the Union are concerned. The auditing of accounts
should be undertaken by the Court of Auditors.
(31) In order to increase the transparency and democratic oversight of Eurojust it is necessary to
provide mechanisms for the involvement of the European Parliament and national
Parliaments in the evaluation of Eurojust's activities. This should not hinder the principles of
independence as regards action taken in specific operational cases or the obligations of
discretion and confidentiality.
(32) It is appropriate to evaluate regularly the application of this Regulation.
(33) Regulation (EU, EURATOM) No 966/2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general
budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/200215
should apply to Eurojust.
(34) Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May
1999 concerning investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF)16
should apply to Eurojust.
(35) The necessary provisions regarding accommodation for Eurojust in the Member State in
which it has its headquarters, that is to say in the Netherlands, and the specific rules
14
OJ L 105, 27.04.1996, p.1.
15
OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p.1.
16
OJ L 136, 31.5.1999, p.1.
EN 11 EN
applicable to all Eurojust’s staff and members of their families should be laid down in a
headquarters agreement. Furthermore, the host Member State should provide the best
possible conditions to ensure the proper functioning of Eurojust, including schools for
children and transport, so as to attract high-quality human resources from as wide a
geographical area as possible.
(36) As Eurojust as set up by this Regulation replaces and succeeds Eurojust as established on the
basis of Decision 2002/187/JHA, it should be the legal successor of Eurojust with respect to
all its contractual obligations, including employment contracts, liabilities and properties
acquired. International agreements concluded by Eurojust as established on the basis of that
Decision should remain in force.
(37) Since the objective of this Regulation, namely the setting up of an entity responsible for
supporting and strengthening coordination and cooperation between judicial authorities of
the Member States in relation to serious crime affecting two or more Member States or
requiring a prosecution on common bases, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member
States and can, therefore, by reason of the scale and effects of the action, be better achieved
at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of
subsidiarity, as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the
principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond
what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.
(38) [In accordance with Article 3 of the Protocol (No 21) on the position of the United Kingdom
and Ireland in respect of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, annexed to the Treaty
on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, those
Member States have notified their wish to take part in the adoption and application of this
Regulation.] OR [Without prejudice to Article 4 of the Protocol (No 21) on the position of
the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice,
annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the
European Union, the United Kingdom and Ireland are not taking part in the adoption of this
Regulation and are not be bound by or subject to its application.]
(39) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the Protocol (No 22) on the position of Denmark,
annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the
European Union, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not
bound by it or subject to its application.
HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
EN 12 EN
CHAPTER I
OBJECTIVE AND TASKS
Article 1
The European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation
1. The European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) is hereby
established.
2. Eurojust, as established by this Regulation, shall be the legal successor of Eurojust as
established by Council Decision 2002/187/JHA.
3. In each of the Member States, Eurojust shall enjoy the most extensive legal capacity
accorded to legal persons under their laws. It may, in particular, acquire and dispose of
movable and immovable property and be party to legal proceedings.
Article 2
Tasks
1. Eurojust shall support and strengthen coordination and cooperation between national
investigating and prosecuting authorities in relation to serious crime affecting two or more
Member States, or requiring a prosecution on common bases, on the basis of operations
conducted and information supplied by the Member States' authorities and by Europol.
2. In the implementation of its tasks Eurojust shall:
a) take into account any request emanating from a competent authority of a Member
State or any information provided by any body competent by virtue of provisions
adopted within the framework of the Treaties or collected by Eurojust itself;
b) facilitate the execution of requests for, and decisions on, judicial cooperation,
including those based on instruments giving effect to the principle of mutual
recognition.
3. Eurojust shall exercise its tasks at the request of the competent authorities of the Member
States or on its own initiative.
Article 3
Competence of Eurojust
1. Eurojust’s competence shall cover the forms of crime listed in Annex 1. However, its
competence shall not include the crimes for which the European Public Prosecutor's Office
is competent.
2. Eurojust's competence shall cover related criminal offences. The following offences shall
be regarded as related criminal offences:
a) criminal offences committed in order to procure the means of perpetrating acts listed
in Annex 1;
b) criminal offences committed in order to facilitate or carry out acts listed in Annex 1;
c) criminal offences committed to ensure the impunity of acts listed in Annex 1.
3. At the request of a Member State's competent authority, Eurojust may also assist
investigations and prosecutions affecting only that Member State and a third country where
a cooperation agreement or arrangement establishing cooperation pursuant to Article 43
has been concluded with that third country or where in a specific case there is an essential
interest in providing such assistance.
EN 13 EN
4. At the request either of a Member State's competent authority or of the Commission,
Eurojust may assist investigations and prosecutions affecting only that Member State and
the Union.
Article 4
Operational functions of Eurojust
1. Eurojust shall:
a) inform the competent authorities of the Member States of investigations and
prosecutions of which it has been informed and which have repercussions at Union
level or which might affect Member States other than those directly concerned;
b) assist the competent authorities of the Member States in ensuring the best possible
coordination of investigations and prosecutions;
c) give assistance in order to improve cooperation between the competent authorities of
the Member States, in particular on the basis of Europol's analyses;
d) cooperate and consult with the European Judicial Network in criminal matters,
including making use of and contributing to the improvement of the documentary
database of that European Judicial Network;
e) provide operational, technical and financial support to Member States' cross-border
operations and investigations, including joint investigation teams.
2. In the exercise of its tasks, Eurojust may ask the competent authorities of the Member
States concerned, giving its reasons, to:
a) undertake an investigation or prosecution of specific acts;
b) accept that one of them may be in a better position to undertake an investigation or to
prosecute specific acts;
c) coordinate between the competent authorities of the Member States concerned;
d) set up a joint investigation team in accordance with the relevant cooperation
instruments;
e) provide it with any information that is necessary to carry out its tasks;
f) take special investigative measures;
g) take any other measure justified for the investigation or prosecution.
EN 14 EN
3. Eurojust may also:
a) provide Europol with opinions based on analyses carried out by Europol;
b) supply logistical support, including assistance for translation, interpretation and the
organisation of coordination meetings.
4. Where two or more Member States cannot agree on which of them should undertake an
investigation or prosecution following a request made under point (b) of paragraph 2,
Eurojust shall issue a written opinion on the case. The opinion shall be promptly forwarded
to the Member States concerned.
5. On request of a competent authority Eurojust shall issue a written opinion on recurrent
refusals or difficulties concerning the execution of requests for, and decisions on, judicial
cooperation, including those based on instruments giving effect to the principle of mutual
recognition, provided it could not be resolved through mutual agreement between the
competent national authorities or through the involvement of the national members
concerned. The opinion shall be promptly forwarded to the Member States concerned.
Article 5
Exercise of operational functions
1. Eurojust shall act through one or more of the national members concerned when taking any
of the actions referred to in Article 4(1) or (2).
2. Eurojust shall act as a College:
a) when taking any of the actions referred to in Article 4(1) or (2):
(i) when so requested by one or more of the national members concerned by a
case dealt with by Eurojust;
(ii) when the case involves investigations or prosecutions which have
repercussions at Union level or which might affect Member States other than
those directly concerned;
b) when taking any of the actions referred to in Article 4 (3), (4) or (5);
c) when a general question relating to the achievement of its operational objectives is
involved;
d) when otherwise provided for in this Regulation.
3. When it fulfils its tasks, Eurojust shall indicate whether it is acting through one or more of
the national members or as a College.
EN 15 EN
CHAPTER II
STRUCTURE AND ORGANISATION OF EUROJUST
SECTION I
STRUCTURE
Article 6
Structure of Eurojust
The structure of Eurojust shall comprise:
a) the national members;
b) the College;
c) the Executive Board;
d) the Administrative Director.
SECTION II
NATIONAL MEMBERS
Article 7
Status of national members
1. Eurojust shall have one national member seconded by each Member State in accordance
with its legal system, who shall have his or her regular place of work at the seat of
Eurojust.
2. Each national member shall be assisted by one deputy and by an Assistant. The deputy and
the Assistant shall have their regular place of work at Eurojust. More deputies or Assistants
may assist the national member and may, if necessary and with the agreement of the
College, have their regular place of work at Eurojust.
3. The national members and deputies shall have a status as a prosecutor, judge or police
officers of equivalent competence. The competent national authorities shall grant them the
powers referred to in this Regulation in order to be able to fulfil their tasks.
4. The deputy shall be able to act on behalf of or to substitute the national member. An
Assistant may also act on behalf of or substitute the national member if he or she has a
status as referred to in paragraph 3.
5. Operational information exchanged between Eurojust and Member States shall be directed
through the national members.
6. National members shall contact the competent authorities of their Member State directly.
7. The salaries and emoluments of the national members, deputies and Assistants shall be
borne by their Member State of origin.
8. Where national members, deputies and Assistants act within the framework of Eurojust's
tasks, the relevant expenditure related to these activities shall be regarded as operational
expenditure.
Article 8
Powers of national members
1. The national members shall have the power to:
EN 16 EN
a) facilitate or otherwise support the issuing and execution of any mutual legal
assistance or mutual recognition request or issue and execute them themselves;
b) contact directly and exchange information with any national competent authority of
the Member State;
c) contact directly and exchange information with any competent international
authority, in accordance with the international commitments of their Member State;
d) participate in joint investigation teams including in their setting up.
2. In agreement with the competent national authority the national members shall:
a) order investigative measures;
b) authorise and coordinate controlled deliveries in the Member State in accordance
with national legislation.
3. In urgent cases when timely agreement cannot be reached, the national members shall be
competent to take the measures referred to in paragraph 2, informing as soon as possible
the national competent authority.
Article 9
Access to national registers
The national members shall have access to, or at least be able to obtain the information contained
in, the following types of registers of their Member State, in accordance with national law:
a) criminal records;
b) registers of arrested persons;
c) investigation registers;
d) DNA registers;
e) other registers of public authorities of their Member States where such information is
necessary to fulfil their tasks.
SECTION III
THE COLLEGE
Article 10
Composition of the College
1. The College shall be composed of:
a) all the national members when the College exercises its operational functions under
Article 4;
b) all the national members and two representatives of the Commission when the
College exercises its management functions under Article 14.
2. The term of office of the members and their deputies shall be at least four years, renewable
once. Upon expiry of their term of office or in the event of their resignation, members shall
remain in office until their term is renewed or until they are replaced.
3. The Administrative Director shall attend the management meetings of the College, without
the right to vote.
4. The College may invite any person whose opinion may be of interest to attend its meetings
as an observer.
EN 17 EN
5. The members of the College may, subject to the provisions of its Rules of Procedure, be
assisted by advisers or experts.
Article 11
The President and Vice-President of Eurojust
1. The College shall elect a President and two Vice-Presidents from among the national
members by a two thirds majority of its members.
2. The Vice-Presidents shall replace the President if he or she is prevented from attending to
his or her duties.
3. The term of office of the President and the Vice-Presidents shall be four years. They may
be re-elected once. When a national member is elected President or Vice-President of
Eurojust, his or her term of office as national member shall be extended to ensure he or she
can fulfil his or her function as President or Vice-President.
Article 12
Meetings of the College
1. The President shall convene the meetings of the College.
2. The College shall hold at least one operational meeting per month. To exercise its
management functions, the College shall hold at least two ordinary meetings a year. In
addition, it shall meet on the initiative of the President, at the request of the Commission,
or at the request of at least one third of its members.
3. The European Public Prosecutor shall receive the agendas of all College meetings and shall
be entitled to participate in such meetings, without the right to vote, whenever issues are
discussed which he or she considers to be of relevance for the functioning of the European
Public Prosecutor's Office.
Article 13
Voting rules of the College
1. Unless stated otherwise, the College shall take its decisions by a majority of its members.
2. Each member shall have one vote. In the absence of a voting member, the deputy shall be
entitled to exercise the right to vote.
3. The President and Vice-Presidents shall have voting rights.
EN 18 EN
Article 14
Management functions of the College
1. The College exercising its management functions shall:
a) adopt each year Eurojust's programming document by a majority of two thirds of its
members and in accordance with Article 15;
b) adopt, by a majority of two thirds of its members, the annual budget of Eurojust and
exercise other functions in respect of Eurojust's budget pursuant to Chapter VI;
c) adopt a consolidated annual activity report on Eurojust's activities and send it, by
[date foreseen in FFR] of the following year, to the European Parliament, national
parliaments, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and make the
consolidated annual activity report public;
d) adopt staff resource programming as part of the programming document;
e) adopt the financial rules applicable to Eurojust in accordance with Article 52;
f) adopt rules for the prevention and management of conflicts of interest in respect of
its members;
g) in accordance with paragraph 2, exercise, with respect to the staff of the Agency, the
powers conferred by the Staff Regulations17
on the Appointing Authority and by the
Conditions of Employment of Other Servants18
on the Authority Empowered to
conclude Contracts of Employment ("the appointing authority powers");
h) appoint the Administrative Director and where relevant extend his or her term of
office or remove him or her from office in accordance with Article 17;
i) appoint an Accounting Officer and a Data Protection Officer who shall be
functionally independent in the performance of their duties;
j) adopt working arrangements concluded in accordance with Article 43;
k) elect the President and Vice-Presidents in accordance with Article 11;
l) adopt its rules of procedure.
2. The College shall adopt, in accordance with Article 110 of the Staff Regulations, a
decision based on Article 2(1) of the Staff Regulations and on Article 6 of the Conditions
of Employment of Other Servants delegating the relevant appointing authority powers to
the Administrative Director and defining the conditions under which this delegation of
powers can be suspended. The Administrative Director shall be authorised to sub-delegate
these powers.
3. Where exceptional circumstances so require, the College may temporarily decide to
suspend the delegation of the appointing authority powers to the Administrative Director
and those sub-delegated by the latter and exercise them itself or delegate them to one of its
members or to a staff member other than the Administrative Director.
17
Council Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC) of 18 December 1961 laying down the Staff Regulations for
Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Economic Community and the
European Atomic Energy Community, OJ P 045, 14.6.1962, p. 1385, as amended, in particular, by Council
Regulation 259/68, of 29 February 1968 (OJ L 56, 4.3.1968, p. 1), as itself subsequently amended.
18
Council Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC) of 18 December 1961 laying down the Staff Regulations for
Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Economic Community and the
European Atomic Energy Community, OJ P 045, 14.6.1962, p. 1385, as amended, in particular, by Council
Regulation 259/68, of 29 February 1968 (OJ L 56, 4.3.1968, p. 1), as itself subsequently amended.
EN 19 EN
4. The College shall reach decisions on appointment, extension of the term of office and
removal from office of the Administrative Director on the basis of a two-thirds majority of
its members.
Article 15
Annual and multi-annual programming
1. By [30 November each year] the College shall adopt a programming document containing
multi-annual and annual programming, based on a draft put forward by the Administrative
Director, taking into account the opinion of the Commission. It shall forward it to the
European Parliament, the Council and the Commission. The programming document shall
become definitive after final adoption of the general budget and if necessary shall be
adjusted accordingly.
2. The annual work programme shall comprise detailed objectives and expected results
including performance indicators. It shall also contain a description of the actions to be
financed and an indication of the financial and human resources allocated to each action, in
accordance with the principles of activity-based budgeting and management. The annual
work programme shall be coherent with the multi-annual work programme referred to in
paragraph 4. It shall clearly indicate which tasks have been added, changed or deleted in
comparison with the previous financial year.
3. The College shall amend the adopted annual work programme when a new task is given to
the Agency. Any substantial amendment to the annual work programme shall be adopted
by the same procedure as the initial annual work programme. The College may delegate to
the Administrative Director the power to make non-substantial amendments to the annual
work programme.
4. The multi-annual work programme shall set out overall strategic programming including
objectives, expected results and performance indicators. It shall also set out resource
programming including multi-annual budget and staff. The resource programming shall be
updated annually. The strategic programming shall be updated where appropriate, and in
particular to address the outcome of the evaluation referred to in Article 56.
SECTION IV
THE EXECUTIVE BOARD
Article 16
Functioning of the Executive Board
1. The College shall be assisted by an Executive Board. The Executive Board shall not be
involved in the operational functions of Eurojust referred to in Articles 4 and 5.
2. The Executive Board shall also:
a) prepare the decisions to be adopted by the College in accordance with Article 14;
b) adopt an anti-fraud strategy, which is proportionate to the fraud risks having regard
to cost-benefit of the measures to be implemented;
c) adopt appropriate implementing rules to the Staff Regulations and the Conditions of
Employment of Other Servants in accordance with Article 110 of the Staff
Regulations;
d) ensure adequate follow-up to the findings and recommendations stemming from the
internal or external audit reports, evaluations and investigations, including those of
the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) and the European Anti-fraud
Office (OLAF);
EN 20 EN
e) take all decisions on the establishment and, where necessary, the modification of
Eurojust's internal administrative structures;
f) without prejudice to the responsibilities of the Administrative Director, as set out in
Article 18, assist and advise him or her in the implementation of the decisions of the
College, with a view to reinforcing supervision of administrative and budgetary
management;
g) take any other decision not expressly attributed to the College in Articles 5 or 14 or
under the responsibility of the Administrative Director in accordance with Article 18;
h) adopt its rules of procedure.
3. When necessary, because of urgency, the Executive Board may take certain provisional
decisions on behalf of the College on administrative and budgetary matters, which shall be
subject to confirmation by the College.
4. The Executive Board shall be composed of the President and Vice-Presidents of the
College, one representative of the Commission and one other member of the College. The
President of the College shall be the Chairperson of the Executive Board. The Executive
Board shall take its decisions by a majority of its members, each member having one vote.
The Administrative Director shall take part in the meetings of the Executive Board, but
shall not have the right to vote.
5. The term of office of members of the Executive Board shall be four years, with the
exception of the member of the College who shall be appointed following a two-year
rotation system. The term of office of members of the Executive Board shall end when
their term as national members ends.
6. The Executive Board shall hold at least one ordinary meeting every three months. In
addition, it shall meet on the initiative of its Chairperson or at the request of the
Commission or of at least two of its other members.
7. The European Public Prosecutor shall receive the agendas of all Executive Board meetings
and shall be free to participate in such meetings, without the right to vote, whenever issues
are discussed which he or she considers to be of relevance for the functioning of the
European Public Prosecutor's Office.
8. The European Public Prosecutor may address written opinions to the Executive Board, to
which the Executive Board shall respond in writing without undue delay.
SECTION V
THE ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR
Article 17
Status of the Administrative Director
1. The Administrative Director shall be engaged as a temporary agent of Eurojust under
Article 2(a) of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union.
2. The Administrative Director shall be appointed by the College from a list of candidates
proposed by the Commission, following an open and transparent selection procedure. For
the purpose of concluding the contract of the Administrative Director, Eurojust shall be
represented by the President of the College.
3. The term of office of the Administrative Director shall be five years. By the end of this
period, the Commission shall undertake an assessment which takes into account an
evaluation of the performance of the Administrative Director.
EN 21 EN
4. The College, acting on a proposal from the Commission which takes into account the
assessment referred to in paragraph 3, may extend once the term of office of the
Administrative Director for no more than five years.
5. An Administrative Director whose term of office has been extended may not participate in
another selection procedure for the same post at the end of the overall period.
6. The Administrative Director shall be accountable to the College and the Executive Board.
7. The Administrative Director may be removed from the office only upon a decision of the
College acting on a proposal from the Commission.
Article 18
Responsibilities of the Administrative Director
1. For administrative purposes, Eurojust shall be managed by its Administrative Director.
2. Without prejudice to the powers of the Commission, the College or the Executive Board,
the Administrative Director shall be independent in the performance of his or her duties
and shall neither seek nor take instructions from any government or from any other body.
3. The Administrative Director shall be the legal representative of Eurojust.
4. The Administrative Director shall be responsible for the implementation of the
administrative tasks assigned to Eurojust. In particular, the Administrative Director shall
be responsible for:
a) the day-to-day administration of Eurojust;
b) implementing the decisions adopted by the College and the Executive Board;
c) preparing the programming document and submitting it to the Executive Board and
College after consultation of the Commission;
d) implementing the programming document and reporting to the Executive Board and
College on its implementation;
e) preparing the annual report on Eurojust’s activities and presenting it to the Executive
Board for completion and to the College for approval;
f) preparing an action plan following-up on the conclusions of the internal or external
audit reports, evaluations and investigations, including those of the European Data
Protection Supervisor and OLAF and reporting on progress twice a year to the
Executive Board, the Commission and the European Data Protection Supervisor;
g) protecting the financial interests of the Union by the application of preventive
measures against fraud, corruption and any other illegal activities, by effective
checks and, if irregularities are detected, by the recovery of the amounts wrongly
paid and, where appropriate, by imposing effective, proportionate and dissuasive
administrative and financial penalties;
h) preparing an anti-fraud strategy for Eurojust and presenting it to the Executive Board
for approval;
i) preparing the draft financial rules applicable to Eurojust;
j) preparing Eurojust's draft statement of estimates of revenue and expenditure and
implementing its budget.
EN 22 EN
CHAPTER III
OPERATIONAL MATTERS
Article 19
On-call coordination (OCC)
1. In order to fulfil its tasks in urgent cases, Eurojust shall operate an On-Call Coordination
able to receive and process at all times requests referred to it. The On-Call Coordination
shall be contactable, through a single On-Call Coordination contact point at Eurojust, on a
24 hour/7 day basis.
2. The On-Call Coordination shall rely on one representative (On-Call Coordination
representative) per Member State who may be either the national member, his deputy, or
an Assistant entitled to replace the national member. The On-Call Coordination
representative shall be able to act on a 24 hour/7 day basis.
3. The On-Call Coordination representatives shall act without delay, in relation to the
execution of the request in their Member State.
Article 20
Eurojust National Coordination System
1. Each Member State shall designate one or more national correspondents for Eurojust.
2. Each Member State shall set up a Eurojust national coordination system to ensure
coordination of the work carried out by:
a) the national correspondents for Eurojust;
b) the national correspondent for Eurojust for terrorism matters;
c) the national correspondent for the European Judicial Network in criminal matters and
up to three other contact points of that European Judicial Network;
d) national members or contact points of the Network for Joint Investigation Teams and
of the networks set up by Decision 2002/494/JHA, Decision 2007/845/JHA and by
Decision 2008/852/JHA.
3. The persons referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall maintain their position and status under
national law.
4. The national correspondents for Eurojust shall be responsible for the functioning of the
Eurojust national coordination system. When several correspondents for Eurojust are
designated, one of them shall be responsible for the functioning of the Eurojust national
coordination system.
5. The Eurojust national coordination system shall facilitate, within the Member State, the
carrying out of the tasks of Eurojust, in particular by:
a) ensuring that the Case Management System referred to in Article 24 receives
information related to the Member State concerned in an efficient and reliable
manner;
b) assisting in determining whether a case should be dealt with the assistance of
Eurojust or of the European Judicial Network;
c) assisting the national member to identify relevant authorities for the execution of
requests for, and decisions on, judicial cooperation, including those based on
instruments giving effect to the principle of mutual recognition;
EN 23 EN
d) maintaining close relations with the Europol National Unit.
6. In order to meet the objectives referred to in paragraph 5, persons referred to in paragraph
1 and in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 shall, and persons referred to in point (d) of
paragraph 2 may be connected to the Case Management System in accordance with this
Article and with Articles 24, 25, 26 and 30. The connection to the Case Management
System shall be at the charge of the general budget of the European Union.
7. The setting up of the Eurojust national coordination system and the designation of national
correspondents shall not prevent direct contacts between the national member and the
competent authorities of his Member State.
Article 21
Exchanges of information with the Member States and between national members
1. The competent authorities of the Member States shall exchange with Eurojust any
information necessary for the performance of its tasks in accordance with Articles 2 and 4
as well as with the rules on data protection set out in this Regulation. This shall at least
include the information referred to in paragraphs 5, 6 and 7.
2. The transmission of information to Eurojust shall be interpreted as a request for the
assistance of Eurojust in the case concerned only if so specified by a competent authority.
3. The national members shall exchange any information necessary for the performance of
the tasks of Eurojust, without prior authorisation, among themselves or with their Member
State's competent authorities. In particular, the competent national authorities shall
promptly inform their national members of a case which concerns them.
4. The national competent authorities shall inform their national members of the setting up of
joint investigation teams and of the results of the work of such teams.
5. The national competent authorities shall inform their national members without undue
delay of any case concerning crimes under the competence of Eurojust affecting at least
three Member States and for which requests for or decisions on judicial cooperation,
including those based on instruments giving effect to the principle of mutual recognition,
have been transmitted to at least two Member States.
6. The national competent authorities shall inform their national members of:
a) cases where conflicts of jurisdiction have arisen or are likely to arise;
b) controlled deliveries affecting at least three countries, at least two of which are
Member States;
c) repeated difficulties or refusals regarding the execution of requests for, and decisions
on, judicial cooperation, including those based on instruments giving effect to the
principle of mutual recognition.
7. National authorities shall not be obliged in a particular case to supply information if this
would mean:
a) harming essential national security interests; or
b) jeopardising the safety of individuals.
8. This Article shall be without prejudice to conditions set in bilateral or multilateral
agreements or arrangements between Member States and third countries including any
conditions set by third countries concerning the use of information once supplied.
9. Information referred to in this Article shall be provided in a structured way as established
by Eurojust.
EN 24 EN
Article 22
Information provided by Eurojust to competent national authorities
1. Eurojust shall provide competent national authorities with information on the results of the
processing of information, including the existence of links with cases already stored in the
Case Management System. This information may include personal data.
2. Where a competent national authority requests Eurojust to provide it with information,
Eurojust shall transmit it in the timeframe requested by that authority.
Article 23
Follow-up to requests and opinions of Eurojust
The competent national authorities shall respond without undue delay to Eurojust's requests and
opinions made under Article 4. Where the competent authorities of the Member States concerned
decide not to comply with a request referred to in Article 4(2) or decide not to follow a written
opinion referred to in Article 4(4) or (5), they shall inform Eurojust without undue delay of their
decision and of the reasons for it. Where it is not possible to give the reasons for refusing to comply
with a request because to do so would harm essential national security interests or would jeopardise
the safety of individuals, the competent authorities of the Member States may cite operational
reasons.
Article 24
Case Management System, index and temporary work files
1. Eurojust shall establish a Case Management System composed of temporary work files and
of an index which contain personal data as referred to in Annex 2 and non-personal data.
2. The purpose of the Case Management System shall be to:
a) support the management and coordination of investigations and prosecutions for
which Eurojust is providing assistance, in particular by the cross-referencing of
information;
b) facilitate access to information on on-going investigations and prosecutions;
c) facilitate the monitoring of lawfulness and compliance with the provisions of this
Regulation concerning the processing of personal data.
3. The Case Management System may be linked to the secure telecommunications connection
referred to in Article 9 of Decision 2008/976/JHA.
4. The index shall contain references to temporary work files processed within the framework
of Eurojust and may contain no personal data other than those referred to in points (1)(a) to
(i), (k) and (m) and (2) of Annex 2.
5. In the performance of their duties, the national members may process data on the
individual cases on which they are working in a temporary work file. They shall allow the
Data Protection Officer to have access to the temporary work file. The Data Protection
Officer shall be informed by the national member concerned of the opening of each new
temporary work file that contains personal data.
6. For the processing of operational personal data, Eurojust may not establish any automated
data file other than the Case Management System or a temporary work file.
7. The Case Management System and its temporary work files shall be made available for use
by the European Public Prosecutor's Office.
8. The provisions on access to the Case Management System and the temporary work files
shall apply mutatis mutandis to the European Public Prosecutor's Office. However, the
EN 25 EN
information entered into the Case Management System, temporary work files and the index
by the European Public Prosecutor's Office shall not be available for access at the national
level.
Article 25
Functioning of temporary work files and the index
1. A temporary work file shall be opened by the national member concerned for every case
with respect to which information is transmitted to him or her in so far as this transmission
is in accordance with this Regulation or other applicable legal instruments. The national
member shall be responsible for the management of the temporary work files opened by
that national member.
2. The national member who has opened a temporary work file shall decide, on a case-by-
case basis, whether to keep the temporary work file restricted or to give access to it or to
parts of it, where necessary to enable Eurojust to carry out its tasks, to other national
members or to Eurojust staff authorised by the Administrative Director.
3. The national member who has opened a temporary work file shall decide which
information related to this temporary work file shall be introduced in the index.
Article 26
Access to the Case Management System at national level
1. Persons referred to in Article 20(2), in so far as they are connected to the Case
Management System, may only have access to:
a) the index, unless the national member who has decided to introduce the data in the
index expressly denied such access;
b) temporary work files opened by the national member of their Member State;
c) temporary work files opened by national members of other Member States and to
which the national member of their Member States has received access unless the
national member who opened the temporary work file expressly denied such access.
2. The national member shall, within the limitations provided for in paragraph 1, decide on
the extent of access to the temporary work files which is granted in his or her Member
State to persons referred to in Article 20(2) in so far as they are connected to the Case
Management System.
3. Each Member State shall decide, after consultation with its national member, on the extent
of access to the index which is granted in that Member State to persons referred to in
Article 20(2) in so far as they are connected to the Case Management System. Member
States shall notify Eurojust and the Commission of their decision regarding the
implementation of this paragraph. The Commission shall inform the other Member States
thereof.
4. Persons which have been granted access in accordance with paragraph 2 shall at least have
access to the index to the extent necessary to access the temporary work files to which they
have been granted access.
EN 26 EN
CHAPTER IV
PROCESSING OF INFORMATION
Article 27
Processing of personal data
1. Insofar as it is necessary to achieve its explicitly stated task, Eurojust may, within the
framework of its competence and in order to carry out its operational functions, process by
automated means or in structured manual files in accordance with this Regulation only the
personal data listed in point 1 of Annex 2, on persons who, under the national legislation of
the Member States concerned are suspected of having committed or having taken part in a
criminal offence in respect of which Eurojust is competent or who have been convicted of
such an offence.
2. Eurojust may process only the personal data listed in point 2 of Annex 2, on persons who,
under the national legislation of the Member States concerned, are regarded as witnesses or
victims in a criminal investigation or prosecution regarding one or more of the types of
crime and the offences referred to in Article 3, or persons under the age of 18. The
processing of such personal data may only take place if it is strictly necessary for the
achievement of the expressly stated task of Eurojust, within the framework of its
competence and in order to carry out its operational functions.
3. In exceptional cases, Eurojust may also, for a limited period of time which shall not exceed
the time needed for the conclusion of the case related to which the data are processed,
process personal data other than those referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 relating to the
circumstances of an offence where they are immediately relevant to and included in on-
going investigations which Eurojust is coordinating or helping to coordinate and when
their processing is strictly necessary for the purposes specified in paragraph 1. The Data
Protection Officer referred to in Article 31 shall be informed immediately of recourse to
this paragraph and of the specific circumstances which justify the necessity of the
processing of such personal data. Where such other data refer to witnesses or victims
within the meaning of paragraph 2, the decision to process them shall be taken jointly by at
least two national members.
4. Personal data, processed by automated or other means, revealing racial or ethnic origin,
political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, trade union membership, and data
concerning health or sex life may be processed by Eurojust only when such data are strictly
necessary for the national investigations concerned as well as for coordination within
Eurojust and if they supplement other personal data already processed. The Data Protection
Officer shall be informed immediately of recourse to this paragraph. Such data may not be
processed in the Index referred to in Article 24(4). Where such other data refer to witnesses
or victims within the meaning of paragraph 3, the decision to process them shall be taken
by the College.
5. Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 shall apply to the processing of personal data by Eurojust in
the context of its activities. This Regulation particularises and complements Regulation
(EC) No 45/2001 in as far as personal data processed by Eurojust for its operational tasks
are concerned.
Article 28
Time limits for the storage of personal data
1. Personal data processed by Eurojust may not be stored beyond the first applicable among
the following dates:
EN 27 EN
a) the date on which prosecution is barred under the statute of limitations of all the
Member States concerned by the investigation and prosecutions;
b) the date on which the person has been acquitted and the judicial decision became
final;
c) three years after the date on which the judicial decision of the last of the Member
States concerned by the investigation or prosecutions became final;
d) the date on which Eurojust and the Member States concerned mutually established or
agreed that it was no longer necessary for Eurojust to coordinate the investigation
and prosecutions, unless there is an obligation to provide Eurojust with this
information in accordance with Article 21(5) or (6);
e) three years after the date on which data were transmitted in accordance with Article
21(6) or (7).
2. Observance of the storage deadlines referred to in points (a), (b), (c) and (d) of paragraph 1
shall be reviewed constantly by appropriate automated processing. Nevertheless, a review
of the need to store the data shall be carried out every three years after they were entered. If
data concerning persons referred to in Article 27(4) are stored for a period exceeding five
years, the European Data Protection Supervisor shall be informed accordingly.
3. When one of the storage deadlines referred to in points (a), (b), (c) and (d) of paragraph 1
has expired, Eurojust shall review the need to store the data longer in order to enable it to
perform its tasks and it may decide by way of derogation to store those data until the
following review. The reasons for the continued storage must be justified and recorded. If
no decision is taken on the continued storage of personal data, those data shall be deleted
automatically after three years. However, once prosecution is statute barred in all Member
States concerned as referred to in point (a) of paragraph 1, data may only be stored if they
are necessary in order for Eurojust to provide assistance in accordance with this
Regulation.
4. Where, in accordance with paragraph 3, data have been stored beyond the dates referred to
in paragraph 1, a review of the need to store those data shall take place every three years
by European Data Protection Supervisor.
5. Where a file contains non-automated and unstructured data, once the deadline for storage
of the last item of automated data from the file has elapsed, all documents in the file shall
be returned to the authority which supplied them and any copies shall be destroyed.
6. Where Eurojust has coordinated an investigation or prosecutions, the national members
concerned shall inform Eurojust and the other Member States concerned of all judicial
decisions relating to the case which have become final in order, inter alia, that point (b) of
paragraph 1 may be applied.
Article 29
Logging and documentation
1. For the purposes of verification of the lawfulness of the data processing, self-monitoring
and ensuring proper data integrity and security, Eurojust shall keep records of any
collection, alteration, access, disclosure, combination or erasure of personal data used for
operational purposes. Such logs or documentation shall be deleted after 18 months, unless
the data are further required for on-going control.
2. Logs or documentation prepared under paragraph 1 shall be communicated on request to
the European Data Protection Supervisor. The European Data Protection Supervisor shall
use this information only for the purpose of data protection control, ensuring proper data
processing, and data integrity and security.
EN 28 EN
Article 30
Authorised access to personal data
Only national members, their deputies and their Assistants, persons referred to in Article 20(2) in so
far as they are connected to the Case Management System and authorised Eurojust staff may, for
the purpose of achieving Eurojust's tasks and within the limits provided for in Articles 24, 25 and
26, have access to personal data processed by Eurojust for its operational tasks.
Article 31
Appointment of the Data Protection Officer
1. The Executive Board shall appoint a Data Protection Officer in accordance with Article 24
of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.
2. When complying with the obligations set out in Article 24 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001,
the Data Protection Officer shall:
a) ensure that a written record of the transfer of personal data is kept;
b) cooperate with Eurojust staff responsible for procedures, training and advice on data
processing;
c) prepare an annual report and communicate that report to the College and to the
European Data Protection Supervisor.
3. In the performance of his or her tasks, the Data Protection Officer shall have access to all
the data processed by Eurojust and to all Eurojust premises.
4. Eurojust’s staff members assisting the Data Protection Officer in the performance of his or
her duties shall have access to the personal data processed at Eurojust and to Eurojust
premises to the extent necessary for the performance of their tasks.
5. If the Data Protection Officer considers that the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001
or this Regulation related to the processing of personal data have not been complied with,
he or she shall inform the Administrative Director, requiring him or her to resolve the non-
compliance within a specified time. If the Administrative Director does not resolve the
non-compliance of the processing within the specified time, the Data Protection Officer
shall inform the College and shall agree with the College a specified time for a response. If
the College does not resolve the non-compliance of the processing within the specified
time, the Data Protection Officer shall refer the matter to the European Data Protection
Supervisor.
6. The Executive Board shall adopt the implementing rules referred to in Article 24(8) of
Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.
Article 32
Modalities regarding the exercise of the right of access
1. Any data subject wishing to exercise the right of access to personal data may make a
request to that effect free of charge to the authority appointed for this purpose in the
Member State of their choice. That authority shall refer the request to Eurojust without
delay and in any case within one month of receipt.
2. The request shall be answered by Eurojust without undue delay and in any case within
three months of its receipt by Eurojust.
3. The competent authorities of the Member States concerned shall be consulted by Eurojust
on a decision to be taken. A decision on access to data shall be conditional upon close
cooperation between Eurojust and the Member States directly concerned by the
EN 29 EN
communication of such data. In any case in which a Member State objects to Eurojust’s
proposed response, it shall notify Eurojust of the reasons for its objection.
4. When the right of access is restricted in accordance with Article 20(1) of Regulation (EC)
No 45/2001, Eurojust shall inform the data subject in accordance with Article 20(3) of that
Regulation in writing. The information about the principal reasons may be omitted where
the provision of such information would deprive the restriction of its effect. The data
subject shall at least be informed that all necessary verifications by the European Data
Protection Supervisor have taken place.
5. Eurojust shall document the grounds for omitting the communication of the principal
reasons on which the restriction referred to in paragraph 4 is based.
6. The national members concerned by the request shall deal with it and reach a decision on
Eurojust's behalf. The request shall be dealt with in full within three months of receipt.
Where the members are not in agreement, they shall refer the matter to the College, which
shall take its decision on the request by a two-thirds majority.
7. When in application of Article 46 and 47 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001, the European
Data Protection Supervisor checks the lawfulness of the processing performed by Eurojust,
he or she shall inform the data subject at least that all necessary verifications by the
European Data Protection Supervisor have taken place.
Article 33
Right to rectification, erasure and restrictions on processing
1. If the personal data that have to be rectified, erased or whose processing has to be
restricted in accordance with Articles 14, 15 or 16 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 have
been provided to Eurojust by third countries, international organisations, private parties,
private persons or are the results of Eurojust's own analyses, Eurojust shall rectify, erase or
restrict the processing of such data.
2. If the personal data that have to be rectified, erased or whose processing has to be
restricted in accordance with Article 14, 15 and 16 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 have
been provided directly to Eurojust by Member States, Eurojust shall rectify, erase or
restrict the processing of such data in collaboration with Member States.
3. If incorrect data were transmitted by another appropriate means or if the errors in the data
supplied by Member States are due to faulty transfer or were transmitted in breach of this
Regulation or if they result from their being input, taken over or stored in an incorrect
manner or in breach of this Regulation by Eurojust, Eurojust shall rectify or erase the data
in collaboration with the Member States concerned.
4. In the cases referred to in Articles 14, 15 or 16 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001, all
addressees of such data shall be notified forthwith in accordance with Article 17 of
Regulation (EC) No 45/2001. In accordance with rules applicable to them, the addressees
shall then rectify, erase or restrict the processing of those data in their systems.
5. Eurojust shall inform the data subject in writing without undue delay and in any case
within three months of the receipt of the request that data concerning him or her have been
rectified, erased or their processing restricted.
6. Eurojust shall inform the data subject in writing on any refusal of rectification, of erasure
or of restrictions to the processing, and the possibility of lodging a complaint with the
European Data Protection Supervisor and seeking a judicial remedy.
EN 30 EN
Article 34
Responsibility in data protection matters
1. Eurojust shall process personal data in such a way that that it can be established which
authority provided the data or where the personal data has been retrieved from.
2. The responsibility for the quality of personal data shall lie with the Member State which
provided the personal data to Eurojust and with Eurojust for personal data provided by EU
bodies, third countries or international organisations, as well for personal data retrieved by
Eurojust from publicly available sources.
3. The responsibility for compliance with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and this Regulation
shall lie with Eurojust. The responsibility for the legality of transfer of personal data
provided by the Member States to Eurojust shall lie with the Member State which provides
the personal data, and with Eurojust for the personal data provided to Member States, EU
bodies and third countries or organisations by Eurojust.
4. Subject to other provisions in this Regulation, Eurojust shall be responsible for all data
processed by it.
Article 35
Cooperation between the European Data Protection Supervisor and national data protection
authorities
1. The European Data Protection Supervisor shall act in close cooperation with national
authorities competent for data protection supervision with respect to specific issues
requiring national involvement, in particular if the European Data Protection Supervisor or
a national authority competent for data protection supervision finds major discrepancies
between practices of the Member States or potentially unlawful transfers using Eurojust's
communication channels, or in the context of questions raised by one or more national
supervisory authorities on the implementation and interpretation of this Regulation.
2. In cases referred to under paragraph 1 the European Data Protection Supervisor and the
national authorities competent for data protection supervision may, each acting within the
scope of their respective competences, exchange relevant information, assist each other in
carrying out audits and inspections, examine difficulties of interpretation or application of
this Regulation, study problems related to the exercise of independent supervision or to the
exercise of the rights of data subjects, draw up harmonised proposals for joint solutions to
any problems and promote awareness of data protection rights, as necessary.
3. The National Supervisory Authorities and the European Data Protection Supervisor shall
meet for the purposes outlined in this Article, as needed. The costs and servicing of these
meetings shall be for the account of the European Data Protection Supervisor. Rules of
procedure shall be adopted at the first meeting. Further working methods shall be
developed jointly as necessary.
Article 36
Right to lodge a complaint with the European Data Protection Supervisor
1. Where a complaint introduced by a data subject pursuant to Article 32(2) of Regulation
(EC) No 45/2001 relates to a decision as referred to in Article 32 or 33, the European Data
Protection Supervisor shall consult the national supervisory bodies or the competent
judicial body in the Member State which was the source of the data or the Member State
directly concerned. The decision of the European Data Protection Supervisor, which may
extend to a refusal to communicate any information, shall be taken in close cooperation
with the national supervisory body or competent judicial body.
EN 31 EN
2. Where a complaint relates to the processing of data provided by a Member State to
Eurojust, the European Data Protection Supervisor shall ensure that the necessary checks
have been carried out correctly in close cooperation with the national supervisory body of
the Member State which has provided the data.
3. Where a complaint relates to the processing of data provided to Eurojust by EU bodies,
third countries or organisations or private parties, the European Data Protection Supervisor
shall ensure that the necessary checks have been carried out by Eurojust.
Article 37
Liability for unauthorised or incorrect processing of data
1 Eurojust shall be liable, in accordance with Article 340 of the Treaty, for any damage
caused to an individual which results from unauthorised or incorrect processing of data
carried out by it.
2. Complaints against Eurojust pursuant to the liability referred to in paragraph 1 shall be
heard by the Court of Justice in accordance with Article 268 of the Treaty.
3. Each Member State shall be liable, in accordance with its national law, for any damage
caused to an individual, which results from unauthorised or incorrect processing carried
out by it of data which were communicated to Eurojust.
CHAPTER V
RELATIONS WITH PARTNERS
SECTION I
COMMON PROVISIONS
Article 38
Common provisions
1. In so far as necessary for the performance of its tasks, Eurojust may establish and maintain
cooperative relations with Union bodies and agencies in accordance with the objectives of
those bodies or agencies, the competent authorities of third countries, international
organisations and the International Criminal Police Organisation (Interpol).
2. In so far as relevant to the performance of its tasks and subject to any restriction stipulated
pursuant to Article 21(8), Eurojust may directly exchange all information, with the
exception of personal data, with the entities referred to in paragraph 1.
3. Eurojust may, in accordance with Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001, receive and
process personal data received from the entities referred to in paragraph 1 in so far as
necessary for the performance of its tasks and subject to the provisions of Section IV.
4. Personal data shall only be transferred by Eurojust to third countries, international
organisations, and Interpol if this is necessary for preventing and combating crime that
falls under Eurojust's competence and in accordance with this Regulation. If the data to be
transferred have been provided by a Member State, Eurojust shall seek that Member
State’s consent, unless:
a) the authorisation can be assumed as the Member State has not expressly limited the
possibility of onward transfers; or
b) the Member State has granted its prior authorisation to such onward transfer, either
in general terms or subject to specific conditions. Such consent may be withdrawn
any moment.
EN 32 EN
5. Onward transfers to third parties of personal data received from Eurojust by Member
States, Union bodies or agencies, third countries and international organisations or Interpol
shall be prohibited unless Eurojust has given its explicit consent after considering the
circumstances of the case at hand, for a specific purpose that is not incompatible with the
purpose for which the data was transmitted.
SECTION II
RELATIONS WITH PARTNERS
Article 39
Cooperation with the European Judicial Network and other networks of the European Union
involved in cooperation in criminal matters
1. Eurojust and the European Judicial Network in criminal matters shall maintain privileged
relations with each other, based on consultation and complementarity, especially between
the national member, the European Judicial Network contact points of the same Member
State and the national correspondents for Eurojust and the European Judicial Network. In
order to ensure efficient cooperation, the following measures shall be taken:
a) national members shall, on a case-by-case basis, inform the European Judicial
Network contact points of all cases which they consider the Network to be in a better
position to deal with;
b) the Secretariat of the European Judicial Network shall form part of the staff of
Eurojust. It shall function as a separate unit. It may draw on the administrative
resources of Eurojust which are necessary for the performance of the European
Judicial Network's tasks, including for covering the costs of the plenary meetings of
the Network;
c) European Judicial Network contact points may be invited on a case-by-case basis to
attend Eurojust meetings.
2. The Secretariat of the Network for Joint Investigation Teams and of the network set up by
Decision 2002/494/JHA shall form part of the staff of Eurojust. These secretariats shall
function as separate units. They may draw on the administrative resources of Eurojust
which are necessary for the performance of their tasks. Coordination between the
secretariats shall be ensured by Eurojust. This paragraph shall apply to the secretariat of
any new network set up by a decision of the Council where that decision provides that the
secretariat shall be provided by Eurojust.
3. The network set up by Decision 2008/852/JHA may request that Eurojust provide a
secretariat to the network. If such request is made, paragraph 2 shall apply.
Article 40
Relations with Europol
1. Eurojust shall take all appropriate measures to enable Europol, within its mandate, to have
indirect access on the basis of a hit/no hit system to information provided to Eurojust,
without prejudice to any restrictions indicated by the providing Member States, Union
bodies, third countries, international organisations or Interpol. In case of a hit, Eurojust
shall initiate the procedure by which the information that generated the hit may be shared,
in accordance with the decision of the Member State, Union body, third country,
international organisation or Interpol that provided the information to Eurojust.
2. Searches of information in accordance with paragraph 1 shall be made only for the purpose
of identifying whether information available at Eurojust matches with information
processed at Europol.
EN 33 EN
3. Eurojust shall allow searches in accordance with paragraph 1 only after obtaining from
Europol information about which staff members have been designated as authorised to
perform such searches.
4. If during Eurojust’s information processing activities in respect of an individual
investigation, Eurojust or a Member State identifies the necessity for coordination,
cooperation or support in accordance with the mandate of Europol, Eurojust shall notify
them thereof and shall initiate the procedure for sharing the information, in accordance
with the decision of the Member State providing the information. In such a case Eurojust
shall consult with Europol.
5. Europol shall respect any restriction to access or use, in general or specific terms, indicated
by Member States, Union bodies or agencies, third countries, international organisations or
Interpol.
Article 41
Relations with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office
1. Eurojust shall establish and maintain a special relationship with the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office based on close cooperation and the development of operational,
administrative and management links between them as defined below. To this end, the
European Public Prosecutor and the President of Eurojust shall meet on a regular basis to
discuss issues of common concern.
2. Eurojust shall treat any request for support emanating from the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office without undue delay, and shall deal with such requests, where
appropriate, as if they had been received from a national authority competent for judicial
cooperation.
3. Whenever necessary, Eurojust shall make use of the Eurojust National Coordination
Systems established in accordance with Article 20, as well as the relations it has
established with third countries, including its liaison magistrates, in order to support the
cooperation established in accordance with paragraph 1.
4. The cooperation established in accordance with paragraph 1 shall entail the exchange of
information, including personal data. Any data thus exchanged shall only be used for the
purposes for which it was provided. Any other usage of the data shall only be allowed in as
far as such usage falls within the mandate of the body receiving the data, and subject to the
prior authorisation of the body which provided the data.
5. For the purpose of identifying whether information available at Eurojust matches with
information processed by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, Eurojust shall put in
place a mechanism for automatic cross-checking of data entered into its Case Management
System. Whenever a match is found between data entered into the Case Management
System by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and data entered by Eurojust, the fact
that there is a match will be communicated to both Eurojust and the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office, as well as the Member State which provided the data to Eurojust. In
cases where the data was provided by a third party, Eurojust shall only inform that third
party of the match found with the consent of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
6. Eurojust shall designate and inform the European Public Prosecutor’s Office which staff
members shall be authorised to have access to the results of the cross-checking mechanism.
7. Eurojust shall support the functioning of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office through
services to be supplied by its staff. Such support shall in any case include:
a) technical support in the preparation of the annual budget, the programming document
containing the annual and multiannual programming and the management plan;
EN 34 EN
b) technical support in staff recruitment and career-management;
c) security services;
d) Information Technology services;
e) financial management, accounting and audit services;
f) any other services of common interest.
The details of the services to be provided shall be laid down in an agreement between
Eurojust and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
8. The European Public Prosecutor may address written opinions to the College, to which the
College shall respond in writing without undue delay. Such written opinions shall in any
case be presented whenever the College adopts the annual budget and work programme.
Article 42
Relations with other Union bodies and agencies
1. Eurojust shall establish and maintain cooperative relations with the European Judicial
Training Network.
2. OLAF may contribute to Eurojust's coordination work regarding the protection of the
financial interests of the Union, in accordance with its mandate under Regulation (EU,
Euratom) of the European Parliament and of the Council No .../2013 concerning
investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and repealing
Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council
Regulation (Euratom) No 1074/1999.
3. For purposes of the receipt and transmission of information between Eurojust and OLAF,
and without prejudice to Article 8, Member States shall ensure that the national members
of Eurojust shall be regarded as competent authorities of the Member States solely for the
purposes of Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 and Council Regulation (Euratom) No
1074/199919
. The exchange of information between OLAF and national members shall be
without prejudice to the information which must be given to other competent authorities
under those Regulations.
SECTION III
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION
Article 43
Relations with the authorities of third countries and international organisations
1. Eurojust may establish working arrangements with the entities referred to in Article 38(1).
2. Eurojust may designate, in agreement with the competent authorities, contact points in
third countries in order to facilitate cooperation.
19
OJ L 136, 31.5.1999, p. 8.
EN 35 EN
SECTION IV
TRANSFERS OF PERSONAL DATA
Article 44
Transfer of personal data to Union bodies or agencies
Subject to any possible restrictions pursuant to Article 21(8) Eurojust may directly transfer personal
data to Union bodies or agencies in so far as it is necessary for the performance of its tasks or those
of the recipient Union body or agency.
Article 45
Transfer of personal data to third countries and international organisations
1. Eurojust may transfer personal data to an authority of a third country or to an international
organisation or Interpol, in so far as this is necessary for it to perform its tasks, only on the
basis of:
a) a decision of the Commission adopted in accordance with Articles 25 and 31 of
Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council20
that that country
or international organisation, or a processing sector within that third country or
international organisation ensures an adequate level of protection (adequacy
decision); or
b) an international agreement concluded between the Union and that third country or
international organisation pursuant to Article 218 of the Treaty adducing adequate
safeguards with respect to the protection of privacy and fundamental rights and
freedoms of individuals; or
c) a cooperation agreement concluded between Eurojust and that third country or
international organisation in accordance with Article 27 of Decision 2002/187/JHA .
Such transfers do not require further authorisation. Eurojust may conclude working
arrangements to implement such agreements or adequacy decisions.
2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, Eurojust may authorise the transfer of personal
data to third countries or international organisations or Interpol on a case-by-case basis if:
a) the transfer of data is absolutely necessary to safeguard the essential interests of one
or more Member States within the scope of Eurojust's objectives;
b) the transfer of the data is absolutely necessary in the interests of preventing imminent
danger associated with crime or terrorist offences;
c) the transfer is otherwise necessary or legally required on important public interest
grounds of the Union or its Member States, as recognised by Union law or by
national law, or for the establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims; or
d) the transfer is necessary to protect the vital interests of the data subject or another
person.
3. Moreover the College may, in agreement with the European Data Protection Supervisor,
authorise a set of transfers in conformity with points a) to d) above, taking into account the
existence of safeguards with respect to the protection of privacy and fundamental rights
and freedoms of individuals, for a period not exceeding one year, renewable.
4. The European Data Protection Supervisor shall be informed of cases where paragraph 3
was applied.
20
OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31.
EN 36 EN
5. Eurojust may transfer administrative personal data in accordance with Article 9 of
Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.
Article 46
Liaison magistrates posted to third countries
1. For the purpose of facilitating judicial cooperation with third countries in cases in which
Eurojust is providing assistance in accordance with this Regulation, the College may post
liaison magistrates to a third country subject to a working arrangement as referred to in
Article 43 with that third country.
2. The liaison magistrate referred to in paragraph 1 is required to have experience of working
with Eurojust and adequate knowledge of judicial cooperation and how Eurojust operates.
The posting of a liaison magistrate on behalf of Eurojust shall be subject to the prior
consent of the magistrate and of his or her Member State.
3. Where the liaison magistrate posted by Eurojust is selected among national members,
deputies or assistants:
a) he or she shall be replaced in his or her function as a national member, deputy or
Assistant, by the Member State;
b) he or she ceases to be entitled to exercise the powers granted to him or her in
accordance with Article 8.
4. Without prejudice to Article 110 of the Staff Regulations, the College shall draw up rules
on the posting of liaison magistrates and adopt the necessary implementing arrangements
in this respect in consultation with the Commission.
5. The activities of liaison magistrates posted by Eurojust shall be the subject of supervision
by the European Data Protection Supervisor. The liaison magistrates shall report to the
College, which shall inform the European Parliament and the Council in the annual report
and in an appropriate manner of their activities. The liaison magistrates shall inform
national members and national competent authorities of all cases concerning their Member
State.
6. Competent authorities of the Member States and liaison magistrates referred to in
paragraph 1 may contact each other directly. In such cases, the liaison magistrate shall
inform the national member concerned of such contacts.
7. The liaison magistrates referred to in paragraph 1 shall be connected to the Case
Management System.
Article 47
Requests for judicial cooperation to and from third Countries
1. Eurojust shall coordinate the execution of requests for judicial cooperation issued by a
third country where these requests are part of the same investigation and require execution
in at least two Member States. Such requests may also be transmitted to Eurojust by a
competent national authority.
2. In case of urgency and in accordance with Article 19, the On-Call Coordination (OCC)
may receive and process requests referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and issued by a
third country which has concluded a working arrangement with Eurojust.
3. Without prejudice to Article 3(3), where requests for judicial cooperation, which relate to
the same investigation and require execution in a third country, are made, Eurojust shall
facilitate judicial cooperation with that third country.
EN 37 EN
CHAPTER VI
FINANCIAL PROVISIONS
Article 48
Budget
1. Estimates of all the revenue and expenditure of Eurojust shall be prepared for each
financial year, corresponding to the calendar year, and shall be shown in Eurojust's budget.
2. Eurojust's budget shall be balanced in terms of revenue and of expenditure.
3. Without prejudice to other resources, Eurojust's revenue shall comprise:
a) a contribution from the Union entered in the general budget of the European Union;
b) any voluntary financial contribution from the Member States;
c) charges for publications and any service provided by Eurojust;
d) ad-hoc grants.
4. The expenditure of Eurojust shall include staff remuneration, administrative and
infrastructure expenses, operating costs.
Article 49
Establishment of the budget
1. Each year the Administrative Director shall draw up a draft statement of estimates of
Eurojust's revenue and expenditure together, for the following financial year, including the
establishment plan, and send it to the College.
2. The College shall, on the basis of that draft, produce a provisional draft estimate of
Eurojust's revenue and expenditure for the following financial year.
3. The provisional draft estimate of Eurojust's revenue and expenditure shall be sent to the
European Commission by no later than 31 January each year. The College shall send a
final draft estimate, which shall include a draft establishment plan, to the Commission by
31 March.
4. The Commission shall send the statement of estimates to the European Parliament and the
Council (the budgetary authority) together with the draft general budget of the European
Union.
5. On the basis of the statement of estimates, the Commission shall enter in the draft general
budget of the European Union the estimates it considers necessary for the establishment
plan and the amount of the contribution to be charged to the general budget, which it shall
place before the budgetary authority in accordance with Articles 313 and 314 of the Treaty.
6. The budgetary authority shall authorise the appropriations for Eurojust's contribution.
7. The budgetary authority shall adopt Eurojust's establishment plan.
8. Eurojust's budget shall be adopted by the College. It shall become final following final
adoption of the general budget of the European Union. Where necessary, it shall be
adjusted accordingly.
9. For any building project likely to have significant implications for the budget Eurojust
shall inform the European Parliament and the Council as early as possible in accordance
with the provisions of Article 203 of Regulation (EU, EURATOM) No 966/2012.
EN 38 EN
10. Except in cases of force majeure referred to in Article 203 of Regulation (EU,
EURATOM) No 966/2012 the European Parliament and the Council shall deliberate upon
the building project within four weeks of its receipt by both institutions.
The building project shall be deemed approved at the expiry of this four-week period,
unless the European Parliament or the Council take a decision contrary to the proposal
within that period of time.
If the European Parliament or the Council raise duly justified concerns within that four-
week period, that period shall be extended once by two weeks.
If the European Parliament or the Council take a decision contrary to the building project,
Eurojust shall withdraw its proposal and may submit a new one.
11. Eurojust may finance a budget acquisition project through a loan subject to prior approval
of the budgetary authority in accordance with Article 203 of Regulation (EU, EURATOM)
No 966/2012.
Article 50
Implementation of the budget
The Administrative Director shall act as the authorising officer of Eurojust and shall implement
Eurojust's budget under his or her own responsibility and within the limits authorised in the budget.
Article 51
Presentation of accounts and discharge
1. By 1 March following each financial year, Eurojust's Accounting Officer shall send the
provisional accounts to the Commission's Accounting Officer and the Court of Auditors.
2. Eurojust shall send the report on the budgetary and financial management to the European
Parliament, the Council and the Court of Auditors, by 31 March of the following financial
year.
3. By 31 March following each financial year, the Commission's accounting officer shall send
Eurojust's provisional accounts consolidated with the Commission’s accounts to the Court
of Auditors.
4. In accordance with Article 148(1) of Regulation (EU, EURATOM) No 966/2012, the
Court of Auditors shall, by 1 June of the following year at the latest, make its observations
on the provisional accounts of Eurojust.
5. On receipt of the Court of Auditors' observations on Eurojust's provisional accounts
pursuant to Article 148 of Regulation (EU, EURATOM) No 966/2012, the Administrative
Director shall draw up Eurojust's final accounts under his or her own responsibility and
submit them to the College for an opinion.
6. The College shall deliver an opinion on Eurojust's final accounts.
7. The Administrative Director shall, by 1 July following each financial year, send the final
accounts to the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission and the Court of
Auditors, together with the College’s opinion.
8. The final accounts of Eurojust shall be published in the Official Journal of the European
Union by 15 November of the following year.
9. The Administrative Director shall send the Court of Auditors a reply to its observations by
30 September of the following year at the latest. The Administrative Director shall also
send this reply to the College and to the Commission.
EN 39 EN
10. The Administrative Director shall report to the European Parliament on the performance of
his/her duties when invited to do so. The Council may invite the Administrative Director to
report on the performance of his/her duties.
11. The Administrative Director shall submit to the European Parliament, at the latter's request,
any information required for the smooth application of the discharge procedure for the
financial year in question in accordance with Article 165(3) of Regulation (EU,
EURATOM) N° 966/2012.
12. On a recommendation from the Council acting by a qualified majority, the European
Parliament, shall, before 15 May of year N + 2, give a discharge to the Administrative
Director in respect of the implementation of the budget for year N.
Article 52
Financial Rules
The financial rules applicable to Eurojust shall be adopted by the College in accordance with
[Regulation 2343/2002 of 23 December 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies
referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial
Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities] and after consultation
with the Commission. They shall not depart from [Regulation 2343/2002] unless such departure is
specifically required for Eurojust's operation and the Commission has given its prior consent.
CHAPTER VII
STAFF PROVISIONS
Article 53
General provisions
The Staff Regulations of the European Union and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants
of the European Union and the rules adopted by agreement between the institutions of the European
Union for giving effect to those Staff Regulations and those Conditions of Employment of Other
Servants shall apply to the staff of Eurojust.
Article 54
Seconded national experts and other staff
1. Eurojust may make use of seconded national experts or other staff not employed by
Eurojust.
2. The College shall adopt a decision laying down rules on the secondment to Eurojust of
national experts.
CHAPTER VIII
EVALUATION AND REPORTING
Article 55
Involvement of the European Parliament and national Parliaments
1. Eurojust shall transmit its Annual Report to the European Parliament, which may present
observations and conclusions.
2. The President of the College shall appear before the European Parliament, at their request,
to discuss matters relating to Eurojust, and in particular to present its Annual Reports,
taking into account the obligations of discretion and confidentiality. Discussions shall not
refer directly or indirectly to concrete actions in relation with specific operational cases.
EN 40 EN
3. In addition to the other obligations of information and consultation set out in this
regulation, Eurojust shall transmit to the European Parliament for information:
a) the results of studies and strategic projects elaborated or commissioned by Eurojust;
b) working arrangements concluded with third parties;
c) the annual report of the European Data Protection Supervisor.
4. Eurojust shall transmit its Annual Report to the national Parliaments. Eurojust shall also
transmit to the national Parliaments the documents referred to in paragraph 3.
Article 56
Evaluation and review
1. By [5 years after the entry into force of this Regulation] at the latest, and every 5 years
thereafter, the Commission shall commission an evaluation of the implementation and
impact of this Regulation, as well as the effectiveness and efficiency of Eurojust and its
working practices. The evaluation shall, in particular, address the possible need to modify
the mandate of Eurojust, and the financial implications of any such modification.
2. The Commission shall forward the evaluation report together with its conclusions to the
European Parliament and national Parliaments, the Council and the College. The findings
of the evaluation shall be made public.
3. On the occasion of every second evaluation, the Commission shall also assess the results
achieved by Eurojust having regard to its objectives, mandate and tasks.
CHAPTER IX
GENERAL AND FINAL PROVISIONS
Article 57
Privileges and Immunities
The Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union shall apply to Eurojust and
its staff.
Article 58
Language arrangements
1. Regulation No 121
shall apply to Eurojust.
2. The translation services required for the functioning of Eurojust shall be provided by the
Translation Centre of the bodies of the European Union.
Article 59
Confidentiality
1. The national members, their deputies and their Assistants referred to in Article 7, Eurojust
staff, national correspondents and the Data Protection Officer shall be bound by an
obligation of confidentiality with respect to any information which has come to their
knowledge in the course of the performance of their tasks.
2. The obligation of confidentiality shall apply to all persons and to all bodies called upon to
work with Eurojust.
21
OJ L 17, 6.10.1958, p.385.
EN 41 EN
3. The obligation of confidentiality shall also apply after leaving office or employment or
after the termination of the activities of the persons referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2.
4. The obligation of confidentiality shall apply to all information received by Eurojust, unless
that information has already been made public or is accessible to the public.
5. Members and the staff of the European Data Protection Supervisor shall be subject to the
obligation of confidentiality with respect to any information which has come to their
knowledge in the course of the performance of their tasks.
Article 60
Transparency
1. Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 shall apply to documents which relate to Eurojust's
administrative tasks.
2. The College shall, within six months of the date of its first meeting, adopt the detailed rules
for applying Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001.
3. Decisions taken by Eurojust under Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 may form
the subject of a complaint to the Ombudsman or of an action before the Court of Justice of
the European Union, under the conditions laid down in Articles 228 and 263 of the Treaty
respectively.
Article 61
OLAF and the European Court of Auditors
1. In order to facilitate combating fraud, corruption and other unlawful activities under
Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999, within six months from the entry into force of this
Regulation, it shall accede to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 25 May 1999 concerning
internal investigations by the European Anti-fraud Office (OLAF) and adopt the
appropriate provisions applicable to all the employees of Eurojust using the template set
out in the Annex to that Agreement.
2. The European Court of Auditors shall have the power of audit, on the basis of documents
and on the spot, over all grant beneficiaries, contractors and subcontractors who have
received Union funds from Eurojust.
3. OLAF may carry out investigations, including on-the-spot checks and inspections, in
accordance with the provisions and procedures laid down in Regulation (EC) No
1073/1999 and Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/9622
with a view to
establishing whether there have been any irregularities affecting the financial interests of
the Union in connection with expenditure funded by Eurojust.
4. Without prejudice to paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, working arrangements with third countries,
international organisations and Interpol, contracts, grant agreements and grant decisions of
Eurojust shall contain provisions expressly empowering the European Court of Auditors
and OLAF to conduct such audits and investigations, according to their respective
competences.
Article 62
Security rules on the protection of classified information
Eurojust shall apply the security principles contained in the Commission's security rules for
protecting European Union Classified Information (EUCI) and sensitive non-classified information,
22
OJ L 292, 15.11.1996, p. 2.
EN 42 EN
as set out in the annex to Commission Decision 2001/844/EC, ECSC, Euratom23
. This shall cover,
inter alia, provisions for the exchange, processing and storage of such information.
Article 63
Administrative inquiries
The administrative activities of Eurojust shall be subject to the inquiries of the European
Ombudsman in accordance with Article 228 of the Treaty.
Article 64
Liability other than liability for unauthorised or incorrect processing of data
1. Eurojust's contractual liability shall be governed by the law applicable to the contract in
question.
2. The Court of Justice of the European Union shall have jurisdiction to give judgment
pursuant to any arbitration clause contained in a contract concluded by Eurojust.
3. In the case of non-contractual liability, Eurojust shall, in accordance with the general
principles common to the laws of the Member States and independently of any liability
under Article 37, make good any damage caused by the College or the staff of Eurojust in
the performance of their duties.
4. Paragraph 3 shall also apply to damage caused through the fault of a national member, a
deputy or an Assistant in the performance of their duties. However, when he or she is
acting on the basis of the powers granted to him or her pursuant to Article 8, his or her
Member State of origin shall reimburse Eurojust the sums which Eurojust has paid to make
good such damage.
5. The Court of Justice of the European Union shall have jurisdiction in disputes over
compensation for damages referred to in paragraph 3.
6. The national courts of the Member States competent to deal with disputes involving
Eurojust's liability as referred to in this Article shall be determined by reference to Council
Regulation (EC) No 44/200124
.
7. The personal liability of its staff towards Eurojust shall be governed by the provisions laid
down in the Staff Regulations or Conditions of Employment applicable to them.
Article 65
Headquarters Agreement and operating conditions
The seat of Eurojust shall be The Hague, The Netherlands.
The necessary arrangements concerning the accommodation to be provided for Eurojust in the
Netherlands and the facilities to be made available by the Netherlands together with the specific
rules applicable in the Netherlands to the Administrative Director, members of the College,
Eurojust staff and members of their families shall be laid down in a Headquarters Agreement
between Eurojust and the Netherlands concluded once the College’s approval is obtained.
The Netherlands shall provide the best possible conditions to ensure the functioning of Eurojust,
including multilingual, European-oriented schooling and appropriate transport connections.
23
OJ L 317, 3.12.2001, p. 1.
24
OJ L 12, 16.1.2001, p. 1. Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 is replaced by Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 from 10
January 2015
EN 43 EN
Article 66
Transitional arrangements
1. Eurojust shall be the general legal successor in respect of all contracts concluded by,
liabilities incumbent on, and properties acquired by Eurojust as established by Council
Decision 2002/187/JHA.
2. The national members of Eurojust who were seconded by each Member State under
Decision 2002/187/JHA shall take the role of national members of Eurojust under Section
II of this Regulation. The term of their office may be extended once under Article 10(2) of
this Regulation after the entry into force of this Regulation, irrespective of a previous
extension.
3. The President and Vice-Presidents of Eurojust at the time of the entry into force of this
Regulation shall take the role of the President and Vice-Presidents of Eurojust under
Article 11, until their term in accordance with Decision 2002/187/JHA expires. They may
be re-elected once after the entry into force of this Regulation under Article 11(3) of this
Regulation, irrespective of a previous re-election.
4. The Administrative Director who was lastly appointed under Article 29 of Decision
2002/187/JHA shall take the role of the Administrative Director under Article 17 until his
or her term as decided under Decision 2002/187/JHA expires.. The term of the
Administrative Director may be extended once after the entry into force of this Regulation.
5. This Regulation shall not affect the legal force of agreements concluded by Eurojust as
established by Decision 2002/187/JHA. In particular, all international agreements
concluded by Eurojust which have entered into force before the entry into force of this
Regulation shall remain legally valid.
Article 67
Repeal
1. This Regulation replaces and repeals Decisions 2002/187/JHA, 2003/659/JHA and
2009/426/JHA.
2. References to the repealed Council Decisions referred to in paragraph 1 shall be construed
as references to this Regulation.
Article 68
Entry into force
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the
Official Journal of the European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in the Member States in
accordance with the Treaties.
Done at Brussels,
For the European Parliament For the Council
The President The President
EN 44 EN
ANNEX 1
List of forms of serious crime which Eurojust is competent to deal with in accordance with Article
3(1):
– organised crime;
– terrorism;
– drug trafficking;
– money-laundering;
– corruption;
– crime against the financial interests of the Union;
– murder, grievous bodily injury;
– kidnapping, illegal restraint and hostage taking;
– sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of women and children, child pornography and
solicitation of children for sexual purposes;
– racism and xenophobia;
– organised robbery;
– motor vehicle crime;
– swindling and fraud;
– racketeering and extortion;
– counterfeiting and product piracy;
– forgery of administrative documents and trafficking therein;
– forgery of money and means of payment;
– computer crime;
– insider dealing and financial market manipulation;
– illegal immigrant smuggling;
– trafficking in human beings;
– illicit trade in human organs and tissue;
– illicit trafficking in hormonal substances and other growth promoters;
– illicit trafficking in cultural goods, including antiquities and works of art;
– illicit trafficking in arms, ammunition and explosives;
– illicit trafficking in endangered animal species;
– illicit trafficking in endangered plant species and varieties;
– environmental crime;
– ship-source pollution;
– crime connected with nuclear and radioactive substances;
– genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.
EN 45 EN
ANNEX 2
Categories of personal data referred to in Article 27
1. a) surname, maiden name, given names and any alias or assumed names;
b) date and place of birth;
c) nationality;
d) sex;
e) place of residence, profession and whereabouts of the person concerned;
f) social security numbers, driving licences, identification documents and passport data,
customs and Tax Identification Numbers;
g) information concerning legal persons if it includes information relating to identified
or identifiable individuals who are the subject of a judicial investigation or
prosecution;
h) bank accounts and accounts with other financial institutions;
i) description and nature of the alleged offences, the date on which they were
committed, the criminal category of the offences and the progress of the
investigations;
j) the facts pointing to an international extension of the case;
k) details relating to alleged membership of a criminal organisation;
l) telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, traffic data and location data, as well as the
related data necessary to identify the subscriber or user;
m) vehicle registration data;
n) DNA profiles established from the non-coding part of DNA, photographs and
fingerprints.
2. a) surname, maiden name, given names and any alias or assumed names;
b) date and place of birth;
c) nationality;
d) sex;
e) place of residence, profession and whereabouts of the person concerned;
f) the description and nature of the offences involving them, the date on which they
were committed, the criminal category of the offences and the progress of the
investigations.
EN 46 EN
LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT
1. FRAMEWORK OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE
1.1. Title of the proposal/initiative
1.2. Policy area(s) concerned in the ABM/ABB structure
1.3. Nature of the proposal/initiative
1.4. Objectives
1.5. Grounds for the proposal/initiative
1.6. Duration and financial impact
1.7. Management mode(s) envisaged
2. MANAGEMENT MEASURES
2.1. Monitoring and reporting rules
2.2. Management and control system
2.3. Measures to prevent fraud and irregularities
3. ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE
3.1. Heading(s) of the multiannual financial framework and expenditure budget line(s)
affected
3.2. Estimated impact on expenditure
3.2.1. Summary of estimated impact on expenditure
3.2.2. Estimated impact on [body]'s appropriations
3.2.3. Estimated impact on [body]'s human resources
3.2.4. Compatibility with the current multiannual financial framework
3.2.5. Third-party contributions
3.3. Estimated impact on revenue
EN 47 EN
LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT
1. FRAMEWORK OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE
1.1. Title of the proposal/initiative
Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European
Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (EUROJUST)
1.2. Policy area(s) concerned in the ABM/ABB structure25
Policy area: 33 - Justice
Activity: 33.03 - Justice in criminal and civil matters (as from 2014: 33.03 – Justice)
1.3. Nature of the proposal/initiative
The proposal/initiative relates to a new action
The proposal/initiative relates to a new action following a pilot project/preparatory action26
; The proposal/initiative relates to the extension of an existing action
The proposal/initiative relates to an action redirected towards a new action
1.4. Objective(s)
1.4.1. The Commission's multiannual strategic objective(s) targeted by the proposal/initiative
Eurojust was set up following a MS initiative by Decision 2002/187/JHA as a body of the Union with
legal personality with a view to reinforcing the fight against serious crime. Article 85 TFEU provides
for Eurojust to be governed by a Regulation, adopted in accordance with the ordinary legislative
procedure. Its mission is to support and strengthen coordination and cooperation between national
investigating and prosecuting authorities relating to serious crime affecting two or more Member States
of the European Union. This proposal for a Regulation provides for a single renovated legal framework
for a new European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation, which is the legal successor of
Eurojust.
1.4.2. Specific objective(s) and ABM/ABB activity(ies) concerned
Specific objective N°2: Enhance judicial cooperation in criminal matters and thus contribute to
creating a genuine European Area of Justice
ABM/ABB activity(ies) concerned
33.03 - Justice in criminal and civil matters
25
ABM: Activity-Based Management – ABB: Activity-Based Budgeting.
26
As referred to in Article 49(6)(a) or (b) of the Financial Regulation.
EN 48 EN
1.4.3. Expected result(s) and impact
Specify the effects which the proposal/initiative should have on the beneficiaries/groups targeted.
By bringing together senior prosecutors and judges from all the Member States of the EU,
Eurojust plays a central role in developing a European area of justice. It also plays a major role
in fighting cross-border crime in the EU as an effective facilitator of judicial co-operation
whose assistance is increasingly sought by national practitioners. The expected effects include:
1. Eurojust's operational work
Eurojust supports and strengthens judicial cooperation in criminal matters. National members,
acting individually or as a College, intervene in concrete criminal cases, where national
authorities need enhanced coordination or need to overcome difficulties in the practical use of
judicial cooperation and mutual recognition instruments. Eurojust has helped to bridge the
EU's wide variety of legal systems and traditions and to foster mutual trust, which is the
cornerstone of mutual recognition instruments by rapidly solving linguistic or legal problems
or identifying competent authorities in other countries.
2. Eurojust centre of judicial expertise for effective action against serious cross-border crime
Eurojust plays a major role in the fight against cross-border crime. Eurojust organises
coordination meetings, where national authorities come together to agree on a common
approach to investigations, prepare assistance requests, solve or anticipate answers to legal
questions or decide upon simultaneous operations. Eurojust is involved in the setting up and
participation in JITs (Joint Investigation Teams), providing support to Member States.
3. Eurojust's cooperation with partners
Eurojust cooperates with other agencies, in particular Europol, OLAF as well as with 3rd
States and hosts the Secretariats of the European Judicial Network, the Joint Investigation
Teams Expert Network and the Genocide Network, in accordance with the Council Decision.
4. Eurojust's relations with the European Public Prosecutor's Office
In accordance with Article 86 TFEU, the European Public Prosecutor's Office must be
established "from Eurojust". This proposal therefore also aims to regulate the relations
between Eurojust and the European Public Prosecutor's Office. The administrative support to
the EPPO will be provided on a zero cost basis.
1.4.4. Indicators of results and impact
Specify the indicators for monitoring implementation of the proposal/initiative.
In accordance with the Roadmap for the implementation of the Common Approach on
agencies, the Commission is developing guidelines for the definition of key performance
indicators for the Agencies. This is expected to be concluded in 2013.
1.5. Grounds for the proposal/initiative
1.5.1. Requirement(s) to be met in the short or long term
In the short run Eurojust is expected to continue conducting its core activities, notably those
directly related to supporting and strengthening coordination and cooperation between national
investigating and prosecuting authorities in cases of serious cross-border crime. The flow of
information and link between national authorities and Eurojust are bound to be strengthened.
EN 49 EN
In the medium term, Eurojust's structure, operation, tasks and parliamentary oversight will be
strengthened through this proposal in accordance with Article 85 TFEU. There are also
requirements linked to Article 86 TFEU and the establishment of a European Public
Prosecutor's Office from Eurojust: Eurojust will be required to provide administrative support
services to the European Public Prosecutor's Office.
1.5.2. Added value of EU involvement
The added value of the action developed by Eurojust: facilitating judicial cooperation between
national authorities of Member States and enhancing coordination to fight organised crime
more effectively, has an intrinsically EU dimension and can only be achieved at EU level.
1.5.3. Lessons learned from similar experiences in the past
Eurojust's annual reports confirm that there is an on-going need for EU and international
coordination and support in the area of cross-border serious crime. The past decade has seen
an explosion of organised crime, such as drug trafficking, trafficking in human beings,
terrorism and cybercrime, including child pornography. A new criminal landscape is
emerging, marked increasingly by highly mobile and flexible groups operating in multiple
jurisdictions and criminal sectors, and aided, in particular, by widespread, illicit use of the
Internet. Member States cannot effectively combat these at national level, so coordination and
assistance become paramount. Eurojust is the only EU agency that supports national judicial
authorities to appropriately investigate and prosecute these cases.
1.5.4. Compatibility and possible synergy with other appropriate instruments
The reinforcement of judicial cooperation in criminal matters is a crucial part of creating an
area of freedom, security and justice. Eurojust's mission in facilitating coordination and
cooperation is developed in the context of other legal instruments in the area such as the 2000
MLA Convention, the Council Framework Decision on the European Arrest Warrant or the
Council Framework Decision on conflicts of jurisdiction. Synergies with the rest of JHA
agencies, in particular Europol, and the need to avoid duplication of tasks and enhance
cooperation are to be borne in mind. Clear synergies will also be part of the cooperation
between Eurojust and the European Public Prosecutor's office.
EN 50 EN
1.6. Duration and financial impact
Proposal/initiative of limited duration
– Proposal/initiative in effect from [DD/MM]YYYY to [DD/MM]YYYY
– Financial impact from YYYY to YYYY
x Proposal/initiative of unlimited duration
– Implementation with a start-up period from YYYY to YYYY,
– followed by full-scale operation.
1.7. Management mode(s) envisaged27
Direct management by the Commission
– by its departments, including by its staff in the Union delegations;
– by the executive agencies;
Shared management with the Member States
X Indirect management by delegating implementation tasks to:
– third countries or the bodies they have designated;
– international organisations and their agencies (to be specified);
– the EIB and the European Investment Fund;
– X bodies referred to in Articles 208 and 209 of the Financial Regulation;
– public law bodies;
– bodies governed by private law with a public service mission to the extent that they
provide adequate financial guarantees;
– bodies governed by the private law of a Member State that are entrusted with the
implementation of a public-private partnership and that provide adequate financial
guarantees;
– persons entrusted with the implementation of specific actions in the CFSP pursuant to
Title V of the TEU, and identified in the relevant basic act.
– If more than one management mode is indicated, please provide details in the "Comments" section.
Comments
This legislative proposal aims at modernising the legal framework of Eurojust and streamlining its
functioning.
It has been drafted with a spirit of budget neutrality. As a consequence, the financial programming of
Eurojust which has been prepared for the period 2014-2020 adopted by the Commission in July 2013 is
valid for this legislative proposal.
However, there is a new element introduced by this Regulation which concerns the relations with the
European Public Prosecutor's office: as defined in this Regulation Eurojust would provide
administrative support structures to the European Public Prosecutor's Office, including finances, human
resources, security and IT.
27
Details of management modes and references to the Financial Regulation may be found on the BudgWeb site:
http://www.cc.cec/budg/man/budgmanag/budgmanag_en.html
EN 51 EN
In parallel, Eurojust would not work anymore on the offences affecting the EU's financial interests
which represent between 5 to 10% of the current caseload. Consequently posts can be moved within the
agency to cover the support to the EPPO function.
Therefore, the financial impact of this proposal is budget neutral and does not change the total of the
posts mentioned in the financial programming for the period 2014-2020.
2. MANAGEMENT MEASURES
2.1. Monitoring and reporting rules
Specify frequency and conditions.
Each year the President of the Eurojust, on behalf of the College, shall forward the Annual
report to the European Parliament on the work carried out by Eurojust, as well as information
on working arrangements concluded with third parties, and the annual report of the European
Data Protection Supervisor.
An external independent evaluation of the implementation of the Regulation and the activities
of Eurojust shall be commissioned by the Commission within five years after the Regulation
takes effect, and every five years thereafter.
2.2. Management and control system
2.2.1. Risk(s) identified
No specific risks in management and control systems were identified at this stage.
2.2.2. Control method(s) envisaged
Eurojust is subject to administrative controls including budgetary control, internal audit,
annual reports by the European Court of Auditors and the annual discharge for the execution
of the EU budget.
2.3. Measures to prevent fraud and irregularities
Specify existing or envisaged prevention and protection measures.
In order to combat fraud, corruption and other unlawful activities, the provisions of
Regulations (EC) N. 1073/1999 shall apply without restrictions to the Agency.
EN 52 EN
3. ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE
3.1. Heading(s) of the multiannual financial framework and expenditure budget line(s)
affected
• Existing budget lines
In order of multiannual financial framework headings and budget lines.
Budget line
Type of
expenditure
Contribution
Heading of
multiannual
financial
framework
Number
[Heading………………………...……….]
Diff./non-
diff.
(28)
from
EFTA
countries
29
from
candidate
countries30
from third
countries
within the meaning
of Article 18(1)(aa)
of the Financial
Regulation
3
33.0304
European Union Agency for Criminal
Justice Cooperation (EUROJUST)
Diff NO
YES
After
agreement
NO NO
• New budget lines requested
In order of multiannual financial framework headings and budget lines.
Budget line
Type of
expenditure
Contribution
Heading of
multiannual
financial
framework
Number
[Heading……………………………………..]
Diff./non-
diff.
from
EFTA
countries
from
candidate
countries
from third
countries
within the meaning
of Article 18(1)(aa)
of the Financial
Regulation
Diff NO NO NO NO
28
Diff. = Differentiated appropriations / Non-Diff. = Non-differentiated appropriations.
29
EFTA: European Free Trade Association.
30
Candidate countries and, where applicable, potential candidate countries from the Western Balkans.
EN 53 E
3.2. Estimated impact on expenditure
3.2.1. Summary of estimated impact on expenditure
EUR million (to three decimal places)
Heading of multiannual financial
Framework:
Number
3
Security and citizenship
EUROJUST
Year
2014
Year
2015
Year
2016
Year
2017
Year
2018
Year
2019
Year
2020
TOTAL
Commitments (1)
Title 1
Payments (2)
Commitments (1a) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Title 2
Payments (2a) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Title 3 Commitments (3a) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Payments (3b) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Commitments
=1+1a
+3a
TOTAL appropriations
for EUROJUST
Payments
=2+2a
+3b
Justice Programme
Year
2014
Year
2015
Year
2016
Year
2017
Year
2018
Year
2019
Year
2020
TOTAL
Commitments (1) 0.400 0.400
33 03 02 – Improving judicial cooperation in
civil and criminal matters Payments (2) 0.400 0.400
Commitments (1) 0.400 0.400
TOTAL Justice Programme31
Payments (2) 0.400 0.400
31
Article 56 of the draft Regulation foresees an obligation for the Commission to present a report on the implementation of the Regulation. This report shall be
based on an external study.
EN 54 E
The current calculation is based on the assumption that the administrative support structures provided by Eurojust to the European Public
Prosecutor's Office, including finances, human resources, security and IT, is budget neutral and does not require additional staff from the
establishment plan of Eurojust, as internal redeployment within Eurojust is foreseen as a result of the cease of some activities after the
establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office.
In practical terms, Eurojust's administrative structure would cover the needs of both Eurojust and the European Public Prosecutor's Office.
This administrative structure would ensure coordinated budgetary planning and execution, various aspect of staff management and the
provision of all other support services.
The accountant of Eurojust is expected to be the accountant of the European Public Prosecutor's Office.
The costs for the evaluation to assess in particular the implementation and impact of this regulation, as well as the effectiveness and
efficiency of Eurojust should be covered by the new Justice Programme.
EN 55 E
Heading of multiannual financial
framework:
5 ‘Administrative expenditure’
EUR million (to three decimal places)
Year
2014
Year
2015
Year
2016
Year
2017
Year
2018
Year
2019
Year
2020
TOTAL
DG: JUSTICE
y Human resources 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
y Other administrative expenditure 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL DG JUSTICE Appropriations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL appropriations
under HEADING 5
of the multiannual financial framework
(Total commitments =
Total payments)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
EUR million (to three decimal places)
Year
2014
Year
2015
Year
2016
Year
2017
Year
2018
Year
2019
Year
2020
TOTAL
Commitments 0.400 0.400
TOTAL appropriations
under HEADINGS 1 to 5
of the multiannual financial framework Payments 0.400 .0400
EN 56 EN
3.2.2. Estimated impact on [body]'s appropriations
– X The proposal/initiative does not require the use of operational appropriations The proposal/initiative requires the use of
operational appropriations, as described below:
Commitment appropriations in EUR million (to three decimal places)
Year 2014
Year
2015
Year
2016
Year
2017
Year
2018
Year
2019
Year
2020
TOTAL
OUTPUTS
Indicate
objectives and
outputs
Ø
Type32 Avera
ge
cost
Number
Cost
Number
Cost
Number
Cost
Number
Cost
Number
Cost
Number
Cost
Number
Cost
Total
numbe
r
Total
cost
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE NO 133
...
- Output
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 2
…
- Output
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 3
Output
TOTAL COST .
32
Outputs are products and services to be supplied (e.g.: number of student exchanges financed, number of km of roads built, etc.).
33
As described in point 1.4.2. ‘Specific objective(s)…’
EN 57 EN
3.2.3. Estimated impact on [body]'s human resources
3.2.3.1. Summary
– ; The proposal/initiative does not require the use of appropriations of an
administrative nature
– † The proposal/initiative requires the use of appropriations of an administrative
nature, as described below:
in Full Time Equivalent: FTE
Human resources
Year
2014
Year
2015
Year
2016
Year
2017
Year
2018
Year
2019
Year
2020
Total
Establishment plan posts
(in headcounts)
- Of which AD
- Of which AST
External personnel (FTE)
- Of which contract agents
- Of which Seconded National
Experts (SNE)
Total staff
EUR million (to three decimal places)
Staff expenditure
Year
2014
Year
2015
Year
2016
Year
2017
Year
2018
Year
2019
Year
2020
Total
Establishment plan posts
- Of which AD
- Of which AST
External personnel
- Of which contract agents
- Of which Seconded National
Experts (SNE)
Total staff expenditure
EN 58 EN
3.2.3.2. Estimated requirements of human resources for the parent DG
– X The proposal/initiative does not require the use of additional human resources.
– The proposal/initiative requires the use of human resources, as described below:
Estimate to be expressed in full amounts (or at most to one decimal place)
Year
2014
Year
2015
Year
2016
Year
2017
Year
2018
Year
2019
Year
2020
y Establishment plan posts (officials and temporary staff)
XX 01 01 01 (Headquarters and
Commission’s Representation
Offices)
XX 01 01 02 (Delegations)
XX 01 05 01 (Indirect research)
10 01 05 01 (Direct research)
y External staff (in Full Time Equivalent: FTE)34
XX 01 02 01 (CA, SNE, INT from
the ‘global envelope’)
XX 01 02 02 (CA, LA, SNE, INT
and JED in the delegations)
- at
Headquarters
36
XX 01 04
yy35
- in
delegations
XX 01 05 02 (CA, SNE, INT -
Indirect research)
10 01 05 02 (CA, SNE, INT- Direct
research)
Other budget lines (specify)
TOTAL
XX is the policy area or budget title concerned.
The human resources required will be met by staff from the DG who are already assigned to
management of the action and/or have been redeployed within the DG, together if necessary
with any additional allocation which may be granted to the managing DG under the annual
allocation procedure and in the light of budgetary constraints.
34
CA= Contract Agent; LA = Local Agent; SNE= Seconded National Expert; INT= agency staff
(‘Intérimaire’); SNE= Seconded National Expert.
35
Sub-ceiling for external staff covered by operational appropriations (former "BA" lines).
36
Mainly for the Structural Funds, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and
the European Fisheries Fund (EFF).
EN 59 EN
Description of tasks to be carried out:
Officials and temporary staff Policy shadowing and advise to the agency, budgetary and financial advice to the
agency and actual payments, discharge, draft budget procedures
External staff
Description of the calculation of cost for FTE equivalent should be included in the Annex,
section 3.
3.2.4. Compatibility with the current multiannual financial framework
– X Proposal/initiative is compatible the next multiannual financial framework.
– Proposal/initiative will entail reprogramming of the relevant heading in the
multiannual financial framework.
Explain what reprogramming is required, specifying the budget lines concerned and the corresponding
amounts.
– Proposal/initiative requires application of the flexibility instrument or revision
of the multiannual financial framework37
.
Explain what is required, specifying the headings and budget lines concerned and the corresponding
amounts.
3.2.5. Third-party contributions
– X The proposal/initiative does not provide for co-financing by third parties.
– The proposal/initiative provides for the co-financing estimated below:
Appropriations in EUR million (to three decimal places)
Year
2014
Year
2015
Year
2016
Year
2017
Enter as many years as necessary
to show the duration of the
impact (see point 1.6)
Total
Specify the co-financing
body
TOTAL appropriations
cofinanced
37
See points 19 and 24 of the Interinstitutional Agreement.
EN 60 EN
3.3. Estimated impact on revenue
– X Proposal/initiative has no financial impact on revenue.
– Proposal/initiative has the following financial impact:
– on own resources
– on miscellaneous revenue
EUR million (to three decimal places)
Impact of the proposal/initiative38
Budget revenue line:
Appropriation
s available for
the current
financial year Year
2014
Year
2015
Year
2016
Year
2017
Enter as many years as necessary to show
the duration of the impact (see point 1.6)
Article ………….
For miscellaneous ‘assigned’ revenue, specify the budget expenditure line(s) affected.
Specify the method for calculating the impact on revenue.
38
As regards traditional own resources (customs duties, sugar levies), the amounts indicated must be net
amounts, i.e. gross amounts after deduction of 25% for collection costs.


EN EN
EUROPEAN
COMMISSION
Brussels, 17.7.2013
COM(2013) 534 final
2013/0255 (APP)
Proposal for a
COUNCIL REGULATION
on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office
{SWD(2013) 274 final}
{SWD(2013) 275 final}
Europaudvalget 2013
KOM (2013) 0532 Bilag 1
Offentligt
EN 2 EN
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM
1. CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL
Prosecuting offences against the EU budget is currently within the exclusive competence of
Member States and no Union authority exists in this area. While their potential damage is
very significant, these offences are not always investigated and prosecuted by the relevant
national authorities, as law enforcement resources are limited. As a result, national law
enforcement efforts remain often fragmented in this area and the cross-border dimension of
these offences usually escapes the attention of the authorities.
Whereas tackling cross-border fraud cases would require closely coordinated and effective
investigations and prosecutions at European level, the current levels of information exchange
and coordination are not sufficient to achieve this, despite the intensified efforts of Union
bodies, such as Eurojust, Europol and the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF). Coordination,
cooperation and information exchange face numerous problems and limitations owing to a
split of responsibilities between authorities belonging to diverse territorial and functional
jurisdictions. Gaps in the judicial action to fight fraud occur daily at different levels and
between different authorities and are a major impediment to the effective investigation and
prosecution of offences affecting the Union’s financial interests.
Eurojust and Europol have a general mandate to facilitate exchange of information and
coordinate national criminal investigations and prosecutions, but lack the power to carry out
acts of investigation or prosecution themselves. The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) has
a mandate to investigate fraud and illegal activities affecting the EU, but its powers are
limited to administrative investigations. Action by national judicial authorities remains often
slow, prosecution rates on the average low and results obtained in the different Member States
over the Union as a whole unequal. Based on this track record the judicial action undertaken
by Member States against fraud may currently not be considered as effective, equivalent and
deterrent as required under the Treaty.
As Member States' criminal investigation and prosecution authorities are currently unable to
achieve an equivalent level of protection and enforcement, the Union not only has the
competence but also the obligation to act. Article 325 of the Treaty so requires from a legal
perspective, but taking into account the specific Union rules which apply in this field the
Union is also best placed to protect its own financial interests, including via the prosecution of
offences against these interests. Article 86 of the Treaty provides the necessary legal basis for
such a new Union-level prosecution system, the purpose of which is to correct the
deficiencies of the current enforcement regime exclusively based on national efforts and add
consistency and coordination to these efforts.
The current proposal seeks to set up the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and define its
competences and procedures. It complements an earlier legislative proposal1
which defines
the criminal offences as well as the applicable sanctions.
This proposal is part of a legislative package as it will be accompanied by a proposal
concerning the reform of Eurojust.
1
Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the fight against fraud to the
Union’s financial interests by means of criminal law, 11 July 2012 COM (2012) 363 final
EN 3 EN
2. RESULTS OF CONSULTATIONS WITH THE INTERESTED PARTIES AND
IMPACT ASSESSMENTS
In order to prepare this Regulation, the Commission has consulted widely with stakeholders,
on a number of occasions, also building on earlier discussions related to the European Public
Prosecutor's Office, which have been going on for more than a decade.2
Preparatory
consultations in view of the present proposal have covered the main issues addressed in this
Regulation, including various options with regard to the institutional, legal, organisational and
operational set-up of a European system for the investigation and prosecution of the relevant
offences.
Early in 2012, two questionnaires were published and distributed on-line, one to justice
professionals and another to the general public, respectively. In general, the replies were
positive towards taking new actions to strengthen the material and procedural framework to
counter offences affecting the EU’s financial interests, and most also expressed support for
the idea to set up a European Public Prosecutor’s Office. A number of more detailed
suggestions, concerns and questions were also voiced, in particular on the relationship
between such the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and national prosecution authorities,
the competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to direct and coordinate
investigations at national level, or the possible difficulties with any harmonised European
rules of procedure in the European Public Prosecutor’s Office's proceedings. In parallel, field
research has been conducted in a number of Member States, as part of the external study in
support of this report. In addition, throughout 2012 and at the beginning of 2013, a number of
discussions or meetings took place at European level:
• The network of Public Prosecutors or equivalent institutions at the Supreme Judicial
Courts of the Member States, Budapest, 25-26 May 2012.
• Conference: A Blueprint for the European Public Prosecutor's Office? Luxembourg,
13-15 June 2012. The conference gathered experts and high level representatives
from academia, EU institutions and Member States.
• Vice-President Reding's consultation meeting with Prosecutors General and
Directors of Public Prosecution from Member States, Brussels, 26 June 2012. The
meeting permitted an open discussion on specific issues regarding the protection of
the Union's financial interests.
• On 18 October 2012, the Commission organised a consultation meeting on issues
relating to a possible reform of Eurojust, in which questions related to the setting up
of a European Public Prosecutor’s Office were also discussed with representatives of
Member States. The meeting generally supported establishing a close link between
Eurojust and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
• The 10th OLAF Conference of Fraud Prosecutors, Berlin, 8-9 November 2012, was
an opportunity to explore the ways in which national prosecutors would interact with
the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, if set up.
• The informal consultation held on 26 November 2012 with defence lawyers (CCBE
and ECBA) looked at procedural safeguards for suspects and made useful
recommendations in that regard.
2
See Green Paper on criminal law protection of the financial interests of the Community and the
establishment of a European Public Prosecutor, 11 December 2001 COM (2001)715 final and its follow
up report, 19 March 2003 COM (2003)128 final
EN 4 EN
• ERA seminar "Towards the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO)", 17 and 18
January 2013.
• Meeting of the Commission Expert Group on European Criminal Policy, Brussels, 23
January 2013.
• Further consultation meeting with ECBA and CCBE, Brussels, 9 April 2013.
Also, numerous bilateral consultation meetings with Member States’ authorities have taken
place over the second half of 2012 and the beginning of 2013.
The Commission conducted an Impact Assessment of policy alternatives taking account inter
alia an external study (Specific contract No. JUST/2011/JPEN/FW/0030.A4) which has
considered various options involving the establishment of a European Public Prosecutor’s
Office. According to the analysis of the Impact Assessment, setting up the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office as a decentralised integrated office of the Union, which relies on national
judicial systems, offers the most benefits and generates the lowest costs.
3. LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL
3.1. The legal basis
The legal basis of the proposal is Article 86 of the Treaty. According to the first paragraph of
that provision, “[i]n order to combat crimes affecting the financial interests of the Union, the
Council, by means of regulations adopted in accordance with a special legislative procedure,
may establish a European Public Prosecutor's Office from Eurojust. The Council shall act
unanimously after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament”. The second paragraph
of that provision defines the responsibility of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office as
follows: “[t]he European Public Prosecutor's Office shall be responsible for investigating,
prosecuting and bringing to judgment, where appropriate in liaison with Europol, the
perpetrators of, and accomplices in, offences against the Union's financial interests, as
determined by the regulation provided for in paragraph 1. It shall exercise the functions of
prosecutor in the competent courts of the Member States in relation to such offences”. Finally,
the third paragraph of Article 86 of the Treaty defines the substantive scope of the regulations
to be adopted pursuant to it: “[t]he regulations referred to in paragraph 1 shall determine the
general rules applicable to the European Public Prosecutor's Office, the conditions governing
the performance of its functions, the rules of procedure applicable to its activities, as well as
those governing the admissibility of evidence, and the rules applicable to the judicial review
of procedural measures taken by it in the performance of its functions”.
3.2. Subsidiarity and proportionality
There is a need for the Union to act because the foreseen action has an intrinsic Union
dimension. It implies Union-level steering and coordination of investigations and
prosecutions of criminal offences affecting its own financial interests, the protection of which
is required both from the Union and the Member States by Articles 310 (6) and 325 TFEU. In
accordance with the subsidiarity principle, this objective can only be achieved at Union level
by reason of its scale and effects. As stated above, the present situation, in which the
prosecution of offences against the Union’s financial interests is exclusively in the hands of
the authorities of the Member States is not satisfactory and does not sufficiently achieve the
objective of fighting effectively against offences affecting the Union budget.
In accordance with the principle of proportionality, this Regulation does not go beyond what
is necessary to achieve this objective. Throughout the proposed text, the options chosen are
those that are least intrusive for the legal orders and the institutional structures of the Member
EN 5 EN
States. Key features of the proposal, such as the choice of the law that applies to investigative
measures, the figure of Delegated Prosecutors, the decentralised character of the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office and the system of judicial review, were designed in order not to go
beyond what was necessary to achieve the main objectives of the proposal.
The Union's competence to counter fraud and other offences affecting its financial interests is
unambiguously stipulated by Articles 86 and 325 of the Treaty. As this Union competence is
not accessory to that of Member States and exercising it has become necessary to achieve a
more effective protection of the Union’s financial interests, the proposed package complies
with the requirement of subsidiarity.
3.3. Explanation of the proposal by chapters
The main objectives of the proposal are:
• To contribute to the strengthening of the protection of the Union's financial interests
and further development of an area of justice, and to enhance the trust of EU
businesses and citizens in the Union’s institutions, while respecting all fundamental
rights enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
• To establish a coherent European system for the investigation and prosecution of
offences affecting the Union’s financial interests.
• To ensure a more efficient and effective investigation and prosecution of offences
affecting the EU’s financial interests.
• To increase the number of prosecutions, leading to more convictions and recovery of
fraudulently obtained Union funds.
• To ensure close cooperation and effective information exchange between the
European and national competent authorities.
• To enhance deterrence of committing offences affecting the Union’s financial
interests.
3.3.1. Chapter I: Subject matter and definitions
This Chapter sets out the subject matter of the Regulation, which is the setting up of the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office. In addition, it defines a certain number of terms used in
the text, such as the “financial interests of the Union”.
3.3.2. Chapter II: General rules
This Chapter regulates the fundamental features of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office,
its status and structure as a new Union office with investigation and prosecution functions. In
doing so, it provides specific rules on the appointment and dismissal of the European Public
Prosecutor and his/her delegates. It also sets out the basic principles of its functioning.
Section 1 (Status, organisation and structure of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office)
clarifies how the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is set up and what functions will be
entrusted to it. The text provides for its establishment as a new Union body with legal
personality and sets out its relationship with Eurojust. Among the key features of the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office, the text refers to independence and accountability,
which should guarantee that it is able to exercise its functions and use its powers in a way that
makes it immune from any improper influence. The main characteristics of the structure of
the European Public Prosecutor’s Office are also described in the text.
Section 2 (Appointment and dismissal of the members of the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office) provides the rules applicable to the appointment and dismissal procedure of the
EN 6 EN
European Public Prosecutor, his/her Deputies and staff. The appointment procedure for the
European Public Prosecutor is designed in a way that guarantees his independence and
accountability towards Union institutions, whereas his/her dismissal procedure rests with the
Court of Justice of the European Union. For the European Delegated Prosecutors, who will be
appointed and dismissed by the European Public Prosecutor, the procedure ensures their
integration into national prosecution systems.
Section 3 (Basic principles) describes the main legal principles that will govern the activities
of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, including conformity with the Charter of
Fundamental Rights of the European Union, proportionality, national law being applicable to
implement the Regulation, procedural neutrality, legality and celerity of investigations,
Member States’ duty to assist the investigations and prosecutions of the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office.
Section 4 (Competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office) clarifies the criminal
offences which fall within the material competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office. These offences are to be defined by reference to national law implementing Union law
(Directive 2013/xx/EU). The text distinguishes between two categories of offences, the first
of which falls automatically within the competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office (Article 12) and the second (Article 13) which requires to establish its competence
where there are certain connecting links with offences of the first category. The Section also
describes how the European Public Prosecutor’s Office will exercise its competence over
these offences.
3.3.3. Chapter III: Rules of procedure on investigations, prosecutions and trial proceedings
This Chapter covers the essential features of the investigations and prosecutions of the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office, including provisions on how they should be controlled
by national courts, what decisions the European Public Prosecutor’s Office could take once
the investigation is completed, how it would exercise its prosecution functions and how the
evidence collected would be used in trial courts.
Section 1 (Conduct of the investigation) provides the general rules that apply to the
investigations of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, including the sources of
information used, how investigations are initiated and conducted and how the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office may obtain further information from databases or data collected at
its request.
Section 2 (Processing of information) explains the functioning of the Case Management
System.
Section 3 (Investigation measures) sets out the types and conditions of the individual
investigation measures which the European Public Prosecutor’s Office will be able to use.
The text does not regulate in detail each of these measures but requires the application of
national law.
Section 4 (Termination of the investigation and powers of prosecution) stipulates the different
types of decisions which the European Public Prosecutor’s Office may take at the end of the
investigation, including indictments and dismissals.
Section 5 (Admissibility of evidence) regulates the admissibility of evidence collected and
presented by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office in trial courts.
Section 6 (Confiscation) regulates the disposition of the assets confiscated by national courts
as a result of the prosecution conducted by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
EN 7 EN
3.3.4. Chapter IV: Procedural safeguards
The rules of this Chapter provide safeguards for suspects and other persons involved in the
proceedings of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, which will need to comply with the
relevant standards, in particular the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
The rules refer to Union legislation (Directives on various procedural rights in criminal
proceedings) with regard to certain rights but also define autonomously other rights which
have not yet been regulated in Union legislation. As such, these rules provide an additional
layer of protection compared to national law so that suspects and other persons may benefit
directly from a Union-level protection.
3.3.5. Chapter V: Judicial review
Article 86(3) of the Treaty prescribes the Union legislator to determine the rules applicable to
the judicial review of procedural measures taken by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office
in the performance of its functions. This possibility reflects the specific nature of the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office, which is different from that of all other Union bodies
and agencies and requires special rules regarding judicial review.
Article 86(2) of the Treaty requires that the European Public Prosecutor’s Office exercise its
functions of prosecutor in the competent courts of the Member States. The acts of
investigation of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office are also closely related to an
eventual prosecution and will mainly deploy their effects in the legal orders of the Member
States. In most cases they will also be carried out by national law enforcement authorities
acting under the instructions of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, and sometimes also
after having obtained the authorisation of a national court. The European Public Prosecutor’s
Office is therefore a Union body whose action will mainly be relevant in the national legal
orders. It is therefore appropriate to consider the European Public Prosecutor’s Office as a
national authority for the purpose of the judicial review of its acts of investigation and
prosecution. As a result, national courts should be entrusted with the judicial review of all the
challengeable acts of investigation and prosecution of the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office, and the Union courts should not be directly competent with regard to those acts
pursuant to Articles 263, 265 and 268 of the Treaty, since such acts should not be considered
as acts of an office of the Union for the purpose of judicial review.
In accordance with Article 267 of the Treaty, national courts are able or, in certain
circumstances, bound to refer to the Court of Justice questions for preliminary rulings on the
interpretation or the validity of provisions of Union law which are relevant for the judicial
review of acts of investigation and prosecution of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
This may include questions on the interpretation of this Regulation. Since the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office will be considered a national authority for the purpose of judicial
review, national courts will only be able to refer questions on interpretation to the Court of
Justice regarding its acts. The preliminary rulings procedure will thus ensure that this
Regulation is applied uniformly throughout the Union, whereas the validity of the acts of the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office may be challenged before national courts in accordance
with national law.
3.3.6. Chapter VI: Data protection
This Chapter provides for rules governing the data protection regime which in the specific
context of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office particularise and complement the Union
legislation applicable to processing of personal data by EU bodies (in particular Regulation
(EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the
protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community
EN 8 EN
institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data). The supervision of all
personal data processing in the context of the activities of the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office has been entrusted to the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS).
3.3.7. Chapter VII: Financial and staff provisions
The rules of this Chapter regulate how the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall handle
its budget and staff. They are based on the applicable Union legislation, i.e. for budget matters
on Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of
25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and
repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002, and for staff matters on
Regulation 31 (EEC), as amended.
3.3.8. Chapter VIII: Provisions on the relations of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office
This Chapter regulates the relationship of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office with Union
institutions or other bodies as well as actors outside the Union. Special rules apply to the
relationship of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office with Eurojust, given the special links
that tie them together in the area of operational activities, administration and management.
3.3.9. Chapter IX: General provisions
These provisions address institutional matters which arise with the setting up of any new
Union office or agency. They are largely inspired by the “Common Approach on
decentralised agencies” but take into account the specific (judicial) nature of the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office. The provisions covers matters such as legal status and operating
conditions, language arrangements, transparency requirements, rules on the prevention of
fraud, handling classified information, administrative enquiries and liability rules.
3.3.10. Chapter X: Final provisions
These provisions deal with the implementation of the Regulation and provide for the adoption
of implementing provisions, transitional provisions, administrative rules and entry into force.
4. BUDGETARY IMPLICATION
The proposal seeks to be cost-efficient for the EU budget: part of OLAF's current resources
will be used for setting up the central headquarters of the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office, which in turn will rely on the administrative support of Eurojust.
Limited additional costs will arise in relation to the position of the European Delegated
Prosecutors who will be located in the Member States and will be an integral part of the
European Public Prosecutor's Office. Given their dual status as both Union and national
prosecutors, they will receive remuneration from the EU budget and will be covered by the
Staff Regulations.
As the set-up phase of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office will probably take several
years, staff members will be gradually transferred from OLAF to the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office. The equivalent number of the staff transferred and the corresponding
credits to finance this staff will be reduced in the establishment plan and budget of OLAF.
The European Public Prosecutor's Office will reach cruising speed once the full staff levels
are achieved. The full staff level will be achieved in 2023 with 235 staff, of which 180
establishment plan posts and 55 external staff. The estimated cost for 2023 with this staff
level is approximately 35 million EUR.
EN 9 EN
2013/0255 (APP)
Proposal for a
COUNCIL REGULATION
on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 86
thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national Parliaments,
Having regard to the consent of the European Parliament,
After consulting the European Data Protection Supervisor,
Acting in accordance with a special legislative procedure,
Whereas:
(1) Both the Union and the Member States have an obligation to protect the Union’s financial
interests against criminal offences, which generate significant financial damages every year.
Yet, these offences are currently not sufficiently investigated and prosecuted by the relevant
national authorities.
(2) The setting up of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is foreseen by the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) in the context of the area of freedom, security and
justice.
(3) The Treaty expressly requires that the European Public Prosecutor’s Office be established from
Eurojust, which implies that this Regulation should establish links between them.
(4) The Treaty provides that the mandate of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is to combat
crime affecting the Union's financial interests.
(5) In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, combatting crimes affecting the financial
interests of the Union can be better achieved at Union level by reason of its scale and effects.
The present situation, in which the prosecution of offences against the Union’s financial
interests is exclusively in the hands of the authorities of the Member States does not
sufficiently achieve that objective. Since the objectives of this Regulation, namely the setting
up of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, cannot be achieved by the Member States given
the fragmentation of national prosecutions in the area of offences committed against the
Union’s financial interests and can therefore, by reason of the fact that the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office is to have exclusive competence to prosecute such offences, be better
achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of
subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union.
(6) In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on
European Union, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve
these objectives and ensures that its impact on the legal orders and the institutional structures
of the Member States is the least intrusive possible.
EN 10 EN
(7) The mandate of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office should be to investigate, prosecute
and bring to judgment the perpetrators of offences against the Union’s financial interests. This
requires autonomous powers of investigation and prosecution, including the ability to carry out
investigations in cross-border or complex cases.
(8) The organisational structure of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office should also allow
quick and efficient decision-making in the conduct of criminal investigations and prosecutions,
whether they involve one or several Member States.
(9) As a rule, the investigations of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office should be carried out
by European Delegated Prosecutors in the Member States. In cases involving several Member
States or cases which are of particular complexity, the efficient investigation and prosecution
may require that the European Public Prosecutor also exercise his powers by instructing
national law enforcement authorities.
(10) Since the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is to be granted powers of investigation and
prosecution, institutional safeguards should be put in place to ensure its independence as well
as its accountability towards the Union institutions.
(11) Strict accountability is a complement to the independence and the powers granted to it under
this Regulation. The European Public Prosecutor is fully accountable for the performance of
his/her duties as the head of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and as such he/she carries
an overall institutional accountability for its general activities before the Union institutions. As
a result, any of the Union institutions can apply to the Court of Justice of the European Union
with a view to his/her removal under certain circumstances, including in cases of serious
misconduct. This accountability should be combined with a strict regime of judicial control
whereby the European Public Prosecutor’s Office can only use coercive investigation powers
subject to prior judicial authorisation and the evidence presented to the trial court should be
subject to verification by that court as to its compliance with the Charter of Fundamental
Rights of the European Union.
(12) To ensure consistency in its action and thus an equivalent protection of the Union's financial
interests, the organisational structure of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office should enable
central coordination and steering of all investigations and prosecutions within its competence.
The European Public Prosecutor’s Office should therefore have a central structure where
decisions are taken by the European Public Prosecutor.
(13) To maximise efficiency and mimimise costs, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office should
respect the principle of decentralisation whereby it should in principle have recourse to
European Delegated Prosecutors located in the Member States to carry out investigations and
prosecutions. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office should rely on national authorities,
including police authorities, in particular for the execution of coercive measures. Under the
principle of loyal cooperation, all national authorities and the relevant Union bodies, including
Europol, Eurojust and OLAF, are obliged to actively support the investigations and
prosecutions of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office as well as to cooperate with it to the
fullest extent possible.
(14) The operational activities of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office should be carried out
under the instruction and on behalf of the European Public Prosecutor by the designated
European Delegated Prosecutors or their national staff in the Member States. The European
Public Prosecutor and the Deputies should have the staff necessary to carry out their functions
under this Regulation. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office should be considered
indivisible.
EN 11 EN
(15) The procedure for the appointment of the European Public Prosecutor should ensure his/her
independence and his/her legitimacy should be drawn from Union institutions. The Deputies of
the European Public Prosecutor should be appointed by the same procedure.
(16) The procedure for the appointment of the European Delegated Prosecutors should ensure that
they are an integral part of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, and that they are
integrated at both an operational and functional level into the national legal systems and
prosecution structures.
(17) The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union constitutes the common basis for
the protection of rights of suspected persons in criminal proceedings during the pre-trial and
trial phase. The activities of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office should in all instances be
carried out in full respect of those rights.
(18) The investigations and prosecutions of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office should be
guided by the principles of proportionality, impartiality and fairness towards the suspect. This
includes the obligation to seek all types of evidence, inculpatory as well as exculpatory.
(19) It is necessary to determine the rules of procedure applicable to the activities of the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office. As it would be disproportionate to provide detailed provisions on
the conduct of its investigations and prosecutions, this Regulation should only list the measures
of investigation that the European Public Prosecutor’s Office may need to use and leave the
other matters, in particular rules related to their execution, to national law.
(20) In order to ensure legal certainty and zero tolerance towards offences affecting the Union's
financial interests, the investigation and prosecution activities of the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office should be based on the principle of mandatory prosecution, whereby it
should initiate investigations and, subject to further conditions, prosecute every offence within
its competence.
(21) The material scope of competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office should be
limited to criminal offences affecting the financial interests of the Union. Any extension of this
competence to include serious crimes having a cross-border dimension would require a
unanimous decision of the European Council.
(22) Offences against the Union's financial interests are often closely connected to other offences.
In the interest of procedural efficiency and to avoid a possible breach of the principle ne bis in
idem, the competence of European Public Prosecutor’s Office should also cover offences
which are not technically defined under national law as offences affecting the Union's financial
interests where their constituent facts are identical and inextricably linked with those of the
offences affecting the financial interests of the Union. In such mixed cases, where the offence
affecting the Union’s financial interests is preponderant, the competence of the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office should be exercised after consultation with the competent
authorities of the Member State concerned. Preponderance should be established on the basis
of criteria such as the offences’ financial impact for the Union, for national budgets, the
number of victims or other circumstances related to the offences’ gravity, or the applicable
penalties.
(23) The competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office regarding offences affecting the
financial interests of the Union should take priority over national claims of jurisdiction so that
it can ensure consistency and provide steering of investigations and prosecutions at Union
level. With regard to these offences the authorities of Member States should only act at the
request of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, unless urgent measures are required.
(24) As the European Public Prosecutor’s Office should bring prosecutions before national courts,
its competence should be defined by reference to the criminal law of the Member States, which
EN 12 EN
criminalises acts or omissions affecting the Union's financial interests and determines the
applicable penalties by implementing the relevant Union legislation, in particular [Directive
2013/xx/EU3
], in national legal systems.
(25) The European Public Prosecutor’s Office should exercise its competence as broadly as possible
so that its investigations and prosecutions may extend to offences committed outside the
territory of the Member States. The exercise of its competence should therefore be aligned
with the rules pursuant to [Directive 2013/xx/EU].
(26) Since the European Public Prosecutor’s Office has exclusive competence to deal with offences
affecting the Union's financial interests, the investigations it conducts on the territory of
Member States should be facilitated by the competent national authorities and the relevant
Union bodies, including Eurojust, Europol and OLAF, from the moment a suspected offence is
reported to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office until it determines whether to prosecute or
otherwise dispose of the case.
(27) In order to comply fully with their obligation to inform the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office where a suspicion of an offence within its competence is identified, the national
authorities of the Member States as well as all institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the
Union should follow the existing reporting procedures and have in place efficient mechanisms
for a preliminary evaluation of allegations reported to them. The institutions, bodies, offices
and agencies of the Union may make use of OLAF to that effect.
(28) It is essential for the effective investigation and prosecution of offences affecting the Union's
financial interests that the European Public Prosecutor’s Office can gather evidence throughout
the Union by using a comprehensive set of investigative measures, while bearing in the mind
the principle of proportionality and the need to obtain judicial authorisation for certain
investigative measures. These measures should be available with regard to the offences within
the mandate of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office for the purpose of its investigations
and prosecutions. Once ordered by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office or by the
competent judicial authority at its request, they should be carried out in accordance with
national law. In addition, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office should have access to all
relevant data sources, including public and private registers.
(29) The use of the investigative measures provided for by this Regulation should comply with the
conditions set out in it, including the need to obtain judicial authorisation for certain coercive
investigative measures. Other investigative measures may be subject to judicial authorisation if
this is required by the national law of the Member State where the investigation measure is to
be carried out. The general requirements of proportionality and necessity should apply to the
ordering of the measures by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and to their authorisation
by the competent national judicial authority pursuant to this Regulation.
(30) Article 86 of the Treaty requires the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to exercise the
functions of the prosecutor, which includes taking decisions on a suspect’s indictment and the
choice of jurisdiction. The decision whether to indict the suspect should be made by the
European Public Prosecutor so that there is a common prosecution policy. The jurisdiction of
trial should be chosen by the European Public Prosecutor on the basis of a set of transparent
criteria.
(31) Taking into account the principle of mandatory prosecution, the investigations of the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office should normally lead to prosecution in the competent national
courts in cases where there is solid evidence and no legal ground bars prosecution. In the
3
Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the fight against fraud to the Union’s
financial interests by means of criminal law, 11 July 2012 COM (2012) 363 final.
EN 13 EN
absence of such evidence and where there is no high prospect that the required evidence could
be produced in trial the case can be dismissed. Additionally the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office should have the possibility to dismiss the case where the offence is a minor one. Where
the case is not dismissed on such grounds but prosecution is not justified either, the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office should have the possibility of proposing a transaction to the suspect,
if this would be in the interest of the proper administration of justice. The rules applicable to
transactions, and those which apply to the calculation of the fines to be imposed, should be
clarified in the administrative rules of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. The closure of
a case through a transaction in accordance with this Regulation should not affect the
application of administrative measures by the competent authorities, as far as those measures
do not refer to penalties that could be equated to criminal penalties.
(32) The evidence presented by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to the trial court should be
recognised as admissible evidence, and thus presumed to meet any relevant evidentiary
requirements under the national law of the Member State where the trial court is located,
provided that court considers it to respect the fairness of the procedure and the suspect’s rights
of defence under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The trial court
cannot exclude the evidence presented by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office as
inadmissible on the ground that the conditions and rules for gathering that type of evidence are
different under the national law applicable to it.
(33) This Regulation respects fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised by the
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. It requires the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office to respect, in particular, the right to a fair trial, the rights of the defence
and the presumption of innocence, as enshrined in Articles 47 and 48 of the Charter. Article 50
of the Charter, which protects the right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal
proceedings for the same offence (ne bis in idem), ensures that there will be no double
jeopardy as a result of the prosecutions brought by European Public Prosecutor’s Office. The
activities of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall thus be exercised in full compliance
with these rights and the Regulation shall be applied and interpreted accordingly.
(34) Article 82(2) of the Treaty allows the Union to establish minimum rules on rights of
individuals in criminal proceedings, in order to ensure that the rights of defence and the
fairness of the proceedings are respected. Although the Union has already established a
significant acquis, some of these rights have not yet been harmonised under Union law. In
respect of those rights, this Regulation should lay down rules which would apply exclusively
for the purposes of this Regulation.
(35) The rights of defence already provided for in the relevant Union legislation, such as Directive
2010/64/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 on the right to
interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings4
, Directive 2012/13/EU of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 on the right to information in criminal
proceedings5
, and [Directive 2013/xx/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of xx
xxxx 2013 on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and on the right to
communicate upon arrest], as implemented by national law, should apply to the activities of
the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. Any suspected person in respect of whom the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office initiates an investigation should benefit from them.
(36) Article 86(3) of the Treaty allows the Union legislator to determine the rules applicable to the
judicial review of procedural measures taken by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office in the
performance of its functions. This competence granted to the legislator reflects the specific
4
OJ L 280, 26.10.2010, p.1.
5
OJ L 142, 1.6.2012, p. 1.
EN 14 EN
nature of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, which is different from that of all other
Union bodies and agencies and requires special rules regarding judicial review.
(37) Article 86(2) of the Treaty requires that the European Public Prosecutor’s Office exercise its
functions of prosecutor in the competent courts of the Member States. Acts undertaken by the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office in the course of its investigations are closely related to the
prosecution which may result therefrom and have effects in the legal order of the Member
States. In most cases they will be carried out by national law enforcement authorities acting
under the instructions of European Public Prosecutor’s Office, sometimes after having
obtained the authorisation of a national court. It is therefore appropriate to consider the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office as a national authority for the purpose of the judicial
review of its acts of investigation and prosecution. As a result, national courts should be
entrusted with the judicial review of all acts of investigation and prosecution of the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office which may be challenged, and the Court of Justice of the European
Union should not be directly competent with regard to those acts pursuant to Articles 263, 265
and 268 of the Treaty, since such acts should not be considered as acts of a body of the Union
for the purpose of judicial review.
(38) In accordance with Article 267 of the Treaty, national courts are able or, in certain
circumstances, bound to refer to the Court of Justice questions for preliminary rulings on the
interpretation or the validity of provisions of Union law, including this Regulation, which are
relevant for the judicial review of the acts of investigation and prosecution of the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office. National courts should not be able to refer questions on the validity
of the acts of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to the Court of Justice, since those acts
should not be considered acts of a body of the Union for the purpose of judicial review.
(39) It should also be clarified that issues concerning the interpretation of provisions of national law
which are rendered applicable by this Regulation should be dealt with by national courts alone.
In consequence, those courts may not refer questions to the Court of Justice relating to the
interpretation of national law to which this Regulation refers.
(40) As the Treaty prescribes that the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is to be set up from
Eurojust, they should organically, operationally and administratively co-exist, co-operate and
complement each other.
(41) The European Public Prosecutor’s Office should also work closely with other Union
institutions and agencies in order to facilitate the exercise of its functions under this Regulation
and establish, where necessary, formal arrangements on detailed rules relating to exchange of
information and cooperation. Cooperation with Europol and OLAF should be of particular
importance to avoid duplication and enable the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to obtain
the relevant information at their disposal as well as to draw on their analyis in specific
investigations.
(42) Regulation (EC) 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000
on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the
Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data6
applies to the
processing of personal data performed by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. This
concerns the processing of personal data in the framework of the objectives and tasks of the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office, personal data related to staff members as well as
administrative personal data held by it. The European Data Protection Supervisor should
monitor the processing of personal data by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. The
principles set out in (EC) No Regulation 45/2001 should be particularised and complemented
6
OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1.
EN 15 EN
as regards the processing of operational personal data by the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office when necessary. When the European Public Prosecutor's Office transfers operational
personal data to an authority of a third country or to an international organisation or Interpol by
virtue of an international agreement concluded pursuant to Article 218 of the Treaty, the
adequate safeguards adduced with respect to the protection of privacy and fundamental rights
and freedoms of individuals should ensure that the data protection provisions of this
Regulation are complied with.
(43) [Directive 2013/xx/EU on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of
personal data and on the free movement of such data] applies to the processing of personal data
by Member States competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation,
detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties.
(44) The data processing system of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office should build on the
Case Management System of Eurojust, but its temporary work files should be considered case-
files from the time an investigation is initiated.
(45) The financial, budgetary and staff regime of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office should
follow the relevant Union standards applicable to bodies referred to in Article 208 of
Regulation (EU, EURATOM) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council7
,
with due regard, however, to the fact that the competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office to carry out investigations and prosecutions at Union-level is unique. The European
Public Prosecutor’s Office should be subject to an annual reporting obligation.
(46) The general rules of transparency applicable to Union agencies should also apply to the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office but only with regard to its administrative tasks so as not
to jeopardise in any manner the requirement of confidentiality in its operational work. In the
same manner, administrative inquiries conducted by the European Ombudsman should respect
the requirement of confidentiality of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
(47) In accordance with Article 3 of Protocol (No 21) on the position of the United Kingdom and
Ireland in respect of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, annexed to the Treaty on
European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, those Member
States have notified their wish [not] [to take part] in the adoption and application of this
Regulation.
(48) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol (No 22) on the position of Denmark, annexed
to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject
to its application,
(49) The Representatives of the Member States, meeting at Head of State or Government level in
Brussels on 13 December 2003 have determined the seat of the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office,
7
Regulation (EU, EURATOM) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012
on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC,
Euratom) No 1605/2002, OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.
EN 16 EN
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
CHAPTER I
SUBJECT MATTER AND DEFINITIONS
Article 1
Subject matter
This Regulation establishes the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and sets out rules concerning its
functioning.
Article 2
Definitions
For the purposes of this Regulation, the following definitions apply:
a) ‘person’ means any natural or legal person;
b) ‘criminal offences affecting the financial interests of the Union’ means the offences provided
for by Directive 2013/xx/EU, as implemented by national law;
c) ‘financial interests of the Union’ means all revenues, expenditures and assets covered by,
acquired through, or due to the Union budget and the budgets of institutions, bodies, offices
and agencies established under the Treaties and budgets managed and monitored by them;
d) ‘administrative personal data’ means all personal data processed by the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office except for operational personal data;
e) ‘operational personal data’ means all personal data processed by the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office to meet the purposes laid down in Article 37.
EN 17 EN
CHAPTER II
GENERAL RULES
SECTION 1
STATUS, ORGANISATION AND STRUCTURE OF THE EUROPEAN PUBLIC PROSECUTOR’S
OFFICE
Article 3
Establishment
1. The European Public Prosecutor's Office is established as a body of the Union with a
decentralised structure.
2. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall have legal personality.
3. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall cooperate with Eurojust and rely on its
administrative support in accordance with Article 57.
Article 4
Tasks
1. The task of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall be to combat criminal offences
affecting the financial interests of the Union.
2. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall be responsible for investigating, prosecuting
and bringing to judgment the perpetrators of, and accomplices in the criminal offences
referred to in paragraph 1. In that respect the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall direct
and supervise investigations, and carry out acts of prosecution, including the dismissal of the
case.
3. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall exercise the functions of prosecutor in the
competent courts of the Member States in respect of the offences referred to in paragraph 1,
including lodging the indictment and any appeals until the case has been finally disposed of.
Article 5
Independence and accountability
1. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall be independent.
2. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office, including the European Public Prosecutor, his/her
Deputies and the staff, the European Delegated Prosecutors and their national staff, shall
neither seek nor take instructions from any person, any Member State or any institution,
body, office or agency of the Union in the performance of their duties. The Union
institutions, bodies, offices or agencies and the Member States shall respect the independence
of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and shall not seek to influence it in the exercise of
its tasks.
3. The European Public Prosecutor shall be accountable to the European Parliament, the
Council and the European Commission for the general activities of the European Public
Prosecutor's Office, in particular by giving an annual report in accordance with Article 70.
EN 18 EN
Article 6
Structure and organisation of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office
1. The structure of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall comprise a European Public
Prosecutor, his/her Deputies, the staff supporting them in the execution of their tasks under
this Regulation, as well as European Delegated Prosecutors located in the Member States.
2. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall be headed by the European Public Prosecutor,
who shall direct its activities and organise its work. The European Public Prosecutor shall be
assisted by four Deputies.
3. The Deputies shall assist the European Public Prosecutor in all his/her duties and act as a
replacement, in accordance with the rules adopted pursuant to Article 72(d), when he/she is
absent or prevented from attending to them. One of the Deputies shall be responsible for the
implementation of the budget.
4. The investigations and prosecutions of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall be
carried out by the European Delegated Prosecutors under the direction and supervision of the
European Public Prosecutor. Where it is deemed necessary in the interest of the investigation
or prosecution, the European Public Prosecutor may also exercise his/her authority directly in
accordance with Article 18(5).
5. There shall be at least one European Delegated Prosecutor in each Member State, who shall
be an integral part of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. The European Delegated
Prosecutors shall act under the exclusive authority of the European Public Prosecutor and
follow only his/her instructions, guidelines and decisions when they carry out investigations
and prosecutions assigned to them. When they act within their mandate under this
Regulation, they shall be fully independent from the national prosecution bodies and have no
obligations with regard to them.
6. The European Delegated Prosecutors may also exercise their function as national prosecutors.
In the event of conflicting assignments, the European Delegated Prosecutors shall notify the
European Public Prosecutor, who may, after consultation with the competent national
prosecution authorities, instruct them in the interest of the investigations and prosecutions of
the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to give priority to their functions deriving from this
Regulation. In such cases, the European Public Prosecutor shall immediately inform the
competent national prosecution authorities thereof.
7. Acts performed by the European Public Prosecutor, European Delegated Prosecutors, any of
the staff members of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office or any other person acting on
behalf of it in the performance of their duties shall be attributed to the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office. The European Public Prosecutor shall represent the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office towards the Union Institutions, the Member States and third parties.
8. Where necessary for the purpose of an investigation or prosecution, the European Public
Prosecutor may temporarily allocate resources and staff to European Delegated Prosecutors.
Article 7
Internal rules of procedure of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office
1. The internal rules of procedure of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall be adopted
by a decision of the European Public Prosecutor, his/her four Deputies and five European
Delegated Prosecutors, who shall be chosen by the European Public Prosecutor on the basis
of a system of strictly equal rotation, reflecting the demographic and geographical range of
all the Member States. The decision shall be taken by simple majority, all members having
EN 19 EN
one vote. Where the votes are equally divided, the European Public Prosecutor shall have a
casting vote.
2. The internal rules of procedure shall govern the organisation of the work of the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office and shall include general rules on the allocation of cases.
SECTION 2
APPOINTMENT AND DISMISSAL OF THE MEMBERS OF THE EUROPEAN PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE
Article 8
Appointment and dismissal of the European Public Prosecutor
1. The European Public Prosecutor shall be appointed by the Council with the consent of the
European Parliament for a term of eight years, which shall not be renewable. The Council
shall act by simple majority.
2. The European Public Prosecutor shall be chosen from persons whose independence is beyond
doubt and who possess the qualifications required for appointment to high judicial office and
relevant prosecutorial experience.
3. The selection shall be based on an open call for candidates, to be published in the Official
Journal of the European Union, following which the Commission shall draw up and submit a
shortlist to the European Parliament and the Council. Before the shortlist is submitted, the
Commission shall seek the opinion of a panel set up by it and composed of seven persons
chosen from among former members of the Court of Justice, members of national supreme
courts, national public prosecution services and/or lawyers of recognised competence, one of
whom shall be proposed by the European Parliament, as well as the President of Eurojust as
an observer.
4. If the European Public Prosecutor no longer fulfils the conditions required for the
performance of his/her duties or if he/she has been guilty of serious misconduct, the Court of
Justice of the European Union may, on application by the European Parliament, the Council,
or the Commission dismiss him/her.
Article 9
Appointment and dismissal of the Deputies of the European Public Prosecutor
1. The Deputies of the European Public Prosecutor shall be appointed in accordance with the
rules set out in Article 8(1).
2. The Deputies of the European Public Prosecutor shall be chosen from persons whose
independence is beyond doubt and who possess the qualifications required for appointment to
high judicial office and relevant prosecutorial experience.
3. The selection shall be based on an open call for candidates, to be published in the Official
Journal, following which the European Commission shall draw up and submit, in agreement
with the European Public Prosecutor, a shortlist to the European Parliament and the Council,
reflecting the demographic balance and geographical range of the Member States.
4. The Deputies may be dismissed in accordance with the rules set out in Article 8(4), on the
initiative of the European Public Prosecutor.
EN 20 EN
Article 10
Appointment and dismissal of the European Delegated Prosecutors
1. The European Delegated Prosecutors shall be appointed by the European Public Prosecutor
from a list of at least three candidates, who comply with the requirements set out in paragraph
2, submitted by the Member State(s) concerned. They shall be appointed for a term of five
years, which shall be renewable.
2. The European Delegated Prosecutors shall possess the qualifications required for
appointment to high judicial office and have relevant prosecutorial experience. Their
independence should be beyond doubt. Member States shall appoint the European Delegated
Prosecutor as a prosecutor under national law, if at the time of his/her appointment as a
European Delegated Prosecutor, he/she did not have this status already.
3. European Delegated Prosecutors may be dismissed by the European Public Prosecutor if they
no longer fulfil the requirements set out in paragraph 2, or the criteria applicable to the
performance of their duties, or if they have been found guilty of serious misconduct.
European Delegated Prosecutors shall not be dismissed as national prosecutors by the
competent national authorities without the consent of the European Public Prosecutor during
the exercise of their functions on behalf of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
SECTION 3
BASIC PRINCIPLES
Article 11
Basic principles of the activities of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office
1. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall ensure that its activities respect the rights
enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
2. The actions of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall be guided by the principle of
proportionality as referred to in Article 26(3).
3. The investigations and prosecutions of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall be
governed by this Regulation. National law shall apply to the extent that a matter is not
regulated by this Regulation. The applicable national law shall be the law of the Member
State where the investigation or prosecution is conducted. Where a matter is governed by
national law and this Regulation, the latter shall prevail.
4. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall have exclusive competence to investigate and
prosecute criminal offences against the Union’s financial interests.
5. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall conduct its investigations in an impartial
manner and seek all relevant evidence, whether inculpatory or exculpatory.
6. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall initiate investigations without undue delay and
ensure that investigations and prosecutions are conducted speedily.
7. The competent authorities of the Member States shall actively assist and support the
investigations and prosecutions of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office at its request and
shall refrain from any action, policy or procedure which may delay or hamper their progress.
EN 21 EN
SECTION 4
COMPETENCE OF THE EUROPEAN PUBLIC PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE
Article 12
Criminal offences within the competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office
The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall have competence in respect of the criminal offences
affecting the financial interests of the Union, as provided for by Directive 2013/xx/EU and
implemented by national law.
Article 13
Ancillary competence
1. Where the offences referred to in Article 12 are inextricably linked with criminal offences
other than those referred to in Article 12 and their joint investigation and prosecution are in
the interest of a good administration of justice the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall
also be competent for those other criminal offences, under the conditions that the offences
referred to in Article 12 are preponderant and the other criminal offences are based on
identical facts.
If those conditions are not met, the Member State that is competent for the other offences
shall also be competent for the offences referred to in Article 12.
2. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office and the national prosecution authorities shall
consult each other in order to determine which authority has competence pursuant to
paragraph 1. Where appropriate to facilitate the determination of such competence Eurojust
may be associated in accordance with Article 57.
3. In case of disagreement between the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and the national
prosecution authorities over competence pursuant to in paragraph 1, the national judicial
authority competent to decide on the attribution of competences concerning prosecution at
national level shall decide on ancillary competence.
4. The determination of competence pursuant to this Article shall not be subject to review.
Article 14
Exercise of the competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office
The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall exercise its exclusive competence to investigate and
prosecute any criminal offence referred to in Articles 12 and 13, where such offence was wholly or
partly committed
a) on the territory of one or several Member States, or
b) by one of their nationals, or by Union staff members or members of the Institutions.
EN 22 EN
CHAPTER III
RULES OF PROCEDURE ON INVESTIGATIONS, PROSECUTIONS
AND TRIAL PROCEEDINGS
SECTION 1
CONDUCT OF INVESTIGATIONS
Article 15
Sources of investigation
1. All national authorities of the Member States and all institutions, bodies, offices and agencies
of the Union shall immediately inform the European Public Prosecutor’s Office of any
conduct which might constitute an offence within its competence.
2. Where European Delegated Prosecutors become aware of any conduct which might constitute
an offence within the competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, they shall
immediately inform the European Public Prosecutor.
3. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office may collect or receive information from any person
on conduct which might constitute an offence within its competence.
4. Any information brought to the attention of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall be
registered and verified by the European Public Prosecutor or the European Delegated
Prosecutors. Where they decide, upon verification, not to initiate an investigation, they shall
close the case and note the reasons in the Case Management System. They shall inform the
national authority, the Union institution, body, office or agency, which provided the
information, thereof, and at their request, where appropriate, the persons who provided the
information.
Article 16
Initiation of investigations
1. The European Public Prosecutor or, on his/her behalf, the European Delegated Prosecutors
shall initiate an investigation by written decision where there are reasonable grounds to
believe that an offence within the competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is
being or has been committed.
2. Where the investigation is initiated by the European Public Prosecutor, he/she shall assign the
case to a European Delegated Prosecutor unless he/she wishes to conduct the investigation
himself/herself in accordance with the criteria set out in Article 18(5). Where the
investigation is initiated by a European Delegated Prosecutor, he/she shall inform the
European Public Prosecutor immediately. Upon receipt of such notification, the European
Public Prosecutor shall verify that an investigation has not already been initiated by him/her
or another European Delegated Prosecutor. In the interest of the efficiency of the
investigation the European Public Prosecutor may allocate the case to another European
Delegated Prosecutor or decide to take over the case himself/herself in accordance with the
criteria set out in Article 18(5).
EN 23 EN
Article 17
Urgent measures and referrals
1. Where immediate action with regard to an offence within the competence of the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office is required, the national authorities shall take any urgent measures
necessary to ensure effective investigation and prosecution. The national authorities shall
subsequently refer the case without delay to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. In that
case, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall confirm, if possible within 48 hours from
the initiation of its investigation, the measures taken by the national authorities, even if such
measures have been undertaken and executed under rules other than those of this Regulation.
2. At any stage of the investigation, where the case gives rise to doubts as to its competence, the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office may consult the national prosecution authorities to
determine which authority is competent. Pending a decision on competence, the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office shall take any urgent measures necessary to ensure effective
investigation and prosecution of the case. Where the competence of the national authority is
established, the national authority shall confirm within 48 hours from the initiation of the
national investigation the urgent measures taken by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
3. Where an investigation initiated by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office reveals that the
conduct subject to investigation constitutes a criminal offence, which is not within its
competence, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall refer the case without delay to the
competent national law enforcement and judicial authorities.
4. Where an investigation initiated by national authorities subsequently reveals that the conduct
constitutes an offence within the competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, the
national authorities shall refer the case without delay to the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office. In that case, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall confirm, if possible within
48 hours from the initiation of its investigation, the measures taken by the national
authorities, even if such measures have been undertaken and executed under rules other than
those of this Regulation.
Article 18
Conducting the investigation
1. The designated European Delegated Prosecutor shall lead the investigation on behalf of and
under the instructions of the European Public Prosecutor. The designated European
Delegated Prosecutor may either undertake the investigation measures on his/her own or
instruct the competent law enforcement authorities in the Member State where he/she is
located. These authorities shall comply with the instructions of the European Delegated
Prosecutor and execute the investigation measures assigned to them.
2. In cross-border cases, where investigation measures need to be executed in a Member State
other than the one where the investigation was initiated, the European Delegated Prosecutor
who initiated it, or to whom the case was assigned by the European Public Prosecutor, shall
act in close consultation with the European Delegated Prosecutor where the investigation
measure needs to be carried out. That European Delegated Prosecutor shall either undertake
the investigation measures himself/herself or instruct the competent national authorities to
execute them.
3. In cross-border cases the European Public Prosecutor may associate several European
Delegated Prosecutors with the investigation and set up joint teams. He/she may instruct any
European Delegated Prosecutor to collect relevant information or undertake specific
investigation measures on his/her behalf.
EN 24 EN
4. The European Public Prosecutor shall monitor the investigations conducted by the European
Delegated Prosecutors and ensure their coordination. He/she shall instruct them where
necessary.
5. The European Public Prosecutor may reallocate the case to another European Delegated
Prosecutor or himself/herself lead the investigation if this appears necessary in the interest of
the efficiency of the investigation or prosecution on the grounds of one or more of the
following criteria:
a) the seriousness of the offence;
b) specific circumstances related to the status of the alleged offender;
c) specific circumstances related to the cross-border dimension of the investigation;
d) the unavailability of national investigation authorities; or
e) a request of the competent authorities of the relevant Member State.
6. Where the investigation is undertaken by the European Public Prosecutor directly, he/she
shall inform the European Delegated Prosecutor in the Member State where the investigation
measures need to be carried out. Any investigation measure conducted by the European
Public Prosecutor shall be carried out in liaison with the authorities of the Member State
whose territory is concerned. Coercive measures shall be carried out by the competent
national authorities.
7. Investigations carried out under the authority of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office
shall be protected by the rules concerning professional secrecy under the applicable Union
legislation. Authorities participating in the investigations of the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office are also bound to respect professional secrecy as provided under the applicable
national law.
Article 19
Lifting privileges or immunities
1. Where the investigations of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office involve persons
protected by privileges or immunities under national law, and such privilege or immunity
presents an obstacle to a specific investigation being conducted, the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office shall make a reasoned written request for its lifting in accordance with
the procedures laid down by that national law.
2. Where the investigations of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office involve persons
protected by privileges or immunities under Union law, in particular the Protocol on the
privileges and immunities of the European Union, and such privilege or immunity presents an
obstacle to a specific investigation being conducted, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office
shall make a reasoned written request for its lifting in accordance with the procedures laid
down by Union law.
SECTION 2
PROCESSING OF INFORMATION
Article 20
Access to information by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office
From the moment it registers a case, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall be able to obtain
any relevant information stored in national criminal investigation and law enforcement databases, as
EN 25 EN
well as other relevant registers of public authorities, or have access to such information through
European Delegated Prosecutors.
Article 21
Collection of information
1. Where necessary for the purpose of its investigations, the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office shall obtain, at its request, from Eurojust and Europol, any relevant information
concerning an offence within its competence, and may also ask Europol to provide analytical
support to a specific investigation conducted by the European Public Prosecutor's Office.
2. The institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union and Member States’ authorities
shall provide the necessary assistance and information to the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office upon its request.
Article 22
Case Management System, index and temporary work files
1. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall establish a Case Management System
composed of temporary work files and of an index which contain personal data as referred to
in the Annex and non-personal data.
2. The purpose of the Case Management System shall be to:
a) support the management of investigations and prosecutions conducted by the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office, in particular by the cross-referencing of information;
b) facilitate access to information on on-going investigations and prosecutions;
c) facilitate the monitoring of lawfulness and compliance with the provisions of this
Regulation concerning the processing of personal data.
3. The Case Management System may be linked to the secure telecommunications connection
referred to in Article 9 of Decision 2008/976/JHA8
.
4. The index shall contain references to temporary work files processed within the framework of
the work of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and may contain no personal data other
than those referred to in points (a) to (i), (k) and (m) of point (1) and in point 2 of the Annex.
5. In the performance of its duties under this Regulation, the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office may process data on the individual cases on which it is working in a temporary work
file. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall allow the Data Protection Officer
provided for in Article 41 to have access to the temporary work file. The European Public
Prosecutor’s Office shall inform the Data Protection Officer each time a new temporary work
file containing personal data is opened.
6. For the processing of case related personal data, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office
may not establish any automated data file other than the Case Management System or a
temporary work file.
8
OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p.130.
EN 26 EN
Article 23
Functioning of temporary work files and the index
1. A temporary work file shall be opened by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office for every
case with respect to which information is transmitted to it in so far as this transmission is in
accordance with this Regulation or other applicable legal instruments. The European Public
Prosecutor’s Office shall be responsible for the management of the temporary work files
which it has opened.
2. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall decide, on a case-by-case basis, whether to
keep the temporary work file restricted or to give access to it or to parts of it to members of
its staff, where necessary to enable such staff to carry out its tasks.
3. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall decide which information related to a
temporary work file shall be introduced in the index. Unless otherwise decided by the
European Public Prosecutor, information registered and subject to verification in accordance
with Article 15(4) shall not be introduced in the index.
Article 24
Access to the Case Management System
European Delegated Prosecutors and their staff, in so far as they are connected to the Case
Management System, may only have access to:
a) the index, unless such access has been expressly denied;
b) temporary work files opened by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office related to
investigations or prosecutions taking place in their Member State;
c) temporary work files opened by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office related to
investigations or prosecutions taking place in another Member State in as far as they relate to
investigations or prosecutions taking place in their Member State.
SECTION 3
INVESTIGATION MEASURES
Article 25
The European Public Prosecutor’s Office’s authority to investigate
1. For the purpose of investigations and prosecutions conducted by the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office, the territory of the Union's Member States shall be considered a single
legal area in which the European Public Prosecutor’s Office may exercise its competence.
2. Where the European Public Prosecutor’s Office decides to exercise its competence over an
offence which was partly or wholly committed outside the territory of the Member States by
one of their nationals, by Union staff members or by members of the Institutions, it shall seek
assistance to obtain the cooperation of the third country concerned pursuant to the
instruments and procedures referred to in Article 59.
Article 26
Investigation measures
1. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall have the power to request or to order the
following investigative measures when exercising its competence:
a) search any premises, land, means of transport, private home, clothes and any other
personal property or computer system;
EN 27 EN
b) obtain the production of any relevant object or document, or of stored computer data,
including traffic data and banking account data, encrypted or decrypted, either in
original or in some other specified form;
c) seal premises and means of transport and freezing of data, in order to preserve their
integrity, to avoid the loss or contamination of evidence or to secure the possibility of
confiscation;
d) freeze instrumentalities or proceeds of crime, including freezing of assets, if they are
expected to be subject to confiscation by the trial court and there is reason to believe
that the owner, possessor or controller will seek to frustrate the judgement ordering
confiscation;
e) intercept telecommunications, including e-mails, to and from the suspected person, on
any telecommunication connection that the suspected person is using;
f) undertake real-time surveillance of telecommunications by ordering instant
transmission of telecommunications traffic data to locate the suspected person and to
identify the persons who have been in contact with him at a specific moment in time;
g) monitor financial transactions, by ordering any financial or credit institution to inform
the European Public Prosecutor’s Office in real time of any financial transaction carried
out through any specific account held or controlled by the suspected person or any
other accounts which are reasonably believed to be used in connection with the offence;
h) freeze future financial transactions, by ordering any financial or credit institution to
refrain from carrying out any financial transaction involving any specified account or
accounts held or controlled by the suspected person;
i) undertake surveillance measures in non-public places, by ordering the covert video and
audio surveillance of non-public places, excluded video surveillance of private homes,
and the recording of its results;
j) undertake covert investigations, by ordering an officer to act covertly or under a false
identity;
k) summon suspected persons and witnesses, where there are reasonable grounds to
believe that they might provide information useful to the investigation;
l) undertake identification measures, by ordering the taking of photos, visual recording of
persons and the recording of a person's biometric features;
m) seize objects which are needed as evidence;
n) access premises and take samples of goods;
o) inspect means of transport, where reasonable grounds exist to believe that goods related
to the investigation are being transported;
p) undertake measures to track and control persons, in order to establish the whereabouts
of a person;
q) track and trace any object by technical means, including controlled deliveries of goods
and controlled financial transactions;
r) undertake targeted surveillance in public places of the suspected and third persons;
s) obtain access to national or European public registers and registers kept by private
entities in a public interest;
t) question the suspected person and witnesses;
EN 28 EN
u) appoint experts, ex officio or at the request of the suspected person, where specialised
knowledge is required.
2. Member States shall ensure that the measures referred to in paragraph 1 may be used in the
investigations and prosecutions conducted by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. Such
measures shall be subject to the conditions provided for in this Article and those set out in
national law. Investigation measures other than those referred to in paragraph 1 may only be
ordered or requested by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office if available under the law of
the Member State where the measure is to be carried out.
3. The individual investigative measures referred to in paragraph 1 shall not be ordered without
reasonable grounds and if less intrusive means can achieve the same objective.
4. Member States shall ensure that the investigative measures referred to in points (a) - (j) of
paragraph 1 are subject to authorisation by the competent judicial authority of the Member
State where they are to be carried out.
5. The investigative measures referred to in points (k) – (u) of paragraph 1 shall be subject to
judicial authorisation if required by the national law of the Member State where the
investigation measure is to be carried out.
6. If the conditions set out in this Article as well as those applicable under national law for
authorising the measure subject to the request are met, the authorisation shall be given within
48 hours in the form of a written and reasoned decision by the competent judicial authority.
7. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office may request from the competent judicial authority
the arrest or pre-trial detention of the suspected person in accordance with national law.
SECTION 4
TERMINATION OF THE INVESTIGATION AND POWERS OF PROSECUTION
Article 27
Prosecution before national courts
1. The European Public Prosecutor and the European Delegated Prosecutors shall have the same
powers as national public prosecutors in respect of prosecution and bringing a case to
judgement, in particular the power to present trial pleas, participate in evidence taking and
exercise the available remedies.
2. When the competent European Delegated Prosecutor considers the investigation to be
completed, he/she shall submit a summary of the case with a draft indictment and the list of
evidence to the European Public Prosecutor for review. Where he/she does not instruct to
dismiss the case pursuant to Article 28, the European Public Prosecutor shall instruct the
European Delegated Prosecutor to bring the case before the competent national court with an
indictment, or refer it back for further investigations. The European Public Prosecutor may
also bring the case to the competent national court himself/herself.
3. The indictment submitted to the competent national court shall list the evidence to be
adduced in trial.
4. The European Public Prosecutor shall choose, in close consultation with the European
Delegated Prosecutor submitting the case and bearing in mind the proper administration of
justice, the jurisdiction of trial and determine the competent national court taking into
account the following criteria:
a) the place where the offence, or in case of several offences, the majority of the offences
was committed;
EN 29 EN
b) the place where the accused person has his/her habitual residence;
c) the place where the evidence is located;
d) the place where the direct victims have their habitual residence.
5. Where necessary for the purposes of recovery, administrative follow-up or monitoring, the
European Public Prosecutor shall notify the competent national authorities, the interested
persons and the relevant Union institutions, bodies, agencies of the indictment.
Article 28
Dismissal of the case
1. The European Public Prosecutor shall dismiss the case where prosecution has become
impossible on account of any of the following grounds:
a) death of the suspected person;
b) the conduct subject to investigation does not amount to a criminal offence;
c) amnesty or immunity granted to the suspect;
d) expiry of the national statutory limitation to prosecute;
e) the suspected person has already been finally acquitted or convicted of the same facts
within the Union or the case has been dealt with in accordance with Article 29.
2. The European Public Prosecutor may dismiss the case on any of the following grounds:
a) the offence is a minor offence according to national law implementing Directive
2013/XX/EU on the fight against fraud to the Union's financial interests by means of
criminal law;
b) lack of relevant evidence.
3. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office may refer cases dismissed by it to OLAF or to the
competent national administrative or judicial authorities for recovery, other administrative
follow-up or monitoring.
4. Where the investigation was initiated on the basis of information provided by the injured
party, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall inform that party thereof.
Article 29
Transaction
1. Where the case is not dismissed and it would serve the purpose of proper administration of
justice, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office may, after the damage has been
compensated, propose to the suspected person to pay a lump-sum fine which, once paid,
entails the final dismissal of the case (transaction). If the suspected person agrees, he/she
shall pay the lump sum fine to the Union.
2. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall supervise the collection of the financial
payment involved in the transaction.
3. Where the transaction is accepted and paid by the suspected person, the European Public
Prosecutor shall finally dismiss the case and officially notify the competent national law
enforcement and judicial authorities and shall inform the relevant Union institutions, bodies,
agencies thereof.
4. The dismissal referred to in paragraph 3 shall not be subject to judicial review.
EN 30 EN
SECTION 5
ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE
Article 30
Admissibility of evidence
1. Evidence presented by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to the trial court, where the
court considers that its admission would not adversely affect the fairness of the procedure or
the rights of defence as enshrined in Articles 47 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights
of the European Union, shall be admitted in the trial without any validation or similar legal
process even if the national law of the Member State where the court is located provides
for different rules on the collection or presentation of such evidence.
2. Once the evidence is admitted, the competence of national courts to assess freely the
evidence presented by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office at trial shall not be affected.
SECTION 6
CONFISCATION
Article 31
Disposition of the confiscated assets
Where at the request of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office the competent national court has
decided by a final ruling to confiscate any property related to, or proceeds derived from, an offence
within the competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, the monetary value of such
property or proceeds shall be transferred to the Union’s budget, to the extent necessary to compensate
the prejudice caused to the Union.
CHAPTER IV
PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS
Article 32
Scope of the rights of the suspects and accused persons as well as other persons involved
1. The activities of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall be carried out in full
compliance with the rights of suspected persons enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental
Rights of the European Union, including the right to a fair trial and the rights of defence.
2. Any suspect and accused person involved in the proceedings of the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office shall, as a minimum, have the following procedural rights as they are
provided for in Union legislation and the national law of the Member State:
(a) the right to interpretation and translation, as provided for in Directive 2010/64/EU of
the European Parliament and of the Council,
(b) the right to information and access to the case materials, as provided for in Directive
2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council,
(c) the right of access to a lawyer and the right to communicate with and have third persons
informed in case of detention, as provided for in [Directive 2013/xx/EU of the
European Parliament and of the Council of xx xxxx 2013 on the right of access to a
lawyer in criminal proceedings and on the right to communicate upon arrest],
(d) the right to remain silent and the right to be presumed innocent,
(e) the right to legal aid,
EN 31 EN
(f) the right to present evidence, appoint experts and hear witnesses.
3. Suspects and accused persons shall have the rights listed in paragraph 2 from the time that
they are suspected of having committed an offence. Once the indictment has been
acknowledged by the competent national court, the suspect and accused person's procedural
rights shall be based on the national regime applicable in the relevant case.
4. The rights listed in paragraph 2 shall also apply to any person other than a suspect or accused
person who is heard by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office if, in the course of
questioning, interrogation or hearing, he/she becomes suspected of having committed a
criminal offence.
5. Without prejudice to the rights provided in this Chapter, suspects and accused persons as well
as other persons involved in the proceedings of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall
have all the procedural rights available to them under the applicable national law.
Article 33
Right to remain silent and to be presumed innocent
1. The suspect and accused person involved in the proceedings of the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office shall have, in accordance with national law, the right to remain silent
when questioned, in relation to the facts that he/she is suspected of having committed, and
shall be informed that he/she is not obliged to incriminate himself/herself.
2. The suspect and accused person shall be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to
national law.
Article 34
Right to legal aid
Any person suspected or accused of an offence within the scope of the competence of the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office shall have, in accordance with national law, the right to be given legal
assistance free or partially free of charge by national authorities if he/she has insufficient means to pay
for it.
Article 35
Rights concerning evidence
1. The suspect and accused person shall have, in accordance with national law, the right to
present evidence to the consideration of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
2. The suspect and accused person shall have, in accordance with national law, the right to
request the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to gather any evidence relevant to the
investigation, including appointing experts and hearing witnesses.
CHAPTER V
JUDICIAL REVIEW
Article 36
Judicial review
1. When adopting procedural measures in the performance of its functions, the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office shall be considered as a national authority for the purpose of judicial
review.
EN 32 EN
2. Where provisions of national law are rendered applicable by this Regulation, such provisions
shall not be considered as provisions of Union law for the purpose of Article 267 of the
Treaty.
CHAPTER VI
DATA PROTECTION
Article 37
Processing of personal data
1. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office may process by automated means or in structured
manual files in accordance with this Regulation only the personal data listed in point 1 of the
Annex, on persons who, under the national legislation of the Member States concerned are
suspected of having committed or having taken part in an offence in respect of which the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office is competent, or who have been convicted of such an
offence, for the following purposes:
– criminal investigations and prosecutions undertaken in accordance with the present
Regulation;
– information exchange with the competent authorities of Member States and other
Union bodies in accordance with the present Regulation;
– co-operation with third countries in accordance with the present Regulation.
2. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office may process only the personal data listed in point 2
of the Annex, on persons who, under the national legislation of the Member States concerned,
are regarded as witnesses or victims in a criminal investigation or prosecution regarding one
or more of the types of offence for which the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is
competent, or persons under the age of 18. The processing of such personal data may only
take place if it is strictly necessary for the purposes specified in paragraph 1.
3. In exceptional cases, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office may also, for a limited period
of time which shall not exceed the time needed for the conclusion of the case related to which
the data are processed, process personal data other than those referred to in paragraphs 1 and
2 relating to the circumstances of an offence where they are immediately relevant to and
included in on-going investigations which the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is
pursuing and when their processing is strictly necessary for the purposes specified in
paragraph 1, provided that the processing of such specific data takes place in accordance with
this Regulation. The Data Protection Officer referred to in Article 41 shall be informed
immediately of recourse to this paragraph.
4. Personal data, processed by automated or other means, revealing racial or ethnic origin,
political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, trade union membership, and data
concerning health or sex life may be processed by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office
only when such data are strictly necessary for his investigations and if they supplement other
personal data already processed. The Data Protection Officer shall be informed immediately
of recourse to this paragraph. Such data may not be processed in the Index referred to in
Article 22(4). Where such other data refer to witnesses or victims within the meaning of
paragraph 2, the decision to process them shall be taken by the European Public Prosecutor.
5. Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 shall apply to the processing of personal data by the EPPO in
the context of its activities. This Regulation particularises and complements Regulation (EC)
No 45/2001 in as far as operational personal data are concerned.
EN 33 EN
Article 38
Time limits for the storage of personal data
1. Personal data processed by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office may not be stored
beyond the first applicable among the following dates:
a) the date on which prosecution is barred under the statute of limitations of all the
Member States concerned by the investigation and prosecutions;
b) the date on which the person has been acquitted and the judicial decision became final;
c) three years after the date on which the judicial decision of the last of the Member States
concerned by the investigation or prosecutions became final;
d) the date on which the European Public Prosecutor’s Office established that it was no
longer necessary for it to continue the investigation or prosecution.
2. Observance of the storage deadlines referred to in paragraph 1 shall be reviewed constantly
by appropriate automated processing. Nevertheless, a review of the need to store the data
shall be carried out every three years after they were entered. If data concerning persons
referred to in the Annex are stored for a period exceeding five years, the European Data
Protection Supervisor shall be informed accordingly.
3. When one of the storage deadlines referred to in paragraph 1 has expired, the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office shall review the need to store the data longer in order to enable it
to perform its tasks and it may decide by way of derogation to store those data until the
following review. The reasons for the continued storage shall be justified and recorded. If no
decision is taken on the continued storage of personal data, those data shall be deleted
automatically after three years.
4. Where, in accordance with paragraph 3, data has been stored beyond the dates referred to in
paragraph 1, a review of the need to store those data shall take place every three years by the
European Data Protection Supervisor.
5. Where a file exists containing non-automated and unstructured data, once the deadline for
storage of the last item of automated data from the file has elapsed all documents in the file
and any copies shall be destroyed.
Article 39
Logging and documentation
1. For the purposes of verification of the lawfulness of the data processing, self-monitoring and
ensuring proper data integrity and security, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall
keep records of any collection, alteration, access, disclosure, combination or erasure of
personal data used for operational purposes. Such logs or documentation shall be deleted
after 18 months, unless the data are further required for on-going control.
2. Logs or documentation prepared under paragraph 1 shall be communicated on request to the
European Data Protection Supervisor. The European Data Protection Supervisor shall use this
information only for the purpose of data protection supervision, ensuring proper data
processing, and data integrity and security.
Article 40
Authorised access to personal data
Only the European Public Prosecutor, the European Delegated Prosecutors and authorised members of
their staff may, for the purpose of achieving their tasks and within the limits provided for in this
EN 34 EN
Regulation, have access to personal data processed by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office for its
operational tasks.
Article 41
Data protection officer
1. The European Public Prosecutor shall appoint a Data Protection Officer in accordance with
Article 24 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.
2. When complying with the obligations set out in Article 24 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001,
the Data Protection Officer shall:
a) ensure that a written record of the transfer of personal data is kept;
b) cooperate with the staff of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office responsible for
procedures, training and advice on data processing;
c) prepare an annual report and communicate that report to the European Public
Prosecutor and to the European Data Protection Supervisor.
3. In the performance of his tasks, the Data Protection Officer shall have access to all the data
processed by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and to all of the Office’s premises.
4. The staff members of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office assisting the Data Protection
Officer in the performance of his/her duties shall have access to the personal data processed
by it and to its premises to the extent necessary for the performance of their tasks.
5. If the Data Protection Officer considers that the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 or
this Regulation related to the processing of personal data have not been complied with, he/she
shall inform the European Public Prosecutor, requiring him/her to resolve the non-
compliance within a specified time. If the European Public Prosecutor does not resolve the
non-compliance of the processing within the specified time, the Data Protection Officer shall
refer the matter to the European Data Protection Supervisor.
6. The European Public Prosecutor shall adopt the implementing rules referred to in Article
24(8) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.
Article 42
Modalities regarding the exercise of the right of access
1. Any data subject may exercise the right of access to personal data in accordance with
Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and in particular Article 13 thereof.
2. When the right of access is restricted in accordance with Article 20 paragraph 1 of Regulation
(EC) No 45/2001, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall inform the data subject in
accordance with Article 20(3) in writing. The information about the principal reasons on
which the application of the restriction is based may be omitted where the provision of such
information would deprive the restriction of its effect. The data subject shall at least be
informed that all necessary verifications by the European Data Protection Supervisor have
taken place.
3. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall document the grounds for omitting the
communication of the principal reasons on which the restriction referred to in paragraph 2 is
based.
4. When in application of Articles 46 and 47 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001, the European
Data Protection Supervisor checks the lawfulness of the processing performed by the
EN 35 EN
European Public Prosecutor’s Office, he/she shall inform the data subject at least that all
necessary verifications by the European Data Protection Supervisor have taken place.
Article 43
Right to rectification, erasure and restrictions on processing
1. If personal data processed by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office have to be rectified,
erased or whose processing has to be restricted in accordance with Articles 14, 15 or 16 of
Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall rectify, erase or
restrict the processing of such data.
2. In the cases referred to in Articles 14, 15 or 16 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001, all addressees
of such data shall be notified forthwith in accordance with Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No
45/2001. In accordance with rules applicable to them, the addressees shall then rectify, erase
or restrict the processing of those data in their systems.
3. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall inform the data subject in writing without
undue delay and in any case within three months of the receipt of the request that data
concerning him or her have been rectified, erased or their processing restricted.
4. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall inform the data subject in writing on any
refusal of rectification, of erasure or of restrictions to the processing, and the possibility of
lodging a complaint with the European Data Protection Supervisor and seeking a judicial
remedy.
Article 44
Responsibility in data protection matters
1. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall process personal data in such a way that that it
can be established which authority provided the data or where the personal data has been
retrieved from.
2. The responsibility for compliance with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and this Regulation shall
lie with the European Public Prosecutor. The responsibility for the legality of transfer of
personal data provided to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall lie with the provider
of the personal data, and with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office for the personal data
provided to Member States, Union bodies and third countries or organisations.
3. Subject to other provisions in this Regulation, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall
be responsible for all data processed by it.
Article 45
Cooperation between the European Data Protection Supervisor and national data protection
authorities
1. The European Data Protection Supervisor shall act in close cooperation with national
authorities competent for data protection supervision with respect to specific issues requiring
national involvement, in particular if the European Data Protection Supervisor or a national
authority competent for data protection supervision finds major discrepancies between
practices of the Member States or potentially unlawful transfers using the communication
channels of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, or in the context of questions raised by
one or more national supervisory authorities on the implementation and interpretation of this
Regulation.
2. In cases referred to under paragraph 1 the European Data Protection Supervisor and the
national authorities competent for data protection supervision may, each acting within the
EN 36 EN
scope of their respective competences, exchange relevant information, assist each other in
carrying out audits and inspections, examine difficulties of interpretation or application of
this Regulation, study problems related to the exercise of independent supervision or to the
exercise of the rights of data subjects, draw up harmonised proposals for joint solutions to
any problems and promote awareness of data protection rights, as necessary.
3. The National Supervisory Authorities and the European Data Protection Supervisor shall
meet for the purposes outlined in this Article, as needed. The costs and servicing of these
meetings shall be for the account of the European Data Protection Supervisor. Rules of
procedure shall be adopted at the first meeting. Further working methods shall be developed
jointly as necessary.
Article 46
Right to lodge a complaint with the European Data Protection Supervisor
1. Where a complaint introduced by a data subject pursuant to Article 32(2) of Regulation (EC)
No 45/2001 relates to a decision as referred to in Article 43, the European Data Protection
Supervisor shall consult the national supervisory bodies or the competent judicial body in the
Member State which was the source of the data or the Member State directly concerned. The
decision of the European Data Protection Supervisor, which may extend to a refusal to
communicate any information, shall be taken in close cooperation with the national
supervisory body or competent judicial body.
2. Where a complaint relates to the processing of data provided to the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office by Union bodies, third countries or organisations or private parties, the
European Data Protection Supervisor shall ensure that the necessary checks have been carried
out by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
Article 47
Liability for unauthorised or incorrect processing of data
1. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall be liable, in accordance with Article 340 of
the Treaty, for any damage caused to an individual which results from unauthorised or
incorrect processing of data carried out by it.
2. Complaints against the European Public Prosecutor’s Office pursuant to the liability referred
to in paragraph 1 shall be heard by the Court of Justice in accordance with Article 268 of the
Treaty.
CHAPTER VII
FINANCIAL AND STAFF PROVISIONS
SECTION 1
FINANCIAL PROVISIONS
Article 48
Financial actors
1. The European Public Prosecutor shall be responsible for taking decisions on financial and
budgetary matters.
2. The Deputy designated by the European Public Prosecutor in accordance with Article 6(3)
shall be responsible for the implementation of the budget of the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office as authorising officer.
EN 37 EN
Article 49
Budget
1. Estimates of all the revenue and expenditure of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall
be prepared for each financial year, corresponding to the calendar year, and shall be shown in
its budget.
2. The budget of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall be balanced in terms of revenue
and of expenditure.
3. Without prejudice to other resources, the revenue of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office
shall comprise:
a) a contribution from the Union entered in the general budget of the Union;
b) charges for publications and any service provided by the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office.
4. The expenditure of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall include staff remuneration,
administrative and infrastructure expenses, and operating costs.
5. Where European Delegated Prosecutors act within the framework of the tasks of the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office, the relevant expenditure related to these activities shall
be regarded as operational expenditure.
Article 50
Establishment of the budget
1. Each year the Deputy of the European Public Prosecutor referred to in Article 48 shall draw
up a provisional draft estimate of the revenue and expenditure of the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office for the following financial year. The European Public Prosecutor shall,
on the basis of that draft, produce a provisional draft estimate of the revenue and expenditure
of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office for the following financial year.
2. The provisional draft estimate of the revenue and expenditure of the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office shall be sent to the Commission no later than 31 January each year. The
European Public Prosecutor shall send a final draft estimate, which shall include a draft
establishment plan, to the Commission by 31 March.
3. The Commission shall send the statement of estimates to the European Parliament and the
Council (the budgetary authority) together with the draft general budget of the Union.
4. On the basis of the statement of estimates, the Commission shall enter in the draft general
budget of the Union the estimates it considers necessary for the establishment plan and the
amount of the contribution to be charged to the general budget, which it shall submit to the
budgetary authority in accordance with Articles 313 and 314 of the Treaty.
5. The budgetary authority shall authorise the appropriations for the contribution of the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
6. The budgetary authority shall adopt the establishment plan of the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office.
7. The European Public Prosecutor shall adopt the budget of the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office. It shall become final following final adoption of the general budget of the Union.
Where necessary, it shall be adjusted accordingly.
8. For any building project likely to have significant implications for the budget the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office shall inform the European Parliament and the Council as early as
EN 38 EN
possible in accordance with the provisions of Article 203 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No
966/2012.
9. Except in cases of force majeure referred to in Article 203 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No
966/2012 shall deliberate upon the building project within four weeks of its receipt by both
institutions. The building project shall be deemed approved at the expiry of this four-week
period, unless the European Parliament or the Council take a decision contrary to the
proposal within that period of time. If the European Parliament or the Council raise duly
justified concerns within that four-week period, that period shall be extended once by two
weeks. If the European Parliament or the Council take a decision contrary to the building
project, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall withdraw its proposal and may submit
a new one.
10. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office may finance a budget acquisition project through a
loan subject to prior approval of the budgetary authority in accordance with Article 203(8) of
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012.
Article 51
Implementation of the budget
1. The Deputy of the European Public Prosecutor referred to in Article 48, acting as the
authorising officer of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, shall implement its budget
under his or her own responsibility and within the limits authorised in budget.
2. Each year the Deputy of the European Public Prosecutor referred to in Article 48 shall send
to the budgetary authority all information relevant to the findings of the evaluation
procedures.
Article 52
Presentation of accounts and discharge
1. The accounting officer of Eurojust shall act as the accounting officer of the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office in the implementation of its budget. The necessary arrangements so as to
avoid any conflict of interest shall be made.
2. By 1 March following each financial year, the accounting officer of the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office shall send the provisional accounts to the Commission's Accounting
Officer and the Court of Auditors.
3. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall send the report on the budgetary and financial
management to the European Parliament, the Council and the Court of Auditors, by 31 March
of the following financial year.
4. By 31 March following each financial year, the Commission's accounting officer shall send
the provisional accounts of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office consolidated with the
Commission’s accounts to the Court of Auditors.
5. In accordance with Article 148(1) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012, the Court of
Auditors shall, by 1 June of the following year at the latest, make its observations on the
provisional accounts of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
6. On receipt of the Court of Auditors' observations on the provisional accounts of the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office pursuant to Article 148 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No
966/2012, the accounting officer of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall draw up its
final accounts under his/her own responsibility.
EN 39 EN
7. The accounting officer of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall, by 1 July following
each financial year, send the final accounts to the European Parliament, the Council, the
Commission and the Court of Auditors.
8. The final accounts of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall be published in the
Official Journal of the European Union by 15 November of the following year.
9 The deputy of the European Public Prosecutor referred to in Article 48 shall send the Court of
Auditors a reply to its observations by 30 September of the following year at the latest. The
replies of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall be sent to the Commission at the
same time.
10. The Deputy of the European Public Prosecutor referred to in Article 48 shall submit to the
European Parliament, at the latter's request, any information required for the smooth
application of the discharge procedure for the financial year in question in accordance with
Article 165(3) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012.
11. On a recommendation from the Council acting by a qualified majority, the European
Parliament, shall, before 15 May of year N + 2, give a discharge to the deputy of the
European Public Prosecutor referred to in Article 48 in respect of the implementation of the
budget for year N.
Article 53
Financial rules
The financial rules applicable to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall be adopted by the
European Public Prosecutor in accordance with [Regulation 2343/2002 of 23 December 2002 on the
framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC,
Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European
Communities] and after consultation with the Commission. They shall not depart from [Regulation
2343/2002] unless such departure is specifically required for the operation of the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office and the Commission has given its prior consent.
SECTION 2
STAFF PROVISIONS
Article 54
General provisions
1. The Staff Regulations of the European Union9
and the Conditions of Employment of Other
Servants of the European Union and the rules adopted by agreement between the institutions
of the European Union for giving effect to those Staff Regulations and those Conditions of
Employment of Other Servants shall apply to the European Public Prosecutor, the Deputies
and the staff of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, unless otherwise stipulated in this
Section.
2. The powers conferred on the appointing authority by the Staff Regulations and by the
Conditions of Employment of Other Servants to conclude Contracts of Employment shall be
exercised by the European Public Prosecutor with respect to the staff of the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office.
9
Council Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC) of 18 December 1961 laying down the Staff Regulations for
Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Economic Community and the
European Atomic Energy Community, OJ P 045, 14.6.1962, p. 1385, as amended, in particular, by Council
Regulation 259/68, of 29 February 1968 (OJ L 56, 4.3.1968, p. 1), as itself subsequently amended.
EN 40 EN
3. The European Public Prosecutor shall adopt appropriate implementing rules to the Staff
Regulations and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants in accordance with Article
110 of the Staff Regulations. The European Public Prosecutor shall also adopt staff resource
programming as part of the programming document.
4. The Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union shall apply to the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office and its staff.
5. European Delegated Prosecutors shall be engaged as Special Advisors in accordance with
Articles 5, 123 and 124 of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European
Union. The competent national authorities shall facilitate the exercise of the functions of
European Delegated Prosecutors under this Regulation and refrain from any action or policy
which may adversely affect their career and status in the national prosecution system. In
particular, the competent national authorities shall provide the European Delegated
Prosecutors with the resources and equipment necessary to exercise their functions under this
Regulation, and ensure that they are fully integrated into their national prosecution services.
Article 55
Seconded national experts and other staff
1. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office may make use of Seconded national experts or
other persons not employed by it. The Seconded national experts shall be subject to the
authority of the European Public Prosecutor in the exercise of tasks related to the functions of
the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
2. The European Public Prosecutor shall adopt a decision laying down rules on the secondment
of national experts to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and further implementing
provisions as may be necessary.
CHAPTER VIII
PROVISIONS ON THE RELATIONS OF THE EUROPEAN PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE WITH ITS PARTNERS
SECTION 1
COMMON PROVISIONS
Article 56
Common provisions
1. In so far as necessary for the performance of its tasks, the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office may establish and maintain cooperative relations with Union bodies or agencies in
accordance with the objectives of those bodies or agencies, the competent authorities of third
countries, international organisations and the International Criminal Police Organisation
(Interpol).
2. In so far as relevant to the performance of its tasks, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office
may, in accordance with Article 61, directly exchange all information, with the exception of
personal data, with the entities referred to in paragraph 1.
3. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office may receive, in accordance with Article 4 of
Regulation (EC) No 45/2001, and process personal data received from the entities referred to
in paragraph 1 in so far as necessary for the performance of its tasks and subject to the
provisions of Section 3.
EN 41 EN
4. Personal data shall only be transferred by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to third
countries, international organisations, and Interpol if this is necessary for preventing and
combating offences that fall under the competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office and in accordance with this Regulation.
5. Onward transfers to third parties of personal data received from the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office by Member States, Union bodies or agencies, third countries and
international organisations or Interpol shall be prohibited unless the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office has given its explicit consent after considering the circumstances of the
case at hand, for a specific purpose that is not incompatible with the purpose for which the
data was transmitted.
SECTION 2
RELATIONS WITH PARTNERS
Article 57
Relations with Eurojust
1. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall establish and maintain a special relationship
with Eurojust based on close cooperation and the development of operational, administrative
and management links between them as defined below.
2. In operational matters, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office may associate Eurojust with
its activities concerning cross-border or complex cases by:
a) sharing information, including personal data, on its investigations, in particular where
they reveal elements which may fall outside the material or territorial competence of
the European Public Prosecutor’s Office;
b) requesting Eurojust or its competent national member(s) to participate in the
coordination of specific acts of investigation regarding specific aspects which may fall
outside the material or territorial competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office;
c) facilitating the agreement between the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and the
Member State(s) concerned on ancillary competence in accordance with Article 13
without prejudice to a possible settlement by the judicial authority of the Member State
concerned and competent to decide on the matter;
d) requesting Eurojust or its competent national member(s) to use the powers attributed to
them by Union legislation or national law regarding specific acts of investigation which
may fall outside the material or territorial competence of the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office;
e) sharing information with Eurojust or its competent national member(s) on prosecution
decisions referred to at Articles 27, 28 and 29 before their submission to the European
Public Prosecutor where Eurojust competences may be affected and this is appropriate
in the light of Eurojust’s previous involvement in the case;
f) requesting Eurojust or its competent national member(s) to provide support in the
transmission of its decisions or requests for mutual legal assistance to, and execution in,
States members of Eurojust but not taking part in the establishment of the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office or third countries.
3. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall have access to a mechanism for automatic
cross-checking of data in Eurojust’s Case Management System. Whenever a match is found
between data entered into the Case Management System by the European Public Prosecutor’s
EN 42 EN
Office and data entered by Eurojust, the fact that there is a match will be communicated to
both Eurojust and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, as well as the Member State
which provided the data to Eurojust. In cases where the data was provided by a third country,
Eurojust will only inform that third country of the match found with the consent of the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
4. The cooperation established in accordance with paragraph 1 shall entail the exchange of
information, including personal data. Any data thus exchanged shall only be used for the
purposes for which it was provided. Any other usage of the data shall only be allowed in as
far as such usage falls within the mandate of the body receiving the data, and subject to the
prior authorisation of the body which provided the data.
5. The European Public Prosecutor shall designate the staff members authorised to have access
to the results of the cross-checking mechanism and inform Eurojust thereof.
6. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall rely on the support and resources of the
administration of Eurojust. The details of this arrangement shall be regulated by an
Agreement. Eurojust shall provide the following services to the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office:
a) technical support in the preparation of the annual budget, the programming document
containing the annual and multi-annual programming, and the management plan;
b) technical support in staff recruitment and career-management;
c) security services;
d) Information Technology services;
e) financial management, accounting and audit services;
f) any other services of common interest.
Article 58
Relations with Union institutions, agencies and other bodies
1. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall develop a special relationship with Europol.
2 The cooperation established in accordance with paragraph 1 shall entail the exchange of
information, including personal data. Any data thus exchanged shall only be used for the
purposes for which it was provided. Any other usage of the data shall only be allowed in as
far as such usage falls within the mandate of the body receiving the data, and subject to the
prior authorisation of the body which provided the data.
3. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall cooperate with the Commission, including
OLAF, for the purpose of implementing the obligations under Article 325(3) of the Treaty.
To this end, they shall conclude an agreement setting out the modalities of their cooperation.
4. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall establish and maintain cooperative relations
with other Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies.
Article 59
Relations with third countries and international organisations
1. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office may establish working arrangements with the
entities referred to in Article 56(1). Such working arrangements may, in particular, concern
the exchange of strategic information and the secondment of liaison officers to the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office.
EN 43 EN
2. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office may designate, in agreement with the competent
authorities, contact points in third countries in order to facilitate cooperation.
3. In accordance with Article 218 of the Treaty, the European Commission may submit to the
Council proposals for the negotiation of agreements with one or more third countries
regarding the cooperation between the European Public Prosecutor's Office and the
competent authorities of these third countries with regard to legal assistance in criminal
matters and extradition in cases falling under the competence of the European Public
Prosecutor's Office.
4. Concerning the criminal offences within its material competence, the Member States shall
either recognise the European Public Prosecutor’s Office as a competent authority for the
purpose of the implementation of their international agreements on legal assistance in
criminal matters and extradition, or, where necessary, alter those international agreements to
ensure that the European Public Prosecutor's Office can exercise its functions on the basis of
such agreements when it assumes its tasks in accordance with Article 75(2).
SECTION 3
TRANSFER OF PERSONAL DATA
Article 60
Transfer of personal data to Union bodies or agencies
Subject to any restrictions pursuant to this Regulation, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office may
directly transfer personal data to Union bodies or agencies in so far as it is necessary for the
performance of its tasks or those of the recipient Union body or agency.
Article 61
Transfer of personal data to third countries and international organisations
1. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office may transfer personal data to an authority of a third
country or to an international organisation or Interpol, in so far as this is necessary for it to
perform its tasks, only on the basis of:
a) a decision of the Commission adopted in accordance with [Articles 25 and 31 of
Directive 95/46/EC] that that country or international organisation, or a processing
sector within that third country or international organisation ensures an adequate level
of protection (adequacy decision); or
b) an international agreement concluded between the Union and that third country or
international organisation pursuant to Article 218 of the Treaty adducing adequate
safeguards with respect to the protection of privacy and fundamental rights and
freedoms of individuals.
Such transfer does not require further authorisation.
The European Public Prosecutor’s Office may conclude working arrangements to implement
such agreements or adequacy decisions.
2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, the European Public Prosecutor may authorise the
transfer of personal data to third countries or international organisations or Interpol on a case-
by-case basis if:
a) the transfer of data is absolutely necessary to safeguard the essential interests of the
Union, including its financial interests, within the scope of the objectives of the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office;
EN 44 EN
b) the transfer of the data is absolutely necessary in the interests of preventing imminent
danger associated with crime or terrorist offences;
c) the transfer is otherwise necessary or legally required on important public interest
grounds of the Union or its Member States, as recognised by Union law or by national
law, or for the establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims; or
d) the transfer is necessary to protect the vital interests of the data subject or another
person.
3. Moreover the European Public Prosecutor may, in agreement with the European Data
Protection Supervisor, authorise a set of transfers in conformity with points a) to d) above,
taking into account the existence of safeguards with respect to the protection of privacy and
fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals, for a period not exceeding one year,
renewable.
4. The European Data Protection Supervisor shall be informed of cases where paragraph 3 was
applied.
5. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office may transfer administrative personal data in
accordance with Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.
CHAPTER IX
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Article 62
Legal status and operating conditions
1. In each of the Member States the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall enjoy the most
extensive legal capacity accorded to legal persons under their laws. It may, in particular,
acquire and dispose of movable and immovable property and be party to legal proceedings.
2. The necessary arrangements concerning the accommodation provided for the European
Public Prosecutor's Office and the facilities made available by the host Member State
together with the specific rules applicable in that Member State to the European Public
Prosecutor, his/her Deputies and their staff, and members of their families, shall be laid down
in a Headquarters Agreement concluded between the European Public Prosecutor's Office
and the host Member State no later than [2 years after the entry into force of this regulation].
3. The host Member State of the European Public Prosecutor's Office shall provide the best
possible conditions to ensure the functioning of the European Public Prosecutor's Office,
including multilingual, European-oriented schooling and appropriate transport connections.
Article 63
Language arrangements
1. Regulation No 110
shall apply to the acts provided in Articles 7 and 72.
2. The translation services required for the functioning of the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office shall be provided by the Translation Centre of the bodies of the European Union.
10
OJ L 17, 6.10.1958, p. 385
EN 45 EN
Article 64
Confidentiality
1. The European Public Prosecutor, the Deputies and the staff, European Delegated Prosecutors
and their national staff shall be bound by an obligation of confidentiality with respect to any
information which has come to their knowledge in the course of the performance of their
tasks.
2. The obligation of confidentiality shall apply to all persons and to all bodies called upon to
work with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
3. The obligation of confidentiality shall also apply after leaving office or employment or after
the termination of the activities of the persons referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2.
4. The obligation of confidentiality shall apply to all information received by the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office, unless that information has already been made public or is
accessible to the public.
5. Members and the staff of the European Data Protection Supervisor shall be subject to the
obligation of confidentiality with respect to any information which has come to their
knowledge in the course of the performance of their tasks.
Article 65
Transparency
1. Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 shall apply to documents which relate to the administrative
tasks of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
2. The European Public Prosecutor shall, within six months of the date of its establishment,
adopt the detailed rules for applying Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001.
3. Decisions taken by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office under Article 8 of Regulation
(EC) No 1049/2001 may form the subject of a complaint to the Ombudsman or of an action
before the Court of Justice of the European Union, under the conditions laid down in Articles
228 and 263 of the Treaty respectively.
Article 66
OLAF and the European Court of Auditors
1. In order to facilitate combating fraud, corruption and other unlawful activities under
Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council11
, within six
months from the day the European Public Prosecutor’s Office becomes operational, it shall
accede to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 25 May 1999 concerning internal investigations
by OLAF and adopt the appropriate provisions applicable to all the employees of the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office using the template set out in the Annex to that
Agreement.
2. The European Court of Auditors shall have the power of audit, on the basis of documents and
on the spot, over all grant beneficiaries, contractors and subcontractors who have received
Union funds from the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
3. OLAF may carry out investigations, including on-the-spot checks and inspections, in
accordance with the provisions and procedures laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999
11
OJ L 136, 31.5.1999, p.1.
EN 46 EN
and Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/9612
with a view to establishing whether
there have been any irregularities affecting the financial interests of the Union in connection
with expenditure funded by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
4. Without prejudice to paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, working arrangements with third countries and
international organisations or Interpol, contracts, grant agreements and grant decisions of the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall contain provisions expressly empowering the
European Court of Auditors and OLAF to conduct such audits and investigations, according
to their respective competences.
Article 67
Security rules on the protection of classified information
The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall apply the security principles contained in the
Commission's security rules for protecting European Union Classified Information (EUCI) and
sensitive non-classified information, as set out in the annex to Commission Decision 2001/844/EC,
ECSC, Euratom13
. This shall cover, inter alia, provisions for the exchange, processing and storage of
such information.
Article 68
Administrative inquiries
The administrative activities of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall be subject to the
inquiries of the European Ombudsman in accordance with Article 228 of the Treaty.
Article 69
General regime of liability
1. The contractual liability of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall be governed by the
law applicable to the contract in question.
2. The Court of Justice of the European Union shall have jurisdiction to give judgment pursuant
to any arbitration clause contained in a contract concluded by the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office.
3. In the case of non-contractual liability, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall, in
accordance with the general principles common to the laws of the Member States and
independently of any liability under Article 47, make good any damage caused by the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office or its staff in the performance of their duties in so far as
it may be imputed to them.
4. Paragraph 3 shall also apply to damage caused through the fault of a European Delegated
Prosecutor in the performance of his duties.
5. The Court of Justice of the European Union shall have jurisdiction in disputes over
compensation for damages referred to in paragraph 3.
6. The national courts of the Member States competent to deal with disputes involving the
liability of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office as referred to in this Article shall be
determined by reference to Council Regulation (EC) No 44/200114
12
OJ L 292, 15.11.1996, p.2.
13
OJ L 317, 3.12.2011, p. 1.
14
OJ L 12, 16.1.2001, p. 1. Regulation (EC) 44/2001 is replaced by Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 as from
10.01.2015.
EN 47 EN
7. The personal liability of its staff towards the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall be
governed by the provisions laid down in the Staff Regulations or Conditions of Employment
applicable to them.
Article 70
Reporting
1. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall issue an Annual Report on its general
activities. It shall transmit this report to the European Parliament and to national Parliaments,
as well as to the Council and the Commission.
2. The European Public Prosecutor shall appear once a year before the European Parliament and
the Council to give account of the general activities of the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office, taking into account the obligation of discretion and confidentiality. Upon request,
he/she shall also appear before the Commission.
3. National Parliaments may invite the European Public Prosecutor or European Delegated
Prosecutors to participate in an exchange of views in relation to the general activities of the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
CHAPTER X
FINAL PROVISIONS
Article 71
Transitional provisions
1. Before exercising its tasks the European Public Prosecutor shall take any measures necessary
for the setting up of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
2. Without prejudice to Article 9, the first appointment of two of the Deputies to the European
Public Prosecutor, to be chosen by lot, shall be made for a period of 6 years.
3. Member States shall remain competent until the date on which the European Public
Prosecutor's Office has been set up and assumed its tasks in accordance with Article 75(2).
The European Public Prosecutor's Office shall exercise its competence with regard to any
offence within its competence committed after that date. The European Public Prosecutor’s
Office may also exercise its competence with regard to any offence within its competence
committed before that date if no competent national authority is already investigating or
prosecuting it.
Article 72
Administrative rules and programme documents
The European Public Prosecutor shall:
a) adopt each year the programming document containing annual and multi-annual
programming of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office;
b) adopt an anti-fraud strategy, which is proportionate to the fraud risks having regard to the
cost-benefit of the measures to be implemented;
c) adopt rules for the prevention and management of conflicts of interest in respect of the
European Delegated Prosecutors;
d) adopt rules on the status, performance criteria, rights and obligations of the Deputies and the
European Delegated Prosecutors, as well as the rotation of European Delegated Prosecutors
for the purpose of implementing Article 7;
EN 48 EN
e) adopt rules on the handling of transactions made in accordance with Article 29 and the
modalities to calculate the amounts of the fine to be paid;
f) adopt rules on the modalities of giving feedback to persons or entities which have provided
information to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office;
g) adopt detailed rules concerning the application of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 in its
activities;
h) implementing rules referred to in Article 24(8) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.
Article 73
Notifications
Each Member State shall designate the authorities which are competent for the purposes of Articles
6(6), 13(3), 17(2) and 26(4). Information on the designated authorities, as well as on any subsequent
change, shall be notified simultaneously to the European Public Prosecutor, the Council and the
Commission.
Article 74
Review clause
1. By [five years after the start of application of this Regulation] at the latest the Commission
shall present its evaluation report to the European Parliament and the Council on the
implementation of this Regulation, which may be accompanied by any legislative proposals.
The report shall contain its findings on the feasibility and advisability of extending the
competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to other criminal offences in
accordance with Article 86(4) of the Treaty.
2. The Commission shall submit legislative proposals to the European Parliament and the
Council if it concludes that more detailed rules on the setting up of the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office, its functions or the procedure applicable to its activities are necessary. It
may recommend to the European Council the extension of the competence of the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office in accordance with Article 86(4) of the Treaty.
Article 75
Entry into force
1. This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in
the Official Journal of the European Union.
2. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall assume the investigative and prosecutorial
tasks conferred on it by this Regulation on a date to be determined by a decision of the
Commission on a proposal of the European Public Prosecutor once the European Public
Prosecutor's Office is set up. The decision of the Commission shall be published in the
Official Journal of the European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in the Member States in
accordance with the Treaties.
Done at Brussels,
For the Council
The President
EN 49 EN
Annex
Categories of personal data
1. a) surname, maiden name, given names and any alias or assumed names;
b) date and place of birth;
c) nationality;
d) sex;
e) place of residence, profession and whereabouts of the person concerned;
f) social security numbers, driving licences, identification documents, passport data,
customs and Tax Identification Numbers;
g) information concerning legal persons if it includes information relating to identified or
identifiable individuals who are the subject of a judicial investigation or prosecution;
h) bank accounts and accounts with other financial institutions;
i) description and nature of the alleged offences, the date on which they were committed,
the criminal category of the offences and the progress of the investigations;
j) the facts pointing to an international extension of the case;
k) details relating to alleged membership of a criminal organisation;
l) telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, traffic data and location data, as well as the
related data necessary to identify the subscriber or user;
m) vehicle registration data;
n) DNA profiles established from the non-coding part of DNA, photographs and
fingerprints.
2. a) surname, maiden name, given names and any alias or assumed names;
b) date and place of birth;
c) nationality;
d) sex;
e) place of residence, profession and whereabouts of the person concerned;
f) the description and nature of the offences involving them, the date on which they were
committed, the criminal category of the offences and the progress.
EN 50 EN
LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT
1. FRAMEWORK OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE
1.1. Title of the proposal/initiative
Commission proposal for a Council Regulation on the establishment of the European Public
Prosecutor's Office
1.2. Policy area(s) concerned in the ABM/ABB structure
Policy area: Justice
Activity: title 33
1.3. Nature of the proposal/initiative
X The proposal/initiative relates to a new action
The proposal/initiative relates to a new action following a pilot project/preparatory action
X The proposal/initiative relates to the extension of an existing action
The proposal/initiative relates to an action redirected towards a new action
1.4. Objective(s)
1.4.1. The Commission's multiannual strategic objective(s) targeted by the proposal/initiative
To contribute to the strengthening of the protection of the Union's financial interests and
further development of an area of justice, and to enhance the trust of EU businesses and
citizens in the Union’s institutions, while respecting all fundamental rights enshrined in the
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
1.4.2. Specific objective(s) and ABM/ABB activity(ies) concerned
Specific Objective No 2 Enhance judicial cooperation in criminal matters and thus contribute
to creating a genuine European Area of Justice
(part of general Objective n° 2: Strengthen confidence in the European Judicial Area)
ABM/ABB activity(ies) concerned
33 03: Justice in criminal and civil matters
EN 51 EN
1.4.3. Expected result(s) and impact
Specify the effects which the proposal/initiative should have on the beneficiaries/groups targeted.
The establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is expected to increase the
protection of the Union's financial interests. Its establishment is expected to lead to an
increase in the number of prosecutions of the perpetrators of crimes affecting the financial
interests, leading to a higher number of convictions, a higher level of recovery of illegally
obtained funds and increased deterrence. In addition, its independence will ensure that
investigations and prosecutions of the relevant crimes will be taken forward without direct
influence of national authorities.
1.4.4. Indicators of results and impact
Specify the indicators for monitoring implementation of the proposal/initiative.
Increased number and percentage of successful criminal investigations and prosecutions
1.5. Grounds for the proposal/initiative
1.5.1. Requirement(s) to be met in the short or long term
Whereas both the Union and the Member States have an obligation to protect the Union's
budget, in reality the Union has little control over the expenditure by Member States and
virtually no power to intervene in cases of criminal misuse of the EU's funds. The vast
majority of the EU budget is managed by national authorities (for example when they award
public procurement grants financed through the EU budget) and any criminal investigations
or prosecutions concerning offences affecting the Union's budget are within the competence
of the Member States. Criminal investigations into fraud and other crimes against the EU
budget are often hampered by divergent legislation and uneven enforcement efforts in the
Member States. National law enforcement authorities, prosecutors and judges in the Member
States decide in accordance with priorities set by national criminal policy and on the basis
of national criminal law competences and procedural rules whether and, if so, how they
intervene to protect the Union's budget. Consequently, the level of protection of the Union's
financial interests differs significantly from one Member State to another. The fact that
the rate of successful prosecutions concerning offences against the EU budget varies
considerably across the EU from one Member State to another (from 19% to 91%15
) shows a
gap in the existing protection mechanisms and calls for corrective measures.
1.5.2. Added value of EU involvement
The added value of establishing a European Public Prosecutor's Office is mainly to be found
in the increased number of prosecutions of crimes affecting the Union's financial interests.
The creation of a European Public Prosecutor’s Office would improve the use of resources
and information exchange necessary to be able to conduct successful investigations and
prosecutions of the relevant offences. This, in turn, would strengthen the law enforcement
response to these offences in general, and increase the preventive effect (deterrence) for
potential criminals. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office would be able to pool
investigative and prosecutorial resources for the needs in a given situation, thereby making
law enforcement at European and national level more efficient.
The European Public Prosecutor’s Office will direct investigations and prosecutions in the
Member States, ensure effective coordination of investigations and prosecutions, and
15
Commission annual Report on the protection of the European Union's financial interests – Fight against fraud;
COM(2012) 408
EN 52 EN
solve problems related to different applicable legal systems. The current system, where
the Member States are solely responsible for such investigations and prosecutions, supported
by Eurojust and Europol, is not efficient enough to deal with the high levels of relevant crime
and associated damages.
Ensuring that the limited financial resources of the Union are used in the best interests of EU
citizens and are better protected against fraud is indispensable also for the legitimacy of
expenditure and for ensuring public trust in the Union.
1.5.3. Lessons learned from similar experiences in the past
At national level, there is often insufficient information exchange on suspected offences
involving EU funds between the authorities responsible for monitoring and control, those
dealing with administrative investigations and law enforcement bodies. This partly arises as a
result of loopholes in the procedural framework referred to above hampering efficient
multidisciplinary investigations involving judicial as well as administrative, customs and tax
authorities in the Member States. Agencies managing and controlling the disbursement of EU
funds sometimes focus solely on getting their money back through administrative and civil
law procedures even if there are strong suspicions that a criminal act has occurred. This may
lead to neglecting criminal prosecutions, and with that deterrence and general prevention.
The effective investigation and prosecution of offences against the EU’s financial interests is,
furthermore, hampered by the fact that law enforcement authorities and prosecutors do not
always transmit information about criminal offences to their colleagues in other Member
States, or to Eurojust or Europol.
In addition, the classical ways of international cooperation via mutual legal assistance (MLA)
requests or via joint investigation teams (JITs) are often not functioning well enough to allow
for the effective investigation and prosecution of these offences despite the efforts of
European bodies such as Eurojust and Europol. Responses to MLA requests are often very
slow and police and judicial authorities experience practical difficulties in contacting and
cooperating with colleagues abroad due to language problems and differences in legal
systems. In some States, slow and ineffective international cooperation has frequently
resulted in the impossibility to pursue the case due to the fact that the prescription period had
expired. In addition, cases affecting the EU’s financial interests are particularly complex.
As regards cooperation at Union level, mixed experiences have been reported regarding the
cooperation with Eurojust and Europol, and between the Member States and OLAF. Eurojust
and Europol do not always receive the information they need to be able to support the
Member States. OLAF provides support to Member States through its ability to grant
specialised technical and operational assistance as required by Article 7 of second Protocol to
the Convention on the Protection of the European Communities’ Financial Interests. At the
same time, OLAF's investigations are conducted subject to specific conditions, in particular
when it comes to transmitting information to the national judiciary, including applicable data
protection rules. For this reason, the cooperation with OLAF has also been criticised on
occasion, in particular with respect to the long time it sometimes takes for OLAF to share
information with national prosecutors. Some Member States also restrict the cooperation with
non-judicial bodies like OLAF based on rules of judicial secrecy.
OLAF's annual statistics demonstrate that the cases which are transferred to national
investigation and judicial authorities are not equally effectively and efficiently
prosecuted across the EU. In its eleventh operational report, OLAF analysed the judicial
follow-up given by Member States to its cases over 12 years and found "very substantial
differences between countries with respect to their capacity to bring EU-budget related
judicial investigations and prosecutions to a conviction within a reasonable time". The fact
EN 53 EN
that the average prosecution rate lies under 50% shows that there are serious difficulties in
achieving overall effectiveness of investigation and prosecution in the Member States.
1.5.4. Compatibility and possible synergy with other appropriate instruments
Anti-fraud Directive proposal
The Union's current actions to protect its financial interests include administrative
investigations, controls and audits, as well as legislative action, including the Commission's
proposal for a Directive on the fight against fraud to the Union's financial interest by means
of criminal law, but do not address the deficiencies identified with respect to the investigation
and prosecution of criminal offences related to the protection of the EU's financial interests.
Eurojust
Eurojust can only coordinate and encourage investigations and prosecutions, and assist with
information exchange. If a Member State refuses to investigate or prosecute a case, Eurojust
cannot compel it to do so. The National Members of Eurojust often lack the powers to ensure
effective follow-up in the Member States, or if they do, they usually refrain from using the
powers which they derive from national laws – most decisions on these sort of issues are
arrived at through consensus.
The proposal on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is
accompanied by a proposal on the reform of Eurojust which will align it with the common
approach on European agencies agreed by the Council, the European Parliament and the
Commission, and will establish a link between Eurojust and the European Public Prosecutor’s
Office. This reform might lead to more efficient information exchange and better cooperation
between the national authorities.
There are, and will always be, cases where both the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and
Eurojust need to be involved, in particular cases where the suspects are involved in both
crimes affecting the Union’s financial interests and other forms of crime. This implies that
there will be a need for continuous close cooperation. To ensure that this takes place,
provisions have been included in both Regulations to set out that the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office may request that Eurojust, or its national members, intervene, coordinate,
or otherwise use their powers in a given case.
In addition it is envisaged that Eurojust will provide practical support services, on a zero cost
basis, to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office in administrative issues, such as personnel,
finance and IT. This approach delivers considerable synergies. One example of such synergy
is that the European Public Prosecutor’s Office will be able to use the IT infrastructure of
Eurojust, including using its Case Management System, temporary work files and index for
its own cases. The details of this arrangement will be laid down in an agreement between the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office and Eurojust.
OLAF
Currently OLAF conducts administrative investigations for the protection of EU's financial
interests. OLAF has specialised staff with significant experience in cooperating with national
criminal authorities. Many members of OLAF staff have a relevant background in their
national enforcement and judicial administrations (police, customs, and prosecutorial
functions).
A part of OLAF's resources would thus be used in order to set up the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office, taking into account their experience in the conduct of administrative
investigations and the objective of avoiding duplication of administrative and criminal
EN 54 EN
investigations. Another important aspect is that of using the current networks which OLAF
has developed over the years in the area of anti-fraud investigations.
Finally, OLAF would contribute to the setting up of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office
with specialised support to facilitate forensic analysis and technical and operational support
to investigations and for the establishment of evidence in criminal cases affecting the Union's
financial interests.
A proposal to amend Regulation 1073/1999 concerning investigations conducted by OLAF
(OLAF reform) is under inter-institutional negotiation. While this proposal improves the
information exchange between OLAF and EU institutions bodies, agencies and offices
(IBOA), as well as with the Member States and it provides better governance for OLAF and a
set of procedural guarantees for the persons concerned by investigations, it does not provide
OLAF with any additional means of action, in particular criminal investigation powers.
Europol
The role of Europol is limited to providing intelligence and support to national law
enforcement activities. It cannot ensure follow-up to its analyses in the Member States, nor
direct national investigations. The powers of Europol are also limited by the TFEU. Under
Article 88 TFEU Europol cannot independently investigate crime, and any operational action
must be carried out by Europol in liaison and with the agreement of the national law
enforcement authorities. Whilst the support functions of Europol are certainly important,
these cannot substitute for the powers to independently investigate criminal behaviour.
A proposal for a Regulation on Europol was adopted by the Commission in March 2013,
focusing on aligning Europol’s competences with the TFEU and to make it a hub for
information exchange, while granting new responsibilities regarding training. It does not
comprise police investigation and law-enforcement powers in the area of the protection of
EU’s financial interests.
1.6. Duration and financial impact
Proposal/initiative of limited duration
– Proposal/initiative in effect from [DD/MM]YYYY to [DD/MM]YYYY
– Financial impact from YYYY to YYYY
X Proposal/initiative of unlimited duration
– Implementation with a start-up period from 2017 to 2023,
– followed by full-scale operation.
1.7. Management mode(s) envisaged
Direct management by the Commission
– by its departments, including by its staff in the Union delegations;
– by the executive agencies;
Shared management with the Member States
X Indirect management by delegating implementation tasks to:
– third countries or the bodies they have designated;
– international organisations and their agencies (to be specified);
– the EIB and the European Investment Fund;
– X bodies referred to in Articles 208 and 209 of the Financial Regulation;
EN 55 EN
– public law bodies;
– bodies governed by private law with a public service mission to the extent that they
provide adequate financial guarantees;
– bodies governed by the private law of a Member State that are entrusted with the
implementation of a public-private partnership and that provide adequate financial
guarantees;
– persons entrusted with the implementation of specific actions in the CFSP pursuant to
Title V of the TEU, and identified in the relevant basic act.
– If more than one management mode is indicated, please provide details in the "Comments" section.
2. MANAGEMENT MEASURES
2.1. Monitoring and reporting rules
Specify frequency and conditions.
The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall issue an annual report on its activities. The
European Public Prosecutor shall appear before the European Parliament and the Council
once a year to give account of the results and priorities of the investigations and prosecutions
of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, taking into account the obligation of discretion
and confidentiality.
The European Public Prosecutor or European Delegated Prosecutors may also be invited to
provide information to national Parliaments.
In addition, within five years following the entry into force of the Regulation establishing the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office, the European Commission shall assess its
implementation, including the feasibility and advisability of extending the competence of the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office to other offences in accordance with Article 86 (4)
TFEU.
2.2. Management and control system
2.2.1. Risk(s) identified
Investigation and prosecution measures, including enforcements powers are sensitive
activities which partially affecting human rights and therefore, can trigger claims for
damages.
Processing of personal data in pending investigations can also be a reason for claims for
damages in case of unlawful processing.
2.2.2. Control method(s) envisaged
Under the standard discharge procedure the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is under
the obligation, inter alia:
– to send the provisional accounts to the Commission's Accounting Officer and the Court
of Auditors;
– to send the final accounts to the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission and
the Court of Auditors;
– to submit to the European Parliament, at the latter's request, any information required
for the smooth application of the discharge procedure for the financial year in question.
EN 56 EN
Moreover, as regards combating fraud and audits by the European Court of Auditors,
once operational:
– The European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall accede to the Interinstitutional
Agreement of 25 May 1999 concerning internal investigations by the European Anti-
fraud Office (OLAF) and adopt the appropriate provisions applicable to all the
employees of the Office using the template set out in the Annex to that Agreement.
– The European Court of Auditors shall have the power of audit, on the basis of
documents and on the spot, over all grant beneficiaries, contractors and subcontractors
who have received Union funds from the Office.
– OLAF may carry out investigations, including on-the-spot checks and inspections, in
accordance with the provisions and procedures laid down the applicable EU rules with
a view to establishing whether there has been any irregularity affecting the financial
interests of the Union in connection with a grant or a contract funded by the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office.
– Working arrangements with third countries and international organisations, contracts,
grant agreements and grant decisions of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office shall
contain provisions expressly empowering the European Court of Auditors and OLAF to
conduct such audits and investigations, according to their respective competences.
2.3. Measures to prevent fraud and irregularities
Specify existing or envisaged prevention and protection measures.
Adoption of an anti-fraud strategy, which is proportionate to the fraud risks having regard to
cost-benefit of the measures to be implemented.
Adoption rules for the prevention and management of conflicts of interest in respect of its
staff members
EN 57 EN
3. ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE
3.1. Heading(s) of the multiannual financial framework and expenditure budget line(s)
affected
• Existing budget lines
In order of multiannual financial framework headings and budget lines.
Budget line
Type of
expenditure
Contribution
Heading of
multiannual
financial
framework
Number
[Heading………………………...……….]
Diff./non-
diff.
(16)
from
EFTA
countries
from
candidate
countries
from third
countries
within the meaning
of Article 18(1)(aa)
of the Financial
Regulation
• New budget lines requested
In order of multiannual financial framework headings and budget lines.
Budget line
Type of
expenditure
Contribution
Heading of
multiannual
financial
framework
Number
[Heading……………………………………..]
Diff./non-
diff.
from
EFTA
countries
from
candidate
countries
from third
countries
within the meaning
of Article 18(1)(aa)
of the Financial
Regulation
3
33.03.YY.YY
EPPO
DIFF NO NO NO NO
3.2. Estimated impact on expenditure
3.2.1. Summary of estimated impact on expenditure (in 2013 prices)
EUR million (to three decimal places)
Heading of multiannual financial
Framework:
Number 3 Security and Citizenship
EPPO17
2017 2018 2019 2020 TOTAL
Commitments (1) 1.393 4.144 6.895 11.039 23.471
Title 118
Payments (2) 1.393 4.144 6.895 11.039 23.471
Title 219
Commitments (1a) 0.099 0.194 0.293 0.487 1.073
16
Diff. = Differentiated appropriations / Non-Diff. = Non-differentiated appropriations.
17
Only investigation and prosecution staff and corresponding costs are calculated. Administrative support structures
will be provided by EUROJUST on a zero cost basis.
18
A progressive recruitment (10 % 20 % - 30 % - 40 %- 50 % - 75 %- 100 %) has been foreseen.
19
It is expected that the host Member State offers a building and ensures the first fitting of the building with all
office, IT and security equipment. Purely utility costs and ICT costs per square meter has been included here.
Provided that the host Member State does not offer this deal, this title will need to be revised.
EN 58 EN
Payments (2a) 0.099 0.194 0.293 0.487 1.073
Title 320
Commitments (3a) 1.052 2.455 3.507 4.558 11.572
Payments (3b) 1.052 2.455 3.507 4.558 11.572
TOTAL appropriations
for EPPO
Commitments
=1+1a
+3a
2.544 6.793 10.695 16.084 36.116
Heading of multiannual financial
framework:
5 ‘Administrative expenditure’
EUR million (to three decimal places)
2017 2018 2019 2020 TOTAL
DG: JUST
y Human Resources 0.170 0.170 0.170 0.170 0.680
y Other administrative expenditure 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.200
TOTAL DG JUST Appropriations 0.220 0.220 0.220 0.220 0.880
y Human Resources 0.131 0.131 0.131 0.131 0.524
y Other administrative expenditure 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.200
TOTAL OLAF Appropriations 0.181 0.181 0.181 0.181 0.724
TOTAL appropriations
under HEADING 5
of the multiannual financial framework
(Total commitments =
Total payments)
0.401 0.401 0.401 0.401 1.604
EUR million (to three decimal places)
2017 2018 2019 2020 TOTAL
Commitments
2.945 7.194 11.096 16.485 37.720
TOTAL appropriations
under HEADINGS 1 to 5
of the multiannual financial framework Payments
2.945 7.194 11.096 16.485 37.720
Reductions in order to achieve cost-
efficiencies in Heading of multiannual
financial
framework:
5 ‘Administrative expenditure’
20
This title is calculated based on the experience of OLAF in investigative work. In addition the costs for the
service contracts with up to 36 FTE delegated European Prosecutors at 80 % of an AD 10 salary estimate are
included. The progression rate for those is 50 % - 75 % - 100 %.
EN 59 EN
Reduction in Heading 5 (OLAF) 2017 2018 2019 2020 TOTAL
Commitments (1) -1.393 -4.144 -6.895 -11.039 -23.471
Title 121
Payments (2) -1.393 -4.144 -6.895 -11.039 -23.471
Commitments (1a) -0.099 -0.194 -0.293 -0.487 -1.073
Title 222
Payments (2a) -0.099 -0.194 -0.293 -0.487 -1.073
Title 323
Commitments (3a) -0.350 -1.051 -1.401 -1.750 -4.552
Payments (3b) -0.350 -1.051 -1.401 -1.750 -4.552
TOTAL reductions in Heading 5 Commitments
=1+1a
+3a
-1.842 -5.389 -8.589 -13.276 -29.096
During the phase-in period any resource increase in appropriations or FTE in EPPO is compensated by
a corresponding decrease in OLAF resources of the same amount in appropriations or FTE.
Difference, i.e. costs related to the service contracts of the EDPs (title 3)
2017 2018 2019 2020 TOTAL
Commitments (1) 0.702 1.404 2.106 2.880 7.020
Payments (2) 0.702 1.404 2.106 2.880 7.020
These are the costs of 9, 18, 27 and 36 EDPs in FTE calculated.
These costs need to be covered by the margin of title 3 or by reductions in other agencies.
3.2.2. Estimated impact on [body]'s appropriations
– The proposal/initiative does not require the use of operational appropriations
– X The proposal/initiative requires the use of operational appropriations, as described
below:
– Commitment appropriations in EUR million (to three decimal places) in 2013 prices
2017 2018 2019 2020 TOTAL
Indicate
objectives and
outputs RÉALISATIONS (outputs)
21
A progressive recruitment (10 % 20 % - 30 % - 40 %- 50 % - 75 %- 100 %) has been foreseen.
22
It is expected that the host Member State offers a building and ensures the first fitting of the building with all
office, IT and security equipment. Purely utility costs and ICT costs per square meter has been included here.
Provided that the host Member State does not offer this deal, this title will need to be revised.
23
This title is calculated based on the experience of OLAF in investigative work. In addition the costs for the
service contracts with up to 36 FTE delegated European Prosecutors at 80 % of an AD 10 salary estimate are
included. The progression rate for those is 50 % - 75 % - 100 %. As the EDPs will be suggested by the Member
States it is likely that this progression rate might not be achieved.
EN 60 EN
Type
Avera
ge
costs
Number
24
Costs
Number
Costs
Number
Costs
Number
Costs
Tot
al
Total
Costs
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE NO 1
Protection of financial interest
investigations
- Réalisation cases 0.008 184 1.526 491 4.076 773 6.417 1163 9.650 21.669
Subtotal for specific objective N°1 1.526 4.076 6.417 9.650 21.669
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE NO 2
Protection of financial interest
prosecutions
- Réalisation cases 0.008 92 0.763 246 2.038 387 3.208 581 4.825 10.834
Subtotal for specific objective N° 2 0.763 2.038 3.208 4.825 10.834
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE NO 3
Cooperation with others
- Réalisation 0.008 31 0.254 82 0.679 129 1.069 194 1.608 3.610
Subtotal for specific objective N° 3 0.254 0.679 1.069 1.608 3.610
TOTAL COSTS 2.543 6.793 10.694
16.08
3
36.11325
3.2.3. Estimated impact on EPPO's human resources
3.2.3.1. Summary
– The proposal/initiative does not require the use of appropriations of an
administrative nature
– X The proposal/initiative requires the use of appropriations of an administrative
nature, as described below:
Human resources 2017 2018 2019 2020
Establishment plan posts
(in headcounts)
18 36 54 90
- Of which AD 12 24 36 60
- Of which AST 6 12 18 30
External personnel (FTE) 6 11 17 28
- Of which contract agents 5 9 14 23
- Of which Seconded National
Experts (SNE)
1 2 3 5
Total staff 24 47 71 118
– 24
The number of cases is based on the assumptions analysed in the Impact assessment accompanying the
draft proposal.
25
The difference to the overall costs of 36.116 million euros mentioned under section 3.2.1 comes from rounding
rules.
EN 61 EN
EUR million (to three decimal places)
Staff expenditure 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total
Establishment plan posts 1.179 3.537 5.895 9.432 20.043
- Of which AD 0.786 2.358 3.930 6.288 13.362
- Of which AST 0.393 1.179 1.965 3.144 6.681
External personnel 0.214 0.607 1.000 1.607 3.428
- Of which contract agents 0.175 0.490 0.805 1.295 2.765
- Of which Seconded
National Experts (SNE)
0.039 0.117 0.195 0.312 663
Total staff expenditure 1.393 4.144 6.895 11.039 23.471
Estimated requirements of human resources for the parent DG
– The proposal/initiative does not require the use of human resources.
– X The proposal/initiative requires the use of human resources, as described below:
Estimate to be expressed in full amounts (or at most to one decimal place)
2017 2018 2019 2020
y Establishment plan posts (officials and temporary staff)
33 01 01 01 Staff JUST 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3
24 01 07 00 01 01 Staff OLAF 1 1 1 1
XX 01 01 02 (Delegations)
XX 01 05 01 (Indirect research)
10 01 05 01 (Direct research)
y External staff (in Full Time Equivalent: FTE)
XX 01 02 01 (CA, SNE, INT from
the ‘global envelope’)
XX 01 02 02 (CA, LA, SNE, INT and
JED in the delegations)
- at
Headquarters
XX 01 04
yy
- in
delegations
XX 01 05 02 (CA, SNE, INT -
Indirect research)
10 01 05 02 (CA, SNE, INT- Direct
research)
Other budget lines (specify)
TOTAL 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3
XX is the policy area or budget title concerned.
EN 62 EN
The human resources required will be met by staff from the DG who are already assigned to
management of the action and/or have been redeployed within the DG, together if necessary with any
additional allocation which may be granted to the managing DG under the annual allocation
procedure and in the light of budgetary constraints.
Officials and temporary staff Policy follow-up and advise to the EPPO, budgetary and financial advice to the EPPO
and actual payments of the subsidy, discharge, draft budget procedures
External staff Not applicable
Description of the calculation of cost for FTE equivalent should be included in the Annex, section 3.
During the phase-in period any resource increase in appropriations or FTE in EPPO is compensated by
a corresponding decrease in OLAF resources of the same amount in appropriations or FTE.
Human resources reductions
in OLAF
2017 2018 2019 2020
Establishment plan posts
(in headcounts)
-18 -36 -54 -90
- Of which AD -12 -24 -36 -60
- Of which AST -6 -12 -18 -30
External personnel (FTE) -6 -11 -17 -28
- Of which contract agents -5 -9
-
14
- 23
- Of which Seconded National
Experts (SNE)
-1 -2 -3 -5
Total staff -24 -47 -71 -118
EUR million (to three decimal places) in 2013 prices
Reductions in Staff
expenditure related to OLAF
2017 2018 2019 2020 Total
Establishment plan posts -1.179 -3.537 -5.895 -9.432 -20.043
- Of which AD -0.786 -2.358 -3.930 -6.288 -13.362
- Of which AST -0.393 -1.179 -1.965 -3.144 -6.681
External personnel -0.214 -0.607 -1.000 -1.607 -3.428
- Of which contract agents -0.175 -0.490 -0.805 -1.295 -2.765
- Of which Seconded
National Experts (SNE)
-0.039 -0.117 -0.195 -0.312 -663
Total staff expenditure
24.0107
-1.393 -4.144 -6.895 -11.039 -23.471
3.2.4. Compatibility with the current multiannual financial framework
– X Proposal/initiative is compatible with the current multiannual financial
framework.
– Proposal/initiative will entail reprogramming of the relevant heading in the
multiannual financial framework.
– Proposal/initiative requires application of the flexibility instrument or revision
of the multiannual financial framework.
EN 63 EN
Heading 5 should be reduced to translate the decrease of the establishment plan of OLAF.
3.2.5. Third-party contributions
– X The proposal/initiative does not provide for co-financing by third parties.
– The proposal/initiative provides for the co-financing estimated below:
Appropriations in EUR million (to three decimal places)
Year
2017
Year
2018
Year
2019
Year
2020
Total
Specify the co-financing
body
TOTAL appropriations
cofinanced
3.3.
Estimated impact on revenue
– Proposal/initiative has no financial impact on revenue.
– X Proposal/initiative has the following financial impact:
– on own resources
– Xon miscellaneous revenue
EUR million (to three decimal places)
Impact of the proposal/initiative
Budget revenue line:
Appropriation
s available for
the current
financial year 2017 2018 2019 2020
Article XX pm pm pm pm
For miscellaneous ‘assigned’ revenue, specify the budget expenditure line(s) affected.
[…]
Specify the method for calculating the impact on revenue.
The revenues will be composed from so called “transaction fees” which should be paid
directly to the EU budget. As this point of time it is not possible to reliably specify amounts.


Europaudvalget 2013
KOM (2013) 0532 Bilag 1
Offentligt


EN EN
EUROPEAN
COMMISSION
Brussels, 17.7.2013
COM(2013) 533 final
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS
Improving OLAF's governance and reinforcing procedural safeguards in investigations:
A step-by-step approach to accompany the establishment of the European Public
Prosecutor's Office
Europaudvalget 2013
KOM (2013) 0532 Bilag 1
Offentligt
2
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE
COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS
Improving OLAF's governance and reinforcing procedural safeguards in investigations: A
step-by-step approach to accompany the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's
Office
1. Introduction:
The European Anti-Fraud Office was set up on 28 April 1999 by a Commission Decision to
enhance the effectiveness of action to combat fraud and other illegal activities detrimental to the
Community's interests. Council Regulation (EC) n° 1073/1999, Council Regulation (EURATOM)
n°1074/1999 and the Inter-institutional Agreement of 25 May 1999 stipulate how OLAF should
carry out investigations.
The Inter-institutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the
Commission legally guarantees that internal investigations can be carried out under equivalent
conditions in the three institutions and in all the other Community bodies, offices and agencies.
OLAF’s external investigative powers are mainly those that were conferred upon the Commission
under Regulations (EC, Euratom) Nos 2988/95 (protection of the European Communities' financial
interests) and 2185/96 (on-the-spot checks and inspections carried out by the Commission in order
to protect the European Communities’ financial interests). OLAF also works on the basis of
Regulation (EC) 515/97 on mutual administrative assistance.
Since the creation of OLAF, the protection of the financial interests of the Union has been
strengthened. Experience gained over time showed that the governance of OLAF needed to be
reinforced. Two legislative proposals were put forward by the Commission, the first in 2004 and the
second in 2006. Both proposals were designed to reinforce the procedural guarantees applicable in
OLAF investigations, as the regulatory framework of 1999 was almost silent on this issue.
2. The revised OLAF Regulation
On the basis of the Commission’s proposal of March 2011, and after intensive negotiations, a
compromise on the revised OLAF Regulation was approved (unanimously) on 25 February 20131
by the Council and on 3 July 2013 by the European Parliament2
.
The revised regulation is designed to strengthen the governance of OLAF, reinforcing procedural
rights in internal and external investigations and OLAF's exchange of information both with the
institutions and with the Member States’ authorities.
3. Envisaged measures in order to further consolidate the legal framework
The establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office will bring about a substantial change
in the way investigations concerning fraud and other illegal activities affecting the financial
interests of the European Union are carried out in the Union.
In future, each time suspicions about criminal conduct falling within the remit of the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office arise, the ensuing investigations will be conducted by the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office as a judicial body, rather than – as today – by OLAF which carries out
1
Position no 2/2013 of the Council at first reading adopted on 25/02/2013, OJ C 89 E/27.03.2013.
2
P7_TA(2013)0308.
3
administrative investigations. This change will of course entail a substantial reinforcement of the
procedural guarantees for the persons concerned by the investigations.
Under the proposed European Public Prosecutor’s Office Regulation, whenever the European
Public Prosecutor’s Office opens an investigation all the reinforced procedural guarantees typical of
judicial investigations will apply. Thus where it intends to carry out investigations vis-à-vis a
member of staff of an EU institution, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office will have to request
the institution to lift the immunity of the individual(s) to be investigated in accordance with
Protocol N° 7 of the Treaties (see also Article 19 of the proposed European Public Prosecutor’s
Office Regulation). These provisions would also apply to members of the Institutions, including the
immunity of Members of the European Parliament and of Members of the Commission.
Furthermore, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office will carry out its investigative measures in
compliance with Article 26 of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office proposal and the detailed
rules of the national criminal law governing the respective measure. For a series of most intrusive
investigative measures as proposed in Article 26 (such as searches and seizures, interceptions of
telecommunications, covert investigations), there will be an EU level harmonised requirement for
the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to obtain a prior judicial authorisation to undertake the
intrusive measure. The investigative measures taken by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office
may be submitted to judicial review by the competent national judge in accordance with the
national rules of criminal procedure (see Article 36 of the proposed European Public Prosecutor’s
Office Regulation). National law may provide for direct judicial protection against an investigative
act, thus allowing swift control of its legality during the investigative phase before a case is brought
to trial.
A consequence of the future establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is that
OLAF's role in relation to possible criminal conduct affecting the EU's financial interests in internal
matters (i.e., in the EU institutions, bodies and agencies of the Union) will be reduced. Once the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office is established OLAF will, in these cases, only provide
preliminary evaluation of allegations reported to it. It will no longer conduct investigations but may
provide assistance to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office on its request (as it already does
today to national prosecutors). This change will facilitate a speedier investigation process and will
help to avoid duplications of administrative and criminal investigations into the same facts. In this
way, the chances of a successful prosecution will be increased.
It is clear that this fundamental shift of approach from administrative to judicial investigations will
necessarily entail also a number of changes in the OLAF Regulation. These should come into force
concurrently with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office Regulation. The Commission will table
legislative proposals to that effect in due course. In the meantime, the Commission considers it
appropriate to envisage further systemic improvements of the OLAF Regulation, which would
come in addition to those achieved with the current reform. These are inspired by the procedural
safeguards proposed in the European Public Prosecutor’s Office Regulation which can be
transposed, mutatis mutandis, into OLAF's administrative investigations. Specifically, two key
elements should be considered, namely:
• creating the office of a "Controller of procedural safeguards" to perform a legal review
of investigative measures, and
• providing for enhanced procedural safeguards where OLAF intends to carry out acts
similar to searches and seizures in EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies.
The office of a "Controller of procedural safeguards" would be administratively attached to the
Commission. The office of the Controller would be expressly endowed with guarantees of complete
independence vis-à-vis OLAF, the Commission and the other EU institutions by the revised OLAF
Regulation. The Controller of procedural safeguards should be appointed by the Commission
4
following a procedure involving the Supervisory Committee, for a term of five years; he/she should
have a judicial background and possess senior legal expertise in the fields of fundamental rights and
criminal law. He/she should be tasked exclusively with the monitoring of compliance with the
procedural guarantees applicable to OLAF investigations and of prompt handling of investigations
to avoid undue delay. He/she should be able to intervene on his/her own motion or upon a
complaint by any person concerned by an investigation. The Controller would be obliged to hear
such complaints in a swift but adversarial procedure. His/her conclusions would not be formally
binding upon the Director-General of OLAF, but OLAF could decide not to follow his/her findings
only by means of a motivated note to be attached to the final report sent to the competent judicial
authorities. The Director-General of OLAF would have a general right to consult the Controller of
procedural safeguards on any matter related to the respect of procedural guarantees and, in
particular, in certain instances where a person concerned must not be informed. The Controller of
procedural safeguards should have the staff necessary for the swift performance of his/her duties.
This new office would not replace the current system of judicial control over OLAF's investigative
action. It would however usefully complement it: individuals concerned by OLAF investigations
would benefit from a new right of recourse, meaning that procedural irregularities allegedly
committed by OLAF would less frequently come to scrutiny by a national judge at the trial stage or
by the General Court in an action for damages. The Controller would monitor compliance in all
investigations carried out independently by OLAF whatever their nature (internal/external,
affectation of the Union’s financial interests or not).
The function of the Controller of procedural safeguards should be clearly distinguished from that of
the OLAF Supervisory Committee, which should continue to exercise its functions as defined in the
currently revised OLAF Regulation. These include monitoring systemic developments regarding
respect of certain conditions (such as procedural rights and reasonable deadlines for handling cases)
without interfering in investigations in progress. To this end, the Controller of procedural
safeguards should periodically give an overview to the Supervisory Committee about his activities.
Second, new enhanced procedural safeguards would be introduced for the most intrusive
investigative measures that OLAF is empowered to take in internal investigations, i.e. the power to
inspect offices and to take copies of documents or content of any data medium and take custody of
such documents or data – a power similar to that of "searches and seizures". This is the only
existing power of OLAF that is functionally comparable to the intrusive judicial investigative
measures provided for in Article 26 of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office Regulation.
Conversely, OLAF has none of the other intrusive powers of European Public Prosecutor’s Office;
for example it has no power whatsoever to intercept telecommunications.
In developing these enhanced procedural requirements, the Regulation would reflect the objective
difference existing between staff of the EU and members of its institutions, i.e. members of
European Parliament, the President of the European Council, members of the Commission, Judges
and Advocates-General of the EU courts, members of the Court of Auditors and of the decision-
making bodies of the European Investment Bank and of the European Central Bank. This is justified
given the special responsibilities of these members and their special mode of election or
appointment under the Treaties, which distinguishes them from the staff whose rights and
obligations derive from the Staff Regulations.
Where OLAF intends to make use of its power to inspect offices of staff and to take copies of
documents or content of any data medium, it should be obliged to seek the prior opinion of the
Controller of procedural safeguards. Where the Controller has doubts about the proportionality of
the intended measure, OLAF could carry it out only after having stated detailed reasons in a
motivated note to be attached to its final report.
5
Where OLAF intends to make use of its power to inspect offices of a member of an EU institution
and to take copies of documents or content of any data medium, it would need to obtain a prior
quasi-judicial authorisation. The role of granting such authorisations to OLAF, on request from its
Director-General, should be entrusted to a person possessing the ability required for appointment to
judicial office, ideally a former judge of the EU Courts. The person should be appointed in a special
inter-institutional procedure for a term set in the Regulation, and work part-time. S/he should be
assisted by the Controller of procedural safeguards and his/her staff.
4. Conclusion
In sum, the Commission considers that a step-by step approach is the best way to further strengthen
OLAF's governance and enhance procedural safeguards in its investigations.
The Commission welcomes the fact that, as a first step, the revised OLAF Regulation will now
enter into force.
As a second step, the Commission would consider it appropriate to envisage further systemic
improvements of the OLAF Regulation, which are inspired by those procedural safeguards in the
Commission's proposal on establishment of a European Public Prosecutor’s Office that can be
transposed to OLAF's administrative investigations and enacted even before the European Public
Prosecutor’s Office is established. Two such key improvements would be the strengthening of legal
review of investigative measures through the new office of an independent Controller of procedural
safeguards, and enhanced procedural safeguards for acts similar to searches and seizures carried out
by OLAF in the institutions. The Commission will also propose the necessary changes to the OLAF
Regulation resulting from the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office. These
should come into force concurrently with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office Regulation. This
will mean a system change, moving from administrative to judicial investigations, and bring about
substantial changes to the way investigations on fraud and other criminal activities affecting the
EU's financial interests are conducted. It will entail a substantial reinforcement of applicable
procedural safeguards.
6
LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT
FRAMEWORK OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE
Title of the proposal/initiative
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the
European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions
“Improving OLAF's governance and reinforcing procedural safeguards in investigations
A step-by-step approach to accompany the establishment of the European Public
Prosecutor's Office”
Policy area(s) concerned in the ABM/ABB structure3
Policy area: 24.01. Administrative expenditure of policy area Fight against fraud
Nature of the proposal/initiative
The proposal/initiative relates to a new action
The proposal/initiative relates to a new action following a pilot project/preparatory action4
X The proposal/initiative relates to the extension of an existing action
The proposal/initiative relates to an action redirected towards a new action
Objective(s)
The Commission's multiannual strategic objective(s) targeted by the proposal/initiative
Fight against fraud-Article 325 TFEU
Specific objective(s) and ABM/ABB activity(ies) concerned
Specific objective No. 7.1.a
ABM/ABB activity(ies) concerned
24.01. Administrative expenditure of policy area Fight against fraud
3
ABM: activity-based management – ABB: activity-based budgeting.
4
As referred to in Article 54(2)(a) or (b) of the Financial Regulation.
7
Expected result(s) and impact
Specify the effects which the proposal/initiative should have on the beneficiaries/groups targeted.
The establishment of a “Controller of procedural safeguards” is expected to lead to:
- Enhanced protection of the procedural rights of persons concerned by OLAF
investigations.
- Increased transparency in internal and external investigations
- Improved monitoring of compliance with the procedural requirements for investigations
- Possibility of intervention on complaint by any person concerned by an OLAF
investigation before the “Controller of procedural safeguards”.
Indicators of results and impact
Specify the indicators for monitoring implementation of the proposal/initiative.
- Prompt handling of complaints without undue delay.
- Organisation of a swift adversarial procedure, independent from OLAF
Grounds for the proposal/initiative
Requirement(s) to be met in the short or long term
The establishment of the “Controller of procedural safeguards” should enhance the respect
of procedural rights of persons concerned by OLAF internal and external investigations
and raise OLAF’s accountability.
Added value of EU involvement
The added value of the “Controller of procedural safeguards” will consist in its ability to
monitor the compliance with the procedural rights provided by the OLAF regulation and to
promptly handle complaints by persons concerned without undue delay. The controller will
ensure that the procedural rights of persons concerned are fully complied with by OLAF.
Lessons learned from similar experiences in the past
The revised OLAF Regulation which should enter into force in October 2013 provides
for a set of procedural rights for the persons concerned by OLAF’s internal and external
investigations, as well as for the witnesses.
The Commission has previously introduced in its previous proposal to amend Regulation
No. 1073/1999 on investigations conducted by OLAF- COM (2006)244 final- the concept
of a “Review adviser” and in its 2011 amended proposal – COM (2011)135- the concept a
of “review procedure”. Both proposed functions were designed to ensure a swift control of
the compliance with procedural rights of persons concerned by OLAF investigations.
However, both proposals were not acceptable to the legislator because of difficulties to
reconcile a high degree of independence from OLAF with the need for cost-efficiency and
cost-neutrality.
The Commission suggests now the office of a "Controller of procedural safeguards" would
be administratively attached to the Commission. The office of the Controller would be
expressly endowed with guarantees of complete independence vis-à-vis OLAF, the
Commission and the other EU institutions by the revised OLAF Regulation. The
Controller of procedural safeguards should be appointed by the Commission following a
procedure involving the Supervisory Committee, for a term of five years; he/she should
have a judicial background and possess senior legal expertise in the fields of fundamental
8
rights and criminal law. He/she should be tasked exclusively with the monitoring of
compliance with the procedural guarantees applicable to OLAF investigations and of
prompt handling of investigations to avoid undue delay. He/she should be able to intervene
on his/her own motion or upon a complaint by any person concerned by an investigation.
This function should be separated from the mission of the Supervisory Committee of
OLAF which will continue to supervise functions of monitoring systemic shortcomings
and support the independence of OLAF.
Compatibility and possible synergy with other appropriate instruments
The revised OLAF Regulation: On the basis of the Commission’s proposal of March
2011, and after intensive negotiations, a compromise on the revised OLAF Regulation was
approved (unanimously) on 25 February 2013 by the Council and on 3 July 2013 by the
European Parliament.
The revised regulation is designed to strengthen the governance of OLAF, reinforcing
procedural rights in internal and external investigations and OLAF's exchange of
information both with the institutions and with the Member States’ authorities.
The Office of the Controller completes the revised Regulation with an independent
handling of complaints concerning the rights provided in the revised Regulation.
The Regulation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office: The
establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office will bring about a substantial
change in the way investigations concerning fraud and other illegal activities affecting the
financial interests of the European Union are carried out in the Union.
In future, each time suspicions about criminal conduct falling within the remit of the
European Public Prosecutor’s Office arise, the ensuing investigations will be conducted by
the European Public Prosecutor’s Office as a prosecutorial body, rather than – as today –
by OLAF which carries out administrative investigations. This change will of course entail
a substantial reinforcement of the procedural guarantees for the persons concerned by the
investigations.
The reinforcement of procedural guarantees of persons concerned by OLAF investigations
through the establishment of a Controller of procedural safeguards represents a preparatory
step in the direction of establishing the EPPO.
9
Duration and financial impact
Proposal/initiative of limited duration
Proposal/initiative in effect from [DD/MM]YYYY to [DD/MM]YYYY
Financial impact from YYYY to YYYY
X Proposal/initiative of unlimited duration
Implementation with a start-up period from 2015 to 2016,
followed by full-scale operation.
Management mode(s) planned5
X Direct management by the Commission
Shared management with the Member States
Indirect management by entrusting budget implementation tasks to:
international organisations and their agencies (to be specified);
the EIB and the European Investment Fund;
bodies referred to in Articles 208 and 209;
public law bodies;
bodies governed by private law with a public service mission to the extent that they
provide adequate financial guarantees;
bodies governed by the private law of a Member State that are entrusted with the
implementation of a public-private partnership and that provide adequate financial
guarantees;
persons entrusted with the implementation of specific actions in the CFSP pursuant to
Title V of the TEU, and identified in the relevant basic act.
Comments
[…]
[…]
5
Details of management modes and references to the Financial Regulation may be found on the BudgWeb site:
http://www.cc.cec/budg/man/budgmanag/budgmanag_en.html
10
MANAGEMENT MEASURES
Monitoring and reporting rules
Specify frequency and conditions.
The “Controller of procedural safeguards” should periodically give an overview of its
activities to the Supervisory Committee of OLAF.
Management and control system
Risk(s) identified
Processing of personal data in complaints by persons concerned by OLAF investigations.
Control method(s) envisaged
Ex- post controls by the European Court of Auditors
Measures to prevent fraud and irregularities
Specify existing or envisaged prevention and protection measures.
Adoption of rules for the prevention and management of conflicts of interest in respect of its
staff members.
11
ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE
Heading(s) of the multiannual financial framework and expenditure budget line(s) affected
Existing budget lines
In order of multiannual financial framework headings and budget lines.
Budget line
Type of
expenditure
Contribution
Heading of
multiannual
financial
framework
Number
Heading 5 – Administrative expenditure
Diff./non-
diff.
(6)
from
EFTA
countries7
from
candidate
countries8
from third
countries
within the meaning
of Article 21(2)(b)
of the Financial
Regulation
XX.YY
European Commission
DIFF NO NO NO NO
New budget lines requested
In order of multiannual financial framework headings and budget lines.
Budget line
Type of
expenditure
Contribution
Heading of
multiannual
financial
framework
Number
[Heading …...….]
Diff./non-
diff.
from
EFTA
countries
from
candidate
countries
from third
countries
within the meaning
of Article 21(2)(b)
of the Financial
Regulation
[XX.YY.YY.YY] YES/N
O
YES/N
O
YES/N
O
YES/NO
6
Diff. = Differentiated appropriations / Non-Diff. = Non-differentiated appropriations.
7
EFTA: European Free Trade Association.
8
Candidate countries and, where applicable, potential candidate countries from the Western Balkans.
12
Estimated impact on expenditure
Summary of estimated impact on expenditure
EUR million (to three decimal places)
Heading of multiannual financial
framework
Number
[Heading……………...…………………………………………………………
…….]
[Body]: <…….>
Year
N
9 Year
N+1
Year
N+2
Year
N+3
Enter as many years as
necessary to show the duration
of the impact (see point 1.6)
TOTAL
Commitments (1)
Title 1:
Payments (2)
Commitments (1a)
Title 2:
Payments (2a)
Title 3: Commitments (3a)
Payments (3b)
Commitments
=1+1a
+3
TOTAL appropriations
for [body] <…….>
Payments
=2+2a
+(3b)
9
Year N is the year in which implementation of the proposal/initiative starts.
13
Heading of multiannual financial
framework
5 "Administrative expenditure"
EUR million (to three decimal places)
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 TOTAL
Controller of procedural safeguard
y Human resources 0.262 0.524 0.524 0.524 0.524 0.524 2.882
y Other administrative expenditure 0.012 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.137
TOTAL Appropriations 0.274 0.549 0.549 0.549 0.549 0.549 3.019
TOTAL appropriations
for HEADING 5
of the multiannual financial framework
(Total commitments =
Total payments)
0.274 0.549 0.549 0.549 0.549 0.549 3.019
EUR million (to three decimal places)
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 TOTAL
Commitments 0.274 0.549 0.549 0.549 0.549 0.549 3.019
TOTAL appropriations
under HEADINGS 1 to 5
of the multiannual financial framework Payments 0.274 0.549 0.549 0.549 0.549 0.549 3.019
14
Estimated impact on [body]'s appropriations
The proposal/initiative does not require the use of operational appropriations
The proposal/initiative requires the use of operational appropriations, as explained below:
Commitment appropriations in EUR million (to three decimal places)
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 TOTAL
OUTPUTS
Indicate
objectives and
outputs
Ø
Type10 Avera
ge
cost
No
Cost
No
Cost
No
Cost
No
Cost
No
Cost
No
Cost
No
Cost
No
total
Total
cost
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE NO 111
...
- Output
- Output
- Output
Subtotal for specific objective No 1
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE NO 2 ...
- Output
Subtotal for specific objective No 2
10
Outputs are products and services to be supplied (e.g.: number of student exchanges financed, number of km of roads built, etc.).
11
As described in point 1.4.2. ‘Specific objective(s)…’
15
TOTAL COST
16
Estimated impact on [body]'s human resources
Summary
The proposal/initiative does not require the use of appropriations of an
administrative nature
; The proposal/initiative requires the use of appropriations of an administrative
nature, as explained below:
EUR million (to three decimal places)
201512
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 TOTAL
Officials (AD grades) 0.196 0.393 0.393 0.393 0.393 0.393 2.161
Officials (AST
grades)
0.066 0.131 0.131 0.131 0.131 0.131 0.721
Contract staff
Temporary staff
Seconded National
Experts
TOTAL 0.262 0.524 0.524 0.524 0.524 0.524 2.882
Human resources
Controller of procedural
safeguard
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Establishment plan posts
(in headcounts)
2 4 4 4 4 4
- Of which AD 1,5 3 3 3 3 3
- Of which AST 0,5 1 1 1 1 1
Total staff 2 4 4 4 4 4
12
During the first year in the start-up phase recruitment will grow progressively, hence 50% of the staff will be
needed in 2016.
17
Estimated requirements of human resources for the parent DG
The proposal/initiative does not require the use of human resources.
; The proposal/initiative requires the use of human resources, as explained below:
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
y Establishment plan posts (officials and temporary staff)
XX YY Staff EC 2 4 4 4 4 4
XX 01 01 02 (Delegations)
XX 01 05 01 (Indirect research)
10 01 05 01 (Direct research)
y External staff (in Full Time Equivalent: FTE)
XX 01 02 01 (CA, SNE, INT from the
‘global envelope’)
XX 01 02 02 (CA, LA, SNE, INT and
JED in the delegations)
- at
Headquarters
XX
01
04
yy - in
delegations
XX 01 05 02 (CA, SNE, INT - Indirect
research)
10 01 05 02 (CA, SNE, INT- Direct
research)
Other budget lines (specify)
TOTAL 2 4 4 4 4 4
XX is the policy area or budget title concerned.
The human resources required will be met by staff from the DG who are already assigned to
management of the action and/or have been redeployed within the DG, together if necessary
with any additional allocation which may be granted to the managing DG under the annual
allocation procedure and in the light of budgetary constraints.
18
Description of tasks to be carried out:
Officials and temporary
agents
Monitoring of compliance with the procedural guarantees applicable to OLAF investigations and of
prompt handling of investigations to avoid undue delay.
Handling of complaints in a swift and adversarial procedure.
Description of the calculation of cost for FTE equivalent should be included in the Annex,
section 3.
Compatibility with the current multiannual financial framework
; Proposal/initiative is compatible the current multiannual financial framework.
Proposal/initiative will entail reprogramming of the relevant heading in the
multiannual financial framework.
† Proposal/initiative requires application of the flexibility instrument or revision of
the multiannual financial framework13
.
Third-party contributions
; The proposal/initiative does not provide for co-financing by third parties.
The proposal/initiative provides for the co-financing estimated below:
Appropriations in EUR million (to 3 decimal places)
Year
N
Year
N+1
Year
N+2
Year
N+3
Enter as many years as necessary
to show the duration of the
impact (see point 1.6)
Total
Specify the co-financing
body
TOTAL appropriations
cofinanced
Estimated impact on revenue
; Proposal/initiative has no financial impact on revenue.
Proposal/initiative has the following financial impact:
on own resources
on miscellaneous revenue
EUR million (to three decimal places)
Impact of the proposal/initiative14
Budget revenue line:
Appropriation
s available for
the current
financial year Year
N
Year
N+1
Year
N+2
Year
N+3
Enter as many years as necessary to show
the duration of the impact (see point 1.6)
13
See points 19 and 24 of the Interinstitutional Agreement for the period 2007-2013.
14
As regards traditional own resources (customs duties, sugar levies), the amounts indicated must be net
amounts, i.e. gross amounts after deduction of 25% for collection costs.
19
Article ………….
For miscellaneous ‘assigned’ revenue, specify the budget expenditure line(s) affected.
[…]
Specify the method for calculating the impact on revenue.
[…]