Case C-57/23, Policejní prezidium (Storage of biometric and genetic data): Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 20 November 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud – Czech Republic) – JH v Policejní prezidium (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of their 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 – Directive (EU) 2016/680 – Article 4(1)(c) and (e) – Minimisation of data processing – Storage limitation of personal data – Article 10 – Collection and storage of biometric and genetic data – Strict necessity – Article 6(a) – Obligation to make a distinction between personal data of different categories of persons – National legislation which provides for the collection of biometric and genetic data of any person suspected or accused of having committed an intentional criminal offence – Article 5 – Appropriate time limits for erasure or for a periodic review of the need for the storage of those data – No maximum time limit for storage – Assessment of the need for the storage of biometric and genetic data by the police on the basis of internal rules – Article 8(2) – Lawfulness of the processing of those data – Concept of Member State law – Whether national case-law may be classified as Member State law)
Date: 2025-11-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: DNA, case-law, data protection, data-processing law, national law, offence, personal data, prevention of delinquency, principle of proportionality, protection of privacy








C_202600262EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2026/262


26.1.2026






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 20 November 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud – Czech Republic) – JH v Policejní prezidium


(Case C-57/23,
                (1)
Policejní prezidium (Storage of biometric and genetic data))

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of their 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 - Directive (EU) 2016/680 - Article 4(1)(c) and (e) - Minimisation of data processing - Storage limitation of personal data - Article 10 - Collection and storage of biometric and genetic data - Strict necessity - Article 6(a) - Obligation to make a distinction between personal data of different categories of persons - National legislation which provides for the collection of biometric and genetic data of any person suspected or accused of having committed an intentional criminal offence - Article 5 - Appropriate time limits for erasure or for a periodic review of the need for the storage of those data - No maximum time limit for storage - Assessment of the need for the storage of biometric and genetic data by the police on the basis of internal rules - Article 8(2) - Lawfulness of the processing of those data - Concept of ‘Member State law’ - Whether national case-law may be classified as ‘Member State law’)
(C/2026/262)
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Nejvyšší správní soud

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: JH

Defendant: Policejní prezidium

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Articles 8 and 10 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
must be interpreted as meaning that, as regards the collection, storage and erasure of biometric and genetic data, the concept of ‘Member State law’, within the meaning of those articles, must be understood as referring to a provision of general application laying down the minimum conditions for collection, storage and erasure of those data, as interpreted by the case-law of the national courts, in so far as that case-law is accessible and sufficiently foreseeable.










2.


Article 6 and Article 4(1)(c) of Directive 2016/680, read in conjunction with Article 10 of that directive
must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which permits the indiscriminate collection of biometric and genetic data of any person accused or suspected of having committed an intentional criminal offence, in so far as, first, the purposes of that collection do not require a distinction to be made between those two categories of persons and, second, the controllers are required, in accordance with national law, including the case-law of the national courts, to comply with all of the principles and specific requirements laid down in Articles 4 and 10 of that directive.










3.


Article 4(1)(e) of Directive 2016/680
must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation under which the need for the continued storage of biometric and genetic data is assessed by the police on the basis of internal rules, without that legislation laying down a maximum period for storage, in so far as that legislation sets appropriate time limits for a periodic review of the need to store those data and, at the time of that review, the strict necessity of extending their storage is assessed.






(1)  
            OJ C 173, 15.5.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/262/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)