REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the implementation of Council Framework Decision 2009/315/JHA of 26 February 2009 on the organisation and content of the exchange of information extracted from criminal record between Member States
Date: 2016-01-19
Institutions: Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers, European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, EU police cooperation, criminal record, exchange of information, information system, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, national, nationality

EN 

   EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Strasbourg, 19.1.2016  COM(2016) 6 final   REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the implementation of Council Framework Decision 2009/315/JHA of  26 February 2009 on the organisation and content of the exchange of information extracted from criminal record between Member States  
 
 
INTRODUCTION 

In a European area of Freedom, Security and Justice, every effort must be made to ensure an 
effective European response to criminal activities, in particular serious cross-border crime and 
terrorism. The European Agenda on Security1 highlights the need to maximise EU measures 
on information exchange and operational cooperation. 

The rapid and efficient exchange between competent Member State authorities of information 
extracted  from  criminal  records  is  important  if  we  are  to  avoid  national  courts  passing 
sentences on the sole basis of past convictions registered in national criminal records, with no 
knowledge of convictions in other Member States, thus allowing criminals to escape their past 
by  moving  between  Member  States.  Framework  Decision  2008/675/JHA2  requires  Member 
States  to  ensure  that  previous  convictions  are  taken  into  account  in  the  course  of  criminal 
procedures. 

Council Framework Decision 2009/315/JHA on the organisation and content of the exchange 
of information extracted from the criminal record between Member States3 (the ‘Framework 
Decision’ or ‘FD’) aims to address these shortcomings by stipulating that information on any 
EU citizen’s previous convictions by any criminal court in the EU is available to all Member 
State courts and law-enforcement authorities for criminal proceedings in the pre-trial and trial 
stages  and  the  execution  of  the  conviction.  By  imposing  a  series  of  obligations  on  the 
convicting  Member  State  and  the  Member  State  of  nationality,  the  Framework  Decision 
ensures that each Member State can provide exhaustive and complete information in relation 
to  the  criminal  records  of  its  nationals  upon  request  by  another  Member  State.  The 
Framework Decision is based on the principle that each Member State stores all convictions 
against its nationals, including those handed down in other Member States. The exchange of 
information is organised on a decentralised basis between the central authorities designated by 
the  Member  States,  for  the  purpose  of  criminal  proceedings  or  for  other  purposes  in 
accordance  with  national  law.  It  thus  contributes  to  the  implementation  of  the  principle  of 
mutual  recognition  of  judgments  in  criminal  matters  and  also  allows  national  authorities  to 
obtain  criminal  record  information  that  may  be  of  relevance  for  certain  activities  (e.g. 
employment at in childcare). 

The  Framework  Decision  provided  a  foundation  for  a  computerised  system  allowing  faster 
and  easier  transmission  of  information  on  criminal  convictions.  The  European  Criminal 
Records  Information  System  (ECRIS)  was  established  by  Council  Decision  2009/316/JHA4 
and  has  been  operational  since  April  2012.  Currently,  25  Member  States  exchange 
information via ECRIS5. The annual volume exchange has reached over 1.8 million messages 
(including notifications, requests and responses to requests) by the end of 2015. On average, 
over 24 000 requests are made each per month, with over 30 % leading to a ‘positive hit’.6 

1  
2  

COM(2015) 185 final. 
Framework Decision 2008/675/JHA of 24 July 2008 on taking account of convictions in the Member States 
of the European Union in the course of new criminal proceedings (OJ L 220, 15.8.2008, p. 32). 

3   OJ L 93, 7.4.2009, p. 23. 
4   Council Decision on the establishment of the European Criminal Records Information System (ECRIS) in 
application of Article 11 of Framework Decision 2009/315/JHA (2009/316/JHA) adopted on 6 April 2009 
(OJ L 93, 7.4.2009, p. 33). 

5        MT, PT and SI are not operational yet. 
6  

i.e. a response containing one or more convictions. 

EN  

2 

EN 

 
 
                                                            
EVALUATION OF IMPLEMENTATION 

In  accordance  with  Article  13  FD,  the  Commission  received  notifications  of  national 
transposition laws from 22 Member States:7 AT, BE8, BG, CY, CZ, DE, EE, ES, FI, FR, HR, 
HU, LT, LU, LV, NL, PL, PT, SE, SI, SK and UK. This report is based on the transposition 
provisions of these Member States. Thus, where the term ‘all Member States’ is used in this 
report, it refers to the Member States having notified national transposition. 

Six Member States (DK, EL, IE, IT, MT and RO) have not yet notified measures transposing 
the  obligations  under  the  Framework  Decision,  but  five  of  these  (DK,  EL,  IE,  IT  and  RO) 
exchange criminal record information through the ECRIS system. 

The Member States have taken various approaches to transpose the Framework Decision into 
their  national  legislation.  AT,  BG,  CZ,  DE,  FR,  HU,  SE  and  SK  have  amended  multiple 
national  acts;  EE,  NL,  PL  and  PT  have  amended  their  national  criminal  records  act.  In 
addition to these amendments, FI and BE adopted or proposed separate implementing acts. ES 
and LU only adopted a separate implementing act. HR, LT and LV adopted new legislation 
regulating matters concerning criminal records in general, and some specific secondary acts. 
Two  Member  States  adopted  new  legislation  that  was  wider  in  scope  (SI:  a  law  on 
international cooperation in criminal matters; UK: a law on criminal law and data protection). 
In CY, the text of the Framework Decision was directly integrated into national law.  

In accordance with Article 10(3) of Protocol No 36 on transitional provisions, annexed to the 
Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the 
powers  of  the  Commission  under  Article  258  of  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the 
European Union are fully applicable as of 1 December 2014. As of that date, the Commission 
is therefore in a position to launch infringement proceedings against Member States that have 
not or not correctly transposed a Framework Decision. 

1.  

Definition of ‘conviction’ 

The definition of ‘conviction’ in Article 2(a) FD covers only final decisions of criminal courts 
against a natural person in respect of a criminal offence to the extent that these decisions are 
entered  in  the  criminal  record  of  the  convicting  Member  State.  The  ‘criminal  record’  is  the 
national register recording these convictions; Member States may have several registers. They 
may agree bilaterally or multilaterally, in accordance with Article 12(5) FD, on a wider scope 
of information to be exchanged. 

Some  Member  States  (AT,  CY,  CZ,  FI,  PL,  PT,  SK  and  UK)  adopted  the  definition  in  the 
Framework  Decision;  for  BG  and  HU,  this  can  be  inferred  from  the  general  context  of  the 
legislation. In a considerable number of Member States (BE, DE, EE, HR, LU, NL, SE and 
SI),  ‘conviction’  seems  to  go  beyond  decisions  of  criminal  courts  only.  For  example,  NL 
would  also  exchange  decisions  taken  by  a  prosecutor  and,  in  some  cases,  judicial  data  on 
investigations or on-going cases. Several Member States (ES, FR, LT and LV) did not provide 

7   A  number  of  Member  States  transmitted  the  text  of  their  national  provisions  to  the  Commission  or  the 
General Secretariat of the Council. The Commission sent two letters to the Member States in this respect, 
on 22 April  and  10 October 2014.  The Annex  to  this report provides  an  overview of the  dates on  which 
Member States submitted the notifications. 

8   BE  also  provided  the  Commission  with  a  copy  of  a  draft  implementing  act,  which  will  complete  the 

transposition. 

EN  

3 

EN 

 
 
 
                                                            
an  explicit  definition  of  what  they  consider  to  be  a  ‘conviction’  for  the  purposes  of  the 
Framework Decision. 

2.  

Central authorities 

In 17 Member States (BE, BG, CZ, DE, EE, EL, ES, FI, FR, HR, IT, LU, NL, PL, PT, SI and 
SK), criminal records are under the responsibility of the Ministry of Justice  and in 11 (AT, 
CY, DK, HU, IE, LT, LV, MT, RO, SE and UK) of the Ministry of Interior . In the Ministries 
of  Justice,  the  majority  of  Member  States  nominated  their  criminal  records  offices  as  the 
central  authorities  for  the  purposes  of  the  Framework  Decision;  LU  and  SK  nominated  the 
general public prosecutor’s office. In the Ministries of Interior, Member States nominated the 
relevant  departments  of  police.  In  accordance  with  Article  3(1)  FD,  two  Member  States 
appointed more one central authority at national level: four in the case of CY and two in the 
case of CZ.9 

3.  

Obligations of the convicting Member State 

3.1.   Registering information on the nationality of the convicted person 

Article  4(1)  FD  requires  each  Member  State  to  ensure  that  all  convictions  of  nationals  of 
another Member State are accompanied by information on the nationality or nationalities of 
the convicted person, when provided to its criminal record. Otherwise, the convicting Member 
State  would  not  be  able  to  transmit  information  to  the  Member  State  of  the  person’s 
nationality, and the principle of centralising information in one place would not work. 

Almost all Member States (AT, BE, BG, CY, DE, EE, ES, FI, FR, HR, HU, LT, LU, LV, NL, 
PL, PT, SI,  SK and  UK) included a direct reference to nationality in their  national criminal 
records, by including ‘nationality’ in the list of identification details of the convicted person to 
be entered in the criminal records and/or by introducing a provision explicitly creating such 
an obligation. In CZ and SE, this obligation can be deduced from the general context of the 
legislative acts. 

HU, LU and NL also register information on previously-held nationalities. NL has a provision 
ensuring  that  data  are  passed  on  between  Member  States  in  the  event  of  a  change  of 
nationality by an offender. 

3.2.   Notifications of convictions 

The  Framework  Decision  obliges  the  convicting  Member  State  to  send  information  on 
convictions  handed  down  within  its  territory  (‘notifications’)  as  soon  as  possible  to  the 
offender’s Member State of nationality. If the person has several nationalities, the notification 
should be  sent to  all  the  Member States in  question,  even  if  he/she  is  also a national of the 
convicting Member State. 

Almost all Member States (AT, BE, BG, CY, CZ, EE, ES, FI, FR, HR, HU, LT, LU, LV, NL, 
PL, PT, SE, SI, SK and UK) fully transposed the notification obligation. While most indicated 
that  the  notification  should  be  sent  ‘immediately’,  ‘without  delay’,  ‘as  soon  as  possible’  or 
‘when entered in the criminal record’, three introduced a concrete deadline for transmission. 
This  ranges  from  ‘the  next  working  day  at  the  latest’  (LT),  through  10  days  (CZ)  to  two 
months after the entry of the information in the criminal records (ES). DE and PT seem not to 
have  stipulated  in  their  national  law  when  such  notifications  should  be  sent;  in  practice, 
however, DE complies with the requirement in Article 4(2) FD. 

9   A detailed list of central authorities can be found in the Annex. 

EN  

4 

EN 

 
 
                                                            
Under Article11(1) FD, the convicting Member State should include in its notification to the 
Member State of nationality ‘obligatory’  information  on the convicted person, the nature of 
the conviction, the offence giving rise to the conviction and the contents of the conviction. It 
should also transmit ‘optional’ information if entered in the criminal record and ‘additional’ 
information if available to the central authority. While the vast majority of the Member States 
(AT, BE, BG, CY, DE, EE, ES, FR, HR, HU, LT, LU, NL, PL, PT, SI, SK and UK) register 
and  transmit  all  the  obligatory  information,  in  four  cases  (CZ,  FI,  LV  and  SE)  the 
implementing provisions are more general or include some specific conditions. For instance, 
FI includes ‘date, place and country of birth’ only in the absence of a ‘personal identification 
code’ and in LV ‘date of birth’ is included only in the absence of such a code.10  

Only some  Member States  introduced explicit  legal provisions allowing for registration  and 
transmission of the ‘optional’ and ‘additional’ information. 

In order to ensure that information on convictions can be transmitted to the Member State of 
the  person’s  nationality  as  soon  as  possible,  it  must  be  available  promptly  in  the  criminal 
records register.  To that end, beyond  their legal obligations under the Framework  Decision, 
some Member States (e.g. CZ, DE, EE, LU and LV) imposed an additional obligation on the 
courts to deliver the information on convictions to the criminal records register. 

3.3.   Updates 

To  ensure  that  information  is  exhaustive  and  up  to  date,  Article  4(3)  FD  requires  the 
convicting  Member  State  immediately  to  notify  the  Member  State  of  nationality  of  any 
subsequent alterations or deletion of information in previous notifications. Almost all Member 
States (AT, BE, BG, CY, DE, EE, ES, FI, FR, HR, HU, LT, LU, LV, PL, PT, SE, SI, SK and 
UK)  implemented  this  provision,  explicitly  referring  to  the  transmission  of  updates.  In  the 
case  of  CZ,  the  obligation  can  be  deduced  from  the  context.  NL  included  a  provision  on 
correcting and erasing ‘inaccurate data’ in previous notifications. 

3.4.   Providing additional information 

At  the  request  of  the  Member  State  of  nationality  and  in  individual  cases,  the  convicting 
Member State is obliged to provide a copy of convictions and subsequent measures and other 
information  relevant thereto.  Member  States  may  appoint  an  additional  central authority  for 
the transmission of such information.   

The majority of Member States (AT, BE, BG, CY, CZ, FI, HR, LT, LU, LV, NL, SI, SK and 
UK)  transposed  Article  4(4)  FD  in  its  entirety.  BG  appears  to  be  sending  transcripts  of 
judgments not on request in individual cases, but automatically for all notifications. In many 
Member States, copies of judgments are not directly available to the central authorities or in 
the  criminal  records.  Some  Member  States  (CZ,  LT,  LV  and  SK)  therefore  imposed  an 
explicit obligation on their courts or relevant state authorities to provide the central authority 
with the requested information. AT forwards such requests to its courts for further action. CZ 
and CY appointed additional central authorities that have direct access to copies of judgments 
to deal with Article 4(4) requests. PT does not explicitly refer to an obligation to respond to 
such  requests,  but  its  central  authority  may  request  copies  of  judgments  from  the  issuing 
courts for the purpose of responding to requests from other Member States. 

10   SE uses some generalisations on the categories of information, but also provides that notification will take 
place according to the principles of the FD; CZ criminal records contain data to ensure that the convicted 
person ‘cannot be confused with another person’. 

EN  

5 

EN 

 
 
                                                            
A  considerable  number  of  Member  States  (DE,  EE,  ES,  FR,  HU,  PL  and  SE)  have  not 
adopted relevant provisions. FR and PL informed the Commission that they do transmit such 
information, but via the channels of the MLA Convention,11 as their central authorities do not 
have direct access to the copies of judgments. 

4.  

Obligations of the Member State of nationality 

4.1.   Storage of information for the purpose of retransmission 

Article 5(1) FD requires the Member State of the person’s nationality to store all information 
transmitted  to  it  for  the  purpose  of  retransmission,  but  leaves  it  to  each  Member  State  to 
decide  how  to  store  the  information.  As  information  on  convictions  handed  down  in  other 
Member  States  is  kept  for  retransmission  purposes  only,  it  should  be  stored  regardless  of 
whether a certain offence is also punishable under the law of the Member State of nationality. 

Almost all Member States (AT, BE, BG, CZ, CY, DE, EE, ES, FI, FR, HR, HU, LT, LU, LV, 
NL, PL, PT, SE, SK and UK) introduced an explicit provision on the storage obligation into 
their legislation. Most stipulated that all information received from other Member States is to 
be stored in their criminal records, i.e. independently of whether the offence is punishable also 
under their law. AT, LT and PT made this explicit in their provisions. SI does not appear to 
have included a provision on storage obligations in its law. 

Article 11(2) FD determines which categories of data received from the convicting Member 
State  in  relation  to  a  person  convicted  abroad  should  be  stored  by  the  Member  State  of 
nationality. While the vast majority of the Member States (AT, BE, BG, CY, DE, EE, FI, FR, 
HR, HU, LT, LU, NL, PL, SK and UK) store all the required information, three (CZ, LV and 
SE) have adopted implementing provisions that do not specify what information needs to be 
stored,  but  are  more  general  or  include  specific  conditions.12  ES  and  PT  have  not  provided 
lists  of  stored  information,  but  established  a  general  obligation  to  store  all  information 
transmitted by other Member States. 

Almost  all  Member  States  register  information  on  foreign  convictions  of  their  citizens 
received from other Member States in their existing criminal records databases. Four (BG, FI, 
HU  and  PT)  have  chosen  to  create  separate  registers  for  storing  such  convictions  for  the 
purpose of retransmission. In the vast majority, there is one criminal records office with one 
or  more  criminal  records  register.  Some  (e.g. BG)  have  a  decentralised  structure  of  entities 
responsible for storing data. 

4.2.   Updating information 

Under Article 5(2) and (3) FD, when the Member State of nationality receives notification of 
any alteration or deletion of information previously notified by a convicting Member State, it 
is obliged to amend or delete the information accordingly. 

This must not, however, lead to persons being treated less favourably than if they had been 
convicted by their national court. For instance, where national rules on retention and deletion 
of information would have prompted the deletion of a certain conviction, the Member State of 
the person’s nationality may no longer use such information in national proceedings; it must, 
however,  always  be  able  to  transmit  such  information  to  another  Member  State  on  request. 
The Framework Decision thus establishes the principle of ‘dual legal regime’, depending on 

11  Convention on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Member States of the European 

Union of 29 May 2000 (OJ C 197, 12.7.2000, p. 3). 

12   SE  uses  some  generalisations  on  the  categories  of  information,  but  also  provides  that  the  Swedish 

Government can issue more detailed rules in this respect. For LV and CZ, see Section 4.2. 

EN  

6 

EN 

 
 
                                                            
whether  information  is  used  internally  in  the  Member  State  of  nationality  or  transmitted  to 
another Member State. 

The vast majority of the Member States (AT, BE, BG, CY, CZ, DE, ES, FI, FR, HR, HU, LV, 
NL, PL, PT, SK and UK) implemented these provisions, explicitly referring to the registering 
of updates. Some (e.g. BE, HR, HU and UK) provided that only the updated information may 
be  retransmitted  further.  FR  and  PT  developed  the  ‘dual  legal  regime’  principle  in  more 
detail,  providing  that  deletion  of  a  foreign  conviction  from  their  national  registers  in 
accordance  with  national  rules  does  not  prevent  its  transmission  to  another  Member  State 
unless  it  was  deleted  in  the  convicting  Member  State.  In  LT’s  provisions,  the  update 
obligation, although not explicit, can be inferred from the context. SE does not mention the 
registering of amendments, only deletion. In EE, only the deletion obligation can be inferred 
from  the  reference  to  the  relevant  legislation,  not  the  amendment  obligation.  Two  Member 
States  provide  for  the  compulsory  deletion  of  foreign  convictions  of  their  citizens  after  a 
maximum  of  five  years  (DE)  or  20  years  (SE)  from  the  conviction  date,  if  deletion 
information  has  not  been  received  from  the  convicting  Member  State  in  the  meantime.  LU 
and SI seem not to have regulated updates. In addition to updates of stored information, NL 
introduced a specific form of updates of information provided previously to another Member 
State in response to a request, if this information changed within a year of being provided. 

5.  

Replies to requests for information 

5.1.   Requests for criminal proceedings 

The Framework Decision requires the Member State of nationality to reply to other Member 
States’ requests for information on its nationals for the purpose of criminal proceedings. The 
criminal  proceedings  encompass  the  pre-trial  and  trial  stages  and  the  execution  of  the 
conviction. The reply includes information on national convictions, convictions handed down 
in  other  Member  States  and  obligatorily  transmitted  after  27  April  2012,  or  transmitted  by 
them  before  that  date  and  entered  in  the  criminal  record.  This  obligation  also  covers 
convictions handed down in third countries and entered in the criminal record of the Member 
State of nationality. 

All Member States (AT, BE, BG, CY, CZ, DE, EE, ES, FI, FR, HR, HU, LT, LU, LV, NL, 
PL, PT, SE, SI, SK, UK)transposed Article 7(1) FD in its entirety into their national law. The 
majority have taken over the exact list of categories of information as provided in the Article. 
The  others  provided  for  an  obligation  to  respond  with  the  relevant  information  included  in 
their register (DE, EE, FI, HU, LV, NL and PL) or in a national extract issued for criminal 
purposes (FR and LU). EE would also send a copy of the conviction. 

5.2.   Requests for purposes other than criminal proceedings 

Article  7(2)  FD  stipulates  that,  if  information  is  requested  for  purposes  other  than  criminal 
proceedings (this applies to around 20 % of all requests), the central authorities may reply in 
accordance with national law. The information that may be included in the reply is potentially 
the same as in the case of requests for the purposes of criminal proceedings, depending on the 
national law, which might regulate differently the scope of information or arrangements for its 
provision.  Additionally,  the  Framework  Decision  lays  down  specific  rules  for  transmitting 
information  that  the  convicting  Member  State  has  declared  not  retransmissible  for  purposes 
other than criminal proceedings. In such cases, the Member State of nationality would need to 
tell  the  requesting  Member  State  to  contact  the  convicting  Member  State  directly.  This 
ensures  a  high  level  of  protection  for  personal  data  transmitted  by  the  convicting  Member 
State to the Member State of nationality.  

EN  

7 

EN 

 
 
Directive  2011/93/EU  on  combating  the  sexual  abuse  and  sexual  exploitation  of  children13 
contains  special  provisions  in  Article  10(3)  laying  down  an  obligation  of  Member  States  to 
transmit  information  on  criminal  convictions  for  child  sex  abuse  offences  and  resulting 
disqualifications,  following  a  request  under  Article  6  FD,  in  order  to  ensure  that  employers 
can become aware of those convictions when recruiting a person for professional or voluntary 
activities involving direct and regular contacts with children. The implementation by Member 
States of these special provisions will be dealt with in the specific implementation report on 
Directive 2011/93/EU. 

All  Member  States  transposed  Article  7(2)  FD  into  their  national  law,  but  the  detailed 
provisions vary considerably. The majority (BE, BG, CZ, CY, DE, EE, ES, FR, HR, LT, NL, 
SE, SI and UK) would reply to requests for other purposes in accordance with their national 
rules; more specifically:  

  BE would respond in accordance with the BE code of criminal procedure; 
  CZ and DE would not send certain convictions handed down in other Member States 

that their national courts would not regard as convictions as well;  

  DE and ES would send information for the same purposes and to the same extent as to 

their respective national authorities;  

  EE would reply where permitted under its criminal records act;  
  FR referred to information included in a national extract issued for purposes other than 

criminal proceedings; 

  HR would reply in certain specified situations; 
  LT would reply without the consent of the convicted person if its national legislation 
restricts the person's rights and freedoms in a concrete case due to his/her conviction; 
otherwise the person's consent is needed; 

  NL  provides  that  a  reply  may  be  given  after  a  careful  assessment  of  each  case;  the 

 

scope of transmitted information would depend on this assessment; 
in  SE,  the  information  would  be  given  if  SE  is  also  entitled  to  receive  such 
information from the requesting Member State; additionally, there are some categories 
of  information  that  cannot  be  transmitted  for  purposes  other  than  criminal 
proceedings; 

  SI  would  exchange  information  only  on  national  criminal  convictions  and  those 
handed down in third countries, but not on convictions handed down in other Member 
States and transmitted to it; 
the UK stipulated that only ‘spent’ convictions, as defined in its national legislation, 
can be transmitted. 

 

Three Member States require additionally the consent of the person concerned if the reply is 
to be given:  

 

 

 

in ES, this is always the case, except where the law obliges an individual to present the 
criminal records extract;  
in LT, consent is required in those cases where the person’s rights and freedoms are 
not restricted by LT legislation due to his/her conviction;  
in  LU,  exchanges  take  place  only  for  the  purpose  of  working  with  children  and 
consent is always required.  

13 Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on combating the 
sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, and replacing Council Framework 
Decision 2004/68/JHA (OJ L 335, 17.12.2011, p. 1). 

EN  

8 

EN 

 
 
                                                            
AT, LV, PL and SK do not include a reference to national law in replies to requests for other 
purposes,  nor  any  other  information  limitations,  allowing  in  this  way  for  transmissions 
comparable  to  those  for  criminal  proceedings.  Four  Member  States  do  not  exchange 
information  for  purposes  other  than  criminal  proceedings,  except  for  requests  from  an 
individual (FI, HU and PT) or for the purpose of working with children (thus implementing 
Directive 2011/93/EU) (LU). Two of these countries (HU and LU), together with SI, which 
does not transmit convictions handed down in other Member States, did not include in their 
provisions  restrictions  on  transmitting  information  further  in  line  with  rules  set  by  the 
convicting Member State. FI, HU,  LU, SI,  EE, FR  and NL  did  not  include an obligation  to 
indicate the convicting Member State from which the restricted information can be obtained. 
While  some  Member  States  (e.g.  BG,  EE,  and  SE)  have  provided  that,  when  sending 
notifications on convictions on their territory, they may restrict the further transmission of this 
information  to  criminal  purposes  only,  notifications  from  ES  and  PT  would  always  be 
restricted in this way. 

5.3.   Requests from a third country 

Under Article 7(3) FD, when replying to requests from third countries (i.e. non-EU countries), 
the Member State of nationality may, subject to the conditions in Article 7(1) and (2), transmit 
conviction information received from other Member States. 

In  Member  States’  legislation,  the  transmission  of  criminal  records  information  to  third 
countries  is  governed  by  conventions  on  mutual  legal  assistance,  other  international 
agreements or specific provisions in criminal records law. 

The vast majority of the Member States (BE, BG, CY, CZ, DE, EE, ES, FI, HR, HU, LV, NL, 
PL, SE, SI, SK and UK) explicitly included the Article 7(3) condition in their legislation. In 
LT, it can be deduced from the context. PT provides for requests from non-EU countries to be 
replied  to  under  the  terms  of  the  applicable  international  agreements,  subject  to  reciprocity. 
AT, FR and LU have not adopted provisions in this area. 

5.4.   Requests to a Member State other than the Member State of nationality 

It  may  be  that  a  request  for  information  is  addressed  to  a  Member  State  other  than  the 
Member  State  of  nationality.  For  example,  the  convicting  Member  State  may  be  asked  for 
information on convictions prior to the entry into force of the Framework Decision that might 
not have been transmitted to the Member State of nationality, or a request may concern a third 
country national who does not have EU nationality also. 

Article 7(4) FD requires the Member State that receives the request to respond by providing 
the information it holds in its criminal record on convictions handed down in its territory and 
convictions  on  non-EU  country  nationals  and  stateless  persons.  The  reply  is  subject  to  the 
same conditions as those in Article 13 of the MLA Convention, i.e. it is obligatory and must 
contain all information (in the case of requests for the purpose of criminal proceedings) or be 
in accordance with national law (in the case of requests for other purposes). 

As regards third country nationals, the ECRIS mechanism whereby ‘blanket’ requests are sent 
to all Member States in order to determine where such a person was convicted, combined with 
the  Article  7(4)  FD  obligation  to  respond,  produces  a  huge  administrative  burden  for  all 
Member  States,  including  the  Member  States  (the  majority)  that  do  not  hold  the  requested 
information.  For  this  reason,  the  Commission  is  proposing  an  amending  directive  on  the 
exchange  of  criminal  records  information  regarding  third  country  nationals  convicted  in  the 
EU. 

EN  

9 

EN 

 
 
The vast majority of Member  States (AT, BE,  BG, CY, CZ, DE, EE,  ES, FI, FR,  HR, HU, 
LT,  LV,  NL,  PL,  PT,  SE  and  UK)  have  implemented  Article  7(4)  FD  in  its  entirety.  Most 
(AT,  CZ,  DE,  EE,  ES,  FI,  FR,  LT,  NL,  PL  and  SE)  did  not  make  any  distinction  between 
replies  to  requests  regarding  their  own  citizens,  citizens  of  other  Member  States  and  third 
country  nationals,  for  criminal  proceedings  or  other  purposes;  all  are  governed  by  the  same 
broad  provisions.  In  addition  to  such  provisions,  two  Member  States  stipulate  more 
specifically that the information should be provided according to the MLA Convention (HU) 
or international treaties (LV). FI, HU and PT would reply to requests only for the purpose of 
criminal  proceedings.  BE,  BG,  CY,  HR  and  UK  adopted  a  separate  provision,  mostly 
reproducing  the  content  of  Article  7(4)  FD,  specifically  for  replies  to  requests  regarding 
citizens of other Member States. Two other Member States have a similar separate provision, 
but in SI this addresses only replies concerning third country nationals and stateless persons 
(not the citizens of other Member States) and in SK it is mentioned only that the information 
should be provided to the extent required by international agreement. LU seems not to have 
transposed this provision. 

5.5.   Deadline for replies 

Replies  to  requests  for  the  purpose  of  criminal  proceedings  and  other  purposes  should  be 
given  immediately  and  in  any  event  within  ten  working  days,  or  20  working  days  if  the 
request  is  from  an  individual  asking  for  information  on  his/her  own  record.  If  the  Member 
State receiving the request requires further information to identify the subject of the request, it 
should consult the requesting Member State immediately and reply within ten working days 
of receiving the information. 

Almost all Member States (AT, BE, CY, CZ, BG, EE, ES, FI, FR, HR, HU, LT, LU, LV, NL, 
PL, SI, SK and UK) transposed the provisions on deadlines. HU and PL did not adopt detailed 
provisions on asking for additional information. CZ, NL and SK apply the ten-day deadline 
also to requests from an individual. SE regulated replies to requests for criminal proceedings, 
but  not  for  other  purposes.  DE  did  not  mention  the  deadline  for  replies  to  requests  in 
accordance with Article 6(1) FD, only for those from an individual. PT seems not to have laid 
down deadlines in its legislation. 

6.  

Requests for information 

When  information  is  requested  at  national  level  for  the  purpose  of  criminal  proceedings  or 
other purposes, the central authority of the Member State may, in accordance with its national 
law,  make  a  request  for  information  to  the  central  authority  of  another  Member  State 
(Article 6(1) FD). 

Almost all Member States (AT, BE, BG, CY, CZ, DE, EE, ES, FI, HR, HU, LU, LV, NL, PL, 
PT,  SE,  SI,  SK  and  UK)  adopted  a  provision  allowing  a  central  authority  to  request 
information where needed for domestic authorities . Some (BG, EE, FI, HR, HU, LV, PL, PT, 
SE and SI) indicated exactly who can request the information and in what circumstances from 
the central authority at national level. CZ, FI and HU would request information only for the 
purpose of criminal proceedings. PL requests information in accordance with the law of the 
addressee Member State, rather than its own. FR and LT have not adopted explicit provisions 
on requests under Article 6(1). 

Particular  considerations  apply  where  an  EU  citizen asks the  central  authority  of  a Member 
State  other  than  his/her  Member  State  of  nationality  for  information  from  his/her  own 
criminal  record  dating  from  27  April  2012  or  later.  In  order  to  ensure  that  the  addressee 
Member  State  does  not  issue  an  extract  that  does  not  include  exhaustive  information  about 
his/her criminal past, Article 6(3) FD obliges it to request information from the Member State 

EN  

10 

EN 

 
 
of  nationality  and  include  this  in  the  extract.  This  provision  is  particularly  important  in  the 
context  of  obtaining  criminal  records  extracts  for  employment  purposes  in  sensitive  sectors 
such as the security sector or working with children (see Directive 2011/93/EU). 

While the vast majority of Member States (AT, BE, BG, CY, CZ, DE, ES, FI, FR, HR, LT, 
LU, LV, PL, PT, SE, SI and SK) introduced an obligation for the central authority to request 
information on behalf of a citizen of another Member State, a few (BG, FI, LV, SE and SK) 
did  not  explicitly  provide  that  the  information  obtained  should  be  included  in  the  extract 
issued  to  the  citizen.  In  HR,  in  general,  individuals  cannot  obtain  criminal  records  extracts, 
but  only  read  the  record  in  the  presence  of  a  clerk.  A  special  certificate  can  be  issued 
exceptionally  for  the  purpose  of  activities  involving  regular  contact  with  children  or  for 
exercising a specific right abroad or in an international organisation. In DE, HR and NL, the 
citizen receives  a  special  ‘certificate of conduct’. EE, HU,  NL and UK have  not  transposed 
the obligation in Article 6(3) FD. In NL, as in HR, an individual cannot apply for an extract 
from  his/her  criminal  records,  but  only  has  the  right  to  inspect  them.  A  certificate  of  ‘good 
behaviour’ can  be obtained, for example  for job  screening purposes,  but  this is regulated in 
separate provisions, not notified to the Commission. The UK transposed only Article 6(2) FD, 
with no obligation to request information. 

7.  

Conditions for the use of personal data 

The  Framework  Decision  contains  several  provisions  designed  to  ensure  a  high  level  of 
protection  of  personal  data  (Articles  7  and  9  FD).  Personal  data  provided  in  response  to 
requests  may  be  used  only  for  the  purposes  for  which  they  were  requested.  Additionally, 
personal  data  provided  for  purposes  other  than  criminal  proceedings  may  be  used  in 
accordance with the national law of the requesting Member State, within any limits specified 
by  the  addressee  Member  State.  Similarly,  personal  data  transmitted  to  a  third  country  are 
subject to any limitations on purpose and usage indicated by the convicting Member State. 

Almost all Member States (AT, BE, BG, CY, CZ, DE, EE, ES, FI, HR, HU, LT, LV, NL, PL, 
PT, SE, SI, SK and UK) implemented these personal data safeguards. While all mirrored to a 
certain  extent  the  provisions  of  the  Framework  Decision,  BG,  FI  and  LT  added  an  explicit 
reference to processing data in accordance with their national data-protection instruments. FI, 
LU, LT and PT directly included provisions on the protection of the rights of the data subject; 
in FI, for example, the individual is entitled to ask to whom and for what purpose his/her data 
have been disclosed in the past year. In any case, national data-protection legislation applies 
to  the  processing  of  personal  data  in  the  national  criminal  records  databases  and  to  the 
exchange of any such data with other Member States. FR and LU seem not to have adopted 
relevant  provisions  in  this  area,  although  FR  included  a  statement  that  information  may  be 
disclosed only where this is provided for by law. 

8.  

Adoption of electronic standardised format of transmission 

The  ECRIS  system,  allowing  information  to  be  exchanged  electronically  according  to  a 
‘standardised European format’, was created on the basis of the Framework Decision. From 
27 April 2012 onwards, Member States are obliged to use it for all transmissions, on the basis 
of Article 11(3) FD. Currently, Member States except SI, PT and MT14 exchange information 
via ECRIS. 

14   By the end of 2014, the interconnection rate was 66 % of all interconnections possible between all Member 

States. MT has said that it started interconnecting in 2015. 

EN  

11 

EN 

 
 
                                                            
The majority of Member States (BE, BG, CY, CZ, EE, ES, FR, FI, HR, LT, LV, NL, PL, PT, 
SI  and  SK)  introduced  an  obligation  in  their  national  law  to  exchange  information 
electronically using a standardised format. Many (BE, BG, EE, HR, LT, PL, SI, SK and UK) 
explicitly referred to the ECRIS system as the electronic channel for the exchange of criminal 
records. In SI, the minister of justice will issue an order setting a date on which the electronic 
exchange of information via ECRIS will begin. In AT, the use of the electronic format can be 
inferred from the context. DE, HU, LU, SE and UK did not mention the electronic format in 
their national provisions, but do in practice exchange information via ECRIS. 

CONCLUSION 

The  transposition  of  the  Framework  Decision  by  22  Member  States  has  led  to  significant 
progress in improving the exchange of criminal records information within the Union. It has 
proved  to  be  an  indispensable  tool  used  on  a  daily  basis  in  25  Member  States  which  has 
provided a real added-value in practice to judicial authorities. 

There  are  areas  identified  in  this  report  where  transposition  of  particular  provisions  is 
incomplete  and  therefore  the  Commission  considers  that  it  is  important  that  Member  States 
fully  transpose  this  Framework  Decision  and  as  a  matter  of  urgency  take  all  necessary 
measures.  In  that  regard,  the  Commission  will  closely  follow  developments  and  take  any 
appropriate action.  

EN  

12 

EN 

 
 
ANNEX  

OVERVIEW OF MEMBER STATES’ NOTIFICATIONS 

Transposing 
measures 
notified? 
Date of 
notification 
Yes 

20.8.2013 

AT 

BE 

Yes 

30.1.2015 
18.7.2014 

BG 

Yes 

30.7.2014 
20.3.2013 

CY 

Yes 

23.4.2012 

Implementation measures 

Amendment  of  the  Federal  Act  on 
Judicial  Cooperation 
in  Criminal 
Matters  with  the  Member  States  of 
the EU of 27.12.2011; 
Amendment of the Criminal Records 
Act of 20.4.2012; 
Amendment of the Spent Convictions 
Act of 20.4.2012 
Articles  589-597  of  the  Criminal 
Procedure  Code  as  amended  by  the 
Law  of  25  April  2014  on  various 
questions in the matter of justice; 
Draft  Circular  on  the  exchange  of 
criminal records information between 
EU Member States 
Amendments to the Judiciary System 
Act and Regulation No 8 of 26 
February 2008 on the Functioning 
and Organisation of the Criminal 
Records Bureaux 
Decision  No  71.068  of  8  October 
2010,  adopting  Framework  Decision 
2009/315/JHA 

Transposition 
date/entry into 
force 

Notification on 
competent 
authorities 
(Article 3(2)) 

27.4.2012 

Police  —  Criminal 
Records Office of the 
Federal 
Police 
Directorate in Vienna 

Circular:  end 
March 2015; 
previous 
measures: 
24.5.2014 

Ministry  of  Justice 
—  Central  Criminal 
Office 
Records 
Judiciaire 
(Casier 
Central), Brussels 

15.2.2013 
1.9.2012 

Ministry  of  Justice 
—  Central  Criminal 
Records 
Bureau, 
Sofia 

Police  —  Chief  of 
Police; 
Previous Convictions 
Office 
(Department C); 
Previous Convictions 
Office:  Police  HQ 
Traffic 
Offences 
(Department B); 
Police  HQ  EU  and 
International  Police 
Cooperation 
Directorate 
Ministry  of  Justice 
—  Criminal  Records 
Office 
in  Prague; 
Ministry of Justice  

Ministry  of  Justice 
—  Central  Federal 
Register, Bonn 

Police  —  Danish 

CZ 

Yes 

DE 

25.3.2015 
9.7.2014 
1.2.2013 
Yes 

25.6.2014 
16.3.2012 

DK 

No 

Act No 357/2011 amending Act No 
269/1994 on Criminal Records, as 
amended, and certain other laws 

27.4.2012 

27.4.2012  

improving 

the  Exchange  of 
Act 
Criminal  Record  Data  between 
Member  States  of 
the  European 
Union  and  amending  provisions 
under the Law governing  Records of 
15 December 2011 

EN  

13 

EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Police 

National 
Communications 
Centre, Copenhagen 
Ministry  of  Justice 
of 
Centre 
— 
Registers 
and 
Information Systems, 
Tallinn 
Ministry  of  Justice 
—  Department  of 
Criminal 
Records, 
Athens 
Ministry  of  Justice 
— Central register of 
convicted 
persons, 
Madrid 

Ministry  of  Justice 
—  Legal  Register 
Centre, Hameenlinna 

1.12.2014 

15.5.2012 

1.12.2014 

Ministry  of  Justice 
— National Criminal 
Records 
Register, 
Nantes 

1.7.2013 

Ministry  of  Justice, 
Zagreb 

Ministry  of  Interior 
—  Central  Institute 
Administrative 
of 
and Electronic Public 
Services, Budapest 

EE 

Yes 

Punishment  Register  Act  of  17 
February 2011 

1.1.2012 

12.2.2015 

EL 

No 

ES 

Yes 

14.11.2014 
7.7.2014 

FI 

Yes 

26.6.2014 
29.5.2012 

FR 

Yes 

10.3.2015 
20.1.2015 
22.1.2013 

HR 

Yes 

18.6.2014 
28.6.2013 

HU 

Yes 

30.12.2014 
28.11.2014 

the 

execution 

Organic Law 7/2014 of 12 November 
2014 on the exchange of information 
on  previous  convictions  and  taking 
account of criminal judgments in the 
European Union 
Act  on 
storing  and  disclosing 
criminal records between Finland and 
other Member States of the European 
Union (214/2012) of 11 May 2012; 
Act  amending  the  Criminal  Records 
Act (215/2012) with the exception of 
the  amendment  to  Section  4a  of  11 
May 2012; 
Act  amending  Section  24  of  the  Act 
on  International  Legal  Assistance  in 
Criminal  Matters  (217/2012)  of  11 
May 2012 
Law  2012-409  of  27  March  2012 
concerning 
of 
convictions; 
Decree No 214 of 28 November 2014 
concerning 
the  national  criminal 
records and exchanges with other EU 
Member States 
Act No 143/12 on the Legal 
Consequences of Convictions, 
Criminal Records and Rehabilitation; 
Amendments  to  the  Rulebook  on 
Criminal Records (NN, No 66/2013) 
Act  XLVII  of  2009  on  the  criminal 
records  system, 
registry  of 
convictions  handed  down  against 
Hungarian  nationals  by  courts  of  the 
Member  States  of 
the  European 
Union, and the recording of criminal 
and law enforcement biometric data; 
Act  LXXVIII  of  2013  amending 
certain acts on criminal matters; 
Act  CLXXXVI  of  2013  amending 
certain  acts  on  criminal  law  matters 
and other acts associated therewith; 
Act  XIX  of  1998  on  criminal 

the 

EN  

14 

EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
proceedings; 
Government  Decree  No  276  of  23 
December 2006 on the establishment, 
responsibilities  and  competence  of 
the Central Office for Administrative 
and Electronic Public Services; 
Act  CXII  of  2011  on  informational 
self-determination  and  freedom  of 
information 

for 

and 

Law  on  the  Register  of  Suspects, 
Accused  and  Convicts  No  XI-1503, 
adopted on 22 June 2011; 
the  Register  of 
Regulations 
Suspects,  Accused  and  Convicts, 
approved  by  Resolution  No  435  of 
the  Government  of  the  Republic  of 
Lithuania of 18 April 2012; 
Rules  for  the  registration  of  subjects 
and  disclosure  of  data  from  the 
Register  of  Suspects,  Accused  and 
Convicts of 10 August 2012 
Law  of  29  March  2013  on  the 
organisation 
of 
information  extracted  from  criminal 
records  between  the  EU  Member 
States 
Criminal  Record  Law  of  10  October 
2013; 
Cabinet  Regulation  of  10  December 
2013  No  1427  regarding  the  content 
and layout of the form for requesting 
on 
and 
convictions; 
Cabinet  Regulation  regarding 
the 
provision  and  receipt  of  information 
the 
the  Criminal  Record, 
from 
amount  of  duty  and  the  preparation 
of the extract 

information 

providing 

exchange 

IE 

No — draft 
law received 

IT 

No 

LT 

Yes 

27.5.2014 

LU 

Yes 

3.7.2014 
24.5.2013 

LV 

Yes 

27.1.2015 
24.7.2014 

MT 

No 

Police), 

Ministry  of  Interior 
— 
Garda 
Commissioner 
(National 
Tipperary 
Ministry  of  Justice 
—  Criminal  Records 
Office, Rome 
Ministry  of  Interior 
Information 
— 
Technology 
and 
Communications 
Department, Vilnius 

1.7.2012 

1.8.2013 

1.1.2014 

General 
Public 
Prosecutor  Office, 
Luxembourg 

Ministry  of  Interior 
— 
Information 
Centre, Riga 

NL 

Yes 

12.4.2012 

Decree  of  23  March  2012  amending 
the  Judicial  Data  and  Criminal 
Records Decree 

1.4.2012 

PL 

Yes 

Act of 16 September 2011 amending  27.4.2012 

Police  —  Criminal 
Investigation 
Department, Floriana 
Ministry  of  Justice 
— 
Judicial 
Information  Service, 
Almelo 
Ministry  of  Justice 

EN  

15 

EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
31.7.2013 

PT 

Yes 

15.6.2015 
5.5.2015 

RO 

No 

the act on National Criminal Register 

22.7.2015 

Law  No  37/2015  of  5  May  2015 
setting  out  the  general  principles 
governing 
and 
operation  of  criminal  identification 
and transposing Framework Decision 
2009/315/JHA into national law. 

the  organisation 

— National Criminal 
Records  Information 
Office, Warsaw 
Ministry  of  Justice 
Criminal 
— 
Identification 
Services, Lisbon 

Ministry  of  Interior 
—General 
Inspectorate  of 
the 
Police: Directorate of 
Records, 
Criminal 
Statistics 
and 
Operational 
Registers, Bucharest 
Police  —  National 
Police Board, Kiruna 

1.1.2013 

SE 

Yes 

21.5.2013 

SI 

Yes 

SK 

UK 

12.12.2013 
22.10.2013 
Yes 

10.6.2014 
Yes 

09.01.2015 

on 
in 

amending 

the  Act 

legal  assistance 

Act  amending  the  Act  on  criminal 
records (1998:620); 
Act  amending  the  Police  Data  Act 
(2010:361); 
Act 
international 
criminal matters (2000:562); 
Act  amending  the  Act  on  Public 
Access  to  Information  and  Secrecy 
(2009:400); 
Regulation amending the Police Data 
Ordinance (2010:1155); 
Ordinance  amending  the  Ordinance 
containing 
the 
instructions 
National Police Board (1989:773); 
Ordinance  amending  the  Ordinance 
on criminal records (1999:1134); 
- all issued on 29 November 2012 
Act  on  International  Cooperation  in 
the 
between 
Criminal  Matters 
Member  States  of 
the  European 
Union of 23 May 2013 
Act  No  334/2012  amending  Act  No 
330/2007  on  criminal  records  and 
amending certain acts 
Regulations  62-74  of  the  Criminal 
Justice and Data Protection (Protocol 
no 
2014 
(International Cooperation) Act 2003 

Regulations 

36) 

for 

20.9.2013 

1.1.2013 

01.12.2014 

Ministry  of  Justice 
—  Department  for 
Criminal 
Records, 
Ljubljana 
Public 
General 
Prosecutor’s  Office, 
Bratislava 
Police  –  Criminal 
Office 
Records 
(ACRO) 
in 
Southampton 

EN  

16 

EN