EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 20.6.2022 COM(2021) 784 final/2 2021/0410(COD) CORRIGENDUM



This document corrects document COM(2021) 784 final of 8.12.2021



Concerns all language versions



Deletion of Article 58 (on the Burden of proof) and replacement of Article 61 (on Communication of personal data to third countries and international organisations)



The text shall read as follows: Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on automated data exchange for police cooperation (“Prüm II”), amending Council Decisions 2008/615/JHA and 2008/616/JHA and Regulations (EU) 2018/1726, 2019/817 and 2019/818 of the European Parliament and of the Council {SEC(2021) 421 final} - {SWD(2021) 378 final} - {SWD(2021) 379 final}



EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL •Reasons for the proposal Criminality across Europe undermines EU citizens’ security and well-being. Law enforcement authorities need robust and performant tools to fight crime effectively. Cooperation and information sharing are the most powerful means to combat crime and pursue justice. In 2021, more than 70% of organised crime groups were found to be present in more than three Member States. Even the seemingly most local crime may have links to other places in Europe where the same perpetrator carried out his/her criminal acts. Similarly, links of presumably local crime to organised crime structures and operations are often not obvious. Therefore, to be able to effectively fight crime, law enforcement authorities need to be able to exchange data in a timely manner. The EU has already provided law enforcement with a range of tools to facilitate the exchange of information, which have proven crucial in uncovering criminal activities and networks, but there are still information gaps that need to be addressed. Moreover, with data stored separately in various national IT systems as well as large-scale IT systems at the EU level, there is a need to ensure the systems can communicate with each other. In an area without internal border controls (the ‘Schengen’ area), there are still borders and obstacles when it comes to data exchange between law enforcement authorities, which leads to blind spots and loopholes for numerous criminals and terrorists that act in more than one Member State. This initiative, together with the proposal, adopted in parallel, for a Directive on information exchange between law enforcement authorities of Member States, aim to reinforce the exchange of information between Member States and therefore provide EU law enforcement authorities with enhanced tools to fight crime and terrorism. For more than ten years, the Prüm framework has enabled law enforcement authorities across the EU to exchange information. The Prüm Decisions, adopted in 2008 with the aim of supporting cross-border police and judicial cooperation related to criminal matters, provide for the automated exchange of specific data (DNA profiles, fingerprints and vehicle registration data) between authorities responsible for the prevention, detection and investigation of criminal offences. The Prüm framework is successfully contributing to fighting crime and terrorism in the EU, but there are still loopholes in the field of information exchange and therefore there is room for further improvement. The Council Conclusions on the implementation of the Prüm Decisions ten years after their adoption underlined the importance of the automated searching and comparison of DNA profiles, dactyloscopic data and vehicle registration data for tackling terrorism and cross-border crime. The Council also invited the Commission to consider revising the Prüm Decisions with a view to broadening their scope and to updating the necessary technical and legal requirements. Prüm II builds on the existing Prüm framework, reinforcing and modernising the framework and allowing interoperability with other EU information systems. It will ensure that all the relevant data that is available for law enforcement authorities in a Member State can be used by law enforcement authorities in other Member States. It will also ensure that Europol can provide support to Member States in the context of the Prüm framework. This initiative provides for the creation of a new architecture that allows for easier and faster exchange of data between Member States and that ensures a high level of protection of fundamental rights. •Objectives of the proposal The general objective of this proposal results from the Treaty-based goal of contributing to the internal security of the European Union. Among measures to do so, the collection, storage, processing, analysis and exchange of relevant information is listed. The general objective of this instrument is thus to improve, streamline and facilitate the exchange of information for the purpose of the prevention, detection and investigation of criminal and terrorist offences between Member States’ law enforcement authorities, but also with Europol as the EU criminal information hub. The specific policy objectives of this proposal are to: (a)Provide a technical solution for efficient automated exchange of data between law enforcement authorities to make them aware of relevant data that is available in the national database of another Member State; (b)Ensure that more relevant data (in terms of data categories) from national databases in other Member States is available to all competent law enforcement authorities; (c)Ensure that relevant data (in terms of sources of data) from Europol’s databases is available to law enforcement authorities; (d)Provide law enforcement authorities with efficient access to the actual data corresponding to a ‘hit’ that is available in the national database of another Member State. •Consistency with existing policy provisions in the policy area The recent Schengen Strategy announced several measures to step up police cooperation and information exchange between law enforcement authorities to enhance security in an inherently interdependent area without internal borders. Together with the proposal for a Directive on information exchange between law enforcement authorities of Member States, this proposal contributes to the objectives of this strategy by ensuring that law enforcement authorities in one Member State have access to the same information that is available to their colleagues in another Member State. The proposal comes within the wider landscape of the large-scale EU information systems that has developed substantially since the adoption of the Prüm framework. This includes the three EU central information systems that are in operation: the Schengen Information System (SIS), the Visa Information System (VIS) and the Eurodac system. In addition, three new systems are currently in development phase: the Entry/Exit System (EES), the European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) and the centralised system for the identification of Member States holding conviction information on third-country nationals and stateless persons (ECRIS-TCN system). All these current and future systems are linked through the interoperability framework for the EU information systems for security, border and migration management, adopted in 2019, and which is currently being put in place. The revisions included in this proposal seek to align the Prüm framework with the interoperability framework, notably when it comes to the exchange of data and the overall architecture provided by the interoperability of EU information systems. This would provide for fast and controlled access to the information that law enforcement officers need to perform their tasks and for which they have access rights. The SIS already contains alerts on missing persons and allows searches based on fingerprints. The SIS is a hit/no hit, actionable centralised information system directly accessible to a large number of frontline end-users containing alerts and providing immediate response on the spot, with actions to be taken related to the subject of the alert. The SIS is mostly used at police, border and custom checks, and by visa and immigration authorities in their routine procedures and checks.

In contrast, the Prüm framework does not have any central component/database at EU level and it is used only in criminal investigations. It allows other Member States to access the de-personalised sub-sets of national criminal DNA and fingerprint databases of all connected Member States. This access is granted to national contact points only. While the hit/no hit response is provided within seconds or minutes, it may take weeks or even months to receive the corresponding personal data related to the hit. 2.LEGAL BASIS, SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY •Legal basis The legal basis of this proposal are the following provisions of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU): Article 16(2), Article 87(2)(a) and Article 88(2). Under Article 16(2), the Union has the power to adopt measures relating to the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies and by Member States when carrying out activities which fall within the scope of Union law, and the rules relating to the free movement of such data. Under point (a) of Article 87(2), the Union has the power to adopt measures on the collection, storage, processing, analysis and exchange of relevant information to ensure police cooperation among Member States’ competent authorities, including police, customs and other specialised enforcement services in relation to the prevention, detection and investigation of criminal offences. Under Article 88(2), the European Parliament and the Council can determine Europol’s structure, operation, field of action and tasks. •Subsidiarity The improvement of information exchange among police and law enforcement authorities within the EU cannot be sufficiently achieved by Member States in isolation, owing to the cross-border nature of crime fighting and security issues. Member States must rely on one another in these matters. Through several implementation projects at EU level, Member States have tried to take action to address the shortcomings of the current Prüm framework. Despite all these actions, many of the shortcomings remained the same as the ones described in the 2012 report on the implementation of the Prüm Decision. This shows the need for EU action as measures implemented by Member States alone have not proved sufficient to address the limitations of the current Prüm framework. Moreover, common EU level rules, standards and requirements facilitate information exchanges while providing compatibility between different national systems. This in turn allows for a certain level of automation in information exchange workflows that release law enforcement officers from labour-intensive manual activities. •Proportionality As explained in full detail in the impact assessment accompanying this proposed Regulation, the policy choices made in this proposal are considered proportionate. This is because they do not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the identified objectives. The proposal envisages the creation of central routers (the Prüm II router and EPRIS) that would each act as a connecting point between Member States. This is a hybrid approach between a decentralised and centralised solution without any data storage at central level. It will imply that national databases in each Member State will all connect to the central router instead of connecting to one another. These routers would serve as message brokers forwarding search transactions and replies to national systems, without creating new data processes, enlarging access rights or replacing national databases. This approach would ensure that law enforcement authorities have fast and controlled access to the information that they need to perform their tasks, in line with their access rights. The router would facilitate the implementation by Member States of existing and future data exchanges in the context of the Prüm framework. The automated exchange of additional data categories, such as facial images and police records, is crucial for effective criminal investigations and for identifying criminals. The introduction of these additional data categories would not lead to storing new categories of data as Member States already collect them under national law and store them in national databases. The exchange of these new data categories would constitute a new processing of data. However, it would be limited to the extent necessary to achieve its purpose and it would only allow for comparison of data in case-by-case situations. A set of several safeguards (e.g. sharing full data only if there is a “hit” following a query) are also foreseen in the proposal. With this proposal, Europol will form an integral part of the Prüm framework, firstly by enabling Member States to automatically check third country-sourced biometric data held at Europol. Secondly, Europol could also check third country-sourced data against Member States’ national databases. These two aspects of Europol’s involvement in the new Prüm framework, in accordance with Europol’s tasks as set out in Regulation (EU) 2016/794, would guarantee that no gaps occur in relation to data related to serious crime and terrorism received from third countries. In an open society in a globalised world, data provided by third countries on criminals and terrorists is crucial. It would allow for the potential identification of criminals known by countries outside the EU, while at the same time benefitting from strong safeguards with respect to the protection of privacy and fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals established in the Europol cooperation agreements with third countries. The revised hit-follow-up exchange process would contribute to the internal security of the European Union by simplifying and streamlining the exchange of law enforcement information. Compared to the current situation where the exchange of information following a hit is governed by national law and is thereby subject to different rules and procedures, common rules harmonising this second step of the Prüm process would give predictability to all users, as they would all know what data they would get in this step. The exchange of data would be facilitated through partial automation, which means that human intervention would still be needed before any comprehensive follow-up data exchange can take place. Member States would retain ownership/control over their data. •Choice of the instrument A Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council is proposed. The proposed legislation builds on an existing framework of Council Decisions contributing to cross-border cooperation between EU Member States in the fields of justice and home affairs. In view of the need for the proposed measures to be directly applicable and uniformly applied across Member States, as well as to enhance the exchange of information, a Regulation is therefore the appropriate choice of legal instrument. 3.RESULTS OF EX-POST EVALUATIONS, STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS •Ex-post evaluations of existing legislation

Overall, the evaluation of the Prüm framework showed that searching and comparing DNA, fingerprint and vehicle registration data in other Member States’ databases for the prevention and investigation of criminal offences, are of paramount importance for safeguarding the internal security of the EU and the safety of its citizens. The evaluation further demonstrated that the Prüm Decisions have helped to establish common EU level rules, standards and requirements, to facilitate information exchange and provide compatibility between different national systems. However, since the expiration of the deadline for the implementation of the Prüm framework ten years ago, the EU has adopted several other measures on the facilitation of the exchange of information between law enforcement authorities, including the interoperability framework. Additionally, provisions on the technical specifications of queries, security measures and communication have not been updated since the adoption of the Prüm Decisions in 2008. Some of these rules are outdated as forensic science and technology have significantly developed in the past decade. The evaluation also found that the implementation of the Prüm Decisions in the past ten years has been slow and that not all Member States have taken the necessary steps to implement the Decisions. As a consequence, a number of bilateral connections have not been established, and queries cannot be launched to some Member States’ databases. Findings of the evaluation also showed that the follow-up to hits occurs based on national law and therefore falls outside the scope of the Prüm Decisions. Differences in national rules and procedures can cause, in several instances, significant time-lags for competent authorities to receive information following a hit. This state of play affects the functioning of the Prüm system as well as the effective exchange of information between Member States by decreasing the possibility that criminals are identified, and cross-border links between crimes are detected. The findings of the evaluation supported the preparation of the impact assessment and of this proposal. • Stakeholder consultations The preparation of this proposal involved targeted consultations of concerned stakeholders, including end-users of the system, namely Member States’ authorities using the Prüm automated data exchange ranging from law enforcement and judicial authorities, national vehicle registration authorities, to national database custodians and forensic laboratories. Europol and eu-LISA were also consulted in view of their respective expertise and their potential role in the new Prüm framework. The FRA, as well as non-governmental organisations such as EDRi (European Digital Rights) and intergovernmental organisations (Eucaris – European car and driving licence information systems) also provided input in light of their expertise. Consultation activities in the context of the preparation of the impact assessment underpinning this proposal gathered feedback from stakeholders in various fora. These activities included notably an inception impact assessment, a public consultation and a series of technical workshops. A feasibility study was conducted based on desk research, interviews with subject matter experts, questionnaires and three expert workshops, and examined the feasibility of improving information exchange under the Prüm Decisions. Regular discussions on law enforcement information exchange and specifically on the Prüm Decisions in the Council Working Party DAPIX/IXIM also contributed to preparing this proposal. An inception impact assessment was published for feedback from August to October 2020, with a total of six contributions received. A public consultation advertised on the European Commission’s website targeted the general public. Replies confirmed that the existing Prüm framework is relevant for the prevention and investigation of criminal offences, and has improved the exchange of data between Member States’ law enforcement authorities. By preventing the need to query each Member State bilaterally, the automated data exchange under the Prüm framework has also brought efficiency gains. Replies further confirmed the coherence of the framework with EU and international actions in this field, and that it has added-value compared to what Member States could achieve in the field of law enforcement information exchange in the absence of the Prüm framework. In terms of strengthening the current framework, most respondents agreed that the fact that some data categories are not covered by the framework and are therefore exchanged by sending manual queries is a shortcoming. The Commission’s services also organised a series of targeted informal technical workshops with experts from Member States and Schengen Associated Countries. The workshops aimed at bringing together end-users for an exchange of views on the options, which were being envisaged and assessed to strengthen the Prüm framework, from a technical perspective. The accompanying impact assessment sets out a more detailed description of the stakeholder consultation (Annex 2). •Impact assessment The proposal is supported by an impact assessment as presented in the accompanying Staff Working Document [Prüm impact assessment reference]. The Regulatory Scrutiny Board reviewed the draft impact assessment at its meeting of 14 July 2021 and delivered its positive opinion on 16 July 2021. The impact assessment concluded that: (1)To meet the objective of providing a technical solution for efficient automated exchange of data, a hybrid solution between a decentralised and a centralised approach without data storage at central level should be applied. (2)To meet the objective of ensuring that more relevant data (in terms of data categories) is available to law enforcement authorities, the exchange of facial images and police records should be introduced. (3)To meet the objective of ensuring that relevant data from Europol’s databases is available to law enforcement authorities, Member States should be able to check automatically third country-sourced biometric data at Europol as part of the Prüm framework. Europol should also be able to check third country-sourced data against Member States’ national databases. (4)To meet the objective of providing efficient access to the actual data corresponding to a ‘hit’ that is available in the national database of another Member State or at Europol, the follow-up process should be regulated at EU level with a semi-automated exchange of the actual data corresponding to a ‘hit’.

The major positive impact of this proposal will be to respond effectively to the identified problems and reinforce the current Prüm framework with targeted and strong additional capabilities to step up its support to Member States in reinforcing information exchange with the final objective of preventing and investigating criminal and terrorist offences, in full compliance with fundamental rights. The ultimate beneficiaries of all preferred options are the citizens, who will directly and indirectly benefit from better crime fighting and lower crime rates. In terms of efficiency, the main beneficiaries are national law enforcement authorities. The immediate financial and economic impacts of the proposal will require investments at both EU and Member States’ level. It is expected that the projected investments costs will be outweighed by benefits and savings, notably at the Member States’ level. Despite the initial investments, the creation of the central Prüm router will save costs for Member States as the router would not require each Member State to create (and maintain) as many connections as there are Member States and data categories. •Fundamental rights In accordance with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, to which EU institutions and Member States are bound when they implement EU law (Article 51(1) of the Charter), and with the principle of non-discrimination, the opportunities offered by the options presented need to be balanced with the obligation to ensure that interferences with fundamental rights that may derive from them are limited to what is strictly necessary to genuinely meet the objectives of general interest pursued, subject to the principle of proportionality (Article 52(1) of the Charter). The proposed solutions offer the opportunity to adopt targeted preventive measures to enhance security. As such, they can contribute pursue the legitimate objective of facilitating the fight against crime, which also implies a positive obligation on authorities to take preventive operational measures to protect an individual whose life is at risk, if they know or ought to have known of the existence of an immediate risk. •Protection of personal data Exchange of information has an impact on the right to the protection of personal data. This right is established by Article 8 of the Charter and Article 16 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. As underlined by the Court of Justice of the EU, the right to the protection of personal data is not an absolute right but must be considered in relation to its function in society. Data protection is closely linked to respect for private and family life protected by Article 7 of the Charter. As regards Prüm, the applicable data protection legislation is Directive (EU) 2016/680. Indeed, the Prüm framework provides for processing of personal data carried out in the context of the exchange of information between law enforcement authorities responsible for the prevention and investigation of criminal offences. The free movement of data within the EU is not to be restricted for reasons of data protection. However, a series of principles must be met. Indeed, to be lawful, any limitation on the exercise of the fundamental rights protected by the Charter must comply with the following criteria, laid down in its Article 52(1): (1)it must be provided for by law; (2)it must respect the essence of the rights; (3)it must genuinely meet objectives of general interest recognised by the Union or the need to protect the rights and freedoms of others; (4)it must be necessary; and (5)it must be proportional. This proposal embeds all these data protection rules, as set out in full detail in the impact assessment accompanying this proposed Regulation. The proposal is based on the principles of data protection by design and by default. It includes all appropriate provisions limiting data processing to what is necessary for the specific purpose and granting data access only to those entities that ‘need to know’. Access to data is reserved exclusively for duly authorised staff of Member States’ authorities or EU bodies that are competent for the specific purposes of the revised Prüm framework and limited to the extent that the data are required for the performance of tasks in accordance with these purposes. The Commission will, at the time of publishing the report assessing the effect given to [Council Recommendation on operational police cooperation] by the Member States referred to under point 9(d) of that Recommendation, decide whether there is a need for EU legislation on cross-border operational police cooperation. Should there be a need for such legislation, the Commission will make a legislative proposal on cross-border operational police cooperation, which will also ensure the alignment of the provisions of Decision 2008/615/JHA and Decision 2008/616/JHA which were not covered under this proposal with Directive 2016/680, in line with the results of the assessment under Article 62(6) of Directive 2016/680. Should there not be a need for EU legislation on cross-border operational police cooperation, the Commission will make a legislative proposal to ensure this same alignment, in line with the results of the assessment under Article 62(6) of Directive 2016/680. 4.BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS This legislative initiative would have an impact on the budget and staff needs of eu-LISA and Europol. For eu-LISA, it is estimated that an additional budget of around EUR 16 million and around 10 additional posts would be needed for the overall MFF period to ensure that eu-LISA has the necessary resources to enforce the tasks attributed to the Agency in this proposed Regulation. The budget allocated to eu-LISA will be offset against the BMVI.

For Europol, it is estimated that an additional budget of around EUR 7 million and around 5 additional posts would be needed for the overall MFF period to ensure that Europol has the necessary resources to enforce the tasks attributed to the Agency in this proposed Regulation. The budget allocated to Europol will be offset against the ISF. 5.OTHER ELEMENTS •Implementation plans and monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements The Commission will ensure that the necessary arrangements are in place to monitor the functioning of the measures proposed and evaluate them against the main policy objectives. Two years after the new functionalities are put in place and operating, and every two years thereafter, Union Agencies should submit to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission a report on the technical functioning of the new proposed measures. In addition, three years after the new functionalities are put in place and operating, and every four years thereafter, the Commission should produce an overall evaluation of the measures, including on any direct or indirect impact on fundamental rights. It should examine results achieved against objectives and assess the continuing validity of the underlying rationale and any implications for future options. The Commission should submit the evaluation reports to the European Parliament and the Council. •Detailed explanation of the specific provisions of the proposal Chapter 1 sets out the general provisions for this Regulation with its subject matter, purpose and scope. It provides a list of definitions and recalls that the processing of personal data for the purposes of this Regulation shall respect the principle of non-discrimination and other fundamental rights. Chapter 2 sets out the provisions for the exchange of the categories of data under this Regulation, namely the exchange of DNA profiles, dactyloscopic data, vehicle registration data, facial images and police records. The principles for the exchange, the automated search of data, the rules for requests and answers are detailed in a separate section for each category of data respectively. Chapter 2 also contains common provisions for the exchange of data, the setting up of national contact points and implementing measure. Chapter 3 sets out the details for the new (technical) architecture for the exchange of data. The first section of this chapter includes provisions describing the central router, the use of the router and the launching of queries. Implementing acts will be needed to specify the technical procedures for these queries. This section also includes provisions on the interoperability between the router and the Common Identity Repository for the purposes of law enforcement access, the keeping of logs of all data processing operations in the router, the quality check and the notification procedures in case of technical impossibility to use the router. A second section provides details on the use of the European Police Records Index System (EPRIS) for the exchange of police records. This section also includes provisions on the keeping of logs of all data processing operations in EPRIS, and the notification procedures in case of technical impossibility to use EPRIS. Chapter 4 sets out the processes for exchange of data following a match. It includes a provision on the automated exchange of core data, with data limited to what is necessary to enable the identification of the individual concerned, and a provision on the exchange of data at any stage of the process under this Regulation which is not explicitly described under this Regulation. Chapter 5 contains provisions on the access by Member States to third country-sourced biometric data stored by Europol and on the access by Europol to data stored in Member States’ databases. Chapter 6 on data protection contains provisions ensuring that data under this Regulation are processed lawfully and appropriately, in line with the provisions of Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA. It explains who the data processor will be for the processing of data pursuant to this Regulation. It sets out measures required from eu-LISA and Member States’ authorities to ensure the security of data processing, the appropriate handling of security incidents and the monitoring of compliance with the measures in this Regulation. The chapter also sets out the provisions relating to supervision and audit in relation to data protection. It underlines the principle that data processed under this Regulation shall not be transferred or made available to any third country or international organisation in an automated manner. Chapter 7 details the responsibilities of Member States, Europol, and eu-LISA respectively in the implementation of the measures in this Regulation. Chapter 8 concerns amendments to other existing instruments, namely Decisions 2008/615/JHA and 2008/616/JHA, Regulation (EU) 2018/1726, Regulation (EU) 2019/817 and Regulation (EU) 2019/818. Chapter 9 on final provisions sets out the details relating to reporting and statistics, costs, notifications, transitional provisions and derogations. It also sets out the requirements for the start of operations of the measures proposed under this Regulation. The chapter also provides for the setting up of a committee and the adoption of a practical handbook to support implementation and management of this Regulation. It also includes a provision on monitoring and evaluation and a provision on the entry into force and applicability of this Regulation. Notably, this Regulation replaces Articles 2 to 6 and Sections 2 and 3 of Chapter 2 of Council Decision 2008/615/JHA and Chapters 2 to 5 and Articles 18, 20 and 21 of Council Decision 2008/616/JHA which will consequently be deleted from those Council Decisions from the date of application of this Regulation. The effect of those amendments will be that the replaced and deleted provisions no longer apply to any Member State.



2021/0410 (COD) Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on automated data exchange for police cooperation (“Prüm II”), amending Council Decisions 2008/615/JHA and 2008/616/JHA and Regulations (EU) 2018/1726, 2019/817 and 2019/818 of the European Parliament and of the Council THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 16(2), Article 87(2), point (a), and Article 88(2) thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission, After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments, Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee, Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions, Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, Whereas: (1)The Union has set itself the objective of offering its citizens an area of freedom, security and justice without internal frontiers, in which the free movement of persons is ensured. That objective should be achieved by means of, among others, appropriate measures to prevent and combat crime, including organised crime and terrorism. (2)That objective requires that law enforcement authorities exchange data, in an efficient and timely manner, in order to effectively fight crime. (3)The objective of this Regulation is therefore to improve, streamline and facilitate the exchange of criminal information between Member States’ law enforcement authorities, but also with the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation established by Regulation (EU) No 2016/794 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Europol) as the Union criminal information hub. (4)Council Decisions 2008/615/JHA and 2008/616/JHA laying down rules for the exchange of information between authorities responsible for the prevention and investigation of criminal offences by providing for the automated transfer of DNA profiles, dactyloscopic data and certain vehicle registration data, have proven important for tackling terrorism and cross-border crime. (5)This Regulation should lay down the conditions and procedures for the automated transfer of DNA profiles, dactyloscopic data, vehicle registration data, facial images and police records. This should be without prejudice to the processing of any of these data in the Schengen Information System (SIS) or the exchange of supplementary information related to them via the SIRENE bureaux or to the rights of individuals whose data is processed therein. (6)The processing of personal data and the exchange of personal data for the purposes of this Regulation should not result in discrimination against persons on any grounds. It should fully respect human dignity and integrity and other fundamental rights, including the right to respect for one's private life and to the protection of personal data, in accordance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. (7)By providing for the automated search or comparison of DNA profiles, dactyloscopic data, vehicle registration data, facial images and police records, the purpose of this Regulation is also to allow for the search of missing persons and unidentified human remains. This should be without prejudice to the entry of SIS alerts on missing persons and the exchange of supplementary information on such alerts under Regulation (EU) 2018/1862 of the European Parliament and of the Council. (8)The Directive (EU) …/… [on information exchange between law enforcement authorities of Member States] provides a coherent Union legal framework to ensure that law enforcement authorities have equivalent access to information held by other Member States when they need it to fight crime and terrorism. To enhance information exchange, that Directive formalises and clarifies the procedures for information sharing between Member States, in particular for investigative purposes, including the role of the ‘Single Point of Contact’ for such exchanges, and making full use of Europol’s information exchange channel SIENA. Any exchange of information beyond what is provided for in this Regulation should be regulated by Directive (EU) …/… [on information exchange between law enforcement authorities of Member States]. (9)For the automated searching of vehicle registration data, Member States should use the European Vehicle and Driving Licence Information System (Eucaris) set up by the Treaty concerning a European Vehicle and Driving Licence Information System (EUCARIS) designed for this purpose. Eucaris should connect all participating Member States in a network. There is no central component needed for the communication to be established as each Member State communicates directly to the other connected Member States. (10)The identification of a criminal is essential for a successful criminal investigation and prosecution. The automated searching of facial images of suspects and convicted criminals should provide for additional information for successfully identifying criminals and fighting crime. (11)The automated search or comparison of biometric data (DNA profiles, dactyloscopic data and facial images) between authorities responsible for the prevention, detection and investigation of criminal offences under this Regulation should only concern data contained in databases established for the prevention, detection and investigation of criminal offences. (12)Participation in the exchange of police records should remain voluntary. Where Member States decide to participate, in the spirit of reciprocity, it should not be possible for them to query other Member States’ databases if they do not make their own data available for queries by other Member States. (13)In recent years, Europol has received a large amount of biometric data of suspected and convicted terrorists and criminals from several third countries. Including third country-sourced data stored at Europol in the Prüm framework and thus making this data available to law enforcement authorities is necessary for better prevention and investigation of criminal offences. It also contributes to building synergies between different law enforcement tools.

(14)Europol should be able to search Member States’ databases under the Prüm framework with data received from third countries in order to establish cross-border links between criminal cases. Being able to use Prüm data, next to other databases available to Europol, should allow establishing more complete and informed analysis on the criminal investigations and should allow Europol to provide better support to Member States’ law enforcement authorities. In case of a match between data used for the search and data held in Member States’ databases, Member States may supply Europol with the information necessary for it to fulfil its tasks. (15)Decisions 2008/615/JHA and 2008/616/JHA provide for a network of bilateral connections between the national databases of Member States. As a consequence of this technical architecture, each Member State should establish at least 26 connections, that means a connection with each Member State, per data category. The router and the European Police Records Index System (EPRIS) established by this Regulation should simplify the technical architecture of the Prüm framework and serve as connecting points between all Member States. The router should require a single connection per Member State in relation to biometric data and EPRIS should require a single connection per Member State in relation to police records. (16)The router should be connected to the European Search Portal established by Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2019/817 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2019/818 of the European Parliament and of the Council to allow Member States’ authorities and Europol to launch queries to national databases under this Regulation simultaneously to queries to the Common Identity Repository established by Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2019/817 and Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2019/818 for law enforcement purposes. (17)In case of a match between the data used for the search or comparison and data held in the national database of the requested Member State(s), and upon confirmation of this match by the requesting Member State, the requested Member State should return a limited set of core data via the router within 24 hours. The deadline would ensure fast communication exchange between Member States’ authorities. Member States should retain control over the release of this limited set of core data. A certain degree of human intervention should be maintained at key points in the process, including for the decision to release personal data to the requesting Member State in order to ensure that there would be no automated exchange of core data. (18)Any exchange between Member States’ authorities or with Europol at any stage of one of the processes described under this Regulation, which is not explicitly described in this Regulation, should take place via SIENA to ensure that a common, secure and reliable channel of communication is used by all Member States. (19)The universal message format (UMF) standard should be used in the development of the router and EPRIS. Any automated exchange of data in accordance with this Regulation should use the UMF standard. Member States’ authorities and Europol are encouraged to use the UMF standard also in relation to any further exchange of data between them in the context of the Prüm II framework. The UMF standard should serve as a standard for structured, cross-border information exchange between information systems, authorities or organisations in the field of Justice and Home Affairs. (20)Only non-classified information should be exchanged via the Prüm II framework. (21)Certain aspects of the Prüm II framework cannot be covered exhaustively by this Regulation given their technical, highly detailed and frequently changing nature. Those aspects include, for example, technical arrangements and specifications for automated searching procedures, the standards for data exchange and the data elements to be exchanged. In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council. (22)As this Regulation provides for the establishment of the new Prüm framework, relevant provisions of Decisions 2008/615/JHA and 2008/616/JHA should be deleted. Those Decisions should therefore be amended accordingly. (23)As the router should be developed and managed by the European Union Agency for the Operational Management of Large-Scale Information Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice established by Regulation (EU) 2018/1726 of the European Parliament and of the Council (eu-LISA), it is therefore necessary to amend Regulation (EU) 2018/1726 by adding that to the tasks of eu-LISA. In order to allow for the router to be connected to the European Search Portal to carry out simultaneous searches of the router and the Common Identity Repository it is therefore necessary to amend Regulation (EU) 2019/817. In order to allow for the router to be connected to the European Search Portal to carry out simultaneous searches of the router and the Common Identity Repository and in order to store reports and statistics of the router on the Common Repository for Reporting and Statistics it is therefore necessary to amend Regulation (EU) 2019/818. Those Regulations should therefore be amended accordingly. (24)In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application. (25)[In accordance with Article 3 of the Protocol (No 21) on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Ireland has notified its wish to take part in the adoption and application of this Regulation.] OR [In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, 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.] (26)The European Data Protection Supervisor was consulted in accordance with Article 42(1) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council and delivered an opinion on [XX]. HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: CHAPTER 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS Article 1 Subject matter This Regulation establishes a framework for the exchange of information between authorities responsible for the prevention, detection and investigation of criminal offences (Prüm II). This Regulation lays down the conditions and procedures for the automated searching of DNA profiles, dactyloscopic data, facial images, police records and certain vehicle registration data and the rules regarding the exchange of core data following a match.

Article 2 Purpose The purpose of Prüm II shall be to step up cross-border cooperation in matters covered by Part III, Title V, Chapter 5 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, particularly the exchange of information between authorities responsible for the prevention, detection and investigation of criminal offences. The purpose of Prüm II shall also be to allow for the search for missing persons and unidentified human remains by authorities responsible for the prevention, detection and investigation of criminal offences. Article 3 Scope This Regulation applies to the national databases used for the automated transfer of the categories of DNA profiles, dactyloscopic data, facial images, police records and certain vehicle registration data. Article 4 Definitions For the purposes of this Regulation, the following definitions apply: (1)‘loci’ means the particular molecular structure at the various DNA locations; (2)‘DNA profile’ means a letter or number code which represents a set of identification characteristics of the non-coding part of an analysed human DNA sample, the particular molecular structure at the various DNA locations; (3)‘non-coding part of DNA’ means chromosome regions not genetically expressed, i.e. not known to provide for any functional properties of an organism; (4)‘DNA reference data’ means DNA profile and the reference number referred to in Article 9; (5)‘reference DNA profile’ means the DNA profile of an identified person; (6)‘unidentified DNA profile’ means the DNA profile obtained from traces collected during the investigation of criminal offences and belonging to a person not yet identified; (7)‘dactyloscopic data’ means fingerprint images, images of fingerprint latents, palm prints, palm print latents and templates of such images (coded minutiae), when they are stored and dealt with in an automated database; (8)‘dactyloscopic reference data’ means dactyloscopic data and the reference number referred to in Article 14; (9)‘individual case’ means a single investigation file; (10)‘facial image’ means digital image of the face;

(11)‘biometric data’ means DNA profiles, dactyloscopic data or facial images; (12)‘match’ means the existence of a correspondence as a result of an automated comparison between personal data recorded or being recorded in an information system or database; (13)‘candidate’ means data with which a match occurred; (14)‘requesting Member State’ means the Member State which is conducting a search through Prüm II; (15)‘requested Member State’ means the Member State in which databases the search is conducted through Prüm II by the requesting Member State; (16)‘police records’ means any information available in the national register or registers recording data of competent authorities, for the prevention, detection and investigation of criminal offences; (17)‘pseudonymisation’ means the processing of personal data in such a manner that the personal data can no longer be attributed to a specific data subject without the use of additional information, provided that such additional information is kept separately and is subject to technical and organisational measures to ensure that the personal data are not attributed to an identified or identifiable natural person; (18)‘Europol data’ means any personal data processed by Europol in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/794; (19)‘supervisory authority’ means an independent public authority established by a Member State pursuant to Article 41 of Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council; (20)‘SIENA’ means the secure information exchange network application, managed by Europol, aimed at facilitating the exchange of information between Member States and Europol; (21)‘significant incident’ means any incident unless it has a limited impact and is likely to be already well understood in terms of method or technology; (22)‘significant cyber threat’ means a cyber threat with the intention, opportunity and capability to cause a significant incident; (23)‘significant vulnerability’ means a vulnerability that will likely lead to a significant incident if it is exploited; (24)‘incident’ means an incident within the meaning of Article 4(5) of Directive (EU) …/… of the European Parliament and of the Council [proposal NIS 2]. CHAPTER 2 EXCHANGE OF DATA SECTION 1 DNA profiles

Article 5 Establishment of national DNA analysis files 1. Member States shall open and keep national DNA analysis files for the investigation of criminal offences. Processing of data kept in those files, under this Regulation, shall be carried out in accordance with this Regulation, in compliance with the national law of the Member States applicable to the processing of those data. 2. Member States shall ensure the availability of DNA reference data from their national DNA analysis files as referred to in paragraph 1. DNA reference data shall not contain any data from which an individual can be directly identified. DNA reference data which is not attributed to any individual (unidentified DNA profiles) shall be recognisable as such. Article 6 Automated searching of DNA profiles 1. Member States shall allow national contact points referred to in Article 29 and Europol access to the DNA reference data in their DNA analysis files, to conduct automated searches by comparing DNA profiles for the investigation of criminal offences. Searches may be conducted only in individual cases and in compliance with the national law of the requesting Member State. 2. Should an automated search show that a supplied DNA profile matches DNA profiles entered in the requested Member State's searched file, the national contact point of the requesting Member State shall receive in an automated way the DNA reference data with which a match has been found. If there is no match, the requesting Member State shall be notified about it in an automated manner. 3. The national contact point of the requesting Member State shall confirm a match of DNA profiles data with DNA reference data held by the requested Member State following the automated supply of the DNA reference data required for confirming a match. Article 7 Automated comparison of unidentified DNA profiles 1. Member States may, via their national contact points, compare the DNA profiles of their unidentified DNA profiles with all DNA profiles from other national DNA analysis files for the investigation of criminal offences. Profiles shall be supplied and compared in an automated manner. 2. Should a requested Member State, as a result of the comparison referred to in paragraph 1, find that any DNA profiles supplied match any of those in its DNA analysis files, it shall, without delay, supply the national contact point of the requesting Member State with the DNA reference data with which a match has been found. 3. The confirmation of a match of DNA profiles with DNA reference data held by the requested Member State shall be carried out by the national contact point of the requesting Member State following the automated supply of the DNA reference data required for confirming a match. Article 8

Reporting about DNA analysis files Each Member State shall inform the Commission and eu-LISA of the national DNA analysis files, to which Articles 5 to 7 apply, in accordance with Article 72. Article 9 Reference numbers for DNA profiles The reference numbers for DNA profiles shall be the combination of the following: (a)a reference number allowing Member States, in case of a match, to retrieve further data and other information in their databases referred to in Article 5 in order to supply it to one, several or all of the other Member States in accordance with Articles 47 and 48; (b)a code to indicate the Member State which holds the DNA profile; (c)a code to indicate the type of DNA profile (reference DNA profiles or unidentified DNA profiles). Article 10 Principles of DNA reference data exchange 1. Appropriate measures shall be taken to ensure confidentiality and integrity for DNA reference data being sent to other Member States, including their encryption. 2. Member States shall take the necessary measures to guarantee the integrity of the DNA profiles made available or sent for comparison to the other Member States and to ensure that those measures comply with the relevant international standards for DNA data exchange. 3. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts to specify the relevant international standards that are to be used by Member States for DNA reference data exchange. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 75(2). Article 11 Rules for requests and answers regarding DNA profiles 1. A request for an automated search or comparison shall include only the following information: (a)the code of the requesting Member State; (b)the date, time and indication number of the request; (c)DNA profiles and their reference numbers referred to in Article 9; (d)the types of DNA profiles transmitted (unidentified DNA profiles or reference DNA profiles).

2. The answer to the request referred to in paragraph 1 shall contain only the following information: (a)an indication as to whether there were one or more matches or no matches ; (b)the date, time and indication number of the request; (c)the date, time and indication number of the answer; (d)the codes of the requesting and requested Member States; (e)the reference numbers of the DNA profiles from the requesting and requested Member States; (f)the type of DNA profiles transmitted (unidentified DNA profiles or reference DNA profiles); (g)the matching DNA profiles. 3. Automated notification of a match shall only be provided if the automated search or comparison has resulted in a match of a minimum number of loci. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts to specify this minimum number of loci, in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 75(2). 4. Where a search or comparison with unidentified DNA profiles results in a match, each requested Member State with matching data may insert a marking in its national database indicating that there has been a match for that DNA profile following another Member State's search or comparison. 5. Member States shall ensure that requests are consistent with declarations sent pursuant to Article 8. Those declarations shall be reproduced in the practical handbook referred to in Article 77. SECTION 2 Dactyloscopic data Article 12 Dactyloscopic reference data 1. Member States shall ensure the availability of dactyloscopic reference data from the file for the national automated fingerprint identification systems established for the prevention, detection and investigation of criminal offences. 2. Dactyloscopic reference data shall not contain any data from which an individual can be directly identified. 3. Dactyloscopic reference data which is not attributed to any individual (unidentified dactyloscopic data) shall be recognisable as such. Article 13 Automated searching of dactyloscopic data

1. For the prevention, detection and investigation of criminal offences, Member States shall allow national contact points of other Member States and Europol access to the dactyloscopic reference data in the automated fingerprint identification systems which they have established for that purpose, to conduct automated searches by comparing dactyloscopic reference data. Searches may be conducted only in individual cases and in compliance with the national law of the requesting Member State. 2. The national contact point of the requesting Member State shall confirm a match of dactyloscopic data with dactyloscopic reference data held by the requested Member State following the automated supply of the dactyloscopic reference data required for confirming a match. Article 14 Reference numbers for dactyloscopic data The reference numbers for dactyloscopic data shall be the combination of the following: (a)a reference number allowing Member States, in the case of a match, to retrieve further data and other information in their databases referred to in Article 12 in order to supply it to one, several or all of the other Member States in accordance with Articles 47 and 48; (b)a code to indicate the Member State which holds the dactyloscopic data. Article 15 Principles for the exchange of dactyloscopic data 1. The digitalisation of dactyloscopic data and their transmission to the other Member States shall be carried out in accordance with a uniform data format. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts to specify the uniform data format in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 75(2). 2. Each Member State shall ensure that the dactyloscopic data it transmits are of sufficient quality for a comparison by the automated fingerprint identification systems. 3. Member States shall take appropriate measures to ensure the confidentiality and integrity of dactyloscopic data being sent to other Member States, including their encryption. 4. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts to specify the relevant existing standards for dactyloscopic data exchange that are to be used by Member States. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 75(2). Article 16 Search capacities for dactyloscopic data 1. Each Member State shall ensure that its search requests do not exceed the search capacities specified by the requested Member State. Member States shall inform the Commission and eu-LISA in accordance with Article 78(8) and (10) about their maximum search capacities per day for dactyloscopic data of identified persons and for dactyloscopic data of persons not yet identified. 2. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts to specify the maximum numbers of candidates accepted for comparison per transmission in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 75(2). Article 17

Rules for requests and answers regarding dactyloscopic data 1. A request for an automated search shall include only the following information: (a)the code of the requesting Member State; (b)the date, time and indication number of the request; (c)the dactyloscopic data and their reference numbers referred to in Article 14. 2. The answer to the request referred to in paragraph 1 shall contain only the following information: (a)an indication as to whether there were one or more matches or no matches; (b)the date, time and indication number of the request; (c)the date, time and indication number of the answer; (d)the codes of the requesting and requested Member States; (e)the reference numbers of the dactyloscopic data from the requesting and requested Member States; (f)the matching dactyloscopic data. SECTION 3 Vehicle registration data Article 18 Automated searching of vehicle registration data 1. For the prevention, detection and investigation of criminal offences, Member States shall allow national contact points of other Member States and Europol access to the following national vehicle registration data, to conduct automated searches in individual cases: (a)data relating to owners or operators; (b)data relating to vehicles. 2. Searches may be conducted only with a full chassis number or a full registration number.

3. Searches may be conducted only in compliance with the national law of the requesting Member State. Article 19 Principles of automated searching of vehicle registration data 1. For automated searching of vehicle registration data Member States shall use the European Vehicle and Driving Licence Information System (Eucaris). 2. The information exchanged via Eucaris shall be transmitted in encrypted form. 3. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts to specify the data elements of the vehicle registration data to be exchanged. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 75(2). Article 20 Keeping of logs 1. Each Member State shall keep logs of queries that the staff of its authorities duly authorised to exchange vehicle registration data make as well as logs of queries requested by other Member States. Europol shall keep logs of queries that its duly authorised staff make. Each Member State and Europol shall keep logs of all data processing operations concerning vehicle registration data. Those logs shall include the following: (a)the Member State or Union agency launching the request for a query; (b)the date and time of the request; (c)the date and time of the answer; (d)the national databases to which a request for a query was sent; (e)the national databases that provided a positive answer. 2. The logs referred to in paragraph 1 may be used only for the collection of statistics and data protection monitoring, including checking the admissibility of a query and the lawfulness of data processing, and for ensuring data security and integrity. Those logs shall be protected by appropriate measures against unauthorised access and erased one year after their creation. If, however, they are required for monitoring procedures that have already begun, they shall be erased once the monitoring procedures no longer require the logs. 3. For the purposes of data protection monitoring, including checking the admissibility of a query and the lawfulness of data processing, the data controllers shall have access to the logs for self-monitoring as referred to in Article 56. SECTION 4 Facial images

Article 21 Facial images 1. Member States shall ensure the availability of facial images from their national databases established for the prevention, detection and investigation of criminal offences. Those data shall only include facial images and the reference number referred to in Article 23, and shall indicate whether the facial images are attributed to an individual or not. Member States shall not make available in this context any data from which an individual can be directly identified. 2. Facial images which are not attributed to any individual (unidentified facial images) must be recognisable as such. Article 22 Automated searching of facial images 1. For the prevention, detection and investigation of criminal offences, Member States shall allow national contact points of other Member States and Europol access to facial images stored in their national databases, to conduct automated searches. Searches may be conducted only in individual cases and in compliance with the national law of the requesting Member State. 2. The requesting Member State shall receive a list composed of matches concerning likely candidates. That Member State shall review the list to determine the existence of a confirmed match. 3. A minimum quality standard shall be established to allow for search and comparison of facial images. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts to specify that minimum quality standard. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 75(2). Article 23 Reference numbers for facial images The reference numbers for facial images shall be the combination of the following: (a)a reference number allowing Member States, in case of a match, to retrieve further data and other information in their databases referred to in Article 21 in order to supply it to one, several or all of the other Member States in accordance with Articles 47 and 48; (b)a code to indicate the Member State which holds the facial images. Article 24 Rules for requests and answers regarding facial images 1. A request for an automated search shall include only the following information: (a)the code of the requesting Member State;

(b)the date, time and indication number of the request; (c)the facial images and their reference numbers referred to in Article 23. 2. The answer to the request referred to in paragraph 1 shall contain only the following information: (a)an indication as to whether there were one or more matches or no matches; (b)the date, time and indication number of the request; (c)the date, time and indication number of the answer; (d)the codes of the requesting and requested Member States; (e)the reference numbers of the facial images from the requesting and requested Member States; (f)the matching facial images. SECTION 5 Police records Article 25 Police records 1. Member States may decide to participate in the automated exchange of police records. Member States participating in the automated exchange of police records shall ensure the availability of biographical data of suspects and criminals from their national police records indexes established for the investigation of criminal offences. This set of data, if available, shall contain the following data: (a)first name(s); (b)family name(s); (c)alias(es); (d)date of birth; (e)nationality or nationalities; (f)place and country of birth;

(g)gender. 2. The data referred to in paragraph 1, points (a), (b), (c), (e) and (f) shall be pseudonymised. Article 26 Automated searching of police records 1. For the investigation of criminal offences, Member States shall allow national contact points of other Member States and Europol access to data from their national police records indexes, to conduct automated searches. Searches may be conducted only in individual cases and in compliance with the national law of the requesting Member State. 2. The requesting Member State shall receive the list of matches with an indication of the quality of the matches. The requesting Member State shall also be informed about the Member State whose database contains data that resulted in the match. Article 27 Reference numbers for police records The reference numbers for police records shall be the combination of the following: (a)a reference number allowing Member States, in the case of a match, to retrieve personal data and other information in their indexes referred to in Article 25 in order to supply it to one, several or all of the Member States in accordance with Articles 47 and 48; (b)a code to indicate the Member State which holds the police records. Article 28 Rules for requests and answers regarding police records 1. A request for an automated search shall include only the following information: (a)the code of the requesting Member State; (b)the date, time and indication number of the request; (c)the police records and their reference numbers referred to in Article 27.

2. The answer to the request referred to in paragraph 1 shall contain only the following information: (a)an indication as to whether there were one or more matches or no matches; (b)the date, time and indication number of the request; (c)the date, time and indication number of the answer; (d)the codes of the requesting and requested Member States; (e)the reference numbers of the police records from the requested Member States. SECTION 6 Common provisions Article 29 National contact points Each Member State shall designate a national contact point. The national contact points shall be responsible for supplying the data referred to in Articles 6, 7, 13, 18, 22 and 26. Article 30 Implementing measures The Commission shall adopt implementing acts to specify the technical arrangements for the procedures set out in Articles 6, 7, 13, 18, 22 and 26. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 75(2). Article 31 Technical specifications Member States and Europol shall observe common technical specifications in connection with all requests and answers related to searches and comparisons of DNA profiles, dactyloscopic data, vehicle registration data, facial images and police records. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts to specify these technical specifications in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 75(2). Article 32 Availability of automated data exchange at national level

1. Member States shall take all necessary measures to ensure that automated searching or comparison of DNA profiles, dactyloscopic data, vehicle registration data, facial images and police records is possible 24 hours a day and seven days a week. 2. National contact points shall immediately inform each other, the Commission, Europol and eu-LISA of the technical fault causing unavailability of the automated data exchange. National contact points shall agree on temporary alternative information exchange arrangements in accordance with the applicable Union law and national legislation. 3. National contact points shall re-establish the automated data exchange without delay. Article 33 Justification for the processing of data 1. Each Member State shall keep a justification of the queries that its competent authorities make. Europol shall keep a justification of the queries it makes. 2. The justification referred to in paragraph 1 shall include: (a)the purpose of the query, including a reference to the specific case or investigation; (b)an indication on whether the query concerns a suspect or a perpetrator of a criminal offence; (c)an indication on whether the query aims to identify an unknown person or obtain more data on a known person. 3. The justifications referred to in paragraph 2 shall only be used for data protection monitoring, including checking the admissibility of a query and the lawfulness of data processing, and for ensuring data security and integrity. Those justifications shall be protected by appropriate measures against unauthorised access and erased one year after their creation. If, however, they are required for monitoring procedures that have already begun, they shall be erased once the monitoring procedures no longer require the justification. 4. For the purposes of data protection monitoring, including checking the admissibility of a query and the lawfulness of data processing, the data controllers shall have access to those justifications for self-monitoring as referred to in Article 56. Article 34 Use of the universal message format 1. The universal message format (UMF) standard shall be used in the development of the router referred to in Article 35 and EPRIS. 2. Any automated exchange of data in accordance with this Regulation shall use the UMF standard.

CHAPTER 3 ARCHITECTURE SECTION 1 Router Article 35 The router 1. A router is established for the purposes of facilitating the establishment of connections between Member States and with Europol for querying with, retrieving and scoring biometric data in accordance with this Regulation. 2. The router shall be composed of: (a)a central infrastructure, including a search tool enabling the simultaneous querying of Member States’ databases referred to in Articles 5, 12 and 21 as well as of Europol data; (b)a secure communication channel between the central infrastructure Member States and Union agencies that are entitled to use the router; (c)a secure communication infrastructure between the central infrastructure and the European Search Portal for the purposes of Article 39. Article 36 Use of the router The use of the router shall be reserved to the Member States’ authorities that have access to the exchange of DNA profiles, dactyloscopic data and facial images, and Europol in accordance with this Regulation and Regulation (EU) 2016/794. Article 37 Queries 1. The router users referred to in Article 36 shall request a query by submitting biometric data to the router. The router shall dispatch the request for a query to the Member States’ databases and Europol data simultaneously with the data submitted by the user and in accordance with their access rights. 2. On receiving the request for a query from the router, each requested Member State and Europol shall launch a query of their databases in an automated manner and without delay. 3. Any matches resulting from the query in each Member States’ databases and Europol data shall be sent back in an automated manner to the router. 4. The router shall rank the replies in accordance with the score of the correspondence between the biometric data used for querying and the biometric data stored in the Member States’ databases and Europol data.

5. The list of matching biometric data and their scores shall be returned to the router user by the router. 6. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts to specify the technical procedure for the router to query Member States’ databases and Europol data, the format of the router replies and the technical rules for scoring the correspondence between biometric data. These implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 75(2). Article 38 Quality check The requested Member State shall check the quality of the transmitted data by means of a fully automated procedure. Should the data be unsuitable for an automated comparison, the requested Member State shall inform the requesting Member State about it via the router without delay. Article 39 Interoperability between the router and the Common Identity Repository for the purposes of law enforcement access 1. The router users referred to in Article 36 may launch a query to Member States’ databases and Europol data simultaneously with a query to the Common Identity Repository where the relevant conditions under Union law are fulfilled and in accordance with their access rights. For this purpose, the router shall query the Common Identity Repository via the European Search Portal. 2. Queries to the Common Identity Repository for law enforcement purposes shall be carried out in accordance with Article 22 of Regulation (EU) 2019/817 and Article 22 of Regulation (EU) 2019/818. Any result from the queries shall be transmitted via the European Search Portal. Only designated authorities defined in Article 4, point 20, of Regulation (EU) 2019/817 and Article 4, point 20, of Regulation (EU) 2019/818 may launch these simultaneous queries. Simultaneous queries of the Member States’ databases and Europol data and the Common Identity Repository may only be launched in cases where it is likely that data on a suspect, perpetrator or victim of a terrorist offence or other serious criminal offences as defined respectively in Article 4, points 21 and 22, of Regulation (EU) 2019/817 and Article 4, points 21 and 22, of Regulation (EU) 2019/818 are stored in the Common Identity Repository. Article 40 Keeping of logs 1. eu-LISA shall keep logs of all data processing operations in the router. Those logs shall include the following: (a)the Member State or Union agency launching the request for a query; (b)the date and time of the request; (c)the date and time of the answer; (d)the national databases or Europol data to which a request for a query was sent; (e)the national databases or Europol data that provided an answer;

(f)where applicable, the fact that there was a simultaneous query to the Common Identity Repository. 2. Each Member State shall keep logs of queries that its competent authorities and the staff of those authorities duly authorised to use the router make as well as logs of queries requested by other Member States. Europol shall keep logs of queries that its duly authorised staff make. 3. The logs referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 may be used only for the collection of statistics and data protection monitoring, including checking the admissibility of a query and the lawfulness of data processing, and for ensuring data security and integrity. Those logs shall be protected by appropriate measures against unauthorised access and erased one year after their creation. If, however, they are required for monitoring procedures that have already begun, they shall be erased once the monitoring procedures no longer require the logs. 4. For the purposes of data protection monitoring, including checking the admissibility of a query and the lawfulness of data processing, the data controllers shall have access to the logs for self-monitoring as referred to in Article 56. Article 41 Notification procedures in case of technical impossibility to use the router 1. Where it is technically impossible to use the router to query one or several national databases or Europol data because of a failure of the router, the router users shall be notified in an automated manner by eu-LISA. eu-LISA shall take measures to address the technical impossibility to use the router without delay. 2. Where it is technically impossible to use the router to query one or several national databases or Europol data because of a failure of the national infrastructure in a Member State, that Member State shall notify the other Member States, eu-LISA and the Commission in an automated manner. Member States shall take measures to address the technical impossibility to use the router without delay. 3. Where it is technically impossible to use the router to query one or several national databases or Europol data because of a failure of the infrastructure of Europol, Europol shall notify the Member States, eu-LISA and the Commission in an automated manner. Europol shall take measures to address the technical impossibility to use the router without delay. SECTION 2 EPRIS Article 42 EPRIS 1. For the automated searching of police records referred to in Article 26, Member States and Europol shall use the European Police Records Index System (EPRIS). 2. EPRIS shall be composed of: (a)a central infrastructure, including a search tool enabling the simultaneous querying of Member States’ databases; (b)a secure communication channel between the EPRIS central infrastructure, Member States and Europol. Article 43

Use of EPRIS 1. For the purposes of searching police records via EPRIS, the following sets of data shall be used: (a)first name(s); (b)family name(s); (c)date of birth. 2. Where available, the following sets of data may also be used: (a)alias(es); (b)nationality or nationalities; (c)place and country of birth; (d)gender. 3. The data referred to in points (a) and (b) of paragraph 1 and in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 used for queries shall be pseudonymised. Article 44 Queries 1. Member States and Europol shall request a query by submitting the data referred to in Article 43. EPRIS shall dispatch the request for a query to the Member States’ databases with the data submitted by the requesting Member State and in accordance with this Regulation. 2. On receiving the request for a query from EPRIS, each requested Member State shall launch a query of their national police records index in an automated manner and without delay. 3. Any matches resulting from the query in each Member State’s database shall be sent back in an automated manner to EPRIS. 4. The list of matches shall be returned to the requesting Member State by EPRIS. The list of matches shall indicate the quality of the match as well as the Member State whose database contains data that resulted in the match. 5. Upon reception of the list of matches, the requesting Member State shall decide the matches for which a follow-up is necessary and send a reasoned follow-up request containing any additional relevant information to the requested Member State(s) via SIENA. 6. The requested Member State(s) shall process such requests without delay to decide whether to share the data stored in their database.

Upon confirmation, the requested Member State(s) shall share the data referred to in Article 43 where available. This exchange of information shall take place via SIENA. 7. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts to specify the technical procedure for EPRIS to query Member States’ databases and the format of the replies. These implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 75(2). Article 45 Keeping of logs 1. Europol shall keep logs of all data processing operations in EPRIS. Those logs shall include the following: (a)the Member State or Union agency launching the request for a query; (b)the date and time of the request; (c)the date and time of the answer; (d)the national databases to which a request for a query was sent; (e)the national databases that provided an answer. 2. Each Member State shall keep logs of the requests for queries that its competent authorities and the staff of those authorities duly authorised to use EPRIS make. Europol shall keep logs of requests for queries that its duly authorised staff make. 3. The logs referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 may be used only for data protection monitoring, including checking the admissibility of a query and the lawfulness of data processing, and for ensuring data security and integrity. Those logs shall be protected by appropriate measures against unauthorised access and erased one year after their creation. If, however, they are required for monitoring procedures that have already begun, they shall be erased once the monitoring procedures no longer require the logs. 4. For the purposes of data protection monitoring, including checking the admissibility of a query and the lawfulness of data processing, the data controllers shall have access to the logs for self-monitoring as referred to in Article 56. Article 46 Notification procedures in case of technical impossibility to use EPRIS 1. Where it is technically impossible to use EPRIS to query one or several national databases because of a failure of the infrastructure of Europol, Member States shall be notified in an automated manner by Europol. Europol shall take measures to address the technical impossibility to use EPRIS without delay. 2. Where it is technically impossible to use EPRIS to query one or several national databases because of a failure of the national infrastructure in a Member State, that Member State shall notify Europol and the Commission in an automated manner. Member States shall take measures to address the technical impossibility to use EPRIS without delay. CHAPTER 4

EXCHANGE OF DATA FOLLOWING A MATCH Article 47 Exchange of core data Where the procedures referred to in Articles 6, 7, 13 or 22 show a match between the data used for the search or comparison and data held in the database of the requested Member State(s), and upon confirmation of this match by the requesting Member State, the requested Member State shall return a set of core data via the router within 24 hours. That set of core data, if available, shall contain the following data: (a)first name(s); (b)family name(s); (c)date of birth; (d)nationality or nationalities; (e)place and country of birth; (f)gender. Article 48 Use of SIENA Any exchange which is not explicitly provided for in this Regulation between Member States’ competent authorities or with Europol, at any stage of one of the procedures under this Regulation, shall take place via SIENA. CHAPTER 5 EUROPOL Article 49 Access by Member States to third country-sourced biometric data stored by Europol 1. Member States shall, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/794, have access to, and be able to search via the router, biometric data which has been provided to Europol by third countries for the purposes of Article 18(2), points (a), (b) and (c), of Regulation (EU) 2016/794. 2. Where this procedure results in a match between the data used for the search and Europol data, the follow-up shall take place in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/794. Article 50

Access by Europol to data stored in Member States’ databases 1. Europol shall, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/794, have access to data, which are stored by Member States in their national databases in accordance with this Regulation. 2. Europol queries performed with biometric data as a search criterion shall be carried out using the router. 3. Europol queries performed with vehicle registration data as a search criterion shall be carried out using Eucaris. 4. Europol queries performed with police records as a search criterion shall be carried out using EPRIS. 5. Europol shall carry out the searches in accordance with paragraph 1 only when carrying out its tasks referred to in Regulation (EU) 2016/794. 6. Where the procedures referred to in Articles 6, 7, 13 or 22 show a match between the data used for the search or comparison and data held in the national database of the requested Member State(s), and upon confirmation of that match by Europol, the requested Member State shall decide whether to return a set of core data via the router within 24 hours. That set of core data, if available, shall contain the following data: (a)first name(s); (b)family name(s); (c)date of birth; (d)nationality or nationalities; (e)place and country of birth; (f)gender. 7. Europol's use of information obtained from a search made in accordance with paragraph 1 and from the exchange of core data in accordance with paragraph 6 shall be subject to the consent of the Member State in which database the match occurred. If the Member State allows the use of such information, its handling by Europol shall be governed by Regulation (EU) 2016/794. CHAPTER 6 DATA PROTECTION Article 51 Purpose of the data 1. Processing of personal data by the requesting Member State or Europol shall be permitted solely for the purposes for which the data have been supplied by the requested Member State in accordance with this Regulation. Processing for other purposes shall be permitted solely with the prior authorisation of the requested Member State. 2. Processing of data supplied pursuant to Articles 6, 7, 13, 18 or 22 by the searching or comparing Member State shall be permitted solely in order to:

(a)establish whether the compared DNA profiles, dactyloscopic data, vehicle registration data, facial images and police records match; (b)prepare and submit a police request for legal assistance if those data match; (c)logging within the meaning of Articles 40 and 45. 3. The requesting Member State may process the data supplied to it in accordance with Articles 6, 7, 13 or 22 solely where this is necessary for the purposes of this Regulation. The supplied data shall be deleted immediately following data comparison or automated replies to searches unless further processing is necessary by the requesting Member State for the purposes of the prevention, detection and investigation of criminal offences. 4. Data supplied in accordance with Article 18 may be used by the requesting Member State solely where this is necessary for the purposes of this Regulation. The data supplied shall be deleted immediately following automated replies to searches unless further processing is necessary for recording pursuant to Article 20. The requesting Member State shall use the data received in a reply solely for the procedure for which the search was made. Article 52 Accuracy, relevance and data retention 1. Member States shall ensure the accuracy and current relevance of personal data. Should a requested Member State become aware that incorrect data or data which should not have been supplied have been supplied, this shall be notified without delay to any requesting Member State. All requesting Member States concerned shall be obliged to correct or delete the data accordingly. Moreover, personal data supplied shall be corrected if they are found to be incorrect. If the requesting Member State has reason to believe that the supplied data are incorrect or should be deleted the requested Member State shall be informed. 2. Where a data subject contested the accuracy of data in possession of a Member State, where the accuracy cannot be reliably established by the Member State concerned and where it is requested by the data subject, the data concerned shall be marked with a flag. Where such a flag exists, Member States may remove it only with the permission of the data subject or based on a decision of the competent court or independent data protection authority. 3. Data supplied which should not have been supplied or received shall be deleted. Data which are lawfully supplied and received shall be deleted: (a)where they are not or no longer necessary for the purpose for which they were supplied; (b)following the expiry of the maximum period for keeping data laid down under the national law of the requested Member State where the requested Member State informed the requesting Member State of that maximum period at the time of supplying the data. Where there is reason to believe that the deletion of data would prejudice the interests of the data subject, the data shall be blocked instead of being deleted. Blocked data may be supplied or used solely for the purpose which prevented their deletion. Article 53 Data processor 1. eu-LISA shall be the processor within the meaning of Article 3, point (12), of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 for the processing of personal data via the router. 2. Europol shall be the processor for the processing of personal data via EPRIS. Article 54 Security of processing 1. Europol, eu-LISA and Member States’ authorities shall ensure the security of the processing of personal data that takes place pursuant to this Regulation. Europol, eu-LISA and Member States’ authorities shall cooperate on security-related tasks.

2. Without prejudice to Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 and Article 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/794, eu-LISA and Europol shall take the necessary measures to ensure the security of the router and EPRIS respectively as well as their related communication infrastructure. 3. In particular, eu-LISA and Europol shall adopt the necessary measures concerning the router and EPRIS respectively, including a security plan, a business continuity plan and a disaster recovery 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 data-processing equipment and installations; (c)prevent the unauthorised reading, copying, modification or removal of data media; (d)prevent the unauthorised input of data and the unauthorised inspection, modification or deletion of recorded personal data; (e)prevent the unauthorised processing of data and any unauthorised copying, modification or deletion of data; (f)prevent the use of automated data-processing systems by unauthorised persons using data communication equipment; (g)ensure that persons authorised to access the router and EPRIS have access only to the data covered by their access authorisation, by means of individual user identities and confidential access modes only; (h)ensure that it is possible to verify and establish to which bodies personal data may be transmitted using data communication equipment; (i)ensure that it is possible to verify and establish what data have been processed in the router and EPRIS, when, by whom and for what purpose; (j)prevent the unauthorised reading, copying, modification or deletion of personal data during the transmission of personal data to or from the router and EPRIS or during the transport of data media, in particular by means of appropriate encryption techniques; (k)ensure that, in the event of interruption, installed systems can be restored to normal operation; (l)ensure reliability by making sure that any faults in the functioning of the router and EPRIS are properly reported; (m)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 and to assess those security measures in the light of new technological developments. Article 55 Security incidents 1. Any event that has or may have an impact on the security of the router or EPRIS and may cause damage to or loss of data stored in them shall be considered to be a security incident, in particular where unauthorised access to data may have occurred or where the availability, integrity and confidentiality of data has or may have been compromised. 2. Security incidents shall be managed so as to ensure a quick, effective and proper response. 3. Member States shall notify its competent supervisory authorities of any security incidents without undue delay.

Without prejudice to Article 34 of Regulation (EU) 2016/794, Europol shall notify CERT-EU of significant cyber threats, significant vulnerabilities and significant incidents without undue delay and in any event no later than 24 hours after becoming aware of them. Actionable and appropriate technical details of cyber threats, vulnerabilities and incidents that enable proactive detection, incident response or mitigating measures shall be disclosed to CERT-EU without undue delay. In the event of a security incident in relation to the central infrastructure of the router, eu-LISA shall notify CERT-EU of significant cyber threats, significant vulnerabilities and significant incidents without undue delay and in any event no later than 24 hours after becoming aware of them. Actionable and appropriate technical details of cyber threats, vulnerabilities and incidents that enable proactive detection, incident response or mitigating measures shall be disclosed to CERT-EU without undue delay. 4. Information regarding a security incident that has or may have an impact on the operation of the router or on the availability, integrity and confidentiality of the data shall be provided by the Member States and Union agencies concerned to the Member States and Europol without delay and reported in compliance with the incident management plan to be provided by eu-LISA. 5. Information regarding a security incident that has or may have an impact on the operation of EPRIS or on the availability, integrity and confidentiality of the data shall be provided by the Member States and Union agencies concerned to the Member States without delay and reported in compliance with the incident management plan to be provided by Europol. Article 56 Self-monitoring 1. Member States and the relevant Union agencies shall ensure that each authority entitled to use Prüm II takes the measures necessary to monitor its compliance with this Regulation and cooperates, where necessary, with the supervisory authority. 2. The data controllers shall take the necessary measures to monitor the compliance of data processing pursuant to this Regulation, including through frequent verification of the logs referred to in Articles 40 and 45, and cooperate, where necessary, with the supervisory authorities and with the European Data Protection Supervisor. Article 57 Penalties Member States shall ensure that any misuse of data, processing of data or exchange of data contrary to this Regulation is punishable in accordance with national law. The penalties provided shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Article 58 Liability If any failure of a Member State to comply with its obligations under this Regulation causes damage to the router or EPRIS, that Member State shall be liable for such damage, unless and insofar as eu-LISA, Europol or another Member State bound by this Regulation failed to take reasonable measures to prevent the damage from occurring or to minimise its impact. Article 59 Audits by the European Data Protection Supervisor 1. The European Data Protection Supervisor shall ensure that an audit of personal data processing operations by eu-LISA and Europol for the purposes of this Regulation is carried out in accordance with relevant international auditing standards at least every four years. A report of that audit shall be sent to the European Parliament, to the Council, to the Commission, to the Member States and to the Union agency concerned. Europol and eu-LISA shall be given an opportunity to make comments before the reports are adopted. 2. eu-LISA and Europol shall supply information requested by the European Data Protection Supervisor to it, grant the European Data Protection Supervisor access to all the documents it requests and to their logs referred to in Articles 40 and 45 and allow the European Data Protection Supervisor access to all their premises at any time. Article 60 Cooperation between supervisory authorities and the European Data Protection Supervisor

1. The supervisory authorities and the European Data Protection Supervisor shall, each acting within the scope of their respective competences, cooperate actively within the framework of their respective responsibilities and ensure coordinated supervision of the application of this Regulation, in particular if the European Data Protection Supervisor or a superviso