# EUR-Lex - 52012PC0254 - EN

*|*

# 52012PC0254

**Amended proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on the establishment of 'EURODAC' for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective application of Regulation (EU) No [.../...] (establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person) and to request comparisons with EURODAC data by Member States' law enforcement authorities and Europol for law enforcement purposes and amending Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011 establishing a European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice  (Recast version) /* COM/2012/0254 final - 2008/0242 (COD) */**

			*

			*

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

1.           CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL

EURODAC was established by Regulation (EC) No 2725/2000 concerning the
establishment of "Eurodac" for the comparison of fingerprints for the
effective application of the Dublin Convention[1]. A recast proposal for the amendment of the EURODAC Regulation was
adopted by the Commission in December 2008[2] (hereafter the December 2008
proposal).

This proposal was designed to ensure a more
efficient support to the application of the Dublin Regulation[3] and to properly address data
protection concerns. It also aligned the IT management framework to that of the
SIS II and VIS Regulations by providing for the taking over of the tasks of the
operational management for EURODAC by the future Agency for the operational management
of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice[4] (hereafter: IT Agency). The
December 2008 proposal also proposed to repeal the Implementing Regulation and
to include its content in the EURODAC Regulation. Finally, changes were
introduced to take into account developments in the asylum acquis and
technical progress which took place since the adoption of the Regulation in
2000.

The proposal was sent
to European Parliament and the Council on 3 December 2008. The European Parliament referred the proposal to its Committee on Civil
Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE). At its sitting on 7 May 2009, the
European Parliament adopted a legislative resolution[5] endorsing the Commission
proposal subject to a number of amendments.

The Commission adopted an amended proposal
in September 2009 in order to, on the one hand, take into account the
resolution of the European Parliament and the results of negotiations in the
Council, and, on the other hand, introduce the possibility for Member States'
law enforcement authorities and Europol to access the EURODAC central database
for the purposes of prevention, detection and investigation of terrorist
offences and other serious criminal offences (the September 2009 proposal).[6]

In particular, that proposal introduced a bridging clause to allow
access for law enforcement purposes as well as the necessary accompanying
provisions and amended the December 2008 proposal. It was
presented at the same time as the Proposal for a Council Decision on requesting
comparisons with EURODAC data by Member States' law enforcement authorities and
Europol for law enforcement purposes[7]
(hereafter: the Council Decision), spelling out the exact modalities of such access.

The European Parliament did not issue a legislative resolution on the September 2009 proposals.

With the entry into force of the Treaty on
the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and the abolition of the pillar
system, the proposal for a Council Decision lapsed. According to the Communication on the consequences of the entry into force of the
Treaty of Lisbon for ongoing interinstitutional decision-making procedures,[8] such proposals
would be formally withdrawn and replaced with a new proposal to take
account of the new framework of the TFEU.

However, with a view to progressing on the
negotiations on the asylum package and facilitating the conclusion of an
agreement on the EURODAC Regulation, the Commission
considered it more appropriate in 2010 to withdraw from the EURODAC Regulation
those provisions referring to the access for law enforcement purposes and
presented a new proposal on 11.10.2010[9]
similar to the 2008 recast of the EURODAC Regulation.

The Commission noted in the Explanatory
Memorandum to its 2010 proposal that enabling the swifter adoption of the new
EURODAC Regulation would also facilitate the timely set up of the Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in
the area of freedom, security and justice, since that Agency is to become responsible
for the management of EURODAC as
from 1 December 2012.

It has since become clear however that including
law enforcement access for EURODAC is needed as part of a balanced deal on the
ngeotiations of the Common European Asylum System package with a view to
completing the package by the end of 2012. Accordingly the Commission has
decided to present again proposals to permit law enforcement access to EURODAC,
but on this occasion merged into a single new EURODAC Regulation as this is now
possible since the entry into force of the TFEU and it is better legislative
practice to present a single instrument.

Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011 of the
European Parliament and the Council of 25 October 2011 establishing a European
Agency for the operational management of large-scale information systems in the
area of freedom, security and justice provides that the Agency should perform
the tasks relating to EURODAC conferred on the Commission as the authority
responible for the operational management of EURODAC in accordance with
Regulations (EC) No 2725/2000 and (EC) No 407/2002 as well as certain tasks
related to the communication infrastructure, namely, supervision, security and
the coordination of relations between the Member States and the provider. The
Agency should take up the tasks entrusted to it under
this Regulation and the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011
should be amended accordingly. In addition, Europol should be granted observer
status in the Management Board of the Agency when a question concerning EURODAC
is on the agenda.

The current proposal therefore withdraws
the 2010 proposal and replaces it with a new one in
order first to take into account the resolution of the European Parliament and
the results of negotiations in the Council; second, to introduce the possibility
for Member States' law enforcement authorities and Europol to access the
EURODAC central database for the purposes of prevention, detection and
investigation of terrorist offences and other serious criminal offences; and
third, to introduce the necessary amendments to Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011.

The proposal addresses a structural
information and verification gap that currently results from the lack of an EU
instrument available to law enforcement authorities to determine the Member
State that holds information on an asylum seeker. While data on EU citizens
exist in many different databases in Member States which are in general
accessible to law enforcement authorities in other Member States, there are no
effective possibilities available for law enforcement authorities to exchange
information on asylum seekers.

The
intention is now to allow consultation of
EURODAC by law enforcement authorities for the purpose of prevention, detection
and investigation of terrorist offences and other serious criminal offences.
This aims at enabling law enforcement authorities to request the comparison of
fingerprint data with those stored in the EURODAC central database when they
seek to establish the exact identity of or get further information on a person
who is suspected of a serious crime or a crime victim. Fingerprint data
constitute an important element of establishing the exact identity of a person
and it is generally acknowledged as an important source of information for
prevention, detection and investigation of terrorist offences and other serious
criminal offences. On a 'hit'/'no hit' basis, the requesting law enforcement
authority will be informed if information on the person is available in the
national asylum database of another Member States. In this case, further
information on the person can be requested from that Member State by using
existing instruments for information exchange, such as Framework Decision
2006/960/JHA on simplifying the exchange of information and intelligence
between law enforcement authorities.

Comparison of fingerprints in possession of
Member States' designated law enforcement authorities and Europol with those
stored in the EURODAC database will only be possible in case of necessity of
such comparison in a specific case under well-defined circumstances. Provisions
on access to data and data security take into account access for law enforcement
purposes. It is therefore necessary to amend the EURODAC Regulation to include
this additional purpose.

General context

The Hague Programme called for the
improvement of the cross-border exchange of data by law enforcement
authorities, also by extending the access to existing data filing systems of
the European Union. The Stockholm Programme called for well targeted data
collection and a development of information exchange and its tools that is
driven by law enforcement needs.

The conclusions of the Mixed Committee of
the JHA Council of 12-13 June 2007 invited the Commission to present as soon as possible the necessary
proposals to achieve the aim of granting access under
certain conditions to EURODAC to Member States' law enforcement authorities and
Europol, to assist them in the course of their duties in relation to the
prevention, detection and investigation of terrorist offences and other serious
criminal offences.

The impacts of the access for law
enforcement purposes introduced in the present amended proposal are assessed by
an Impact Assessment attached to this proposal.

The current proposal also amends Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011 (the Agency Regulation) in order to
align it to the present Regulation.

2.           Consistency with other policies

This proposal is fully in line with the
Hague programme of 2004 and the Stockholm Programme of 2009, the European Pact
on Immigration and Asylum endorsed by the European Council of 15-16 October
2008 and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular
as regards the right to asylum and protection of personal data.

Furthermore,
this proposal is in line with the Commission's Communication to the Council and
the European Parliament on improved effectiveness, enhanced interoperability
and synergies among European databases in the area of Justice and Home Affairs[10], which noted that the Council and the law enforcement community identify the absence of
access by internal security authorities to VIS, SIS II immigration and EURODAC
data as a shortcoming, which results in a serious gap in the identification of
suspected perpetrators of terrorist or serious crimes. Since the adoption of
the Communication in 2005, the VIS Decision was adopted in order to grant law
enforcement authorities and Europol access to that database.

3.           Compliance with the Charter of
Fundamental Rights

The respect for fundamental rights is a
legal requirement subject to the scrutiny of the European Court of Justice. The
institutions, bodies, agencies and offices of the European Union and its Member
States when implementing European Union law are bound by the EU Charter of
Fundamental Rights which has the same legal value as the Treaties. Respect of
fundamental rights is a condition of the lawfulness of EU acts. During the
drafting exercise, full account was taken of the impacts on fundamental rights
in order to ensure that the proposal complies with the fundamental rights
protected by the Charter. Due attention to the right to asylum and the right to
the protection of personal data was thoroughly considered in the Impact
Assessment attached to the proposal.[11]

As regards the right to asylum, guaranteed
by Article 18 of the Charter, amendments to the provisions of the Regulation on
the information to be given to asylum seekers on the application of the Dublin
system enables them to effectively exercise their right to asylum. The new
provision that requires Member States to indicate in EURODAC the fact that they
apply the discretionary clauses of the Dublin Regulation, facilitates
communication amongst Member States and therefore prevents uncertainty for the
asylum seeker, by making clarity about which Member State handles his case. With regard to the special situation of persons seeking
international protection, the concern was raised that data extracted from
EURODAC for law enforcement purposes could end up in the hands of the countries
from which the applicants fled and fear persecution. This could have adverse
effects on the applicant, his relatives and friends, thus potentially
discouraging refugees from formally applying for international protection in
the first place. As a result of this scrutiny, the proposal contains a specific
prohibition of sharing personal data obtained pursuant to this proposal with
third countries, organisations or entities. In addition, an extensive
monitoring and evaluation mechanism of the proposal is foreseen. This
evaluation will include whether the operation of the search functionality for
law enforcement purposes will have led to the stigmatisation of persons seeking
international protection. Consequently, the proposal does not limit the right
to asylum as guaranteed by Article 18 of the Charter.

As regards the right to the protection of
personal data guaranteed by Article 8 of the Charter, by allowing for efficient
management of erasure of data, the proposal ensures that no data should be kept
in a form which allows the identification of data subjects for longer than is
necessary for the purposes for which data were collected. The same principle underpins
the amendment aligning the storage period for data on third country nationals
or stateless persons fingerprinted in connection with the irregular crossing of
an external border with the period until which the Dublin Regulation allocates
responsibility on the basis of that information.

The comparison with EURODAC data for the
prevention, detection or investigation of terrorist offences or other serious
criminal offences constitutes a limitation of the right to the protection of
personal data, as these purposes are not compatible with the purposes for which
the data were originally collected and for which EURODAC has been established.
Moreover, EURODAC contains data of individuals who in principle are not
suspected of committing any crime.

The use of EURODAC data for law enforcement
purposes implies a change of purpose of the data processed and constitutes an "interference"
with the right to data protection[12].
As stipulated by Article 52(1) of the Charter, any limitation to the right to
the protection of personal data must be provided for by law, must respect the
essence of the right, must be necessary to achieve an objective of general
interest recognised by the Union or to protect the rights and freedoms of
others, and must be proportionate, i.e. appropriate for attaining the objective
pursued and not going beyond what is necessary to achieve it.

The law imposing such a limitation must be
formulated with sufficient precision to allow individuals to adjust their
conduct and protect them against arbitrariness. It must also indicate with
sufficient clarity the scope of discretion conferred on the competent
authorities and the manner of its exercise[13].
The prevention, detection or investigation of terrorist offences or other
serious criminal offences contributes to the establishment of an area of
freedom, security and justice as a general interest recognised by the Union in
Article 3(2) TFEU. Article 8(2) of the European Convention of Human Rights also
recognises that interference by a public authority with a person's right to
privacy may be justified as necessary in the interest of national security,
public safety or the prevention of crime. The proposal provides for a more
effective and less intrusive measure for competent law enforcement authorities
to determine if another Member State holds data on an asylum seeker. Under
current rules, Member States' law enforcement authorities have to contact
bilaterally all other Member States participating in EURODAC to determine if
another Member State holds data on an asylum seeker. This inefficient crime
resolution under the current rules requires that law enforcement authorities
access more personal data or data on more persons than is necessary to
establish whether relevant information exists.

Indeed, the proposal provides for effective
safeguards that mitigate the limitation of the right to the protection of
personal data. The comparison of EURODAC data for law enforcement purposes
follows a two-step approach, as this comparison may only be made after a prior
Prüm check under Council Decision 2008/615/JHA and if the Prüm check returns
negative results. This means that Member States that have not implemented Council
Decision 2008/615/JHA will not be able to conduct searches in EURODAC for law
enforcement purposes.

Moreover, the comparison of EURODAC data
for law enforcement purposes may only be made for the prevention, detection or
investigation of terrorist offences or other serious criminal offences if it is
necessary in a specific case as they are defined in Council Framework Decisions
2002/475/JHA on combating terrorism and 2002/584/JHA on the European arrest
warrant. This excludes both the comparison of EURODAC data for the crimes that
are not serious and a systematic or mass comparison of data. Moreover,
designated law enforcement authorities may only request the comparison with
EURODAC data if there are reasonable grounds to consider that such comparison
will substantially contribute to the prevention, detection or investigation of
the criminal offence in question. Upon receipt of such request by a designated
law enforcement authority, a verifying authority verifies whether the strict
conditions for requesting a comparison with EURODAC data for law enforcement
purposes are fulfilled. If the verifying authority agrees with the request, it
will transmit the request to the National Access Point which will process it to
the EURODAC Central System. Member States may not conduct searches on a
systematic and routine basis. Thus, as an additional safeguard, the proposal
provides for a three-step approach in relation to the authorities that can
consult the EURODAC system. The comparison with EURODAC for law enforcement purposes
will provide a result on a 'hit'/'no hit' basis, i.e. it will only determine if
another Member State holds data on an asylum seeker. The proposal does not
provide for new possibilities to process additional personal information in the
follow-up to a 'hit'.

Furthermore, the proposal also lays down
strict data security measures to ensure the security of personal data processed
and establishes supervision of the processing activities by independent public
data protection authorities and documentation of all searches conducted. The
proposal also states that the processing of all personal data carried out by
law enforcement authorities on EURODAC data once they have been extracted is
subject to Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA.

Individuals should be given rights of
access, correction and redress in particular the right to a judicial remedy,
and supervision of processing operations by public independent authorities
should be ensured. The European Data Protection Supervisor (as regards all
processing activities in EURODAC) and national data protection authorities will
supervise the compliance with data protection law and if appropriate will
enforce it. Consequently, the limitation of the right
to the protection of personal data by the comparison
with EURODAC data as provided by this proposal is surrounded with the necessary
safeguards to ensure the respect of the fundamental rights.

Databases of asylum seekers might contain
fingerprint data from persons as young as 14 years, but children of this age
are not criminally responsible in all Member States. Member States have to
ensure that the data of children they retrieve by consulting such databases and
which, according to their national law, cannot be held criminally responsible,
are treated in a legal and non-discriminatory manner (in comparison with the
data from children who are citizens of the concerned Member State) while
respecting the principle of the best interests of the child.

Therefore, this proposal fully complies
with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular as
regards the right to asylum (Article 18) and protection of personal data
(Article 8). The proposal is also in line with Article
16 TFEU, which guarantees everyone the right to the protection of personal data.

4.           RESULTS OF CONSULTATIONS WITH THE
INTERESTED PARTIES AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS

The present amended proposal reinstates all
of the provisions proposed in the lapsed draft Council Decision of 2009. In
addition, it introduces two technical provisions relating to the asylum
provisions.[14]
None of these elements is new and all were explored thoroughly in the Impact
Assessments to the previous 2008 and 2009 proposals.
Therefore, no new consultation and impact assessment were conducted
specifically for the present proposal. However, the Impact Assessments of 2008
and 2009[15]
are still valid for its purposes.

The Commission published the Green Paper on
the future Common European Asylum System[16]
in June 2007, which proposed options concerning the future features of the Dublin
and EURODAC Regulations. In the framework of the wide public consultation on
the Green Paper, 89 contributions were received from a wide range of
stakeholders.

The Commission services discussed the
outcome of the Evaluation Report and the outline of the planned amendments to
the Regulation with the Member States in the Committee on Immigration and
Asylum (CIA) in March 2008 as well as in two informal expert meetings with
Member States’ practitioners dedicated to the conclusions of the Evaluation Report
in October 2007 and April 2008.

UNHCR, the European Council on Refugees and
Exiles (ECRE) as well as the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) were
also informally consulted in the preparation of the amendment of the
Regulation.

During the drafting of the 2008 proposals
concerning improvements to the functioning of EURODAC and to the 2009 amended
proposals relating to law enforcement access, the Commission consulted the
States applying the Dublin acquis, i.e. the Member States, Iceland,
Norway and Switzerland, as well as to Europol by way of two questionnaires and
an expert meeting which took place in Brussels on 25-26 September 2007, during
which the experts had the opportunity to clarify the replies to the
questionnaire and express further views. Several intergovernmental
organisations, non-governmental organisations and other experts working in the
area of asylum, fundamental rights were consulted during a meeting in Brussels
on 8 October 2007. Representatives of the national data protection authorities
of the States that implement the Dublin acquis, as well as the Joint
Supervisory Body of Europol and the European Data Protection Supervisor were
consulted in the framework of a meeting held in Brussels on 11 October 2007. As
Liechtenstein has only applied the Dublin acquis very recently, there
has not been an opportunity to consult Liechtenstein on this proposal.

A detailed list of consulted parties was
included in the Impact Assessment attached to the 2009 proposal.

5.           LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL

This proposal amends the 2010 Amended
proposal for a Commission Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament
and of the Council concerning the establishment of
'Eurodac' for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective application of Regulation (EC) No [.../...] [establishing the
criteria and mechanisms for
determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one
of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person] - COM(2010)
555.

This proposal also amends Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011 of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 25 October 2011 establishing a European Agency for the
operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom,
security and justice

The present amended proposal uses Article
78(2)(e) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) as legal
base concerning criteria and mechanisms for determining which Member State is
responsible for considering an application for asylum or subsidiary protection,
which is the TFEU Article corresponding to the legal base of the original
proposal (Article 63(1)(a) of the Treaty establishing the European Community).
In addition, it uses Article 87(2)(a) as the legal base concerning the elements
related to the collation, storage, processing, analysis and exchange of
relevant information for law enforcement purposes; and Article 88(2)(a) as the
legal base concerning Europol's field of action and tasks including the
collection, storage, processing, analysis and exchange of information.

Title V of the TFEU is not applicable to
the United Kingdom and Ireland, unless those two countries decide otherwise, in
accordance with the provisions set out in the Protocol on the position of the
United Kingdom and Ireland annexed to the Treaty on the European Union (TEU)
and to the TFEU.

The United Kingdom and Ireland are bound by
Council Regulation (EC) No 2725/2000 following their notice of their wish to
take part in the adoption and application of that Regulation based on the
above-mentioned Protocol. The position of these Member States with regard to
the current Regulation does not affect their possible participation with regard
to the amended Regulation.

Under the Protocol on the position of
Denmark, annexed to the TEU and the TFEU, Denmark does not take part in the
adoption by the Council of the measures pursuant to Title V of the TFEU (with
the exception of "measures determining the third countries whose nationals
must be in possession of a visa when crossing the external borders of the
Member States, or measures relating to a uniform format for visas").
Therefore, Denmark does not take part in the adoption of this Regulation and is
not bound by it nor subject to its application. However, given that Denmark
applies the current Eurodac Regulation, following an international agreement[17] that it concluded with the EC
in 2006, it shall, in accordance with Article 3 of that agreement, notify the
Commission of its decision whether or not to implement the content of the
amended Regulation.

This proposal maintains the changes made in
the previous proposals to abolish the Committee provided for in Article 22 of
the Regulation.

6.           IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL ON NON-EU MEMBER
STATES ASSOCIATED TO THE DUBLIN SYSTEM

In parallel to the association of several
non-EU Member States to the Schengen acquis, the Community concluded, or
is in the process of doing so, several agreements associating these countries
also to the Dublin/EURODAC acquis:

–
the agreement associating Iceland and Norway,
concluded in 2001[18];

–
the agreement associating Switzerland, concluded
on 28 February 2008[19];

–
the protocol associating Liechtenstein,
concluded on 18 June 2011[20].

In order to create rights and obligations
between Denmark – which as explained above has been associated to the
Dublin/EURODAC acquis via an international agreement – and the
associated countries mentioned above, two other instruments have been concluded
between the Community and the associated countries.[21]

In accordance with the three above-cited
agreements, the associated countries shall accept the Dublin/EURODAC acquis
and its development without exception. They do not take part in the adoption of
any acts amending or building upon the Dublin acquis (including
therefore this proposal) but have to notify to the Commission within a given
time-frame of their decision whether or not to accept the content of that act,
once approved by the Council and the European Parliament. In case Norway,
Iceland, Switzerland or Liechtenstein do not accept an act amending or building
upon the Dublin/EURODAC acquis, the "guillotine" clause is
applied and the respective agreements will be terminated, unless the
Joint/Mixed Committee established by the agreements decides otherwise by
unanimity.

The
scope of the above-cited association agreements with Iceland, Norway,
Switzerland and Liechtenstein as well as the parallel agreement with Denmark
does not cover law enforcement access to EURODAC.

The current proposal, as per the 2009
proposal, notes that the comparison of fingerprint data using EURODAC may only
be made after national fingerprint databases and the Automated Fingerpirnt
Databases of other Member States under Council Decision 2008/615/JHA (the Prüm
Agreements) return negative results. This rule means that if any Member State
has not implemented the above Council Decision and cannot perform a Prüm check,
it also may not make a EURODAC check for law enforcement purposes. Similarly,
any associated States that have not implemented or do not participate in the
Prüm Agreements may not conduct such a EURODAC check.

7.           Detailed explanation of the proposal

References to the "blocking" of
data were changed in the 2008 recast to the "marking" of data
concerning recognised beneficiaries of international protection. Under the
original Regulation, the data of persons granted international protection
remained on the EURODAC system but were blocked. As such, the EURODAC system
recorded when there were hits concerning the fingerprints of recognised
beneficiaries of international protection, but Member States were not informed
of these hits. The new proposal was designed to "mark" these data
instead in order to inform the Member States if there is a hit for a marked
data subject. This is to inform Member States if an existing beneficiary of
international protection attempts to put in a fresh claim for asylum.

Several of the amendments to the 2010
proposal are extracted directly from the lapsed September 2009 proposal on law
enforcement access to EURODAC. As such, this section has been split into those
areas amending the remainder of the proposal and amendments that are largely
inspired by the September 2009 proposal, including their article references for
ease of comparison.

The elements incorporated from the September
2009 proposal are the following.

Articles 1(2) laying down the conditions –
from Article 1 of the September 2009 proposal.

Article 5 on designated authorised to
access EURODAC data – from Article 3 of the September 2009 proposal, except for
clarified title.

Article 6 on verifying authorities whose
purpose is to ensure that the conditions for requesting comparisons of
fingerprints with EURODAC data are fulfilled – from Article 4 of the September
2009 proposal.

Article 7 on Europol – from Article 5 of
the September 2009 proposal.

Chapter VI (Articles 19-22) on the
procedure for comparison and data transmission for law enforcement purposes –
from Articles 6-9 of the September 2009 proposal.

Article 33 on data protection, 34 on data
security, 35 on prohibition of data transfers, 36 on logging and transfers –
from Articles 10-13 of the September 2009 proposal.

Article 39(3) on costs related to the
prevention, detection or investigation of any of the criminal offences defined
in this Regulation – from Article 14 of the September 2009 proposal.

Article 40(8) and (9) on annual reporting
on law enforcement access to EURODAC – modified from Article 17(1) and 17(3) of
the September 2009 proposal.

Article 43 on notification of designated
and verifying authorities – from Article 16 of the September 2009 proposal.

The elements that were neither in the
September 2009 proposal nor the 2010 proposal are the following:

Article 2(1) contains further definitions
concerning the IT Agency and Europol and the nature of terrorist and criminal
offences.

Article 2(2) and 2(4) clarify for data
protection purposes when Directive 95/46/EC and how Framework Decision
2008/977/JHA apply.

Article 29 – the wording on the leaflet has
been enhanced to ensure that it is simple and written in a language the
applicant can understand.

Chapter VIII (Article 38) makes several
amendments to Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011 of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 25 October 2011 establishing a European Agency for the
operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom,
security and justice. Article 41 – the words "and Europol" have been
included into the article on penalties.

Throughout the recast, the references to
the "Management Authority" have been replaced with the "Agency".

8.           BUDGETARY IMPLICATION

The present proposal entails a technical
amendment to the EURODAC central system in order to provide for the possibility
to carry out comparisons for law enforcement purposes. A new functionality to
search on the basis of a latent is also proposed.

This proposal retains from the 2010
proposal the improvements of the system as regards new, asylum-focused
functionalities regarding information on the status of the data subject (which
were the outcome of negotiations in the Council). The financial statement
attached to this proposal reflects this change and is
also valid for the elements concerning the request for comparison with EURODAC
data by Member States' law enforcement authorities and by Europol for the
purposes of prevention, detection and investigation of terrorist offences and
other serious criminal offences - COM(2009) 344.

The non-administrative cost estimate of
2,415 million EUR (2,771 million EUR including administrative / human resources
costs) includes costs of 3 years of technical maintenance, and consists of
IT-related services, software and hardware and would cover the upgrade and
customisation to allow searches for law enforcement purposes and also the
changes for the original asylum purpose unrelated to law enforcement access.
The amounts of the EURODAC recast proposal adopted on 10 September 2009 have largely
been reproduced in the present financial statement and only altered slightly to
reflect the staffing costs in the IT Agency. Given the relatively small overall
cost, no extra resources and no rectification of the Home Affairs budget will
be sought and funding will be found from within existing budget lines, either
of the IT Agency or from the Home Affairs budget.

9.           Subsidiarity principle

Due to the transnational nature of the
problems related to asylum and refugee protection, the EU is well placed to
propose solutions in the framework of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS)
to the issues described above as problems regarding the EURODAC Regulation.
Although an important level of harmonization was reached in the Regulation
adopted in 2000, there is still room for developing the support that EURODAC
provides to the implementation of the Dublin Regulation. The need for EU action
regarding the management of an EU database which was created for assisting in
the implementation of a Regulation dealing with transnational movements of
asylum seekers seems clear.

An amendment of the EURODAC Regulation is
also required in order to add a secondary purpose thereto, namely allow access
for the purpose to fight against terrorism and crime to data stored in the
EURODAC central database. This objective cannot be sufficiently achieved by the
Member States, since such amendment can only be proposed by the Commission.

10.         Proportionality principle

The impact assessments published along with
the 2008 and 2009 proposals[22]
assessed each sub-option regarding the problems identified so as to represent
an ideal proportion between practical value and efforts needed. It concluded
that opting for EU action does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the
objective of solving those problems.

The relevant Impact Assessment concluded
that access of law enforcement authorities to EURODAC is the only timely,
accurate, secure and cost-efficient way to identify whether and if so, where
data about asylum seekers are available in the Member States. No reasonable
efficient alternative to EURODAC exists to establish or verify the exact
identity of an asylum seeker that allows law enforcement authorities to obtain
the same result.

ê 2725/2000/EC
(adapted)

ð new

2008/0242 (COD)

Amended proposal for a

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
AND OF THE COUNCIL

on the establishment of 'EURODAC' for the
comparison of fingerprints for the effective application of Regulation (EU) No [.../...] (establishing the criteria and mechanisms for
determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for
international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country
national or a stateless person) and to request comparisons with EURODAC data by
Member States' law enforcement authorities and Europol for law enforcement
purposes and amending Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011 establishing a European
Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of
freedom, security and justice
(Recast version)

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE
COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
establishing
the European Community, and in particular Article 78 point (2)(e) 63
point (1)(a) ð , Article 87 point (2)(a) and
Article 88 point (2)(a) ï thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the
Commission[23],

Having regard to the opinion of the
European Data Protection Supervisor[24],

Having regard to the opinion of the European
Parliament[25]

Ö Acting in
accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, Õ

Whereas:

ò new

(1)       A
number of substantive changes are to be made to Council Regulation (EC) No
2725/2000 of 11 December 2000 concerning the establishment of
"Eurodac" for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective
application of the Dublin Convention[26]
and Council Regulation (EC) No 407/2002 of 28 February 2002 laying down certain
rules to implement Regulation (EC) No 2725/2000 concerning the establishment of
"Eurodac" for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective
application of the Dublin Convention[27]. In
the interest of clarity, those Regulations should be recast.

ê 2725/2000/EC
recital 1

(1)       Member States have ratified the Geneva Convention
of 28 July 1951, as amended by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967,
relating to the Status of Refugees.

ê 2725/2000/EC
recital 2 (adapted)

(2)       Member
States have concluded the Convention determining the State responsible for
examining applications for asylum lodged in one of the Member States of the
European Communities, signed in Dublin on 15 June 1990 (hereinafter referred
to as "the Dublin Convention").

ò new

(2)       A
common policy on asylum, including a Common European Asylum System, is a
constituent part of the European Union's objective of progressively
establishing an area of freedom, security and justice open to those who, forced
by circumstances, legitimately seek international protection in the Union.

(3)       The
European Council of 4 November 2004 adopted The Hague Programme which sets the
objectives to be implemented in the area of freedom, security and justice in
the period 2005-2010. The European Pact on Immigration and Asylum endorsed by
the European Council of 15-16 October 2008 called for the completion of the
establishment of a Common European Asylum System by creating a single asylum
procedure comprising common guarantees and a uniform status for refugees and
the beneficiaries of subsidiary protection.

ê 2725/2000/EC
recital 3 (adapted)

ð new

(4)       For the purposes of
applying the
Dublin
Convention
Ö Council
Regulation (EU) No [.../...] [establishing the criteria and mechanisms for
determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for
international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country
national or a stateless person][28]Õ, it is
necessary to establish the identity of applicants for asylum ð international protection ï and of persons apprehended in connection with the unlawful crossing
of the external borders of the Community. It is also desirable, in order
effectively to apply the Dublin Convention Ö Council
Regulation (EU) No [.../...] [establishing the criteria and mechanisms for
determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for
international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country
national or a stateless person] Õ, and in
particular points (c) and (e) (b) and (d) of Article 10(1)18(1) thereof, to allow each Member
State to check whether an alien Ö third
country national or stateless person Õ found
illegally present
Ö staying Õ on its
territory has applied for asylum ð international protection ï in another Member State.

ê 2725/2000/EC
recital 4

(5)       Fingerprints constitute an
important element in establishing the exact identity of such persons. It is
necessary to set up a system for the comparison of their fingerprint data.

ê 2725/2000/EC
recital 5

ð new

(6)       To this end, it is necessary
to set up a system known as "EurodacEURODAC", consisting of a Central Unit ð System ï, to be established
within the Commission and which will
operate a computerised central database of fingerprint data, as well as of the
electronic means of transmission between the Member States and the central database ð Central System, hereinafter the
"Communication Infrastructure". ï

ò new

(7)       The
Hague Programme called for the improvement of access to existing data filing
systems in the European Union. In addition, The Stockholm Programme called for
well targeted data collection and a development of information exchange and its
tools that is driven by law enforcement needs.

(8)       It
is essential in the fight against terrorist offences and other serious criminal
offences for the law enforcement authorities to have the fullest and most
up-to-date information if they are to perform their tasks. The information
contained in EURODAC is necessary for the purposes of the prevention, detection
and investigation of terrorist offences and other serious criminal offences.
Therefore, the data in EURODAC should be available, subject to the conditions
set out in this Regulation, for comparison by the designated authorities of
Member States and Europol.

(9)       The Commission outlined in its
Communication to the Council and the European Parliament on improved
effectiveness, enhanced interoperability and synergies among European data
bases in the area of Justice and Home Affairs[29] of 24 November 2005 that authorities responsible for
internal security could have access to EURODAC in well defined cases, when
there would be a substantiated suspicion that the perpetrator of a terrorist or
other serious criminal offence has applied for asylum. In this Communication
the Commission also found that the proportionality principle requires that
EURODAC be queried for these purposes only once there is an overriding public
security concern, that is, if the act committed by the criminal or terrorist to
be identified is so reprehensible that it justifies querying a database that
registers persons with a clean criminal record and it concluded that the
threshold for authorities responsible for internal security to query EURODAC
must therefore always be significantly higher than the threshold for querying
criminal databases.

(10)     Moreover, Europol has a key role with
respect to cooperation between Member States' authorities in the field of cross-border
crime investigation in supporting Union-wide crime prevention, analyses and
investigation. Consequently, Europol should also have access to EURODAC data
within the framework of its tasks and in accordance with the Decision
establishing the European Police Office (Europol) No (2009/371/JHA).[30]

(11)     Since EURODAC has been established to
facilitate the application of Council Regulation (EU) No [.../...] [establishing
the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for
examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the
Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person], access to
EURODAC for the purposes of preventing, detecting or investigating terrorist
offences and other serious criminal offences constitutes a change of the
original purpose of EURODAC, which interferes with the right to respect the
private life of individuals whose personal data are processed in EURODAC. Any
such interference must be in accordance with the law, which must be formulated
with sufficient precision to allow individuals to adjust their conduct and it
must protect individuals against arbitrariness and indicate with sufficient
clarity the scope of discretion conferred on the competent authorities and the
manner of its exercise. Any interference must be necessary in a democratic
society to attain a legitimate and proportionate interest and proportionate to
the legitimate objective it aims to achieve.

(12)     Even though the original purpose for the
establishment of EURODAC did not require the facility of requesting comparisons
of data with the database on the basis of a latent which is the dactyloscopic
trace which may be found at a crime scene, such a facility is a fundamental one
in the field of police cooperation. The possibility to compare a latent with
the fingerprint data which is stored in EURODAC will provide the designated
authorities of the Member States with a very valuable tool in preventing,
detecting and investigating terrorist offences and other serious criminal
offences, when for example the only evidence available at a crime scene are
latents.

(13)     This Regulation also lays down the conditions under which requests for
comparison of fingerprint data with EURODAC data for the purposes of
preventing, detecting or investigating terrorist offences and other serious
criminal offences should be allowed and the necessary safeguards to ensure the
protection of the fundamental right to respect for the private life of
individuals whose personal data are processed in EURODAC.

(14)     In
view of ensuring equal treatment for all applicants and beneficiaries of
international protection, as well as in order to ensure consistency with
current Union asylum acquis, in particular with Council Directive
2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 on minimum standards for the qualification and
status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as
persons who otherwise need international protection and the content of the
protection granted[31]
and Regulation (EU) No [.../...] [establishing the criteria and mechanisms for
determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for
international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country
national or a stateless person], it is appropriate to extent the scope of this
Regulation to order to include applicants for subsidiary protection and persons
enjoying subsidiary protection.

ê 2725/2000/EC
recital 6 (adapted)

ð new

(15)     It is also necessary to
require the Member States promptly to take ð and transmit ï fingerprints ð data ï of every applicant for asylum ð international protection ï and of every alien Ö third
country national or stateless person Õ who is
apprehended in connection with the irregular crossing of an external border of
a Member State, if they are at least 14 years of age.

ê 2725/2000/EC
recital 7 (adapted)

ð new

(16)     It is necessary to lay down
precise rules on the transmission of such fingerprint data to the Central Unit ð System ï, the recording of such fingerprint data and other relevant data in
the Central Unit ð System ï, their storage, their comparison with other fingerprint data, the
transmission of the results of such comparison and the blocking
ð marking ï and erasure of the recorded data. Such rules may be different for,
and should be specifically adapted to, the situation of different categories of
aliens
Ö third
country nationals or stateless persons Õ.

ò new

(17)     Hits
obtained from EURODAC should be verified by a fingerprint expert in order to ensure
the accurate determination of responsibility under Regulation (EU) No [.../...]
[establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State
responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in
one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person].

ê 2725/2000/EC
recital 8 (adapted)

ð new

(18)     Aliens Ö Third
country nationals or stateless persons Õ who have
requested asylum ð international protection ï in one Member State may have the option of requesting asylum ð international protection ï in another Member State for many years to come. Therefore, the
maximum period during which fingerprint data should be kept by the Central Unit ð System ï should be of considerable length. Given that most aliens Ö third
country nationals or stateless persons Õ who have
stayed in the Community
Ö European
Union Õ for several
years will have obtained a settled status or even citizenship of a Member State
after that period, a period of ten years should be considered a reasonable
period for the conservation of fingerprint data.

ê 2725/2000/EC
recital 9 (adapted)

(19)     The conservation period
should be shorter in certain special situations where there is no need to keep
fingerprint data for that length of time. Fingerprint data should be erased
immediately once aliens
Ö third
country nationals or stateless persons Õ obtain
citizenship of a Member State.

ò new

(20)     It is appropriate to store data relating
to those data subjects whose fingerprints were initially recorded in EURODAC
upon lodging their applications for international protection and who have been
granted international protection in a Member State in order to allow data
recorded upon lodging an application for international protection to be
compared against them.

(21)     The
European Agency for the operational management of large-scale information
systems in the area of freedom security and justice established by Regulation
(EU) n° 1077/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October
2011[32]
(the "Agency") has been entrusted with the Commission's tasks
relating to the operational management of EURODAC in accordance with this
Regulation and with certain taks relating to the communication infrastructure
as from the date on which the Agency takes up its responsibilities as of 1
December 2012. The Agency should take up the tasks entrusted to it under this
Regulation and the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011 should
be amended accordingly. In addition, Europol should have observer status at the
meetings of the Management Board of the Agency, when a question in relation to
the application of this Regulation concerning access for consultation of
Eurodac by designated authorities of Member States and by Europol for the
purposes of the prevention, detection and investigation of terrorist offences
and of other serious criminal offences is on the agenda. Europol should be able
to appoint a representative to the Eurodac Advisory Group of the Agency.

(22)     The Staff Regulations of Officials of the European
Union (Staff Regulations of Officials) and the Conditions of Employment of
Other Servants of the European Union (Conditions of Employment), laid down in
Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68 (15) (together referred to
as the ‘Staff Regulations’), should apply to all staff working in the Agency on
matters pertaining to this Regulation.

ê 2725/2000/EC
recital 10 (adapted)

ð new

(23)     It is necessary to lay down
clearly the respective responsibilities of the Commission ð and the Agency ï, in respect of the Central Unit ð System ï ð and the Communication
Infrastructure ï, and of the Member States, as regards data use
processing, data security, access
to, and correction of, recorded data.

ò new

(24)     It is necessary to designate the competent
Member States' authorities as well as the National Central Access Point through
which the requests for comparison with EURODAC data are done and to keep a list
of the operating units within the designated authorities that are authorised to
request such comparison for the specific purposes of the prevention, detection
and investigation of terrorist offences as referred to in the Council Framework
Decision 2002/475/JHA of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism[33] and of other serious criminal offences as referred to
in the Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the European
arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States[34].

(25)     Requests for comparison with data stored
in the EURODAC central database shall be made by the operating units within the
designated authorities to the National Access Point, through the verifying
authority and shall be reasoned. The operating units within the designated authorities that are
authorised to request comparisons with EURODAC data shall not act as a verifying
authority. The verifying authorities should be
responsible for ensuring strict compliance with the conditions for access as
established in this Regulation.The verifying authorities should then
forward the request for comparison through the National Access Point to the
EURODAC Central System following verification of whether all conditions for
access are fulfilled. In the exceptional case of urgency where early access is necessary to respond
to a specific and actual threat related to terrorist offences or serious crime, the verifying authority should process the request immediately and only
do the verification afterwards.

(26)     For the purposes of protection of personal
data, and to exclude systematic comparisons which should be forbidden, the
processing of EURODAC data should only take place on a case-by-case basis and
when it is necessary for the purposes of preventing, detecting and
investigating terrorist offences and other serious criminal offences. In
addition access should only be allowed when comparisons with the national
databases of the Member State and with the Automated Fingerprint Databases of
other Member States under the Council Decision 2008/615/JHA of 23 June 2008 on
the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating
terrorism and cross-border crime[35] have returned negative results. This condition
requires prior implementation of the Council Decision as it shall not be
permitted to conduct a EURODAC check for law enforcement purposes where these
above steps have not been first undertaken. A specific case exists in
particular when the request for comparison is connected to a specific and
concrete situation or to a specific and concrete danger associated with a
terrorist or other serious criminal offence, or to specific persons in respect
of whom there are serious grounds for believing that the persons will commit or
have committed terrorist offences or other serious criminal offences. A
specific case also exists when the request for comparison is connected to a
person who is a victim of a terrorist or other serious criminal offence. The
designated authorities and Europol should thus only request a comparison with
EURODAC when they have reasonable grounds to believe that such a comparison
will provide information that will substantially assist them in preventing,
detecting or investigating a terrorist or other serious criminal offence.

(27)     In
case the requesting Member State establishes that EURODAC data pertains to a
minor, these data may only be used for law enforcement purposes by the
requesting Member State in accordance with that State’s laws for minors and in
accordance with the obligation to give primary consideration to the child's
best interest.

ê 2725/2000/EC
recital 11

(28)     While the non-contractual
liability of the Community in connection with the operation of the EurodacEURODAC system will be governed by the
relevant provisions of the Treaty, it is necessary to lay down specific rules
for the non-contractual liability of the Member States in connection with the
operation of the system.

ê 2725/2000/EC
recital 12

(29)     In accordance with the
principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty, the objective
of the proposed measures, namely the creation within the Commission of a system for the comparison of fingerprint data to assist the
implementation of the Community's asylum policy, cannot, by its very nature, be
sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore be better achieved
by the Community. In accordance with the principle of proportionality as set
out in the said Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary to
achieve that those
objectives.

ê 2725/2000/EC
recital 15 (adapted)

ð new

(30)     Directive 95/46/EC of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of
individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free
movement of such data[36]
applies to the processing of personal data by the Member States Ö carried
out in application of this Regulation Õ within the framework of
the Eurodac system ð unless such processing takes place by Member States' designated authorities
for the purposes of the prevention, detection and investigation of terrorist
offences and other serious criminal offences ï.

ò new

(31)     Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA of
27 November 2008 on the protection of personal data processed in the framework
of police and judicial co-operation in criminal matters[37] applies to all processing of personal data by Member
States' designated authorities for the purposes of the prevention, detection
and investigation of terrorist offences and other serious criminal offences
pursuant to this Regulation.

ê 2725/2000/EC
recital 16

(16)     By virtue of Article 286 of the Treaty, Directive
95/46/EC also applies to Community institutions and bodies. Since the
Central Unit will be established within the Commission, that Directive will
apply to the processing of personal data by that Unit.

ê 2725/2000/EC
recital 17

(32)     The principles set out in
Directive 95/46/EC regarding the protection of the rights and freedoms of
individuals, notably their right to privacy, with regard to the processing of
personal data should be supplemented or clarified, in particular as far as
certain sectors are concerned.

ò new

(33)     Transfers of data obtained pursuant to
this Decision to third countries or international organisations or private
entities should be prohibited, in order to ensure the right to asylum and to
safeguard applicants for international protection from having their data
disclosed to any third country. This prohibition shall be without prejudice to
the right of Member States to transfer such data to third countries to which Regulation (EU) No [.../...] [establishing the
criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for
examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the
Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person] applies, in order to ensure that Member
States have the possibility of cooperating with such third countries for the
purposes of this Regulation.

(34)     National competent authorities for the
supervision of the processing of personal data should monitor the lawfulness of
the processing of personal data by the Member States, and the supervisory
authority set up by the Europol Decision should monitor the lawfulness of data
processing activities performed by Europol.

(35)     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 institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such
data[38]
and in particular Articles 21 and 22 thereof concerning confidentiality and
security of processing apply to the processing of personal data by Union
institutions, bodies, offices and agencies carried out in application of this
Regulation. However, certain points should be clarified in respect of the
responsibility for the processing of data and of the supervision of data
protection.

(36)     It
is appropriate that national supervisory authorities monitor the lawfulness of
the processing of personal data by the Member States, whilst the European Data
Protection Supervisor, as referred to in Article 41 of Regulation (EC) No
45/2001, should monitor the activities of the Union institutions, bodies,
offices and agencies in relation to the processing of personal data carried out
in application of this Regulation.

ê 2725/2000/EC
recital 18

ð new

(37)     It is appropriate to
monitor and evaluate the performance of EurodacEURODAC ð at regular intervals ï.

ê 2725/2000/EC
recital 19 (adapted)

ð new

(38)     Member States should
provide for a system of Öeffective, proportionate and dissuasiveÕ penalties
to sanction the processing use
of data ÖenteredÕ in the central database ð Central System ï contrary to the purpose of EurodacEURODAC.

ò new

(39)     It
is necessary that Member States are informed of the status of particular asylum
procedures, with a view to facilitating the adequate application of Regulation
(EU) No [.../...] [establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the
Member State responsible for examining an application for international
protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a
stateless person].

(40)     This Regulation respects and has to be
applied in accordance with fundamental rights and observes the principles
recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European
Union. In particular, this Regulation fully respects the individual’s right to
protection of his or her personal data and the right to asylum.

(41)     In
accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the Protocol 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. As regards
Denmark, this Regulation, with the
exception of the procedure for comparison and data transmission for law
enforcement purposes laid down in Articles 5, 6, 19-22, 33, 36,
39(3), 40(8) and 43, constitutes
amendment to the EURODAC Regulation within the meaning of the Agreement between
the European Community and the Kingdom of Denmark on the criteria and
mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum
lodged in Denmark or any other Member State of the European Union and ‘Eurodac’
for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective application of the Dublin
Convention[39].
Consequently, in accordance with Article 3 thereof, Denmark is to notify the Commission
whether it will implement the contents of this Regulation and when it does so,
this Regulation creates mutual obligations under international law between
Denmark and the European Union. Once this
Recast Regulation is adopted and subject to a Commission recommendation for a
Council Decision authorising the opening of negotiations, Denmark will be
consulted as to whether it wishes to enter into negotiations on complementary
agreements also covering the
procedure for comparison and data transmission for law enforcement purposes
laid down in Articles 5, 6, 19-22, 33, 36, 39(3), 40(8) and 43.

(42)     In accordance with Article 3 of the
Protocol 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, and without
prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, the United Kingdom [is not taking
part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to
its application / has notified its wish to take part in the adoption and
application of this Regulation].

(43)     In accordance with Article 3 of the
Protocol 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, and without
prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, Ireland [is not taking part in the
adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its
application / has notified its wish to take part in the adoption and
application of this Regulation].

(44)     As regards the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway, this Regulation, with the exception of the
procedure for comparison and data transmission for law enforcement purposes
laid down in Articles 5, 6, 19-22, 33, 36, 39(3), 40(8) and 43, constitutes a new measure related to EURODAC within
the meaning of the Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of
Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the criteria and mechanisms for
establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in
a Member State or in Iceland or Norway[40]. Consequently, subject to their decision to implement it in their
internal legal order, this Regulation shall be applied between the Republic of
Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway in their mutual relations and in there
relations with the Member States of the European Union. Once this Recast
Regulation is adopted and subject to a Commission recommendation for a Council
Decision authorising the opening of negotiations, the Republic of Iceland and
the Kingdom of Norway will be consulted as to whether they wish to enter into
negotiations on complementary agreements also covering the procedure for comparison and data transmission
for law enforcement purposes laid down in Articles 5, 6, 19-22, 33,
36, 39(3), 40(8) and 43.

(45)     As regards the Swiss Confederation, this Regulation, with the
exception of the procedure for comparison and data transmission for law
enforcement purposes laid down in Articles 5, 6, 19-22, 33, 36,
39(3), 40(8) and 43, constitutes a new
measure related to EURODAC within the meaning of the Agreement
between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the
criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a
request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland[41]. Consequently, subject to its decision to implement it in its internal
legal order, this Regulation shall be applied between the Swiss
Confederation and the Member States of the European Union. Once this Recast Regulation is adopted and subject
to a Commission recommendation for a Council Decision authorising the opening
of negotiations, the Swiss Confederation will be consulted as to whether it
wishes to enter into negotiations on complementary agreements also covering the procedure for comparison and data transmission
for law enforcement purposes laid down in Articles 5, 6, 19-22, 33,
36, 39(3), 40(8) and 43, subject
to a separate agreement on the application of relevant provisions of Council Decision 2008/615/JHA on
the stepping up of cross-border cooperation.

(46)     As
regards the Principality of Liechtenstein, this Regulation, with the exception of the procedure for comparison
and data transmission for law enforcement purposes laid down in Articles
5, 6, 19-22, 33, 36, 39(3), 40(8) and 43, constitutes
a new measure related to EURODAC within the meaning of the Protocol between the
European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of
Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the
Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning
the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for
examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland[42]. Consequently, subject to its decision to implement it in its internal
legal order, this Regulation shall be applied between the
Principality of Liechtenstein, the Swiss Confederation and the Member States of
the European Union. Once this Recast
Regulation is adopted and subject to a Commission recommendation for a Council
Decision authorising the opening of negotiations, the Principality of
Liechtenstein will be consulted as to whether it wishes to enter into
negotiations on complementary agreements also covering the procedure for comparison and data transmission
for law enforcement purposes laid down in Articles 5, 6, 19-22, 33,
36, 39(3), 40(8) and 43, subject
to a separate agreement on their application of relevant provisions of Council Decision 2008/615/JHA on
the stepping up of cross-border cooperation.

ê 2725/2000/EC
recital 22 (adapted)

(47)     It is appropriate to
restrict the territorial scope of this Regulation so as to align it on the
territorial scope of the Dublin Convention Ö Regulation
(EU) No [.../...] [establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the
Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection
lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless
person] Õ .

ê 2725/2000/EC
(adapted)

ð new

HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

CHAPTER I

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Article 1
Purpose of "EurodacEURODAC"

1.           A system known as "EurodacEURODAC" is hereby established, the
purpose of which shall be to assist in determining which Member State is to be
responsible pursuant to the Dublin Convention Ö Regulation
(EU) No [.../...] [establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the
Member State responsible for examining an application for international
protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a
stateless person] Õ for examining
an application for asylum ð international protection ï lodged in a Member State ð by a third country national or a
stateless person ï, and otherwise to facilitate the application of the Dublin Convention
Ö Regulation Õ under the
conditions set out in this Regulation.

2.           Eurodac shall consist of:

(a)          the Central Unit referred to in Article 3;

(b)          a computerised central database in which the data
referred to in Article 5(1), Article 8(2) and Article 11(2) are processed
for the purpose of comparing the fingerprint data of applicants for asylum and
of the categories of aliens referred to in Article 8(1) and Article 11(1);

(c)          means of data transmission between the Member
States and the central database.

2.           This
Regulation also lays down the conditions under which Member States' designated
authorities and the European Police Office (Europol) may request the comparison
of fingerprint data with those stored in the EURODAC central database for the
purposes of the prevention, detection and investigation of terrorist offences
and other serious criminal offences.

ê 2725/2000/EC
(adapted)

ð new

3.           Without prejudice to the processing use
of data intended for EurodacEURODAC by the Member State of origin in
databases set up under the latter's national law, fingerprint data and other
personal data may be processed in EurodacEURODAC only for the purposes set out in
ð this Regulation and ï Article 15(1)32(1) of the Dublin Convention
Ö Regulation Õ .

ê 2725/2000/EC
(adapted)

ð new

Article 2
Definitions

1.           For the purposes of this
Regulation:

(a)     "the Dublin Convention
Ö Regulation Õ " means
the Convention
determining the State responsible for examining applications for asylum lodged
in one of the Member States of the European Communities, signed at Dublin on 15
June 1990 Ö Regulation
(EU) No [.../...] [establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the
Member State responsible for examining an application for international
protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a
stateless person] Õ;

(b)     an "applicant for asylum ð international protection ï" means an alien Ö third-country
national or a stateless person Õ who has made an
application for asylum or on whose behalf such an application has
been made ð international protection as defined
in Article 2(g) of Council Directive 2004/83/EC in respect of
which a final decision has not yet been taken ï;

(c)     "Member State of
origin" means:

(i)      in relation to an applicant for asylum
Ö person
covered by Article 6 Õ , the Member
State which transmits the personal data to the Central Unit ð System ï and receives the results of the comparison;

(ii)      in relation to a person
covered by Article 8 11 , the Member State which transmits
the personal data to the Central Unit ð System ï;

(iii)     in relation to a person
covered by Article 11 14 , the Member State which transmits
such data to the Central Unit ð System ï and receives the results of the comparison;

ê 2725/2000/EC
(adapted)

ð new

(d)     "refugee" ð "person granted international
protection" ï means a Ö third
country national or a stateless Õ person who has been recognised as a
refugee in accordance with the Geneva Convention on Refugees of 28 July 1951,
as amended by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967 ð entitled to international protection
as defined in point (a) of Article 2 of Council
Directive 2004/83/EC ï;

(e)     "hit" shall
mean the existence of a match or matches established by the Central Unit ð System ï by comparison between fingerprint data recorded in the databank
Ö central
database Õ and those
transmitted by a Member State with regard to a person, without prejudice to the
requirement that Member States shall immediately check the results of the comparison
pursuant to Article 4(6) 18(4);

ò new

(f)      "National Acces
Point" means the designated national system which communicates with the
Central System;

(g)     "Agency"
means the Agency established by Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011;

(h)     'Europol' means the
European Police Office as established by Decision 2009/371/JHA;

(i)      'EURODAC data' means
all fingerprint data stored in the central database in accordance with Article
11 and Article 16(2);

(j)      'terrorist offences'
means the offences under national law which correspond or are equivalent to the
offences referred to in Articles 1 to 4 of Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA;

(k)     'serious criminal offences' means the
forms of crime which correspond or are equivalent to those referred to in Article
2(2) of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA if they are punishable by a custodial
sentence or a detention order for a maximum period of at least three years
under national law;

(l)      'fingerprint data' means the data relating
to fingerprints of all or at least the index fingers, and if those are missing,
the prints of all other fingers of a person, or a latent.

ê 2725/2000/EC
(adapted)

ð new

2.           The terms defined in
Article 2 of Directive 95/46/EC shall have the same meaning in this Regulation ð unless the processing of personal
data takes place by Member
States' designated authorities for the purposes of the prevention, detection
and investigation of terrorist offences and other serious criminal offences ï.

3.           Unless stated otherwise,
the terms defined in Article 1 2 of the Dublin Convention Ö Regulation Õ shall have the
same meaning in this Regulation.

ò new

4.           The terms defined in Article 2 of the Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA shall have the
same meaning in this Regulation in so far as personal data are processed by
Member States' designated authorities for the purposes of the prevention,
detection and investigation of terrorist offences and other serious criminal
offences pursuant to this Regulation.

ê 2725/2000/EC
(adapted)

Article 3
Central Unit Ö System architecture and basic
principles Õ

1.           A Central Unit shall be established within the Commission which shall be responsible for operating the
central database referred to in Article 1(2)(b) on behalf of the Member States.
The Central Unit shall be equipped with a computerised fingerprint recognition
system.

ò new

1.           EURODAC
shall consist of:

(a) a computerised
central fingerprint database (Central System) composed of

–
a Central Unit,

–
a Business Continuity
System.

(b) a communication
infrastructure between the Central System and Member States that provides an encrypted virtual network dedicated to EURODAC
data (Communication
Infrastructure).

2.           Each
Member State shall have a single National Access Point.

ê 2725/2000/EC
(adapted)

ð new

2.3.        Data on applicants for asylum, persons covered by Articles 8
and persons covered by Article 11 9, 14 and 17 which are processed in the
Central Unit ð System ï shall be processed on behalf of the Member State of origin under
the conditions set out in this Regulation Ö and
separated by appropriate technical means Õ.

ê 2725/2000/EC
Article 1(2) third subparagraph

ð new

4.           The rules governing EurodacEURODAC shall also apply to operations
effected by the Member States as from the transmission of data to the Central Unit ð System ï until use is made of the results of the comparison.

ê 2725/2000/EC
Article 4(1) second sentence

ð new

5.           The procedure for taking fingerprints shall be determined
ð and applied ï in accordance with the national practice of the Member State
concerned and in accordance with the safeguards laid down in ð the Charter of Fundamental Rights of
the European Union, in the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms and ï the European
Convention on Human Rights and in the
United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

ò new

Article 4
Operational
management

1.           The
Agency, shall be responsible for the operational management of EURODAC. The
Agency shall ensure, in cooperation with the Member States, that at all times
the best available technology, subject to a cost-benefit analysis, is used for
the Central System.

2.           The
Agency shall also be responsible for the following tasks relating to the
Communication Infrastructure:

(a) supervision;

(b) security;

(c) the coordination
of relations between the Member States and the provider.

3.           The
Commission shall be responsible for all other tasks relating to the
Communication Infrastructure, in particular:

(a) tasks relating
to implementation of the budget;

(b) acquisition and
renewal;

(c) contractual
matters.

4.           Before
the Agency takes up its responsibilities, the Commission shall be responsible
for all tasks attributed to the Agency by this Regulation.

5.           Operational
management of EURODAC shall consist of all the tasks necessary to keep EURODAC
functioning 24 hours a day, 7 days a week in accordance with this Regulation,
in particular the maintenance work and technical developments necessary to
ensure that the system functions at a satisfactory level of operational
quality, in particular as regards the time required for interrogation of the
Central System.

6.           Without
prejudice to Article 17 of Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC)[43], the Agency shall apply
appropriate rules of professional secrecy or other equivalent duties of
confidentiality to all its staff required to work with EURODAC data. This
obligation shall also apply after such staff leave office or employment or
after the termination of their activities.

ò new

Article 5
Designated
Authorities for the purpose of law enforcement access

1.           Member
States shall designate the authorities which are authorised to access EURODAC
data pursuant to this Regulation. Designated authorities shall be authorities
of the Member States which are responsible for the prevention, detection or
investigation of terrorist offences and other serious criminal offences.

2.           Every
Member State shall keep a list of the designated authorities.

3.           At national level, each Member State shall
keep a list of the operating units within the designated authorities that are
authorised to request comparisons with EURODAC data through the National Access
Point.

Article 6
Verifying
Authorities

1.           Each
Member State shall designate a single national body to act as its verifying
authority. The verifying authority shall be an authority of the Member State
which is responsible for the prevention, detection or investigation of terrorist
offences and other serious criminal offences.

2.           The
verifying authority shall ensure that the conditions for requesting comparisons
of fingerprints with EURODAC data are fulfilled.

Only the verifying
authority shall be authorised to forward requests for comparison of
fingerprints to the National Access Point which communicates with the Central
System.

Article 7
Europol

1.           Europol
shall designate a specialised unit with duly empowered Europol officials to act
as its verifying authority and shall designate in agreement with any Member
State the National Access Point of that Member State which shall communicate
its requests for comparison of fingerprint data to the Central System.

2.           Europol shall designate an operating unit
that is authorised to request comparisons with EURODAC data through its
designated National Access Point.

ê 2725/2000/EC
(adapted)

ð new

Article 8
3
Ö Statistics Õ

3. 1.       The Central Unit
Ö Agency Õ shall draw up
statistics on its Ö the Õ work Ö of the
Central System Õ every quarter ð month ï, indicating ð in particular ï :

(a)     the number of data sets transmitted on
persons referred to in Articles 9(1), 8(1) and 11(1) 14(1) and 17(1) ;

(b)     the number of hits for applicants for asylum ð international protection ï who have lodged an application for asylum ð international protection ï in another Member State;

(c)     the number of hits for persons
referred to in Article 8(1) 14(1) who have subsequently lodged an
application for asylum ð international protection ï;

(d)     the number of hits for persons
referred to in Article 11(1) 17(1) who had previously lodged an
application for asylum ð international protection ï in another Member State;

(e)     the number of fingerprint data which
the Central Unit ð System ï had to ð repeatedly ï request a second time from the Member States of origin because the fingerprint data
originally transmitted did not lend themselves to comparison using the computerised
fingerprint recognition system;.

ò new

(f)      the number
of requests for marking and unmarking transmitted in accordance with Article 18(1)
and (2).

(g)     the number
of hits for persons referred to in Article 18(1) for whom hits have been recorded
under points (b) and (d) of this Article.

ê 2725/2000/EC

ð new

2.           At the end of each year, statistical data shall be
established in the form of a compilation of the ð monthly ï quarterly statistics drawn up since the
beginning of Eurodac's activities ð for that year ï, including an indication of the number of persons for whom hits
have been recorded under ð points ï (b), (c), and (d). ð The statistics shall contain a
breakdown of data for each Member State. ï

4.           Pursuant to the procedure laid down in Article
23(2), the Central Unit may be charged with carrying out certain other
statistical tasks on the basis of the data processed at the Central Unit.

ê 2725/2000/EC
(adapted)

ð new

CHAPTER II

APPLICANTS FOR ASYLUM Ö INTERNATIONAL
PROTECTION Õ

Article 9 4
Collection,
transmission and comparison of fingerprints

1.           Each Member State shall promptly
take the fingerprints of all fingers of every applicant for asylum ð international protection ï of at least 14 years of age and shall promptly
ð as soon as possible and no later
than 72 hours after the lodging of that application for
international protection as defined by Article 20(2) of the Dublin
Regulation ï transmit Ö them
together with Õ the data
referred to in points (a) (b) to (f) (g) of Article 5(1)
11 to the Central Unit ð System ï.

ò new

ð Non compliance with the 72 hours
time limit does not relieve Member States of the obligation to take and
transmit the fingerprints to the Central System. Where the condition of the
fingertips does not allow to take the fingerprints in a quality ensuring
appropriate comparison under Article 25 of this Regulation, the Member State of
origin shall retake the fingerprints of the applicant and resend them as soon
as possible and no later than 48 hours after they have been successfully taken. ï

ê 2725/2000/EC

(2)     The data referred to in Article 5(1) shall be
immediately recorded in the central database by the Central Unit, or,
provided that the technical conditions for such purposes are met, directly by
the Member State of origin.

ò new

2.           By
way of derogation from paragraph 1, where it is not possible to take the
fingerprints of an applicant on account of measures taken to ensure the health
of the applicant or the protection of public health, Member States shall take
and send the fingerprints of the applicant as soon as possible and no later
than 48 hours after these grounds no longer prevail.

ê 2725/2000/EC
(adapted)

ð new

3.           Fingerprint data within
the meaning of point (b) (a) of Article 5(1) 11, transmitted by any Member State, Ö with
exception to those transmitted in accordance with Article 10 point (b) Õ shall be
compared ð automatically ï with the fingerprint data transmitted by other Member States and
already stored in the Ccentral
database
ð System ï.

4.           The Central Unit ð System ï shall ensure, on the request of a Member State, that the comparison
referred to in paragraph 3 covers the fingerprint data previously transmitted
by that Member State, in addition to the data from other Member States.

5.           The Central Unit ð System ï shall forthwith ð automatically ï transmit the hit or the negative result of the comparison to the
Member State of origin. Where there is a hit, it shall transmit for all data
sets corresponding to the hit, the data referred to in Article 5(1)
8(a) to (ð g ï), although in the case of the data referred to in
Article 5(1)(b), only insofar as they were the basis for the hit ð along with, where appropriate, the
mark referred to in Article 18(1) ï.

Direct transmission to the Member
State of origin of the result of the comparison shall be permissible where the
technical conditions for such purpose are met.

7.           The implementing rules setting out the
procedures necessary for the application of paragraphs 1 to 6 shall be adopted
in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 22(1).

ò new

Article 10
Information on the
status of the data subject

The following
information shall be sent to the Central System in order to be stored in
accordance with Article 9 for the purpose of transmission under Article 9(5):

(a)          When
an applicant for international protection or another person as referred to in point
(d) of Article 18(1) of the Dublin Regulation arrives in the responsible Member
State following a transfer pursuant to a decision acceding to a request to take
him/her back as referred to in Article 24 of the Dublin Regulation, the
responsible Member State shall update its dataset recorded in conformity with
Article 8 of this Regulation relating to the person concerned by adding their
date of arrival .

(b)          When
an applicant for international protection arrives in the responsible Member
State following a transfer pursuant to a decision acceding to a request to take
charge of them as referred to in Article 22 of the Dublin Regulation, the
responsible Member State shall send a dataset in conformity with Article 11 of
this Regulation relating to the person concerned and include their date of
arrival.

(c)          As
soon as the Member State of origin can establish that the person concerned
whose data was recorded in EURODAC in accordance with Article 11 of this
Regulation has left the territory of the Member States, it shall update its
dataset recorded in conformity with Article 11 of this Regulation relating to
the person concerned by adding the date when the person left the territory, in
order to facilitate the application of Articles 19(2) and 20(5) of the Dublin
Regulation.

(d)          As
soon as the Member State of origin ensures that the person concerned whose data
was recorded in EURODAC in accordance with Article 11 has left the territory of
the Member States in compliance with a return decision or removal order it
issued following the withdrawal or rejection of the application as provided for
in Article 19(3) of the Dublin Regulation, it shall update its dataset recorded
in conformity with Article 11 relating to the person concerned by adding the
date of his/her removal or when the person left the territory.

(e)          The
Member State which assumes responsibility in accordance with Article 17(1) of
the Dublin Regulation shall update its dataset recorded in conformity with
Article 11 of this Regulation relating to that applicant by adding the date when
the decision to examine the application was taken.

ê 2725/2000/EC

ð new

Article 11 5
Recording
of data

1.           Only the following data shall be recorded in the cCentral database
ð System ï :

(ab)
fingerprint data;

(ba)
Member State of origin, place and date of the application for asylum ð international protection; in the
cases referred to in point (b) of Article 10, the date of application shall be
the one entered by the Member State who transferred the applicant ï;

(c) sex;

(d) reference number used by the Member State
of origin;

(e) date on which the fingerprints were taken;

(f) date on which the data were transmitted to
the Central Unit ð System ï;

(g) date on which
the data were entered in the central database ;

ò new

(g) operator user
ID.

ê 2725/2000/EC

ð new

(h) details in
respect of the recipient(s) of the data transmitted and the date(s) of
transmission(s).

(h) where applicable
in accordance with Article 10 point (a) or point (b), the date of the arrival
of the person concerned after a successful transfer;

(i) where applicable
in accordance with Article 10 point (c), the date when the person concerned
left the territory of the Member States;

(j) where applicable
in accordance with Article 10 point (d), the date when the person concerned
left or was removed from the territory of the Member States;

(k) where applicable
in accordance with Article 10 point (e), the date when the decision to examine
the application was taken.

2.      After recording the data in the central database,
the Central Unit shall destroy the media used for transmitting the data, unless
the Member State of origin has requested their return.

Article 12 6
Data
storage

Each set of data, as referred to in Article 5(1)
11, shall be stored in the Ccentral ð System ï database for ten years from the date on which the fingerprints were taken.

Upon expiry of this period, the Central Unit ð System ï shall automatically erase the data from the Ccentral database
ð System ï.

Article 13 7
Advance
data erasure

1.           Data relating to a person who has acquired citizenship of
any Member State before expiry of the period referred to in Article 6
12 shall be erased from the
Central Unit ð System ï, in accordance with Article 15(3) 27(4) as soon as the Member State of
origin becomes aware that the person has acquired such citizenship.

ò new

2.           The
Central System shall inform all Member States of origin about the erasure of
data for the reason specified in paragraph 1 by another Member State of origin
having produced a hit with data which they transmitted relating to persons
referred to in Article 9(1) or Article 14(1).

ê 2725/2000/EC
(adapted)

ð new

CHAPTER III

ALIENS Ö THIRD
COUNTRY NATIONALS or stateless persons Õ APPREHENDED IN
CONNECTION WITH THE IRREGULAR CROSSING OF AN EXTERNAL BORDER

Article 14 8
Collection
and transmission of fingerprint data

1.           Each Member State shall, in accordance with the safeguards laid down in the
European Convention on Human Rights and in the United Nations Convention on
the Rights of the Child promptly take
the fingerprints of all fingers of every alien Ö third
country national or stateless person Õ of at least 14
years of age who is apprehended by the competent control authorities in
connection with the irregular crossing by land, sea or air of the border of
that Member State having come from a third country and who is not turned back ð or who remains physically on the
territory of the Member States and who is not kept in custody, confinement or
detention during the entirety of the period between apprehension and removal on
the basis of the decision to turn them back ï .

2.           The Member State concerned
shall promptly ðas soon as possible and no later than 72
hours from the date of apprehension ï transmit to the Central Unit ð System ï the following data in relation to any alien Ö third
country national or stateless person Õ, as referred
to in paragraph 1, who is not turned back:

(ab)
fingerprint data;

(ba)
Member State of origin, place and date of the apprehension;

(c) sex;

(d) reference number used by the Member State
of origin;

(e) date on which the fingerprints were taken;

(f) date on which the data were transmitted to
the Central Unit ð System ï;

ò new

(g) operator user
ID.

3.           By
way of derogation from paragraph 2, as regards persons apprehended in the
manner described in paragraph 1 who remain physically on the territory of the
Member States but are kept in custody, confinement or detention upon their
apprehension for a period exceeding 72 hours, the transmission of the data
specified in paragraph 2 relating to those persons shall take place
before their release from custody, confinement or detention.

4.           Non
compliance with the 72 hours time limit referred to in paragraph 2 does not
relieve Member States of the obligation to take and transmit the fingerprints
to the Central System. Where the condition of the fingertips does not allow to
take the fingerprints in a quality ensuring appropriate comparison under
Article 25, the Member State of origin shall retake the fingerprints of such
person and resend them as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after
they have been successfully taken.

5.           By
way of derogation from paragraph 1, where it is not possible to take the
fingerprints of such person on account of measures taken to ensure the health
of the person or the protection of public health, the Member State concerned
shall take and send the fingerprints of the person, in accordance with the
deadline set out in paragraph 2, once these grounds no longer prevail.

ê 2725/2000/EC
(adapted)

ð new

Article 15
9
Recording
of data

1.           The data referred to in Article 5(1)(g) and in Article 8(2) 14(2) shall be recorded in the central database ð Central System ï.

Without prejudice to Article 3(3)8, data transmitted to the Central Unit ð System ï pursuant to Article 8(2) 14(2) shall be recorded for the sole
purpose of comparison with data on applicants for asylum ð international protection ï transmitted subsequently to the Central Unit ð System ï.

The Central Unit ð System ï shall not compare data transmitted to it pursuant to Article 8(2)
14(2) with any data previously
recorded in the central database ð Central System ï, nor with data subsequently transmitted to the Central Unit ð System ï pursuant to Article 8(2) 14(2).

2.           The procedures provided for in Article 4(1), second sentence, Article 4(2) and Article 5(2) as well as the provisions laid
down pursuant to Article 4(7) shall apply. As regards the comparison of data on applicants for asylum ð international protection ï subsequently transmitted to the Central Unit ð System ï with the data referred to in paragraph 1, the procedures provided
for in Article 4(3), (5) and (6) 9(3) and (5) and in Article 25(4) shall apply.

Article 16
10
Storage of
data

1.           Each set of data relating
to an alien
Ö third
country national or stateless person Õ as referred to
in Article 8(1) 14(1)
shall be stored in the central database ð Central System ï for ð one year ï two years from the date on which the fingerprints of the alien Ö third
country national or stateless person Õ were taken.
Upon expiry of this period, the Central Unit ð System ï shall automatically erase the data from the central database ð Central System ï.

2.           The data relating to an alien
Ö third
country national or stateless person Õ as referred to
in Article 8(1) 14(1)
shall be erased from the central
database ð Central System ï in accordance with Article 15(3) 28(3)Ö as soon
as Õ the Member
State of origin becomes aware of one of the following circumstances before the two ð one ï-year period mentioned in paragraph 1 has expired:

(a) the alien Ö third
country national or stateless person Õ has been
issued with a residence permit Ö document Õ ;

(b) the alien Ö third
country national or stateless person Õ has left the
territory of the Member States;

(c) the alien Ö third
country national or stateless person Õ has acquired
the citizenship of any Member State.

ò new

3.           The
Central System shall inform all Member States of origin about the erasure of
data for the reason specified in point (a) or (b) of paragraph 2 or by another
Member State of origin having produced a hit with data which they transmitted
relating to persons referred to in Article 14(1).

4.           The
Central System shall inform all Member States of origin about the erasure of
data for the reason specified in point (c) of paragraph 2 by another Member
State of origin having produced a hit with data which they transmitted relating
to persons referred to in Article 9(1) or Article 14(1).

ê 2725/2000/EC
(adapted)

ð new

CHAPTER IV

ALIENS Ö THIRD
COUNTRY NATIONALS or stateless persons Õ FOUND ILLEGALLY PRESENT Ö STAYING Õ IN A MEMBER
STATE

Article 17
11
Comparison
of fingerprint data

1.           With a view to checking
whether an alien
Ö third
country national or a stateless person Õ found
illegally present
Ö staying Õ within its
territory has previously lodged an application for asylum ð international protection ï in another Member State, each Member State may transmit to the
Central Unit ð System ï any fingerprint data relating to fingerprints which it may have
taken of any such alien
Ö third
country national or stateless person Õ of at least 14
years of age together with the reference number used by that Member State.

As a general rule there are grounds for
checking whether the alien Ö third
country national or stateless person Õ has previously
lodged an application for asylum ð international protection ï in another Member State where:

(a) the alien Ö third
country national or stateless person Õ declares that
he/she has lodged an application for asylum ð international protection ï but without indicating the Member State in which he/she made the
application;

(b) the alien Ö third
country national or stateless person Õ does not
request asylum ð international protection ï but objects to being returned to his/her country of origin by
claiming that he/she would be in danger, or

(c) the alien Ö third
country national or stateless person Õ otherwise
seeks to prevent his/her removal by refusing to cooperate in establishing
his/her identity, in particular by showing no, or false, identity papers.

2.           Where Member States take
part in the procedure referred to in paragraph 1, they shall transmit to the
Central Unit ð System ï the fingerprint data relating to all or at least the index fingers,
and, if those are missing, the prints of all other fingers, of aliens Ö third
country nationals or stateless persons Õ referred to in
paragraph 1.

3.           The fingerprint data of an alien
Ö third country
national or a stateless person Õ as referred to
in paragraph 1 shall be transmitted to the Central Unit ð System ï solely for the purpose of comparison with the fingerprint data of
applicants for asylum ð international protection ï transmitted by other Member States and already recorded in the central database ð Central System ï.

The fingerprint data of such an alien
Ö third
country national or a stateless person Õ shall not be
recorded in the central database ð Central System ï, nor shall they be compared with the data transmitted to the
Central Unit ð System ï pursuant to Article 8(2) 14(2).

4.           As regards the comparison
of fingerprint data transmitted under this Article with the fingerprint data of
applicants for asylum ð international protection ï transmitted by other Member States which have already been stored
in the Central Unit ð System ï, the procedures provided for in Article 4(3)
(5) and (6) 9(3) and
(5) as well as the
provisions laid down pursuant to Article 4(7) shall apply.

5.           Once the results of the comparison have been
transmitted to the Member State of origin, the Central Unit shall forthwith:

(a) erase the
fingerprint data and other data transmitted to it under paragraph 1; and

(b) destroy the
media used by the Member State of origin for transmitting the data to the
Central Unit, unless the Member State of origin has requested their return.

CHAPTER V

RECOGNISED REFUGEESÖ PERSONS
GRANTED INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION Õ

Article 12

Blocking of data

1.           Data
relating to an applicant for asylum which
have been recorded pursuant to Article 4(2) shall be blocked in the central
database if that person is recognised and admitted as a refugee in a Member
State. Such blocking shall be carried out by the Central Unit on the
instructions of the Member State of origin.

As long as a
decision pursuant to paragraph 2 has not been adopted, hits concerning persons
who have been recognised and admitted as refugees in a Member State shall not
be transmitted. The Central Unit shall return a negative result to the
requesting Member State.

2.           Five
years after Eurodac starts operations, and on the basis of reliable statistics
compiled by the Central Unit on persons who have lodged an application for
asylum in a Member State after having been recognised and admitted as refugees in another Member State, a
decision shall be taken in accordance with the relevant provisions of the
Treaty, as to whether the data relating to persons who have been recognised and
admitted as refugees in a Member State should:

(a) be stored
in accordance with Article 6 for the purpose of the comparison provided for in
Article 4(3); or

(b) be erased in
advance once a person has been recognised and admitted as a refugee.

3.           In
the case referred to in paragraph 2(a), the data blocked pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be unblocked and the
procedure referred to in paragraph 1 shall no longer apply.

4.           In
the case referred to in paragraph 2(b):

(a) data which
have been blocked in accordance with paragraph 1 shall be erased immediately by
the Central Unit; and

(b) data relating
to persons who are subsequently recognised and admitted as refugees shall be
erased in accordance with Article 15(3), as soon as the Member State of origin
becomes aware that the person has been recognised and admitted as a refugee
in a Member State.

5.           The
implementing rules concerning the procedure for the blocking of data referred
to in paragraph 1 and the compilation of statistics referred to in paragraph 2
shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 22(1).

ò new

Article 18
Marking
of data

1.           The
Member State of origin which granted international protection to an applicant
for international protection whose data were previously recorded pursuant to
Article 11 in the Central System shall mark the relevant data in conformity
with the requirements for electronic communication with the Central System
established by the Agency. This mark shall be stored in the Central System in
accordance with Article 12 for the purpose of transmission under Article 9(5).

2.           The
Member State of origin shall unmark data concerning a third country national or
stateless person whose data were previously marked in accordance with paragraph
1 if his or her status is revoked or ended or renewal of his status is refused
under Article 14 or 19 of Council
Directive 2004/83/EC.

ò new

CHAPTER VI

PROCEDURE FOR
COMPARISON AND DATA TRANSMISSION FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES

Article 19
Procedure
for comparison of fingerprint data with EURODAC data

1.           The
designated authorities referred to in Article 5(1) and Europol may submit a
reasoned electronic request to the verifying authority for the transmission for
comparison of fingerprint data to the EURODAC Central System via the National
Access Point. Upon receipt of such a request, the verifying authority shall
verify whether the conditions for requesting a comparison referred to in Article
20 or Article 21, as appropriate,
are fulfilled.

2.           Where
all the conditions for requesting a comparison are fulfilled, the verifying
authority shall transmit the request for comparison to the National Access
Point which will process it to the EURODAC Central System for the purpose of
comparison with all the EURODAC data.

3.           In
exceptional cases of urgency, the verifying authority may transmit the
fingerprint data to the National Access Point for comparison immediately upon
receipt of a request by a designated authority and only verify ex-post whether
all the conditions of Article 20 or Article 21 are fulfilled, including whether an exceptional case of urgency
actually existed. The ex-post verification shall take place without undue delay
after the processing of the request.

4.           Where
the ex-post verification determines that the access was not justified, the
information communicated from EURODAC shall be destroyed by all authorities that
have accessed it and they shall inform the verifying authority of such
destruction.

Article 20
Conditions for access to EURODAC data by designated authorities

1.           Designated
authorities may request the comparison of fingerprint data with those stored in
the EURODAC central database within the scope of their powers only if
comparisons of national fingerprint databases and of the Automated Fingerprint
Databases of other Member States under Decision 2008/615/JHA return negative
results and where:

(a)     the
comparison is necessary for the purpose of the prevention, detection or
investigation of terrorist offences or other serious criminal offences;

(b)     the
comparison is necessary in a specific case; systematic comparisons shall not be
carried out; and

(c)     there are
reasonable grounds to consider that such comparison with EURODAC data will  contribute
to the prevention, detection or investigation of any of the criminal offences
in question.

2.           Requests
for comparison with EURODAC data shall be limited to searching with fingerprint
data.

Article 21
Conditions for access to EURODAC data by Europol

1.           Requests
for comparison with EURODAC data by Europol shall take place within the limits
of its mandate and where necessary for the performance of its tasks pursuant to
the Europol Decision and for the purposes of a specific analysis or an analysis
of a general nature and of a strategic type.

2.           Requests
for comparison with EURODAC data shall be limited to comparisons of fingerprint
data.

3.           Processing
of information obtained by Europol from comparison with EURODAC shall be
subject to the authorisation of the Member State of origin. Such authorisation
shall be obtained via the Europol national unit of that Member State.

Article 22
Communication between the verifying authorities and the National Access Points

1.           EURODAC
Communication Infrastructure shall be used for the data transmission by the
verifying authorities of Member States and Europol to the National Access
Points and vice versa. All communications shall take place electronically.

2.           Fingerprints
shall be digitally processed by the Member State and transmitted in the data
format referred to in Annex I, in order to ensure that the comparison can be
carried out by means of the computerised fingerprint recognition system.

ê 2725/2000/EC
(adapted)

ð new

CHAPTER VI
VII

DATA PROCESSING
USE,
DATA PROTECTION AND LIABILITY

Article 23
13
Responsibility
for data processing use

1.           The Member State of origin
shall be responsible for ensuring that:

(a) fingerprints are taken lawfully;

(b) fingerprint data and the other data
referred to in Article 5(1) 11, Article 8(2)
14(2) and Article 11(2)
17(2) are lawfully transmitted to
the Central Unit ð System ï;

(c) data are accurate and up-to-date when they
are transmitted to the Central Unit ð System ï;

(d) without prejudice to the responsibilities
of the Commission ð Agency ï , data in the central
database ð Central System ï are lawfully recorded, stored, corrected and erased;

(e) the results of fingerprint data
comparisons transmitted by the Central Unit ð System ï are lawfully processed
used.

2.           In accordance with Article
14
34, the Member State of origin
shall ensure the security of the data referred to in paragraph 1 before and
during transmission to the Central Unit ð System ï as well as the security of the data it receives from the Central Unit ð System ï.

3.           The Member State of origin
shall be responsible for the final identification of the data pursuant to
Article 4(6) 25(4).

4.           The Commission ð Agency ï shall ensure that the Central Unit ð System ï is operated in accordance with the provisions of this Regulation and its implementing rules. In particular, the Commission ð Agency ï shall:

(a) adopt measures ensuring that persons
working ð with ï in the Central Unit ð System ï process use
the data recorded Ö therein Õ in the central database
only in accordance with the purpose of EurodacEURODAC as laid down in Article 1(1);

(b) ensure that
persons working in the Central System comply with all requests from Member
States made pursuant to this Regulation in relation to recording, comparison,
correction and erasure of data for which they are responsible;

(b) (c) take the necessary measures to ensure
the security of the Central Unit ð System ï in accordance with Article 14 34;

(c) (d) ensure that only persons authorised to
work ð with ï in the Central Unit ð System ï have access Ö thereto Õ to data recorded in the
central database, without prejudice to Article 20 and the powers of the independent supervisory body which will be established
under Article 286(2) of the Treaty Ö the
competences of the European Data Protection Supervisor Õ.

The Commission ð Agency ï shall inform the European Parliament and the Council ð as well as the European Data
Protection Supervisor ï of the measures it takes pursuant to the first subparagraph.

ê 407/2002/EC
Article 2 (adapted)

ð new

Article 24 2
Transmission

1.           Fingerprints shall be
digitally processed and transmitted in the data format referred to in Annex I.
As far as it is necessary for the efficient operation of the Central Unit ð System ï, the Central
Unit Ö Agency Õ shall
establish the technical requirements for transmission of the data format by
Member States to the Central Unit ð System ï and vice versa. The Central Unit Ö Agency Õ shall ensure
that the fingerprint data transmitted by the Member States can be compared by
the computerised fingerprint recognition system.

2.           Member States should Ö shall Õ transmit the
data referred to in Article 5(1) 11(1), Article 14(2) and Article 17(2) of
the Eurodac Regulation electronically. ð The data referred to in Article 11(1)
and Article 14(2) shall be automatically recorded in the Central System. ï As far as it is necessary for the efficient operation of the
Central Unit ð System ï, the Central
Unit ð Agency ï shall establish the technical requirements to ensure that data can
be properly electronically transmitted from the Member States to the Central Unit ð System ï and vice versa. Transmission
of data in paper form using the form set out in Annex II or by other means of
data support (diskettes, CD-ROM or other means of data support which may be
developed and generally used in future) should be limited to situations in
which there are continuous technical problems.

3.           The reference number
referred to in Article 5(1)(d) 11(d) and Article 14(2)(d) and 17(1) of
the Eurodac Regulation shall make it possible to relate
data unambiguously to one particular person and to the Member State which is
transmitting the data. In addition, it shall make it possible to tell whether
such data relate to an
asylum seeker or a person referred to in Article 8
or Article 11 of the Eurodac Regulation9, Article 14 or Article 17.

4.           The reference number shall begin with the identification
letter or letters by which, in accordance with the norm referred to in Annex I,
the Member State transmitting the data is identified. The identification letter
or letters shall be followed by the identification of the category of person.
"1" refers to data relating to asylum seekers Ö persons
referred to in Article 9(1) Õ, "2"
to persons referred to in Article 8 14(1) of the Eurodac Regulation and
"3" to persons referred to in Article 11
17 of
the Eurodac Regulation.

5.           The Central Unit Ö Agency Õ shall
establish the technical procedures necessary for Member States to ensure
receipt of unambiguous data by the Central Unit ð System ï.

64.         The
Central Unit ð System ï shall confirm receipt of the transmitted data as soon as possible.
To this end the Central
Unit Ö Agency Õ shall
establish the necessary technical requirements to ensure that Member States
receive the confirmation receipt if requested.

Article 25 3
Carrying
out comparisons and transmitting results

1.           Member States shall ensure
the transmission of fingerprint data in an appropriate quality for the purpose
of comparison by means of the computerised fingerprint recognition system. As
far as it is necessary to ensure that the results of the comparison by the
Central Unit ð System ï reach a very high level of accuracy, the Central Unit ð Agency ï shall define the appropriate quality of transmitted fingerprint
data. The Central Unit ð System ï shall, as soon as possible, check the quality of the fingerprint
data transmitted. If fingerprint data do not lend themselves to comparison
using the computerised fingerprint recognition system, the Central Unit ð System ï shall, as soon as
possible, ð inform ï the Member State. ð The Member State concerned
shall ï transmit fingerprint data of the appropriate quality ð using the same reference number of
the previous set of fingerprint data ï.

2.           The Central Unit ð System ï shall carry out comparisons in the order of arrival of requests.
Each request must be dealt with within 24 hours. In the case of data which are transmitted
electronically, a
A Member State may for reasons
connected with national law require particularly urgent comparisons to be
carried out within one hour. Where these times cannot be respected owing to
circumstances which are outside the Central
Unit ð Agency's ï responsibility, the Central Unit ð System ï shall process the request as a matter of priority as soon as those
circumstances no longer prevail. In such cases, as far as it is necessary for
the efficient operation of the Central Unit ð System ï , the Central Unit ð Agency ï shall establish criteria to ensure the priority handling of
requests.

3.           As far as it is necessary
for the efficient operation of the Central Unit ð System ï , the Central Unit ð Agency ï shall establish the operational procedures for the processing of
the data received and for transmitting the result of the comparison.

ê 2725/2000/EC
Article 4(6) (adapted)

ð new

4.           The results of the comparison shall be immediately
checked in the Member State of origin ð by a fingerprint expert ï. Final identification shall be made by the Member State of origin
in cooperation with the Member States concerned, pursuant to Article 15
32 of the Dublin Convention
Ö Regulation Õ.

Information received from the Central Unit ð System ï relating to other data found to be unreliable shall be erased or destroyed as soon as the unreliability of the data is established.

ò new

5.           Where
final identification in accordance with paragraph 4 reveal that the result of
the comparison received from the Central System is inaccurate, Member States
shall communicate this fact to the Commission and to the Agency.

ê 407/2002/EC
(adapted)

ð new

Article 26 4
Communication between
Member States and the Central Unit ð System ï

Data transmitted from the Member States to the
Central Unit ð System ï and vice versa shall use IDA
generic services referred to in Decision No 1719/1999/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 1999 on a series of guidelines,
including the identification of projects of common interest, for trans-European
networks for the electronic interchange of data between administrations (IDA) ð the EURODAC Communication
Infrastructure ï. As far as it is necessary for the efficient operation of the
Central Unit ð System ï, the Central
Unit Ö Agency Õ shall
establish the technical procedures necessary for the use of IDA generic services ð the Communication ï.

Article 14
Security

1.           The
Member State of origin shall take the necessary measures to:

(a) prevent any unauthorised person
from having access to national installations in which the Member State carries
out operations in accordance with the aim of Eurodac (checks at the entrance to the installation);

(b) prevent data and data media in Eurodac from being read, copied, modified or erased by
unauthorised persons (control of data media);

(c) guarantee that it is possible
to check and establish a posteriori what data have been recorded in Eurodac when and by whom (control of data recording);

(d) prevent the unauthorised
recording of data in Eurodac
and any
unauthorised modification or erasure of data recorded in Eurodac (control of data entry);

(e) guarantee that, in using Eurodac, authorised persons have access only to data
which are within their competence (control of access);

(f) guarantee that it is possible to
check and establish to which authorities data recorded in Eurodac may be
transmitted by data transmission equipment (control of transmission);

(g) prevent the unauthorised
reading, copying, modification or erasure of data during both the direct
transmission of data to or from the central database and the transport of
data media to or from the Central Unit (control of transport).

2.           As
regards the operation of the Central Unit, the Commission shall be responsible
for applying the measures mentioned under paragraph 1.

ê 2725/2000/EC

ð new

Article 27
15
Access to, and correction
or erasure of, data recorded in EurodacEURODAC

1.           The Member State of origin
shall have access to data which it has transmitted and which are recorded in
the central database ð Central System ï in accordance with the provisions of this Regulation.

No Member State may conduct searches in the
data transmitted by another Member State, nor may it receive such data apart
from data resulting from the comparison referred to in Article 4(5)
9(5).

ê 2725/2000/EC
(adapted)

ð new

2.           The authorities of Member
States which, pursuant to paragraph 1, have access to data recorded in the central database ð Central System ï shall be those designated by each Member State ð for the purpose of Article 1(1).
This designation shall specify the exact unit responsible for carrying out
tasks related to the application of this Regulation. ï Each Member State shall without delay communicate to the Commission
ð and the Agency ï a list of those authorities ð and any amendments thereto. The Agency
shall publish the consolidated list in the Official Journal of the European
Union. Where there are amendments thereto, the Agency shall publish once a year
an updated consolidated list. ï

3.           Only the Member State of
origin shall have the right to amend the data which it has transmitted to the
Central Unit ð System ï by correcting or supplementing such data, or to erase them, without
prejudice to erasure carried out in pursuance of Article 6,
Article 10(1) or Article 12(4)(a) 12 or Article 16(1).

Where the Member
State of origin records data directly in the central database, it may amend
or erase the data directly.

Where the Member
State of origin does not record data directly in the central database, the
Central Unit shall amend or erase the data at the request of that Member State.

4.           If a Member State or the Central Unit ð Agency ï has evidence to suggest that data recorded in the central database ð Central System ï are factually inaccurate, it shall advise the Member State of
origin as soon as possible.

If a Member State has evidence to suggest that
data were recorded in the central
database ð Central System ï contrary to this Regulation, it shall similarly advise ð the Agency, the Commission and ï the Member State of origin as soon as possible. The latter shall
check the data concerned and, if necessary, amend or erase them without delay.

5.           The Central Unit ð Agency ï shall not transfer or make available to the authorities of any
third country data recorded in the central
database ð Central System ï, unless it is specifically authorised to do so in the framework of
a Community agreement on the criteria and mechanisms for determining the State
responsible for examining an application for asylum ð international protection ï .

Article 22

Implementing rules

1.           The
Council shall adopt, acting by the majority laid down in Article 205(2) of the
Treaty, the implementing provisions
necessary for

–
laying down the
procedure referred to in Article 4(7),

–
laying down the
procedure for the blocking of the data referred to in Article 12(1),

–
drawing up the
statistics referred to in Article 12(2).

In cases where
these implementing provisions have implications for the operational expenses
to be borne by the Member States, the Council shall act unanimously.

2.           The
measures referred to in Article 3(4) shall be adopted in accordance with the
procedure referred to in Article 23(2).

Article 28
16
Keeping
of records by the
Central Unit

1.           The Central Unit ð Agency ï shall keep records of all data processing operations within the
Central Unit ð System ï. These records shall show the purpose of access, the date and time,
the data transmitted, the data used for interrogation and the name of both the
unit putting
Ö entering Õ in or
retrieving the data and the persons responsible.

2.           Such records may be used
only for the data-protection monitoring of the admissibility of data processing
as well as to ensure data security pursuant to Article 14
34. The records must be protected
by appropriate measures against unauthorised access and erased after a period
of one year ð after the retention period referred
to in Article 12 and in Article 16(1) has expired ï, if they are not required for monitoring procedures which have
already begun.

ò new

3.           Each
Member State shall take the necessary measures in order to achieve the
objectives set out in paragraph 1 and 2 in relation to its national system. In
addition, each Member State shall keep records of the staff duly authorised to
enter or retrieve the data.

ê 2725/2000/EC
(adapted)

ð new

Article 23

Committee

1.           The
Commission shall be assisted by a committee.

2.           In
the cases where reference is made to this paragraph, Articles 5 and 7 of
Decision 1999/468/EC shall apply.

The period laid
down in Article 5(6) of Decision 1999/468/EC shall be set at three months.

3.           The
committee shall adopt its rules of procedure.

Article 29
18
Rights
of the data subject

1.           A person covered by this
Regulation shall be informed by the Member State of origin ð in writing, and where appropriate,
orally, in a language which he or she understands or may reasonably be presumed
to understand ï of the following:

(a) the identity of the controller and of his
representative, if any;

(b) ÖregardingÕ the purpose
for which the
Ö his or
her Õ data will be
processed within EurodacEURODAC
ð including a description of the aims
of the Dublin Regulation, in accordance with Article 4 of that Regulation ï.

(c) the recipients of the data;

(d) in relation to a person covered by Article
4
9 or Article 8
14, the obligation to have his/her
fingerprints taken;

(e) the existence of the right of access to, and the right to rectify,
the data Örelating to him/herÕconcerning him/herÖ , and the right to request that inaccurate data relating to him/her
be corrected Õ ð or that unlawfully processed data relating to them be
erased, as well as the right to receive information on the procedures for
exercising those rights including the contact details of the controller and the
National Supervisory Authorities referred to in Article 31(1) ï.

In relation to a person covered by Article 4
9 or Article 8
14, the information referred to in
the first subparagraph shall be provided when his/her fingerprints are taken.

In relation to a person covered by Article 11
17, the information referred to in
the first subparagraph shall be provided no later than the time when the data
relating to the person are transmitted to the Central Unit ð System ï. This obligation shall not apply where the provision of such
information proves impossible or would involve a disproportionate effort.

ò new

A common leaflet,
containing at least the information referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article
and the information referred to in Article 4(1) of the Dublin Regulation shall
be drawn up in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 40(2) of
the Dublin Regulation. The leaflet
should be "clear and simple, drafted in a language that the person
understands or may reasonably be presumed to understand.

Where a person
covered by this Regulation is a minor, Member States shall provide the
information in an age-appropriate manner.

ê 2725/2000/EC

ð new

2.           In each Member State any
data subject may, in accordance with the laws, regulations and procedures of
that State, exercise the rights provided for in Article 12 of Directive
95/46/EC.

Without prejudice to the obligation to provide
other information in accordance with point (a) of Article 12 of Directive
95/46/EC, the data subject shall have the right to obtain communication of the
data relating to him/her recorded in the central
database ð Central System ï and of the Member State which transmitted them to the Central Unit ð System ï. Such access to data may be granted only by a Member State.

3.           In each Member State, any
person may request that data which are factually inaccurate be corrected or
that data recorded unlawfully be erased. The correction and erasure shall be
carried out without excessive delay by the Member State which transmitted the
data, in accordance with its laws, regulations and procedures.

4.           If the rights of
correction and erasure are exercised in a Member State, other than that, or
those, which transmitted the data, the authorities of that Member State shall
contact the authorities of the Member State, or States, in question so that the
latter may check the accuracy of the data and the lawfulness of their
transmission and recording in the central
database ð Central System ï.

5.           If it emerges that data
recorded in the central database ð Central System ï are factually inaccurate or have been recorded unlawfully, the
Member State which transmitted them shall correct or erase the data in
accordance with Article 15(3) 27(3). That Member State shall confirm
in writing to the data subject without excessive delay that it has taken action
to correct or erase data relating to him/her.

6.           If the Member State which
transmitted the data does not agree that data recorded in the central database ð Central System ï are factually inaccurate or have been recorded unlawfully, it shall
explain in writing to the data subject without excessive delay why it is not
prepared to correct or erase the data.

That Member State shall also provide the data
subject with information explaining the steps which he/she can take if he/she
does not accept the explanation provided. This shall include information on how
to bring an action or, if appropriate, a complaint before the competent
authorities or courts of that Member State and any financial or other
assistance that is available in accordance with the laws, regulations and
procedures of that Member State.

7.           Any request under
paragraphs 2 and 3 shall contain all the necessary particulars to identify the
data subject, including fingerprints. Such data shall be used exclusively to
permit the exercise of the rights referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3 and shall
be destroyed immediately afterwards.

8.           The competent authorities
of the Member States shall cooperate actively to enforce promptly the rights
laid down in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5.

ò new

9.           Whenever a person requests data relating
to him or her in accordance
with paragraph 2, the competent authority shall keep a record in the form of a
written document that such a request was made, and shall make this document
available to the National Supervisory Authorities without delay, upon their
request.

ê 2725/2000/EC
(adapted)

ð new

9. 10.     In each Member State, the national supervisory authority shall ð on the basis of his/her request, ïassist the data subject in accordance with Article 28(4) of
Directive 95/46/EC in exercising his/her rights.

10. 11.   The national
supervisory authority of the Member State which transmitted the data and the
national supervisory authority of the Member State in which the data subject is
present shall assist and, where requested, advise him/her in exercising his/her
right to correct or erase data. Both national supervisory authorities shall
cooperate to this end. Requests for such assistance may be made to the national
supervisory authority of the Member State in which the data subject is present,
which shall transmit the requests to the authority of the Member State which
transmitted the data. The data subject
may also apply for assistance and advice to the joint supervisory authority set
up by Article 20.

11. 12.   In each Member
State any person may, in accordance with the laws, regulations and procedures
of that State, bring an action or, if appropriate, a complaint before the
competent authorities or courts of the State if he/she is refused the right of
access provided for in paragraph 2.

12. 13.   Any person may,
in accordance with the laws, regulations and procedures of the Member State
which transmitted the data, bring an action or, if appropriate, a complaint
before the competent authorities or courts of that State concerning the data
relating to him/her recorded in the central
database ð Central System ï, in order to exercise his/her rights under paragraph 3. The
obligation of the national supervisory authorities to assist and, where
requested, advise the data subject, in accordance with paragraph 10
13 , shall subsist throughout the
proceedings.

Article 30
19
Ö Supervision by the Õ National Ssupervisory
Aauthority

1.           Each Member State shall
provide that the national supervisory authority or authorities designated
pursuant to Article 28(1) of Directive 95/46/EC shall monitor independently, in
accordance with its respective national law, the lawfulness of the processing,
in accordance with this Regulation, of personal data by the Member State in
question, including their transmission to the Central Unit ð System ï.

2.           Each Member State shall
ensure that its national supervisory authority has access to advice from
persons with sufficient knowledge of fingerprint data.

ò new

Article 31
Supervision
by the European Data Protection Supervisor

1.           The
European Data Protection Supervisor shall ensure that all the personal data
processing activities concerning EURODAC, in particular by the Agency are
carried out in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and this Regulation.

2.           The
European Data Protection Supervisor shall ensure that an audit of the Agency's
personal data processing activities is carried out in accordance with
international auditing standards at least every four years. A report of such
audit shall be sent to the European Parliament, the Council, the Agency, the
Commission and the National Supervisory Authorities. The Agency shall be given
an opportunity to make comments before the report is adopted.

Article 32
Cooperation
between National Supervisory Authorities and the European Data Protection
Supervisor

1.           The
National Supervisory Authorities and the European Data Protection Supervisor,
each acting within the scope of its respective competences, shall cooperate
actively in the framework of their responsibilities and shall ensure
coordinated supervision of EURODAC.

2.           They
shall, each acting within the scope of its 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 with the exercise of independent supervision or in 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 that purpose at least twice a year. 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. A joint report of
activities shall be sent to the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission
and the Agency every two years.

Article 33
Protection
of personal data for the purposes of the prevention, detection and
investigation of terrorist offences or of other serious criminal offences

1.           The
Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA is applicable to the processing of relevant
personal data for law enforcement purposes under this Regulation.

2.           The
processing of personal data by Europol pursuant to this Regulation shall be in
accordance with Decision 2009/371/JHA.

3.           Personal
data obtained pursuant to this Regulation from EURODAC shall only be processed
for the purposes of the prevention, detection and investigation of terrorist
offences or of other serious criminal offences.

4.           Personal
data obtained by a Member State or Europol pursuant to this Regulation from
EURODAC shall be erased in national and Europol files after a period of one
month, if the data are not required for a specific ongoing criminal
investigation by that Member State, or Europol.

5.           The
monitoring of the lawfulness of the processing of personal data under this
Regulation by the Member States, including their transmission to and from
EURODAC shall be carried out by the national competent authorities designated
pursuant to Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA.

Article 34
Data
security

1.           The
Member State of origin shall ensure the security of the data before and during
transmission to the Central System.

2.           Each
Member State shall, in relation to its national system, adopt the necessary
measures, including a security plan, in order to:

(a)     physically
protect data, including by making contingency plans for the protection of
critical infrastructure;

(b)     deny
unauthorised persons access to national installations in which the Member State
carries out operations in accordance with the purpose of EURODAC (checks at
entrance to the installation);

(c)     prevent the
unauthorised reading, copying, modification or removal of data media (data
media control);

(d)     prevent the
unauthorised input of data and the unauthorised inspection, modification or erasure
of stored personal data (storage control);

(e)     prevent the
unauthorised processing of data in EURODAC and any unauthorised modification or
erasure of data processed in EURODAC (control of data entry);

(f)      ensure that
persons authorised to access EURODAC have access only to the data covered by
their access authorisation, by means of individual and unique user identities
and confidential access modes only (data access control);

(g)     ensure that
all authorities with a right of access to EURODAC create profiles describing
the functions and responsibilities of persons who are authorised to access,
enter, update, erase and search the data and make these profiles available to
the National Supervisory Authorities referred to in Article 25 of Framework
Decision 2008/977/JHA without delay at their request (personnel profiles);

(h)     ensure that
it is possible to verify and establish to which bodies personal data may be
transmitted using data communication equipment (communication control);

(i)      ensure that
it is possible to verify and establish what data have been processed in
EURODAC, when, by whom and for what purpose (control of data recording);

(j)      prevent the
unauthorised reading, copying, modification or erasure of personal data during
the transmission of personal data to or from EURODAC or during the transport of
data media, in particular by means of appropriate encryption techniques
(transport control);

(k)     monitor the
effectiveness of the security measures referred to in this paragraph and take
the necessary organisational measures related to internal monitoring to ensure
compliance with this Regulation (self-auditing).

3.           The
Agency shall take the necessary measures in order to achieve the objectives set
out in paragraph 2 as regards the operation of EURODAC, including the adoption
of a security plan.

Article 35
Prohibition
of transfers of data to third countries or to international bodies or to
private parties

Personal data obtained by a Member State
or Europol pursuant to this Regulation from the EURODAC central database shall
not be transferred or made available to any third country or international
organisation or a private entity established in or outside the European Union.
This prohibition shall be without prejudice to the right of Member States to
transfer such data to third countries to which the Dublin Regulation applies.

Article 36
Logging
and documentation

1.           Each
Member Stat and Europol shall ensure that all data processing operations
resulting from requests for comparison with EURODAC data pursuant to this Regulation are logged or documented for the purposes of checking
the admissibility of the request monitoring the lawfulness of the data
processing and data integrity and security and for self-monitoring.

2.           The
log or documentation shall show in all cases:

(a)     the exact
purpose of the request for comparison, including the concerned form of a
terrorist offence or other serious criminal offence and for Europol, the exact
purpose of the request for comparison;

(b)     the
respective national file reference;

(c)     the date and
exact time of the request for comparison by the National Access Point to the
EURODAC Central System;

(d)     the name of
the authority having requested access for comparison, and the person
responsible who has made the request and processed the data;

(e)     where
applicable the use of the urgent procedure referred to in Article 19(3) and the decision taken with regard to the ex-post
verification;

(f)      the data
used for comparison;

(g)     according to
national rules or the rules of the Europol decision the identifying mark of the
official who carried out the search and of the official who ordered the search
or supply.

3.           Such
logs or documentation shall be used only for the data protection monitoring of
the lawfulness of data processing as well as to ensure data security. Only logs
containing non-personal data may be used for the monitoring and evaluation
referred to in Article 38. The competent national supervisory
authorities responsible for checking the admissibility of the request and
monitoring the lawfulness of the data processing and data integrity and
security, shall have access to these logs at their request for the purpose of
fulfilling their duties.

ê 2725/2000/EC

ð new

Article 37 17
Liability

1.           Any person who, or Member
State which, has suffered damage as a result of an unlawful processing
operation or any act incompatible with the provisions laid down in this
Regulation shall be entitled to receive compensation from the Member State
responsible for the damage suffered. That State shall be exempted from its
liability, in whole or in part, if it proves that it is not responsible for the
event giving rise to the damage.

2.           If failure of a Member
State to comply with its obligations under this Regulation causes damage to the
central database ð Central System ï, that Member State shall be held liable for such damage, unless and
insofar as the Commission ð Agency or another Member State ï failed to take reasonable steps to prevent the damage from
occurring or to minimise its impact.

3.           Claims for compensation
against a Member State for the damage referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall
be governed by the provisions of national law of the defendant Member State.

ò new

CHAPTER VIII

AMENDMENTS TO
THE REGULATION (EU) No
1077/2011

Article 38
Provisions amending
Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011

1.           Article
5 is replaced by the following:

“Article 5
Tasks relating to EURODAC

In relation to
EURODAC, the Agency shall perform :

(a)        the tasks conferred on the Agency by
Regulation (EU) No ..../.... [of the European Parliament and the Council on the
establishment of 'EURODAC' for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective
application of Regulation (EU) No {.../....}].

(b)          tasks
relating to training on the technical use of EURODAC.”

2.           Article
12(1) is amended as follows:

(a)     points (t),
(u) and (v) are replaced by
the following:

“(t)     to adopt
the reports on the technical functioning of SIS II pursuant to Article 50(4) of
Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and Article 66(4) of Decision 2007/533/JHA respectively, of VIS pursuant
to Article 50(3) of Regulation (EC) No 767/2008 and Article 17(3) of Decision
2008/633/JHA; and of EURODAC
pursuant to Article 40(4) of Regulation (EU) No ..../... [of the European
Parliament and the Council on the establishment of 'EURODAC' for the comparison
of fingerprints for the effective application of Regulation (EU) No {.../....}
establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible
for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the
Member States by a third country national or a stateless person] and to
request comparisons with EURODAC data by Member States' law enforcement
authorities for law enforcement purposes;

(u)     to adopt the
annual report on the activities of the Central System of EURODAC pursuant to
Article 40(1) of Regulation (EU) No ..../.... [of the European Parliament and
the Council on the establishment of 'EURODAC' for the comparison of fingerprints
for the effective application of Regulation (EU) No .../....];

(v)     to make comments on the European Data
Protection Supervisor's reports on the audits pursuant to Article 45 of
Regulation (EC) 1987/2006 , Article 42(2) of Regulation (EC) No 767/2008 and
Article 31 (2) of Regulation (EU) No ..../.... [of the European Parliament and
the Council on the establishment of 'EURODAC' for the comparison of
fingerprints for the effective application of Regulation (EU) No .../....] and ensure
appropriate follow‑up of the audit;”

(b)     point (x) is
replaced by the following:

“(x)    to compile
statistics on the work of the Central System of EURODAC pursuant to Article
8(2) of Regulation (EU) No
..../.... [of the European Parliament and the Council on the establishment of
'EURODAC' for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective application of
Regulation (EU) No {.../....]”

(c)     point (z) is
replaced by the following:

“(z)    to ensure
annual publication of the list of authorities designated pursuant to Article
27(2) of Regulation (EU) No
.../.... [of the European Parliament and the Council on the establishment of
'EURODAC' for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective application of
Regulation (EU) No .../....]”

3.           In
Article 15 paragraph (4) is replaced by the following:

“4.        Europol
and Eurojust may attend the meetings of the Management Board as observers when
a question concerning SIS II, in relation to the application of Decision
2007/533/JHA, is on the agenda. Europol may also attend the meetings of the
Management Board as observer when a question concerning VIS, in relation to the
application of Decision 2008/633/JHA, is on the agenda or when a question
concerning EURODAC, in relation with the application of Regulation (EU) No .../....
[of the European Parliament and the Council on the establishment of
'EURODAC' for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective application of
Regulation (EU) No ..../....]is on the agenda.”

4.           Article
17 is amended as follows:

(a)     in paragraph
5 point (g) is replaced by
the following:

“(g)       without
prejudice to Article 17 of the Staff Regulations, establish confidentiality
requirements in order to comply with Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006, Article 17 of Decision 2007/533/JHA and Article 26(9) of
Regulation (EC) No 767/2008 respectively and Article 4(6) of Regulation (EU) No .../....
[of the European Parliament and the Council on the establishment of
'EURODAC' for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective application of
Regulation (EU) No .../...];”

(b)     in paragraph
6 point (i) is replaced by the following:

“(i)        reports
on the technical functioning of each large-scale IT system referred to in point
(t) of Article 12(1) and the annual report on the activities of the Central
System of EURODAC referred to in point (u) of Article 12(1), on the basis of
the results of monitoring and evaluation.”

5.           In
Article 19 paragraph 3 is replaced by the following:

"3. Europol and
Eurojust may each appoint a representative to the SIS II Advisory Group.
Europol may also appoint a representative to the VIS and to the EURODAC
Advisory Groups."

ê 2725/2000/EC
(adapted)

ð new

CHAPTER VII
IX

FINAL PROVISIONS

Article 39
21
Costs

1.           The costs incurred in
connection with the establishment and operation of the Central Unit ð Central System and the Communication
Infrastructure ï shall be borne by the general budget of the European Union.

2.           The costs incurred by
national ð access points ï units and the costs for connection to the central database ð Central System ï shall be borne by each Member State.

3.           Each
Member State and Europol shall set up and maintain at their expense the
technical infrastructure necessary to implement this Regulation, and be
responsible for bearing its costs resulting from requests for comparison with
EURODAC data for the purposes of the prevention, detection or investigation of any of the criminal
offences defined in this Regulation.

3.           The
costs of transmission of data from the Member State of origin and of the findings of the comparison to that State shall
be borne by the State in question.

Article 40
24
Annual
report:, mMonitoring and
evaluation

1.           The Commission ð Agency ï shall submit to the European Parliament and the Council an annual
report on the activities of the Central Unit ð System ï. The annual report shall include information on the management and
performance of EurodacEURODAC
against pre-defined quantitative indicators for the objectives referred to in
paragraph 2.

2.           The Commission ð Agency ï shall ensure that Ö procedures Õ systems
are in place to monitor the functioning of the Central Unit ð System ï against objectives Ö relating
to Õ in terms of
outputs,
cost-effectiveness and quality of service.

3.           The Commission shall regularly evaluate the
operation of the Central Unit in order to establish whether its objectives
have been attained cost-effectively and with a view to providing guidelines for
improving the efficiency of future operations.

4.           One year after Eurodac starts operations, the
Commission shall produce an evaluation report on the Central Unit, focusing
on the level of demand compared with expectation and on operational and
management issues in the light of experience, with a view to identifying
possible short-term improvements to operational practice.

ò new

3.           For
the purposes of technical maintenance, reporting and statistics, the Agency
shall have access to the necessary information relating to the processing
operations performed in the Central System.

4.           Every
two years, the Agency shall submit to the European Parliament, the Council, the
Commission and the European Data Protection Supervisor a report on the
technical functioning of the Central System, including the security thereof.

ê 2725/2000/EC

ð new

5.           Three years after Eurodac starts operations ð the start of application of this
Regulation as provided for in Article 46(2) ï and every six ð four ï years thereafter, the Commission shall produce an overall
evaluation of EurodacEURODAC,
examining results achieved against objectives and assessing the continuing
validity of the underlying rationale, and any implications for future
operations ð , as well as make any necessary recommendations ï . ð The Commission shall transmit the
evaluation to the European Parliament and the
Council. ï

ò new

6.           Member
States shall provide the Agency and the Commission with the information
necessary to draft the reports referred to in paragraph 4 and 5.

7.           The
Agency shall provide the Commission with the information necessary to produce
the overall evaluations referred to in paragraph 5.

8.           Each
Member State and Europol shall prepare annual reports on the effectiveness of
the comparison of fingerprint data with EURODAC data for law enforcement access
purposes, containing information and statistics on the exact purpose of the
comparison, including the type of a terrorist offence or a serious criminal
offence, number of requests for comparison, the number and type of cases which
have ended in successful identifications and on the need and use made of the
exceptional case of urgency as well as on those cases where that urgency was
not accepted by the ex post verification carried out by the verifying authority.
Such reports shall be transmitted to the Commission.

9.           The
Agency, Member States and Europol shall provide the Commission the information
necessary to draft the evaluation reports referred to in paragraph 5. This information shall not jeopardise working methods nor include
information that reveals sources, staff members or investigations of the
designated authorities.

ê 2725/2000/EC
(adapted)

ð new

Article 41
25
Penalties

Member States   shall Ö take the necessary measures to Õ ensure
that Ö any Õ processing use of data recorded
Ö entered Õ in the
central database ð Central System ï contrary to the purpose of EurodacEURODAC as laid down in Article 1(1) shall be
subject to
appropriate penalties Ö is punishable by penalties, including administrative and/or criminal
penalties in accordance with national law, that are effective, proportionate
and dissuasive Õ.

Article 42
26
Territorial
scope

The provisions of this Regulation shall not be
applicable to any territory to which the
Dublin Convention
Ö Regulation Õ does not
apply.

ò new

Article 43
Notification
of designated authorities and verifying authorities

1.           By
[three months after the date of entry into force of this Regulation] at the latest each Member State shall notify the
Commission of its designated authorities and shall notify without delay any
amendment thereto.

2.           By
[three months after the date of entry into force of this Regulation] at the latest each Member State shall notify the
Commission of its verifying authority and shall notify without delay any
amendment thereto.

3.           By
[three months after the date of entry into force of this Regulation] at the latest Europol shall notify the Commission of
its verifying authority and the National Access Point which it has designated
and shall notify without delay any amendment thereto.

4.           The
Commission shall publish information referred to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 in
the Official Journal of the European Union on an annual basis.

ò new

Article 44
Transitional provision

Data blocked in the
Central System in accordance with Article 12 of Council Regulation (EC) No
2725/2000/EC shall be unblocked and marked in accordance with Article 18(1) of
this Regulation on the date provided for in Article 46 of this Regulation.

Article 45
Repeal

Council Regulation
(EC) No 2725/2000 of 11 December 2000 and Council Regulation (EC) No 407/2002 are repealed with effect from the date referred
to in Article 46(2).

References
to the repealed Regulations shall be read in accordance with the correlation
table in Annex III.

ê 2725/2000/EC
Article 27 (adapted)

ð new

Article 46
27
Entry into
force and applicability

1.           This Regulation shall
enter into force on the Ö twentieth Õ day Ö following
that Õ of its
publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities Ö Union Õ.

2.           This Regulation shall
apply ð two years from the date of the entry
into force of this Regulation.ï , and Eurodac
shall start operations,from the date which the Commission shall publish in
the Official Journal of the European Communities, when the following conditions
met:

(a) each Member
State has notified the Commission that it has made the necessary technical
arrangements to transmit data to the Central Unit in accordance
with the implementing rules adopted under Article 4(7) and to comply with
the implementing rules adopted under Article 12(5); and

(b) the Commission
has made the necessary technical arrangements for the Central Unit to begin operations
in accordance with the implementing rules adopted under Article 4(7) and
Article 12(5).

ò new

3.           Member
States shall notify the Commission and the Agency as soon as they have made the
technical arrangements to transmit data to the Central System, and in any event
no later than two years from the date of the entry into force of this
Regulation.

4.           This
Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in the
Member States in accordance with the Treaties.

ê 2725/2000/EC

Done at Brussels,

For the European Parliament                       For
the Council

The
President                                                 The President

ê 407/2002/EC

ð new

Annex I

Data format for the exchange of fingerprint
data

The following format is prescribed for the
exchange of fingerprint data:

ANSI/NIST - CSL 1
1993 ð ANSI/NIST-ITL 1a-1997, Ver.3, June
2001 (INT-1) ï and any future further developments of this standard.

Norm for Member State identification letters

The following ISO norm will apply: ISO 3166 - 2
letters code.

Annex II

é

ANNEX II
Repealed Regulations
(referred to in Article 45)

Council Regulation (EC) No 2725/2000/EC Council Regulation (EC) No 407/2002/EC || (OJ L 316, 15.12.2000, p. 1.) (OJ L 062, 05.03.2002 p. 1.)

ANNEX III
Correlation table

Regulation 2725/2000/EC || This Regulation

Article 1(1) || Article 1(1)

Article 1(2), first subparagraph || Article 3(1)

Article 1(2), second subparagraph || Deleted

Article 1(2), third subparagraph || Article 3(4)

Article 1(3) || Article 1(3)

Article 2 || Article 2

Article 3(1) || deleted

Article 3(2) || Article 3(3)

Article 3(3) || Article 8

Article 3(4) || Deleted

Article 4(1) || Article 9(1), 3(5)

Article 4(2) || Deleted

Article 4(3) || Article 9(3)

Article 4(4) || Article 9(4)

Article 4(5) || Article 9(5)

Article 4(6) || Article 25(4)

Article 5 || Article 11

Article 6 || Article 12

Article 7 || Article 13

Article 8 || Article 14

Article 9 || Article 15

Article 10 || Article 16

Article 11(1)-(4) || Article 17(1)-(4)

Article 11(5) || Deleted

Article 12 || Article 18

Article 13 || Article 23

Article 14 || Deleted

Article 15 || Article 27

Article 16 || Article 28

Article 17 || Article 37

Article 18 || Article 29

Article 19 || Article 30

Article 20 || Deleted

Article 21 || Article 39

Article 22 || Deleted

Article 23 || Deleted

Article 24 || Article 40

Article 25 || Article 24

Article 26 || Article 42

Article 27 || Article 46

Regulation 407/2002/EC || This Regulation

Article 2 || Article 24

Article 3 || Article 25

Article 4 || Article 26

Article 5(1) || Article 3(3)

Annex I || Annex I

Annex II || Deleted

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.    Objective(s)

1.5.    Grounds
for the proposal/initiative

1.6.    Duration
and financial impact

1.7.    Management
method(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
participation in financing

3.3.    Estimated impact on revenue

LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT

11.         FRAMEWORK OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE

11.1.      Title of the
proposal/initiative

Amended proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and the
Council on the establishment of 'EURODAC' for the comparison of fingerprints
for the effective application of Regulation (EU) No [.../...] [establishing the
criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for
examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the
Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person] and to request
comparisons with EURODAC data by Member States' law enforcement authorities and
Europol for law enforcement purposes and amending Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011
establishing a European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT
systems in the area of freedom, security and justice.

11.2.      Policy area(s) concerned in
the ABM/ABB structure[44]

Area of Home Affairs (title 18)

Activity: Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT
systems in the area of freedom, security and justice (chapter
18.02.11)

11.3.      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 action[45]

x The proposal/initiative relates to the
extension of an existing action

 ̈ The
proposal/initiative relates to an action redirected towards a new action

11.4.      Objectives

11.4.1.   The Commission's multiannual
strategic objective(s) targeted by the proposal/initiative

Not applicable

11.4.2.   Specific objective(s) and
ABM/ABB activity(ies) concerned

Specific objective No. 1

Contribute to the completion of the Common European Asylum System by
adopting higher common standards of protection, supporting practical
cooperation and increasing solidarity within the EU and between the EU and
third countries with the support of the European Refugee Fund.

Specific objective No. 2

Facilitate the prevention, detection and investigation of terrorist
offences and other serious criminal offences.

ABM/ABB activity(ies) concerned

18 02 – Solidarity – External Borders, Return, Visa Policy and Free
Movement of People

11.4.3.   Expected result(s) and
impact

Specify the effects
which the proposal/initiative should have on the beneficiaries/groups targeted.

This proposal retains from the previous
proposal [COM (2010) 555 final] the improvements of the
system as regards new, asylum-focused functionalities and, at the same time,
adds the functionality of law enforcement searches
originally proposed in COM (2009) 342 final and COM (2009) 344 final.

The proposal will better manage and protect the data of data
subjects while it will also facilitate Member States' procedures to determine
the Member State responsible for the assessment of an asylum claim. It will facilitate
prevention, detection and investigation of terrorist offences and other serious
criminal offences by allowing access to EURODAC for consultation for law
enforcement purposes.

11.4.4.   Indicators of results and
impact

Specify the
indicators for monitoring implementation of the proposal/initiative.

Concerning the improvements to the efficiency of EURODAC and the
better addressing of data protection concerns, the indicators would be the annual
statistics on the operation of EURODAC, eg. those on missed hits and wrong
hits, transmission delays, etc., together with the four-yearly evaluation of
EURODAC. The modification to "mark" data instead of "block"
data as in the original Regulation should be implemented by the IT Agency
within two years after the publication of this
Regulation. Success will be measured through the annual EURODAC report that
will highlight how many cases were marked, together with responses in the
four-yearly evaluation from Member States noting whether this information
permitted a transfer back to the country that should have been hosting the data
subject. The change in the rules on deletion of data is designed to ensure that
no EU citizen's data are stored in EURODAC. This can be tested when future
nations acceed to the EU (such as Croatia) to ensure that all data concerning
Croatian nationals are deleted automatically. The success of this change will
be reported in the four-yearly evalaution.

Concerning the facilitation of the
prevention, detection and investigation of terrorist offences and other serious
criminal offences, the indicators would be the statistics on the number of
terrorist offences and other serious criminal offences prevented, detected and
investigated as a result of a EURODAC consultation for law enforcement purposes.
The IT modifications to permit comparisons with latent fingerprints should be
completed by the IT Agency two years after the publication of this Regulation.
It is not possible to anticipate the number of requests that will be made for
law enforcement purposes, but if even only a few serious crimes are solved or
prevented over a period of several years, the investment will have been
merited. There are significant safeguards in the proposal designed to prevent
excessive use of the law enforcement access tool (must be a serious crime as
laid down by the European Arrest Warrant, and there must have been a Prüm check
first) therefore one indicator of success will also be that the requests are
limited only to those falling within these strict boundaries.

Statistics sets are requested in Article 40 of the Recast.

11.5.      Grounds for the
proposal/initiative

11.5.1.   Requirement(s) to be met in
the short or long term

As elaborated in the Explanatory Memorandum to the proposal in
sections 1, 3, 5 and 7:

In order to inform Member States of the status of those applicants
who have in fact been already granted international protection in a Member
State, data on refugees should be deblocked (i.e. made available for
searches).

In order to better facilitate the application of the Dublin
Regulation, Member States will be required to indicate in EURODAC the fact
that they apply the sovereignty or the humanitarian clauses provided for by
that Regulation, ie. assume responsibility for the assessment of the claim of
an applicant for whom they would not normally be responsible under the criteria
of the Dublin Regulation.

In order to ensure consistency with the asylum acquis, the
scope of the Regulation is proposed to be extended to cover subsidiary
protection.

In order to ensure consistency with the asylum acquis, the
storage period for data on third country nationals or stateless persons
fingerprinted in connection with the irregular crossing of an external border
is proposed to be aligned with the period until which Article 10(1) of the
Dublin Regulation allocates responsibility on the basis of that information
(i.e. one year).

Based on the outcome of negotiations in the Council, a new Article was introduced in order to provide information to Member
States on the status of the data subject (asylum seekers or irregular entrant).
This article foresees that Member States are also informed if a given person,
whose data is stored in the database, was transferred following a Dublin take
charge procedure, or if he or she left the territory of the Member
States, either voluntarily or as the result of a return decision or removal
order.

In order to facilitate prevention, detection and investigation of
terrorist offences and other serious criminal offences, access for consultation
for law enforcement purposes to EURODAC will be allowed.

11.5.2.   Added value of EU
involvement

Cross-border crime is increasing and presents one of the most
serious threats to our society as reported by Europol. Without adequate and
efficient cooperation between law enforcement authorities of Member States,
including access to relevant information held in other Member States, it will
be very difficult, if not impossible, for these authorities to perform their
duties in relation to the prevention, detection and investigation of terrorists
offences and other serious criminal offences and hence to fight such
cross-border crime effectively. Because of the very nature of these crimes,
instruments on an EU level are required to set the ground for cooperation
between Member States.

In addition, action at the EU level will help to ensure harmonised
provisions on safeguarding data protection, whereas if Member States are left
to legislate independently, a harmonised level of safeguards will be difficult
to achieve. Furthermore, absence of action at EU level would be detrimental for
data protection as it compels law enforcement authorities to process much more
data than is required if they had access to a central index of available data.
In addition, as the safeguards would not be harmonised at EU level, the level
of protection of individuals with regard to the protection of their personal
data could vary sensibly between Member States. The reason for this is that
they have to resort to requests for the data to all Member States, rather than
a single request to the relevant Member State. All these requests ultimately
lead to the processing of much more data, which itself is detrimental to data
protection.

As EURODAC is a fingerprint database run currently by the European
Commission and in future by the IT Agency, it is only possible for the Union to
make the necessary upgrades to the EURODAC system as identified by the last
evaluation of EURODAC. The Central Unit needs to make the changes concerning
the marking of data (instead of marking, as before). Member States wishing to
access EURODAC for law enforcement purposes can only do so via a centrally
coordinated system as provided for in this EURODAC Recast Regulation. The Union
must therefore provide the basis through which the comparison of latent
fingerprints from a crime scene may be made with live fingerprints taken in the
course of applying for asylum. Such a comparison of data would not be possible
without action at the level of the Union.

11.5.3.   Lessons learned from similar
experiences in the past

EURODAC has been a succesfully operation database since 15 January
2003 containing the fingerprints of all asylum seekers within the EU. Most of
its original specifications have served their intended functions well, but as
shown by the evaluation of Dublin and EURODAC in 2007[46] it is necessary to make
certain modifications to improve its usage. The majority of amendments made via
this Recast Regulation are therefore on the basis of the lessons learned
through the prior evaluation. In addition, using EURODAC for law enforcement
purposes is a further efficiency as it will better utilise already existing
data for only a small outlay of EU investment.

11.5.4.   Coherence and possible
synergy with other relevant instruments

The present proposal was drafted in full coherence with the recast
proposal on the Dublin Regulation.[47]

11.6.      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.

11.7.      Management mode(s)
envisaged[48]

x Centralised indirect management with the delegation of implementation tasks to:

–
 ̈  executive agencies

–
x bodies set up by the European Union[49]

–
 ̈  national public-sector bodies/bodies with public-service mission

–
 ̈  persons entrusted with the implementation of specific actions
pursuant to Title V of the Treaty on European Union and identified in the
relevant basic act within the meaning of Article 49 of the Financial Regulation

 ̈ Joint management with international organisations (to be specified)

If more than one
management mode is indicated, please provide details in the
"Comments" section.

Comments

EURODAC
will be transferred to the European Agency for the operational management of
large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice (the
"IT Agency"). The additional features specified in the EURODAC Recast
will be developed by the IT Agency.

12.         MANAGEMENT MEASURES

12.1.      Monitoring and reporting
rules

Specify frequency
and conditions.

Monitoring of the efficiency of the changes introduced by the
present proposal is to be performed in the framework of the annual reports on
the activities of the EURODAC Central Unit. Monitoring of data protection
issues will be performed by the European Data Protection Supervisor.

National competent authorities for the supervision of the processing
of personal data should monitor the lawfulness of the processing of personal
data by the Member States, and the Joint Supervisory Body set up by the Europol
Decision should monitor the lawfulness of data processing activities performed
by Europol.

The original EURODAC Regulation contained Article 24 concerning
evaluation of EURODAC. This Recast proposal also includes an Article (40)
concerning monitoring and evaluation.

12.2.      Management and control
system

12.2.1.   Risk(s) identified

Failing to make important amendments to the Regulation in force, the
efficiency of EURODAC could be undermined, as well as its supporting role to
the implementation of the Dublin Regulation. Not being able to keep up with the
changes of the asylum and data protection acquis would be also an
important risk.

12.2.2.   Control method(s) envisaged

The indicators will be the statistics on the operation of EURODAC,
eg. those on missed hits and wrong hits, transmission delays, etc.

12.3.      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 Regulation (EC) No 1037/1999 shall apply without restriction
to the Agency responsible for the operational management of EURODAC.

The Agency shall also accede to the interinstitutional Agreement
concerning internal investigations by the European Antifraud Office (OLAF) and
shall issue, without delay, the appropriate provisions applicable to all the
employees of the Agency.

The decisions concerning funding and the implementation agreements
and instruments resulting from them shall explicitly stipulate that the Court
of Auditors and OLAF shall carry out, if necessary, on-the-spot checks among
the recipients of the Agency's funding and the agents responsible for
allocating it.

13.         ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE
PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE

13.1.      Heading(s) of the
multiannual financial framework and expenditure budget line(s) affected

–
Existing expenditure budget lines

In order of
multiannual financial framework headings and budget lines.

Heading of multiannual financial framework || Budget line || Type of expenditure || Contribution

Number [Description........................................] || Diff./non-diff. ([50]) || from EFTA[51] countries || from candidate countries[52] || from third countries || within the meaning of Article 18(1)(aa) of the Financial Regulation

3A || 18.02.11.01 Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice — Contribution to Titles 1 and 2 18.02.11.02 Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice — Contribution to Title 3 || DA || NO || NO || YES || NO

–
New budget lines requested

In order of multiannual financial framework
headings and budget lines.

Heading of multiannual financial framework || Budget line || Type of expenditure || Contribution

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

|| [XX.YY.YY.YY] || || YES/NO || YES/NO || YES/NO || YES/NO

13.2.      Estimated impact on
expenditure

13.2.1.   Summary of estimated impact
on expenditure

EUR million (to 3 decimal places)

Heading of multiannual financial framework: || Number || [Heading 3A]

DG: <Home Affairs> || || || Year N[53] (2013) || Year N+1 || Year N+2 || || ... enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) || TOTAL

Title 1 (Human Resources)[54] || Commitments || (1) || 0.128 || 0.064 || 0.064 || || || || || 0.256

Payments || (2) || 0.128 || 0.064 || 0.064 || || || || || 0.256

Title 2 (Other Administrative Expenditure)[55] || Commitments || (1a) || 0.100 || 0 || 0 || || || || || 0.100

Payments || (2a) || 0.100 || 0 || 0 || || || || || 0.100

Title 3 (Operational Expenditure) || Commitments || (3a) || 2.415 || 0 || 0 || || || || || 2.415

|| Payments || (3b) || 1.690 || 0.725 || 0 || || || || || 2.415

TOTAL appropriations for DG <Home Affairs> || Commitments || =1+1a +3a || 2.643 || 0.064 || 0.064 || || || || || 2.771

Payments || =2+2a +3b || 1.918 || 0.789 || 0.064 || || || || || 2.771

Heading of multiannual financial framework: || 5 || " Administrative expenditure "

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

DG: <Home Affairs> ||

Ÿ Human resources || 0 || 0 || 0 || || || || ||

Ÿ Other administrative expenditure || 0 || 0 || 0 || || || || ||

TOTAL DG <Home Affairs> || Appropriations || 0 || 0 || 0 || || || || ||

TOTAL appropriations under HEADING 5 of the multiannual financial framework || (Total commitments = Total payments) || 0 || 0 || 0 || || || || ||

EUR million (to 3 decimal places)

|| || || Year N[56] || 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

TOTAL appropriations under HEADINGS 1 to 5 of the multiannual financial framework || Commitments || 2.643 || 0.064 || 0.064 || || || || || 2.771

Payments || 1.918 || 0.789 || 0.064 || || || || || 2.771

13.2.2.   Estimated impact on [body]
appropriations

–
 ̈  The proposal/initiative does not require the use of operational
appropriations

–
x The proposal/initiative requires the use of operational
appropriations, as explained below:

Commitment appropriations in EUR million (to 3 decimal
places)

Indicate objectives and outputs ò || || || 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

OUTPUTS

Type of output[57] || Average cost of the output || Number of outputs || Cost || Number of outputs || Cost || Number of outputs || Cost || Number of outputs || Cost || Number of outputs || Cost || Number of outputs || Cost || Number of outputs || Cost || Total number of outputs || Total cost

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 1[58] Asylum Requirements deriving from the EURODAC Regulation

Changes other than for Law Enforcement Access || Imple || || 1 || 0.100 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0 || || || || || || || || 0.100

|| || || || || || || || || || || || || || || ||

|| || || || || || || || || || || || || || || ||

Sub-total for specific objective N°1 || 1 || 0.100 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0 || || || || || || || || 0.100

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 2 facilitate prevention, detection and investigation of terrorist offences and other serious criminal offences

Changes for Law Enforcement Access || Imple || || 1 || 2.543 || 1 || 0.064 || 1 || 0.064 || || || || || || || || || || 2.671

Sub-total for specific objective N°2 || 1 || 2.543 || 1 || 0.064 || 1 || 0.064 || || || || || || || || || || 2.671

TOTAL COST || 2 || 2.643 || 1 || 0.064 || 1 || 0.064 || || || || || || || || || || 2.771

13.2.3.   Estimated impact on the IT
Agency's human resources

13.2.3.1.          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 explained below:

EUR million (to 3
decimal places)

|| Year N [59] || 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

Officials (AD Grades) || || || || || || || ||

Officials (AST grades) || || || || || || || ||

Contractual agent || 0.128 || 0.064 || 0.064 || || || || || 0.256

Temporary agents || || || || || || || ||

Seconded National Experts || || || || || || || ||

TOTAL || 0.128 || 0.064 || 0.064 || || || || || 0.256

Annual Human Resources Requirements || N || N+1 || N+2

Total number of Human Resources || 2 || 1 || 1

Existing IT Agency staff cannot be used for the
upgrade of EURODAC because they are not development staff and are needed to
operate the existing EURODAC functionalities. The changes provided by this
Recast to permit the comparison of latent fingerprints from a crime-scene with
live rolled fingerprints require expertise that the IT Agency and currently the
Commission do not possess. As such, it will be necessary to hire contractual
agents as follows:

Year N: Two contractual agents required to work
the on technical tasks (technical specifications, technical support to the
administrative tasks, coordination of internal services) as well as on the call
for tender preparation and publication, opening committee, evaluation
committee, evaluation report, award decision, contract signature).

In years N+1 and N+2, one staff member would be
needed for technical tasks (project management, follow-up of contract
deliverables, deliverable quality check and acceptance, coordination of
internal services, service orders, change requests).

By year N+3 the new functionalities will become
operational once the development phase is complete and as such no additional
staff should be required.

13.2.3.2.          Estimated
requirements of human resources for the parent DG

–
x The proposal/initiative does not require the use of human resources

–
 ̈  The proposal/initiative requires the use of human resources, as
explained below:

Estimate to be expressed in full amounts
(or at most to one decimal place)

|| 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)

Ÿ Establishment plan posts (officials and temporary agents) ||

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) || || || || || || ||

|| || || || || || ||

Ÿ External personnel (in Full Time Equivalent unit: FTE)[60] ||

XX 01 02 01 (CA, INT, SNE from the "global envelope") || || || || || || ||

XX 01 02 02 (CA, INT, JED, LA and SNE in the delegations) || || || || || || ||

XX 01 04 yy [61] || - at Headquarters[62] || || || || || || ||

- in delegations || || || || || || ||

XX 01 05 02 (CA, INT, SNE - Indirect research) || || || || || || ||

10 01 05 02 (CA, INT, SNE - 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.

Description of
tasks to be carried out:

Officials and temporary agents ||

External personnel ||

Description of the calculation of cost for
FTE equivalent should be included in the Annex, section 3.

13.2.4.   Compatibility with the
current multiannual financial framework

–
x Proposal/initiative is compatible with both the 2007-13 and 2014-20
multiannual financial frameworks.

–
 ̈  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 framework[63].

Explain what is required, specifying the
headings and budget lines concerned and the corresponding amounts.

13.2.5.   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 || || || || || || || ||

13.3.      Estimated impact on revenue

–
 ̈  Proposal/initiative has no financial impact on revenue.

–
x Proposal/initiative has the following financial impact:

 ̈         on own resources

(1)
x      on miscellaneous revenue

EUR million (to 3 decimal places)

Budget revenue line: || Appropriations available for the ongoing budget year || Impact of the proposal/initiative[64]

Year N || Year N+1 || Year N+2 || Year N+3 || ... insert as many columns as necessary in order to reflect the duration of the impact (see point 1.6)

|| || || || || || || ||

For miscellaneous
assigned revenue, specify the budget expenditure line(s) affected.

Revenue line 6312

Specify the method for
calculating the impact on revenue.

[NO, IS, CH and FL contribute for a total of 12.452% in the payments
made over a given year]

[1]               OJ
L 062, 05.03.2002, p. 1.

[2]               Proposal for a Regulation of the
European Parliament and of the Council concerning the establishment of
'Eurodac' for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective application of
Regulation (EC) No [.../...] [establishing the criteria and mechanisms for
determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for
international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country
national or a stateless person], COM(2008)825 final.

[3]               Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February
2003 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State
responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the Member
States by a third-country national. OJ L 50, 25.02.2003, p. 1

[4]               The Proposal for a Regulation of
the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an Agency for the
operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security
and justice [COM(2009) 293 final] was adopted on 24 June 2009. An amended
proposal was adopted on 19 March 2010: Amended proposal for a Regulation (EU)
No .../... of the European Parliament and of the Council on establishing an Agency
for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of
freedom, security and justice, COM(2010)93.

[5]               Establishment of 'Eurodac' for
the comparison of fingerprints (recast), P6_TA(2009)0378.

[6]               Such a proposal was called for
by Council Conclusions on access to Eurodac by Member States’ police and law
enforcement authorities as well as Europol of 12 and 13 June 2007.

[7]               COM(2009) 344.

[8]               COM(2009) 665 final/2.

[9]               COM(2010) 555 final.

[10]             COM(2005)
597.

[11]             See pages 15-16 and 57 of the 2009 Impact Assessment SEC(2009) 936.

[12]             See the reference to "interference" in Judgment
of the ECJ of 20 May 2003, Österreichischer Rundfunk and Others. Joined Cases
C-465/2000, C-138/01 and C-139/01, ECR [2003], p. I-4989, paragraph 83

[13]             Joined applications 30562/04 and 30566/04, S. and
Marper v. United Kingdom, judgment of 4 December 2008.

[14]             One to ensure
consistency with the Dublin Regulation and one to clarify the need for having
the system's automated hit replies verified by a fingerprints expert.

[15]             SEC(2008) 2981 and SEC(2009) 936

[16]             COM(2007) 301.

[17]             Agreement between the European
Community and the Kingdom of Denmark on the criteria and mechanisms for
establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in
Denmark or any other Member State of the European Union and “Eurodac” for the
comparison of fingerprints for the effective application of the Dublin
Convention (OJ L 66, 8.3.2006).

[18]             Agreement between the European
Community and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the
criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a
request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Iceland or Norway (OJ L 93,
3.4.2001, p. 40).

[19]             Agreement between the European
Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms
for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum
lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland (OJ L 53, 27.2.2008, p. 5).

[20]             Protocol between the European Community, the Swiss
Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the
Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Community
and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for
establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in
a Member State or in Switzerland (OJ L 160 18.6.2011 p. 39)

[21]             Protocol between the European
Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein to the
Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning
the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for
examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland
(2006/0257 CNS, concluded on 24.10.2008, publication in OJ pending) and
Protocol to the Agreement between the Community, Republic of Iceland and the
Kingdom of Norway concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the
State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State,
Iceland and Norway (OJ L 93, 3.4.2001).

[22]             SEC(2008) 2981 and SEC(2009) 936

[23]             COM(2012) XXX.

[24]             OJ L 92 10.04.2010, p. 1

[25]             OJ C 189, 7.7.2000, p. 105 and p. 227 and opinion delivered on 21
September 2000 (not yet published in the Official Journal).

[26]             OJ L 316, 15.12.2000, p. 1.

[27]             OJ L 62, 5.3.2002, p. 1.

[28]             COM(2008)XXX.

[29]             COM(2005) 597, 24.11.2005.

[30]             OJ L 121, 15.5.2009, p. 37

[31]             OJ L 304, 30.9.2004, p. 12.

[32]             OJ L 286, 1.11.2011, p. 1.

[33]             OJ L 164, 22.6.2002, p. 3.

[34]             OJ L 190, 18.7.2002, p. 1.

[35]             OJ L 210, 6.8.2008, p. 1.

[36]             OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31.

[37]             OJ L 350, 30.12.2008, p. 60.

[38]             OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1.

[39]             OJ L 66, 8.3.2006, p. 38.

[40]             OJ L 93, 3.4.2001, p. 40.

[41]             OJ L 53, 27.2.2008, p. 5

[42]             OJ L 160, 18.6.2011, p. 39.

[43]             OJ 45, 14.6.1962, p. 1385.

[44]             ABM: Activity-Based Management – ABB: Activity-Based
Budgeting.

[45]             As referred to in Article 49(6)(a) or (b) of the
Financial Regulation.

[46]             COM(2007) 299 final

[47]             Proposal for a Regulation of the
European Parliament and of the Council establishing the criteria and mechanisms
for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for
international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country
national or a stateless person, COM(2008) 820.

[48]             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

[49]             As referred to in Article 185 of the Financial
Regulation.

[50]             Diff. = Differentiated appropriations / Non-Diff. =
Non-differentiated appropriations

[51]             EFTA: European Free Trade Association.

[52]             Candidate countries and, where applicable, potential
candidate countries from the Western Balkans.

[53]             Year N is the year in which implementation of the
proposal/initiative starts.

[54]             See 13.2.3.1 for explanation of HR costs

[55]             Conferences, meetings, other administrative expenses.

[56]             Year N is the year in which implementation of the
proposal/initiative starts.

[57]             Outputs are products and services to be supplied (e.g.:
number of student exchanges financed, number of km of roads built, etc.).

[58]             As described in Section 1.4.2. "Specific
objective(s)..."

[59]             Year N is the year in which implementation of the
proposal/initiative starts.

[60]             CA= Contract Agent; INT= agency staff ("Intérimaire");
JED= "Jeune Expert en Délégation" (Young Experts in
Delegations); LA= Local Agent; SNE= Seconded National Expert;

[61]             Under
the ceiling for external personnel from operational
appropriations (former "BA" lines).

[62]             Essentially for Structural Funds, European Agricultural
Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and European Fisheries Fund (EFF).

[63]             See points 19 and 24 of the Interinstitutional
Agreement.

[64]             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.