Article 43 Supervision by the EDPS
1. The EDPS shall be responsible for monitoring and ensuring the application of the provisions of this Regulation relating to the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by Europol, and for advising Europol and data subjects on all matters concerning the processing of personal data. To that end, he or she shall fulfil the duties set out in paragraph 2 and exercise the powers laid down in paragraph 3, while closely cooperating with the national supervisory authorities in accordance with Article 44. 2. The EDPS shall have the following duties: (a) hearing and investigating complaints, and informing the data subject of the outcome within a reasonable period; (b) conducting inquiries either on his or her own initiative or on the basis of a complaint, and informing the data subject of the outcome within a reasonable period; (c) monitoring and ensuring the application of this Regulation and any other Union act relating to the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by Europol; (d) advising Europol, either on his or her own initiative or in response to a consultation, on all matters concerning the processing of personal data, in particular before it draws up internal rules relating to the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms with regard to the processing of personal data; (e) keeping a register of new types of processing operations notified to him or her by virtue of Article 39(1) and registered in accordance with Article 39(4); (f) carrying out a prior consultation on processing notified to him or her. 3. The EDPS may pursuant to this Regulation: (a) give advice to data subjects on the exercise of their rights; (b) refer a matter to Europol in the event of an alleged breach of the provisions governing the processing of personal data, and, where appropriate, make proposals for remedying that breach and for improving the protection of the data subjects; (c) order that requests to exercise certain rights in relation to data be complied with where such requests have been refused in breach of Articles 36 and 37; (d) warn or admonish Europol; (e) order Europol to carry out the rectification, restriction, erasure or destruction of personal data which have been processed in breach of the provisions governing the processing of personal data and to notify such actions to third parties to whom such data have been disclosed; (f) impose a temporary or definitive ban on processing operations by Europol which are in breach of the provisions governing the processing of personal data; (g) refer a matter to Europol and, if necessary, to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission; (h) refer a matter to the Court of Justice of the European Union under the conditions provided for in the TFEU; (i) intervene in actions brought before the Court of Justice of the European Union. 4. The EDPS shall have the power to: (a) obtain from Europol access to all personal data and to all information necessary for his or her enquiries; (b) obtain access to any premises in which Europol carries on its activities when there are reasonable grounds for presuming that an activity covered by this Regulation is being carried out there. 5. The EDPS shall draw up an annual report on the supervisory activities of Europol, after consulting the national supervisory authorities. That report shall be part of the annual report of the EDPS referred to in Article 48 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001. The report shall include statistical information regarding complaints, inquiries, and investigations carried out in accordance with paragraph 2, as well as regarding transfers of personal data to third countries and international organisations, cases of prior consultation, and the use of the powers laid down in paragraph 3. 6. The EDPS, the officials and the other staff members of the EDPS's Secretariat shall be bound by the obligation of confidentiality laid down in Article 67(1).
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Europe faces a security landscape in flux, with evolving and increasingly complex security threats. Criminals exploit the advantages that the digital transformation, new technologies 1 , globalisation and mobility bring about, including the inter-connectivity and blurring of the boundaries between the physical and digital world. 2 Recent events 3 have once again shown that terrorism remains a significant threat to the freedom and way of life of the European Union and its citizens. The COVID-19 crisis adds to this, as criminals have quickly seized opportunities to exploit the crisis by adapting their modes of operation or developing new criminal activities . 4 Although the full impact of the COVID-19 crisis on security is not yet apparent, it is expected to shape the landscape of serious and organised crime in the EU in mid- and long-term. 5 These evolving security threats call for effective EU level support to the work of national law enforcement authorities. These threats spread across borders, cut across a variety of crimes that they facilitate, and manifest themselves in poly-criminal organised crime groups 6 that engage in a wide range of criminal activities. As action at national level alone does not suffice to address these transnational security challenges , Member States’ law enforcement authorities have increasingly made use of the support and expertise that Europol, the EU agency for law enforcement cooperation, offers to counter serious crime and terrorism. Europol is the centrepiece for EU-level support to Member States in countering serious crime and terrorism. The agency offers support and expertise to national law enforcement authorities in preventing and combating serious crime affecting two or more Member States, terrorism and forms of crime which affect a common interest covered by a Union policy. Since the entry into application of the 2016 Europol Regulation 7 , the operational importance of the agency’s tasks has changed substantially. For example, the operational support provided by Europol’s European Counter-Terrorism Centre has increased fivefold over recent years (from 127 operational cases supported in 2016 to 632 cases in 2019). The Centre is now part of almost every major counter-terrorism investigation in the EU. The threat from terrorism in Europe remains high. 8 In a joint statement by the EU Home Affairs Ministers of 13 November 2020 on the recent terrorist attacks in Europe, Ministers “ invite the Commission to submit a proposal revising the Europol mandate with a strong legal basis for the handling of large datasets. Europol and especially its European Counter Terrorism Centre are of fundamental importance for effectively supporting the Member States in their prevention and prosecution of terrorist crimes, and need to be bolstered. ” 9 The threat environment also changes type of the support Member States need and expect from Europol to keep citizens safe, in a way that was not foreseeable when the co-legislators negotiated the current Europol mandate. The December 2019 Council Conclusions acknowledge “ the urgent operational need for Europol to request and receive data directly from private parties ”, calling on the Commission to consider adapting the schedule for the review of the Europol Regulation “ in view of the need for European law enforcement to address ongoing technological developments ”. 10 There is a pressing social need to counter serious crimes prepared or committed with the use of cross-border services offered by private parties 11 , notably cybercrimes. Whereas this challenge is partially addressed by the e-evidence package 12 , there are situations where Europol’s support is necessary to counter the threats posed by cybercrime and cyber-enabled crimes effectively, notably when private parties seek to report such crimes. A July 2020 European Parliament Resolution also calls for reinforcing Europol, stating that “ strengthening Europol’s capacity to request the initiation of cross-border investigations, particularly in cases of serious attacks against whistleblowers and investigative journalists who play an essential role in exposing corruption, fraud, mismanagement and other wrongdoing in the public and private sectors, should be a priority.” 13 Given the changing security landscape, Europol needs to have the capabilities and tools to support Member States effectively in countering serious crime and terrorism. In response to pressing operational needs, and calls by the co-legislators for stronger support from Europol, the Commission Work Programme for 2020 announced a legislative initiative to “ strengthen the Europol mandate in order to reinforce operational police cooperation ”. This is also a key action of the July 2020 EU Security Union Strategy. 14 In line with the call by the Political Guidelines 15 to “ leave no stone unturned when it comes to protecting our citizens ”, this legislative initiative addresses those areas where stakeholders ask for reinforced support from Europol to help Member States keeping citizens safe. To that end, this proposal seeks to strengthen the mandate of Europol within the mission and tasks of the agency as laid down in the Treaty 16 , notably by: · enabling Europol to cooperate effectively with private parties, addressing lack of effective cooperation between private parties and law enforcement authorities to counter the use of cross-border services, such as communication, banking, or transport services, by criminals; · enabling Europol to effectively support Member States and their investigations with the analysis of large and complex datasets, addressing the big data challenge for law enforcement authorities; · strengthening Europol’s role on research and innovation, addressing gaps relevant for law enforcement; · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with third countries in specific situations and on a case-by-case basis for preventing and countering crimes falling within the scope of Europol’s objectives; · clarifying that Europol may request, in specific cases where Europol considers that a criminal investigation should be initiated, the competent authorities of a Member State to initiate, conduct or coordinate an investigation of a crime which affects a common interest covered by a Union policy, without the requirement of a cross-border dimension of the crime concerned; 17 · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO); · further strengthening the data protection framework applicable to Europol; · further strengthening parliamentary oversight and accountability of Europol. This legislative initiative is linked to a legislative proposal amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1862 on the establishment, operation and use of the Schengen Information System (SIS) in the field of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters to enable Europol to enter data into the SIS. Subject to consultation of the Member States, this would enable Europol to enter data into the SIS on the suspected involvement of a third country national in an offence in respect of which Europol is competent. This legislative initiative is part of a package of measures presented by the Commission on 9 December 2020 to reinforce the Union’s response to the threat posed by terrorism. 
Revised version (Article 43 Supervision by the EDPS):
1. The EDPS shall be responsible for monitoring and ensuring the application of the provisions of this Regulation and of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 relating to the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by Europol, and for advising Europol and data subjects on all matters concerning the processing of personal data. that end, he or she shall fulfil the duties set out in paragraph 2 and exercise the powers laid down in paragraph 3, while closely cooperating with the national supervisory authorities in accordance with Article 44. 4. The EDPS shall have the power to: (a) obtain from Europol access to all personal data and to all information necessary for his or her enquiries; (b) obtain access to any premises in which Europol carries on its activities when there are reasonable grounds for presuming that an activity covered by this Regulation is being carried out there. 5. The EDPS shall prepare an annual report on his or her supervisory activities in relation to Europol. That report shall be part of the annual report of the EDPS referred to in Article 60 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725. The EDPS shall invite the national supervisory authorities to submit observations on that part of the annual report before the annual report is adopted. The EDPS shall take utmost account of those observations and shall refer to them in the annual report. The part of the annual report referred to in the second subparagraph shall include statistical information regarding complaints, inquiries, and investigations, as well as regarding transfers of personal data to third countries and international organisations, cases of prior consultation of the EDPS, and the use of the powers laid down in paragraph 3 of this Article. 6. The EDPS, the officials and the other staff members of the EDPS's Secretariat shall be bound by the obligation of confidentiality laid down in Article 67(1).
Article 44 Cooperation between the EDPS and national supervisory authorities
1. The EDPS shall act in close cooperation with the national supervisory authorities on issues requiring national involvement, in particular if the EDPS or a national supervisory authority finds major discrepancies between the practices of Member States or potentially unlawful transfers in the use of Europol's channels for exchanges of information, or in the context of questions raised by one or more national supervisory authorities on the implementation and interpretation of this Regulation. 2. The EDPS shall use the expertise and experience of the national supervisory authorities in carrying out his or her duties as set out in Article 43(2). In carrying out joint inspections together with the EDPS, members and staff of national supervisory authorities shall, taking due account of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, have powers equivalent to those laid down in Article 43(4) and be bound by an obligation equivalent to that laid down in Article 43(6). The EDPS and the national supervisory authorities shall, each acting within the scope of their respective competences, exchange relevant information and assist each other in carrying out audits and inspections. 3. The EDPS shall keep national supervisory authorities fully informed of all issues directly affecting or otherwise relevant to them. Upon the request of one or more national supervisory authorities, the EDPS shall inform them of specific issues. 4. In cases relating to data originating from one or more Member States, including the cases referred to in Article 47(2), the EDPS shall consult the national supervisory authorities concerned. The EDPS shall not decide on further action to be taken before those national supervisory authorities have informed the EDPS of their position, within a deadline specified by him or her which shall not be shorter than one month and not longer than three months. The EDPS shall take the utmost account of the respective positions of the national supervisory authorities concerned. In cases where the EDPS intends not to follow the position of a national supervisory authority, he or she shall inform that authority, provide a justification and submit the matter for discussion to the Cooperation Board established by Article 45(1). In cases which the EDPS considers to be extremely urgent, he or she may decide to take immediate action. In such cases, the EDPS shall immediately inform the national supervisory authorities concerned and justify the urgent nature of the situation as well as the action he or she has taken.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Europe faces a security landscape in flux, with evolving and increasingly complex security threats. Criminals exploit the advantages that the digital transformation, new technologies 1 , globalisation and mobility bring about, including the inter-connectivity and blurring of the boundaries between the physical and digital world. 2 Recent events 3 have once again shown that terrorism remains a significant threat to the freedom and way of life of the European Union and its citizens. The COVID-19 crisis adds to this, as criminals have quickly seized opportunities to exploit the crisis by adapting their modes of operation or developing new criminal activities . 4 Although the full impact of the COVID-19 crisis on security is not yet apparent, it is expected to shape the landscape of serious and organised crime in the EU in mid- and long-term. 5 These evolving security threats call for effective EU level support to the work of national law enforcement authorities. These threats spread across borders, cut across a variety of crimes that they facilitate, and manifest themselves in poly-criminal organised crime groups 6 that engage in a wide range of criminal activities. As action at national level alone does not suffice to address these transnational security challenges , Member States’ law enforcement authorities have increasingly made use of the support and expertise that Europol, the EU agency for law enforcement cooperation, offers to counter serious crime and terrorism. Europol is the centrepiece for EU-level support to Member States in countering serious crime and terrorism. The agency offers support and expertise to national law enforcement authorities in preventing and combating serious crime affecting two or more Member States, terrorism and forms of crime which affect a common interest covered by a Union policy. Since the entry into application of the 2016 Europol Regulation 7 , the operational importance of the agency’s tasks has changed substantially. For example, the operational support provided by Europol’s European Counter-Terrorism Centre has increased fivefold over recent years (from 127 operational cases supported in 2016 to 632 cases in 2019). The Centre is now part of almost every major counter-terrorism investigation in the EU. The threat from terrorism in Europe remains high. 8 In a joint statement by the EU Home Affairs Ministers of 13 November 2020 on the recent terrorist attacks in Europe, Ministers “ invite the Commission to submit a proposal revising the Europol mandate with a strong legal basis for the handling of large datasets. Europol and especially its European Counter Terrorism Centre are of fundamental importance for effectively supporting the Member States in their prevention and prosecution of terrorist crimes, and need to be bolstered. ” 9 The threat environment also changes type of the support Member States need and expect from Europol to keep citizens safe, in a way that was not foreseeable when the co-legislators negotiated the current Europol mandate. The December 2019 Council Conclusions acknowledge “ the urgent operational need for Europol to request and receive data directly from private parties ”, calling on the Commission to consider adapting the schedule for the review of the Europol Regulation “ in view of the need for European law enforcement to address ongoing technological developments ”. 10 There is a pressing social need to counter serious crimes prepared or committed with the use of cross-border services offered by private parties 11 , notably cybercrimes. Whereas this challenge is partially addressed by the e-evidence package 12 , there are situations where Europol’s support is necessary to counter the threats posed by cybercrime and cyber-enabled crimes effectively, notably when private parties seek to report such crimes. A July 2020 European Parliament Resolution also calls for reinforcing Europol, stating that “ strengthening Europol’s capacity to request the initiation of cross-border investigations, particularly in cases of serious attacks against whistleblowers and investigative journalists who play an essential role in exposing corruption, fraud, mismanagement and other wrongdoing in the public and private sectors, should be a priority.” 13 Given the changing security landscape, Europol needs to have the capabilities and tools to support Member States effectively in countering serious crime and terrorism. In response to pressing operational needs, and calls by the co-legislators for stronger support from Europol, the Commission Work Programme for 2020 announced a legislative initiative to “ strengthen the Europol mandate in order to reinforce operational police cooperation ”. This is also a key action of the July 2020 EU Security Union Strategy. 14 In line with the call by the Political Guidelines 15 to “ leave no stone unturned when it comes to protecting our citizens ”, this legislative initiative addresses those areas where stakeholders ask for reinforced support from Europol to help Member States keeping citizens safe. To that end, this proposal seeks to strengthen the mandate of Europol within the mission and tasks of the agency as laid down in the Treaty 16 , notably by: · enabling Europol to cooperate effectively with private parties, addressing lack of effective cooperation between private parties and law enforcement authorities to counter the use of cross-border services, such as communication, banking, or transport services, by criminals; · enabling Europol to effectively support Member States and their investigations with the analysis of large and complex datasets, addressing the big data challenge for law enforcement authorities; · strengthening Europol’s role on research and innovation, addressing gaps relevant for law enforcement; · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with third countries in specific situations and on a case-by-case basis for preventing and countering crimes falling within the scope of Europol’s objectives; · clarifying that Europol may request, in specific cases where Europol considers that a criminal investigation should be initiated, the competent authorities of a Member State to initiate, conduct or coordinate an investigation of a crime which affects a common interest covered by a Union policy, without the requirement of a cross-border dimension of the crime concerned; 17 · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO); · further strengthening the data protection framework applicable to Europol; · further strengthening parliamentary oversight and accountability of Europol. This legislative initiative is linked to a legislative proposal amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1862 on the establishment, operation and use of the Schengen Information System (SIS) in the field of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters to enable Europol to enter data into the SIS. Subject to consultation of the Member States, this would enable Europol to enter data into the SIS on the suspected involvement of a third country national in an offence in respect of which Europol is competent. This legislative initiative is part of a package of measures presented by the Commission on 9 December 2020 to reinforce the Union’s response to the threat posed by terrorism. 
Revised version (Article 44 Cooperation between the EDPS and national supervisory authorities):
1. The EDPS shall act in close cooperation with the national supervisory authorities on issues requiring national involvement, in particular if the EDPS or a national supervisory authority finds major discrepancies between the practices of Member States or potentially unlawful transfers in the use of Europol's channels for exchanges of information, or in the context of questions raised by one or more national supervisory authorities on the implementation and interpretation of this Regulation. 2. In the cases referred to in paragraph 1, coordinated supervision shall be ensured in accordance with Article 62 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725. The EDPS shall use the expertise and experience of the national supervisory authorities in carrying out his or her duties as set out in Article 43(2) of this Regulation. In carrying out joint inspections together with the EDPS, members and staff of national supervisory authorities shall, taking due account of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, have powers equivalent to those laid down in Article 43(4) of this Regulation and be bound by an obligation equivalent to that laid down in Article 43(6) of this Regulation. 3. The EDPS shall keep national supervisory authorities fully informed of all issues directly affecting or otherwise relevant to them. Upon the request of one or more national supervisory authorities, the EDPS shall inform them of specific issues. 4. In cases relating to data originating from one or more Member States, including the cases referred to in Article 47(2), the EDPS shall consult the national supervisory authorities concerned. The EDPS shall not decide on further action to be taken before those national supervisory authorities have informed the EDPS of their opinion, within a deadline specified by him or her which shall not be shorter than one month and not longer than three months from when the EDPS consults the national supervisory authorities concerned. The EDPS shall take the utmost account of the respective positions of the national supervisory authorities concerned. Where the EDPS intends not to follow the position of a national supervisory authority, he or she shall inform that authority, provide a justification and submit the matter to the European Data Protection Board.
Article 45 Cooperation Board
1. A Cooperation Board with an advisory function is hereby established. It shall be composed of a representative of a national supervisory authority of each Member State and of the EDPS. 2. The Cooperation Board shall act independently when performing its tasks pursuant to paragraph 3 and shall neither seek nor take instructions from any body. 3. The Cooperation Board shall have the following tasks: (a) discussing general policy and strategy of data protection supervision of Europol and the permissibility of the transfer, the retrieval and any communication to Europol of personal data by the Member States; (b) examining difficulties of interpretation or application of this Regulation; (c) studying general problems relating to the exercise of independent supervision or the exercise of the rights of data subjects; (d) discussing and drawing up harmonised proposals for joint solutions on matters referred to in Article 44(1); (e) discussing cases submitted by the EDPS in accordance with Article 44(4); (f) discussing cases submitted by any national supervisory authority; and (g) promoting awareness of data protection rights. 4. The Cooperation Board may issue opinions, guidelines, recommendations and best practices. The EDPS and the national supervisory authorities shall, without prejudice to their independence and each acting within the scope of their respective competences, take the utmost account of them. 5. The Cooperation Board shall meet whenever necessary, and at least twice a year. The costs and servicing of its meetings shall be borne by the EDPS. 6. Rules of procedure of the Cooperation Board shall be adopted at its first meeting by a simple majority of its members. Further working methods shall be developed jointly as necessary.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Europe faces a security landscape in flux, with evolving and increasingly complex security threats. Criminals exploit the advantages that the digital transformation, new technologies 1 , globalisation and mobility bring about, including the inter-connectivity and blurring of the boundaries between the physical and digital world. 2 Recent events 3 have once again shown that terrorism remains a significant threat to the freedom and way of life of the European Union and its citizens. The COVID-19 crisis adds to this, as criminals have quickly seized opportunities to exploit the crisis by adapting their modes of operation or developing new criminal activities . 4 Although the full impact of the COVID-19 crisis on security is not yet apparent, it is expected to shape the landscape of serious and organised crime in the EU in mid- and long-term. 5 These evolving security threats call for effective EU level support to the work of national law enforcement authorities. These threats spread across borders, cut across a variety of crimes that they facilitate, and manifest themselves in poly-criminal organised crime groups 6 that engage in a wide range of criminal activities. As action at national level alone does not suffice to address these transnational security challenges , Member States’ law enforcement authorities have increasingly made use of the support and expertise that Europol, the EU agency for law enforcement cooperation, offers to counter serious crime and terrorism. Europol is the centrepiece for EU-level support to Member States in countering serious crime and terrorism. The agency offers support and expertise to national law enforcement authorities in preventing and combating serious crime affecting two or more Member States, terrorism and forms of crime which affect a common interest covered by a Union policy. Since the entry into application of the 2016 Europol Regulation 7 , the operational importance of the agency’s tasks has changed substantially. For example, the operational support provided by Europol’s European Counter-Terrorism Centre has increased fivefold over recent years (from 127 operational cases supported in 2016 to 632 cases in 2019). The Centre is now part of almost every major counter-terrorism investigation in the EU. The threat from terrorism in Europe remains high. 8 In a joint statement by the EU Home Affairs Ministers of 13 November 2020 on the recent terrorist attacks in Europe, Ministers “ invite the Commission to submit a proposal revising the Europol mandate with a strong legal basis for the handling of large datasets. Europol and especially its European Counter Terrorism Centre are of fundamental importance for effectively supporting the Member States in their prevention and prosecution of terrorist crimes, and need to be bolstered. ” 9 The threat environment also changes type of the support Member States need and expect from Europol to keep citizens safe, in a way that was not foreseeable when the co-legislators negotiated the current Europol mandate. The December 2019 Council Conclusions acknowledge “ the urgent operational need for Europol to request and receive data directly from private parties ”, calling on the Commission to consider adapting the schedule for the review of the Europol Regulation “ in view of the need for European law enforcement to address ongoing technological developments ”. 10 There is a pressing social need to counter serious crimes prepared or committed with the use of cross-border services offered by private parties 11 , notably cybercrimes. Whereas this challenge is partially addressed by the e-evidence package 12 , there are situations where Europol’s support is necessary to counter the threats posed by cybercrime and cyber-enabled crimes effectively, notably when private parties seek to report such crimes. A July 2020 European Parliament Resolution also calls for reinforcing Europol, stating that “ strengthening Europol’s capacity to request the initiation of cross-border investigations, particularly in cases of serious attacks against whistleblowers and investigative journalists who play an essential role in exposing corruption, fraud, mismanagement and other wrongdoing in the public and private sectors, should be a priority.” 13 Given the changing security landscape, Europol needs to have the capabilities and tools to support Member States effectively in countering serious crime and terrorism. In response to pressing operational needs, and calls by the co-legislators for stronger support from Europol, the Commission Work Programme for 2020 announced a legislative initiative to “ strengthen the Europol mandate in order to reinforce operational police cooperation ”. This is also a key action of the July 2020 EU Security Union Strategy. 14 In line with the call by the Political Guidelines 15 to “ leave no stone unturned when it comes to protecting our citizens ”, this legislative initiative addresses those areas where stakeholders ask for reinforced support from Europol to help Member States keeping citizens safe. To that end, this proposal seeks to strengthen the mandate of Europol within the mission and tasks of the agency as laid down in the Treaty 16 , notably by: · enabling Europol to cooperate effectively with private parties, addressing lack of effective cooperation between private parties and law enforcement authorities to counter the use of cross-border services, such as communication, banking, or transport services, by criminals; · enabling Europol to effectively support Member States and their investigations with the analysis of large and complex datasets, addressing the big data challenge for law enforcement authorities; · strengthening Europol’s role on research and innovation, addressing gaps relevant for law enforcement; · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with third countries in specific situations and on a case-by-case basis for preventing and countering crimes falling within the scope of Europol’s objectives; · clarifying that Europol may request, in specific cases where Europol considers that a criminal investigation should be initiated, the competent authorities of a Member State to initiate, conduct or coordinate an investigation of a crime which affects a common interest covered by a Union policy, without the requirement of a cross-border dimension of the crime concerned; 17 · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO); · further strengthening the data protection framework applicable to Europol; · further strengthening parliamentary oversight and accountability of Europol. This legislative initiative is linked to a legislative proposal amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1862 on the establishment, operation and use of the Schengen Information System (SIS) in the field of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters to enable Europol to enter data into the SIS. Subject to consultation of the Member States, this would enable Europol to enter data into the SIS on the suspected involvement of a third country national in an offence in respect of which Europol is competent. This legislative initiative is part of a package of measures presented by the Commission on 9 December 2020 to reinforce the Union’s response to the threat posed by terrorism.
Article 46 Administrative personal data
Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 shall apply to all administrative personal data held by Europol.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Europe faces a security landscape in flux, with evolving and increasingly complex security threats. Criminals exploit the advantages that the digital transformation, new technologies 1 , globalisation and mobility bring about, including the inter-connectivity and blurring of the boundaries between the physical and digital world. 2 Recent events 3 have once again shown that terrorism remains a significant threat to the freedom and way of life of the European Union and its citizens. The COVID-19 crisis adds to this, as criminals have quickly seized opportunities to exploit the crisis by adapting their modes of operation or developing new criminal activities . 4 Although the full impact of the COVID-19 crisis on security is not yet apparent, it is expected to shape the landscape of serious and organised crime in the EU in mid- and long-term. 5 These evolving security threats call for effective EU level support to the work of national law enforcement authorities. These threats spread across borders, cut across a variety of crimes that they facilitate, and manifest themselves in poly-criminal organised crime groups 6 that engage in a wide range of criminal activities. As action at national level alone does not suffice to address these transnational security challenges , Member States’ law enforcement authorities have increasingly made use of the support and expertise that Europol, the EU agency for law enforcement cooperation, offers to counter serious crime and terrorism. Europol is the centrepiece for EU-level support to Member States in countering serious crime and terrorism. The agency offers support and expertise to national law enforcement authorities in preventing and combating serious crime affecting two or more Member States, terrorism and forms of crime which affect a common interest covered by a Union policy. Since the entry into application of the 2016 Europol Regulation 7 , the operational importance of the agency’s tasks has changed substantially. For example, the operational support provided by Europol’s European Counter-Terrorism Centre has increased fivefold over recent years (from 127 operational cases supported in 2016 to 632 cases in 2019). The Centre is now part of almost every major counter-terrorism investigation in the EU. The threat from terrorism in Europe remains high. 8 In a joint statement by the EU Home Affairs Ministers of 13 November 2020 on the recent terrorist attacks in Europe, Ministers “ invite the Commission to submit a proposal revising the Europol mandate with a strong legal basis for the handling of large datasets. Europol and especially its European Counter Terrorism Centre are of fundamental importance for effectively supporting the Member States in their prevention and prosecution of terrorist crimes, and need to be bolstered. ” 9 The threat environment also changes type of the support Member States need and expect from Europol to keep citizens safe, in a way that was not foreseeable when the co-legislators negotiated the current Europol mandate. The December 2019 Council Conclusions acknowledge “ the urgent operational need for Europol to request and receive data directly from private parties ”, calling on the Commission to consider adapting the schedule for the review of the Europol Regulation “ in view of the need for European law enforcement to address ongoing technological developments ”. 10 There is a pressing social need to counter serious crimes prepared or committed with the use of cross-border services offered by private parties 11 , notably cybercrimes. Whereas this challenge is partially addressed by the e-evidence package 12 , there are situations where Europol’s support is necessary to counter the threats posed by cybercrime and cyber-enabled crimes effectively, notably when private parties seek to report such crimes. A July 2020 European Parliament Resolution also calls for reinforcing Europol, stating that “ strengthening Europol’s capacity to request the initiation of cross-border investigations, particularly in cases of serious attacks against whistleblowers and investigative journalists who play an essential role in exposing corruption, fraud, mismanagement and other wrongdoing in the public and private sectors, should be a priority.” 13 Given the changing security landscape, Europol needs to have the capabilities and tools to support Member States effectively in countering serious crime and terrorism. In response to pressing operational needs, and calls by the co-legislators for stronger support from Europol, the Commission Work Programme for 2020 announced a legislative initiative to “ strengthen the Europol mandate in order to reinforce operational police cooperation ”. This is also a key action of the July 2020 EU Security Union Strategy. 14 In line with the call by the Political Guidelines 15 to “ leave no stone unturned when it comes to protecting our citizens ”, this legislative initiative addresses those areas where stakeholders ask for reinforced support from Europol to help Member States keeping citizens safe. To that end, this proposal seeks to strengthen the mandate of Europol within the mission and tasks of the agency as laid down in the Treaty 16 , notably by: · enabling Europol to cooperate effectively with private parties, addressing lack of effective cooperation between private parties and law enforcement authorities to counter the use of cross-border services, such as communication, banking, or transport services, by criminals; · enabling Europol to effectively support Member States and their investigations with the analysis of large and complex datasets, addressing the big data challenge for law enforcement authorities; · strengthening Europol’s role on research and innovation, addressing gaps relevant for law enforcement; · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with third countries in specific situations and on a case-by-case basis for preventing and countering crimes falling within the scope of Europol’s objectives; · clarifying that Europol may request, in specific cases where Europol considers that a criminal investigation should be initiated, the competent authorities of a Member State to initiate, conduct or coordinate an investigation of a crime which affects a common interest covered by a Union policy, without the requirement of a cross-border dimension of the crime concerned; 17 · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO); · further strengthening the data protection framework applicable to Europol; · further strengthening parliamentary oversight and accountability of Europol. This legislative initiative is linked to a legislative proposal amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1862 on the establishment, operation and use of the Schengen Information System (SIS) in the field of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters to enable Europol to enter data into the SIS. Subject to consultation of the Member States, this would enable Europol to enter data into the SIS on the suspected involvement of a third country national in an offence in respect of which Europol is competent. This legislative initiative is part of a package of measures presented by the Commission on 9 December 2020 to reinforce the Union’s response to the threat posed by terrorism.
Article 47 Right to lodge a complaint with the EDPS
1. Any data subject shall have the right to lodge a complaint with the EDPS if he or she considers that the processing by Europol of personal data relating to him or her does not comply with this Regulation. 2. Where a complaint relates to a decision as referred to in Article 36 or 37, the EDPS shall consult the national supervisory authorities of the Member State that provided the data or the Member State directly concerned. In adopting his or her decision, which may extend to a refusal to communicate any information, the EDPS shall take into account the opinion of the national supervisory authority. 3. Where a complaint relates to the processing of data provided by a Member State to Europol, the EDPS and the national supervisory authority of the Member State that provided the data shall, each acting within the scope of their respective competences, ensure that the necessary checks on the lawfulness of the processing of the data have been carried out correctly. 4. Where a complaint relates to the processing of data provided to Europol by Union bodies, third countries or international organisations, or of data retrieved by Europol from publicly available sources or resulting from Europol's own analyses, the EDPS shall ensure that Europol has correctly carried out the necessary checks on the lawfulness of the processing of the data.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Europe faces a security landscape in flux, with evolving and increasingly complex security threats. Criminals exploit the advantages that the digital transformation, new technologies 1 , globalisation and mobility bring about, including the inter-connectivity and blurring of the boundaries between the physical and digital world. 2 Recent events 3 have once again shown that terrorism remains a significant threat to the freedom and way of life of the European Union and its citizens. The COVID-19 crisis adds to this, as criminals have quickly seized opportunities to exploit the crisis by adapting their modes of operation or developing new criminal activities . 4 Although the full impact of the COVID-19 crisis on security is not yet apparent, it is expected to shape the landscape of serious and organised crime in the EU in mid- and long-term. 5 These evolving security threats call for effective EU level support to the work of national law enforcement authorities. These threats spread across borders, cut across a variety of crimes that they facilitate, and manifest themselves in poly-criminal organised crime groups 6 that engage in a wide range of criminal activities. As action at national level alone does not suffice to address these transnational security challenges , Member States’ law enforcement authorities have increasingly made use of the support and expertise that Europol, the EU agency for law enforcement cooperation, offers to counter serious crime and terrorism. Europol is the centrepiece for EU-level support to Member States in countering serious crime and terrorism. The agency offers support and expertise to national law enforcement authorities in preventing and combating serious crime affecting two or more Member States, terrorism and forms of crime which affect a common interest covered by a Union policy. Since the entry into application of the 2016 Europol Regulation 7 , the operational importance of the agency’s tasks has changed substantially. For example, the operational support provided by Europol’s European Counter-Terrorism Centre has increased fivefold over recent years (from 127 operational cases supported in 2016 to 632 cases in 2019). The Centre is now part of almost every major counter-terrorism investigation in the EU. The threat from terrorism in Europe remains high. 8 In a joint statement by the EU Home Affairs Ministers of 13 November 2020 on the recent terrorist attacks in Europe, Ministers “ invite the Commission to submit a proposal revising the Europol mandate with a strong legal basis for the handling of large datasets. Europol and especially its European Counter Terrorism Centre are of fundamental importance for effectively supporting the Member States in their prevention and prosecution of terrorist crimes, and need to be bolstered. ” 9 The threat environment also changes type of the support Member States need and expect from Europol to keep citizens safe, in a way that was not foreseeable when the co-legislators negotiated the current Europol mandate. The December 2019 Council Conclusions acknowledge “ the urgent operational need for Europol to request and receive data directly from private parties ”, calling on the Commission to consider adapting the schedule for the review of the Europol Regulation “ in view of the need for European law enforcement to address ongoing technological developments ”. 10 There is a pressing social need to counter serious crimes prepared or committed with the use of cross-border services offered by private parties 11 , notably cybercrimes. Whereas this challenge is partially addressed by the e-evidence package 12 , there are situations where Europol’s support is necessary to counter the threats posed by cybercrime and cyber-enabled crimes effectively, notably when private parties seek to report such crimes. A July 2020 European Parliament Resolution also calls for reinforcing Europol, stating that “ strengthening Europol’s capacity to request the initiation of cross-border investigations, particularly in cases of serious attacks against whistleblowers and investigative journalists who play an essential role in exposing corruption, fraud, mismanagement and other wrongdoing in the public and private sectors, should be a priority.” 13 Given the changing security landscape, Europol needs to have the capabilities and tools to support Member States effectively in countering serious crime and terrorism. In response to pressing operational needs, and calls by the co-legislators for stronger support from Europol, the Commission Work Programme for 2020 announced a legislative initiative to “ strengthen the Europol mandate in order to reinforce operational police cooperation ”. This is also a key action of the July 2020 EU Security Union Strategy. 14 In line with the call by the Political Guidelines 15 to “ leave no stone unturned when it comes to protecting our citizens ”, this legislative initiative addresses those areas where stakeholders ask for reinforced support from Europol to help Member States keeping citizens safe. To that end, this proposal seeks to strengthen the mandate of Europol within the mission and tasks of the agency as laid down in the Treaty 16 , notably by: · enabling Europol to cooperate effectively with private parties, addressing lack of effective cooperation between private parties and law enforcement authorities to counter the use of cross-border services, such as communication, banking, or transport services, by criminals; · enabling Europol to effectively support Member States and their investigations with the analysis of large and complex datasets, addressing the big data challenge for law enforcement authorities; · strengthening Europol’s role on research and innovation, addressing gaps relevant for law enforcement; · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with third countries in specific situations and on a case-by-case basis for preventing and countering crimes falling within the scope of Europol’s objectives; · clarifying that Europol may request, in specific cases where Europol considers that a criminal investigation should be initiated, the competent authorities of a Member State to initiate, conduct or coordinate an investigation of a crime which affects a common interest covered by a Union policy, without the requirement of a cross-border dimension of the crime concerned; 17 · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO); · further strengthening the data protection framework applicable to Europol; · further strengthening parliamentary oversight and accountability of Europol. This legislative initiative is linked to a legislative proposal amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1862 on the establishment, operation and use of the Schengen Information System (SIS) in the field of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters to enable Europol to enter data into the SIS. Subject to consultation of the Member States, this would enable Europol to enter data into the SIS on the suspected involvement of a third country national in an offence in respect of which Europol is competent. This legislative initiative is part of a package of measures presented by the Commission on 9 December 2020 to reinforce the Union’s response to the threat posed by terrorism. 
Revised version (Article 47 Right to lodge a complaint with the EDPS):
1. Any data subject shall have the right to lodge a complaint with the EDPS if he or she considers that the processing by Europol of personal data relating to him or her does not comply with this Regulation or Regulation (EU) 2018/1725. 2. Where a complaint relates to a decision referred to in Article 36 or 37 of this Regulation or Article 81 or 82 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725, the EDPS shall consult the national supervisory authorities of the Member State that provided the data or of the Member State directly concerned. adopting his or her decision, which may extend to a refusal to communicate any information, the EDPS shall take into account the opinion of the national supervisory authority. 3. Where a complaint relates to the processing of data provided by a Member State to Europol, the EDPS and the national supervisory authority of the Member State that provided the data shall, each acting within the scope of their respective competences, ensure that the necessary checks on the lawfulness of the processing of the data have been carried out correctly. 4. Where a complaint relates to the processing of data provided to Europol by Union bodies, third countries or international organisations, or of data retrieved by Europol from publicly available sources or resulting from Europol's own analyses, the EDPS shall ensure that Europol has correctly carried out the necessary checks on the lawfulness of the processing of the data. 5. The EDPS shall inform the data subject of the progress and outcome of the complaint, as well as the possibility of a judicial remedy pursuant to Article 48.
Article 48 Right to a judicial remedy against the EDPS
Any action against a decision of the EDPS shall be brought before the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Article 49 General provisions on liability and the right to compensation
1. Europol's contractual liability shall be governed by the law applicable to the contract in question. 2. The Court of Justice of the European Union shall have jurisdiction to give judgment pursuant to any arbitration clause in a contract concluded by Europol. 3. Without prejudice to Article 49, in the case of non-contractual liability, Europol shall, in accordance with the general principles common to the laws of the Member States, make good any damage caused by its departments or by its staff in the performance of their duties. 4. The Court of Justice of the European Union shall have jurisdiction in disputes relating to compensation for damage as referred to in paragraph 3. 5. The personal liability of Europol staff vis-à-vis Europol shall be governed by the provisions laid down in the Staff Regulations or in the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants applicable to them.
Article 50 Liability for incorrect personal data processing and the right to compensation
1. Any individual who has suffered damage as a result of an unlawful data processing operation shall have the right to receive compensation for damage suffered, either from Europol in accordance with Article 340 TFEU or from the Member State in which the event that gave rise to the damage occurred, in accordance with its national law. The individual shall bring an action against Europol before the Court of Justice of the European Union, or against the Member State before a competent national court of that Member State. 2. Any dispute between Europol and Member States over the ultimate responsibility for compensation awarded to an individual in accordance with paragraph 1 shall be referred to the Management Board, which shall decide by a majority of two-thirds of its members, without prejudice to the right to challenge that decision in accordance with Article 263 TFEU.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Europe faces a security landscape in flux, with evolving and increasingly complex security threats. Criminals exploit the advantages that the digital transformation, new technologies 1 , globalisation and mobility bring about, including the inter-connectivity and blurring of the boundaries between the physical and digital world. 2 Recent events 3 have once again shown that terrorism remains a significant threat to the freedom and way of life of the European Union and its citizens. The COVID-19 crisis adds to this, as criminals have quickly seized opportunities to exploit the crisis by adapting their modes of operation or developing new criminal activities . 4 Although the full impact of the COVID-19 crisis on security is not yet apparent, it is expected to shape the landscape of serious and organised crime in the EU in mid- and long-term. 5 These evolving security threats call for effective EU level support to the work of national law enforcement authorities. These threats spread across borders, cut across a variety of crimes that they facilitate, and manifest themselves in poly-criminal organised crime groups 6 that engage in a wide range of criminal activities. As action at national level alone does not suffice to address these transnational security challenges , Member States’ law enforcement authorities have increasingly made use of the support and expertise that Europol, the EU agency for law enforcement cooperation, offers to counter serious crime and terrorism. Europol is the centrepiece for EU-level support to Member States in countering serious crime and terrorism. The agency offers support and expertise to national law enforcement authorities in preventing and combating serious crime affecting two or more Member States, terrorism and forms of crime which affect a common interest covered by a Union policy. Since the entry into application of the 2016 Europol Regulation 7 , the operational importance of the agency’s tasks has changed substantially. For example, the operational support provided by Europol’s European Counter-Terrorism Centre has increased fivefold over recent years (from 127 operational cases supported in 2016 to 632 cases in 2019). The Centre is now part of almost every major counter-terrorism investigation in the EU. The threat from terrorism in Europe remains high. 8 In a joint statement by the EU Home Affairs Ministers of 13 November 2020 on the recent terrorist attacks in Europe, Ministers “ invite the Commission to submit a proposal revising the Europol mandate with a strong legal basis for the handling of large datasets. Europol and especially its European Counter Terrorism Centre are of fundamental importance for effectively supporting the Member States in their prevention and prosecution of terrorist crimes, and need to be bolstered. ” 9 The threat environment also changes type of the support Member States need and expect from Europol to keep citizens safe, in a way that was not foreseeable when the co-legislators negotiated the current Europol mandate. The December 2019 Council Conclusions acknowledge “ the urgent operational need for Europol to request and receive data directly from private parties ”, calling on the Commission to consider adapting the schedule for the review of the Europol Regulation “ in view of the need for European law enforcement to address ongoing technological developments ”. 10 There is a pressing social need to counter serious crimes prepared or committed with the use of cross-border services offered by private parties 11 , notably cybercrimes. Whereas this challenge is partially addressed by the e-evidence package 12 , there are situations where Europol’s support is necessary to counter the threats posed by cybercrime and cyber-enabled crimes effectively, notably when private parties seek to report such crimes. A July 2020 European Parliament Resolution also calls for reinforcing Europol, stating that “ strengthening Europol’s capacity to request the initiation of cross-border investigations, particularly in cases of serious attacks against whistleblowers and investigative journalists who play an essential role in exposing corruption, fraud, mismanagement and other wrongdoing in the public and private sectors, should be a priority.” 13 Given the changing security landscape, Europol needs to have the capabilities and tools to support Member States effectively in countering serious crime and terrorism. In response to pressing operational needs, and calls by the co-legislators for stronger support from Europol, the Commission Work Programme for 2020 announced a legislative initiative to “ strengthen the Europol mandate in order to reinforce operational police cooperation ”. This is also a key action of the July 2020 EU Security Union Strategy. 14 In line with the call by the Political Guidelines 15 to “ leave no stone unturned when it comes to protecting our citizens ”, this legislative initiative addresses those areas where stakeholders ask for reinforced support from Europol to help Member States keeping citizens safe. To that end, this proposal seeks to strengthen the mandate of Europol within the mission and tasks of the agency as laid down in the Treaty 16 , notably by: · enabling Europol to cooperate effectively with private parties, addressing lack of effective cooperation between private parties and law enforcement authorities to counter the use of cross-border services, such as communication, banking, or transport services, by criminals; · enabling Europol to effectively support Member States and their investigations with the analysis of large and complex datasets, addressing the big data challenge for law enforcement authorities; · strengthening Europol’s role on research and innovation, addressing gaps relevant for law enforcement; · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with third countries in specific situations and on a case-by-case basis for preventing and countering crimes falling within the scope of Europol’s objectives; · clarifying that Europol may request, in specific cases where Europol considers that a criminal investigation should be initiated, the competent authorities of a Member State to initiate, conduct or coordinate an investigation of a crime which affects a common interest covered by a Union policy, without the requirement of a cross-border dimension of the crime concerned; 17 · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO); · further strengthening the data protection framework applicable to Europol; · further strengthening parliamentary oversight and accountability of Europol. This legislative initiative is linked to a legislative proposal amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1862 on the establishment, operation and use of the Schengen Information System (SIS) in the field of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters to enable Europol to enter data into the SIS. Subject to consultation of the Member States, this would enable Europol to enter data into the SIS on the suspected involvement of a third country national in an offence in respect of which Europol is competent. This legislative initiative is part of a package of measures presented by the Commission on 9 December 2020 to reinforce the Union’s response to the threat posed by terrorism. 
Revised version (Article 50 Right to compensation):
1. Any person who has suffered material or non-material damage as a result of an infringement of this Regulation shall have the right to receive compensation in accordance with Article 65 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 and Article 56 of Directive (EU) 2016/680. 2. Any dispute between Europol and Member States over the ultimate responsibility for compensation awarded to a person who has suffered material or non-material damage in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article shall be referred to the Management Board. The Management Board shall decide on that responsibility by a majority of two-thirds of its members, without prejudice to the right to challenge that decision in accordance with Article 263 TFEU.
Article 51 Joint Parliamentary scrutiny
1. Pursuant to Article 88 TFEU, the scrutiny of Europol's activities shall be carried out by the European Parliament together with national parliaments. This shall constitute a specialised Joint Parliamentary Scrutiny Group (JPSG) established together by the national parliaments and the competent committee of the European Parliament. The organisation and the rules of procedure of the JPSG shall be determined together by the European Parliament and the national parliaments in accordance with Article 9 of Protocol No 1. 2. The JPSG shall politically monitor Europol's activities in fulfilling its mission, including as regards the impact of those activities on the fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons. For the purposes of the first subparagraph: (a) the Chairperson of the Management Board, the Executive Director or their Deputies shall appear before the JPSG at its request to discuss matters relating to the activities referred to in the first subparagraph, including the budgetary aspects of such activities, the structural organisation of Europol and the potential establishment of new units and specialised centres, taking into account the obligations of discretion and confidentiality. The JPSG may decide to invite to its meetings other relevant persons, where appropriate; (b) the EDPS shall appear before the JPSG at its request, and at least once a year, to discuss general matters relating to the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons, and in particular the protection of personal data, with regard to Europol's activities, taking into account the obligations of discretion and confidentiality; (c) the JPSG shall be consulted in relation to the multiannual programming of Europol in accordance with Article 12(1). 3. Europol shall transmit the following documents, for information purposes, to the JPSG, taking into account the obligations of discretion and confidentiality: (a) threat assessments, strategic analyses and general situation reports relating to Europol's objective as well as the results of studies and evaluations commissioned by Europol; (b) the administrative arrangements concluded pursuant to Article 25(1); (c) the document containing the multiannual programming and the annual work programme of Europol, referred to in Article 12(1); (d) the consolidated annual activity report on Europol's activities, referred to in point (c) of Article 11(1); (e) the evaluation report drawn up by the Commission, referred to in Article 68(1). 4. The JPSG may request other relevant documents necessary for the fulfilment of its tasks relating to the political monitoring of Europol's activities, subject to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 23 ) and without prejudice to Articles 52 and 67 of this Regulation. 5. The JPSG may draw up summary conclusions on the political monitoring of Europol's activities and submit those conclusions to the European Parliament and national parliaments. The European Parliament shall forward them, for information purposes, to the Council, the Commission and Europol.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Europe faces a security landscape in flux, with evolving and increasingly complex security threats. Criminals exploit the advantages that the digital transformation, new technologies 1 , globalisation and mobility bring about, including the inter-connectivity and blurring of the boundaries between the physical and digital world. 2 Recent events 3 have once again shown that terrorism remains a significant threat to the freedom and way of life of the European Union and its citizens. The COVID-19 crisis adds to this, as criminals have quickly seized opportunities to exploit the crisis by adapting their modes of operation or developing new criminal activities . 4 Although the full impact of the COVID-19 crisis on security is not yet apparent, it is expected to shape the landscape of serious and organised crime in the EU in mid- and long-term. 5 These evolving security threats call for effective EU level support to the work of national law enforcement authorities. These threats spread across borders, cut across a variety of crimes that they facilitate, and manifest themselves in poly-criminal organised crime groups 6 that engage in a wide range of criminal activities. As action at national level alone does not suffice to address these transnational security challenges , Member States’ law enforcement authorities have increasingly made use of the support and expertise that Europol, the EU agency for law enforcement cooperation, offers to counter serious crime and terrorism. Europol is the centrepiece for EU-level support to Member States in countering serious crime and terrorism. The agency offers support and expertise to national law enforcement authorities in preventing and combating serious crime affecting two or more Member States, terrorism and forms of crime which affect a common interest covered by a Union policy. Since the entry into application of the 2016 Europol Regulation 7 , the operational importance of the agency’s tasks has changed substantially. For example, the operational support provided by Europol’s European Counter-Terrorism Centre has increased fivefold over recent years (from 127 operational cases supported in 2016 to 632 cases in 2019). The Centre is now part of almost every major counter-terrorism investigation in the EU. The threat from terrorism in Europe remains high. 8 In a joint statement by the EU Home Affairs Ministers of 13 November 2020 on the recent terrorist attacks in Europe, Ministers “ invite the Commission to submit a proposal revising the Europol mandate with a strong legal basis for the handling of large datasets. Europol and especially its European Counter Terrorism Centre are of fundamental importance for effectively supporting the Member States in their prevention and prosecution of terrorist crimes, and need to be bolstered. ” 9 The threat environment also changes type of the support Member States need and expect from Europol to keep citizens safe, in a way that was not foreseeable when the co-legislators negotiated the current Europol mandate. The December 2019 Council Conclusions acknowledge “ the urgent operational need for Europol to request and receive data directly from private parties ”, calling on the Commission to consider adapting the schedule for the review of the Europol Regulation “ in view of the need for European law enforcement to address ongoing technological developments ”. 10 There is a pressing social need to counter serious crimes prepared or committed with the use of cross-border services offered by private parties 11 , notably cybercrimes. Whereas this challenge is partially addressed by the e-evidence package 12 , there are situations where Europol’s support is necessary to counter the threats posed by cybercrime and cyber-enabled crimes effectively, notably when private parties seek to report such crimes. A July 2020 European Parliament Resolution also calls for reinforcing Europol, stating that “ strengthening Europol’s capacity to request the initiation of cross-border investigations, particularly in cases of serious attacks against whistleblowers and investigative journalists who play an essential role in exposing corruption, fraud, mismanagement and other wrongdoing in the public and private sectors, should be a priority.” 13 Given the changing security landscape, Europol needs to have the capabilities and tools to support Member States effectively in countering serious crime and terrorism. In response to pressing operational needs, and calls by the co-legislators for stronger support from Europol, the Commission Work Programme for 2020 announced a legislative initiative to “ strengthen the Europol mandate in order to reinforce operational police cooperation ”. This is also a key action of the July 2020 EU Security Union Strategy. 14 In line with the call by the Political Guidelines 15 to “ leave no stone unturned when it comes to protecting our citizens ”, this legislative initiative addresses those areas where stakeholders ask for reinforced support from Europol to help Member States keeping citizens safe. To that end, this proposal seeks to strengthen the mandate of Europol within the mission and tasks of the agency as laid down in the Treaty 16 , notably by: · enabling Europol to cooperate effectively with private parties, addressing lack of effective cooperation between private parties and law enforcement authorities to counter the use of cross-border services, such as communication, banking, or transport services, by criminals; · enabling Europol to effectively support Member States and their investigations with the analysis of large and complex datasets, addressing the big data challenge for law enforcement authorities; · strengthening Europol’s role on research and innovation, addressing gaps relevant for law enforcement; · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with third countries in specific situations and on a case-by-case basis for preventing and countering crimes falling within the scope of Europol’s objectives; · clarifying that Europol may request, in specific cases where Europol considers that a criminal investigation should be initiated, the competent authorities of a Member State to initiate, conduct or coordinate an investigation of a crime which affects a common interest covered by a Union policy, without the requirement of a cross-border dimension of the crime concerned; 17 · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO); · further strengthening the data protection framework applicable to Europol; · further strengthening parliamentary oversight and accountability of Europol. This legislative initiative is linked to a legislative proposal amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1862 on the establishment, operation and use of the Schengen Information System (SIS) in the field of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters to enable Europol to enter data into the SIS. Subject to consultation of the Member States, this would enable Europol to enter data into the SIS on the suspected involvement of a third country national in an offence in respect of which Europol is competent. This legislative initiative is part of a package of measures presented by the Commission on 9 December 2020 to reinforce the Union’s response to the threat posed by terrorism. 
Revised version (Article 51 Joint Parliamentary scrutiny):
1. Pursuant to Article 88 TFEU, the scrutiny of Europol's activities shall be carried out by the European Parliament together with national parliaments. This shall constitute a specialised Joint Parliamentary Scrutiny Group (JPSG) established together by the national parliaments and the competent committee of the European Parliament. The organisation and the rules of procedure of the JPSG shall be determined together by the European Parliament and the national parliaments in accordance with Article 9 of Protocol No 1. 2. The JPSG shall politically monitor Europol's activities in fulfilling its mission, including as regards the impact of those activities on the fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons. For the purposes of the first subparagraph: (a) the Chairperson of the Management Board, the Executive Director or their Deputies shall appear before the JPSG at its request to discuss matters relating to the activities referred to in the first subparagraph, including the budgetary aspects of such activities, the structural organisation of Europol and the potential establishment of new units and specialised centres, taking into account the obligations of discretion and confidentiality. The JPSG may decide to invite to its meetings other relevant persons, where appropriate; (b) the EDPS shall appear before the JPSG at its request, and at least once a year, to discuss general matters relating to the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons, and in particular the protection of personal data, with regard to Europol's activities, taking into account the obligations of discretion and confidentiality; (c) the JPSG shall be consulted in relation to the multiannual programming of Europol in accordance with Article 12(1). 4. The JPSG may request other relevant documents necessary for the fulfilment of its tasks relating to the political monitoring of Europol's activities, subject to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 16 ) and without prejudice to Articles 52 and 67 of this Regulation. 5. The JPSG may draw up summary conclusions on the political monitoring of Europol’s activities, including non-binding specific recommendations to Europol, and submit those conclusions to the European Parliament and national parliaments. The European Parliament shall forward those conclusions, for information purposes, to the Council, the Commission and Europol.
Article 52 Access by the European Parliament to information processed by or through Europol
1. For the purpose of enabling it to exercise parliamentary scrutiny of Europol's activities in accordance with Article 51, access by the European Parliament to sensitive non-classified information processed by or through Europol, upon the European Parliament's request, shall comply with the rules referred to in Article 67(1). 2. Access by the European Parliament to EU classified information processed by or through Europol shall be consistent with the Interinstitutional Agreement of 12 March 2014 between the European Parliament and the Council concerning the forwarding to and the handling by the European Parliament of classified information held by the Council on matters other than those in the area of the common foreign and security policy ( 24 ) , and shall comply with the rules referred to in Article 67(2) of this Regulation. 3. The necessary details regarding access by the European Parliament to the information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be governed by working arrangements concluded between Europol and the European Parliament.
Article 53 General provisions
1. The Staff Regulations, the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants and the rules adopted by agreement between the institutions of the Union for giving effect to the Staff Regulations and to the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants shall apply to the staff of Europol with the exception of staff who, on 1 May 2017, are employed pursuant to a contract concluded by Europol as established by the Europol Convention without prejudice to Article 73(4) of this Regulation. Such contracts shall continue to be governed by the Council Act of 3 December 1998. 2. Europol staff shall consist of temporary staff and/or contract staff. The Management Board shall be informed on a yearly basis of contracts of an indefinite duration granted by the Executive Director. The Management Board shall decide which temporary posts provided for in the establishment plan can be filled only by staff from the competent authorities of the Member States. Staff recruited to occupy such posts shall be temporary agents and may be awarded only fixed-term contracts, renewable once for a fixed period.
Article 54 Executive Director
1. The Executive Director shall be engaged as a temporary agent of Europol under point (a) of Article 2 of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants. 2. The Executive Director shall be appointed by the Council from a shortlist of candidates proposed by the Management Board, following an open and transparent selection procedure. The shortlist shall be drawn up by a selection committee set up by the Management Board and composed of members designated by Member States and a Commission representative For the purpose of concluding a contract with the Executive Director, Europol shall be represented by the Chairperson of the Management Board. Before appointment, the candidate selected by the Council may be invited to appear before the competent committee of the European Parliament, which shall subsequently give a non-binding opinion. 3. The term of office of the Executive Director shall be four years. By the end of that period, the Commission, in association with the Management Board, shall undertake an assessment taking into account: (a) an evaluation of the Executive Director's performance, and (b) Europol's future tasks and challenges. 4. The Council, acting on a proposal from the Management Board that takes into account the assessment referred to in paragraph 3, may extend the term of office of the Executive Director once and for no more than four years. 5. The Management Board shall inform the European Parliament if it intends to propose to the Council that the Executive Director's term of office be extended. Within the month before any such extension, the Executive Director may be invited to appear before the competent committee of the European Parliament. 6. An Executive Director whose term of office has been extended shall not participate in another selection procedure for the same post at the end of the overall period. 7. The Executive Director may be removed from office only pursuant to a decision of the Council acting on a proposal from the Management Board. The European Parliament shall be informed about that decision. 8. The Management Board shall reach decisions regarding proposals to be made to the Council on the appointment, extension of the term of office, or removal from office, of the Executive Director by a majority of two-thirds of its members with voting rights.
Article 55 Deputy Executive Directors
1. Three Deputy Executive Directors shall assist the Executive Director. The Executive Director shall define their tasks. 2. Article 54 shall apply to the Deputy Executive Directors. The Executive Director shall be consulted prior to their appointment, any extension of their term of office or their removal from office.
Article 56 Seconded national experts
1. Europol may make use of seconded national experts. 2. The Management Board shall adopt a decision laying down rules on the secondment of national experts to Europol.
Article 57 Budget
1. Estimates of all revenue and expenditure for Europol shall be prepared each financial year, which shall correspond to the calendar year, and shall be shown in Europol's budget. 2. Europol's budget shall be balanced in terms of revenue and of expenditure. 3. Without prejudice to other resources, Europol's revenue shall comprise a contribution from the Union entered in the general budget of the Union. 4. Europol may benefit from Union funding in the form of delegation agreements or ad hoc grants in accordance with its financial rules referred to in Article 61 and with the provisions of the relevant instruments supporting the policies of the Union. 5. Europol's expenditure shall include staff remuneration, administrative and infrastructure expenses, and operating costs. 6. Budgetary commitments for actions relating to large-scale projects extending over more than one financial year may be broken down into several annual instalments.
Article 58 Establishment of the budget
1. Each year the Executive Director shall draw up a draft statement of estimates of Europol's revenue and expenditure for the following financial year, including an establishment plan, and shall send it to the Management Board. 2. The Management Board shall, on the basis of the draft statement of estimates, adopt a provisional draft estimate of Europol's revenue and expenditure for the following financial year and shall send it to the Commission by 31 January each year. 3. The Management Board shall send the final draft estimate of Europol's revenue and expenditure, which shall include a draft establishment plan, to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission by 31 March each year. 4. The Commission shall send the statement of estimates to the European Parliament and the Council, together with the draft general budget of the Union. 5. On the basis of the statement of estimates, the Commission shall enter in the draft general budget of the Union the estimates that it considers necessary for the establishment plan and the amount of the contribution to be charged to the general budget, which it shall place before the European Parliament and the Council in accordance with Articles 313 and 314 TFEU. 6. The European Parliament and the Council shall authorise the appropriations for the contribution from the Union to Europol. 7. The European Parliament and the Council shall adopt Europol's establishment plan. 8. Europol's budget shall be adopted by the Management Board. It shall become final following the final adoption of the general budget of the Union. Where necessary, it shall be adjusted accordingly. 9. For any building projects likely to have significant implications for Europol's budget, Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1271/2013 shall apply.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Europe faces a security landscape in flux, with evolving and increasingly complex security threats. Criminals exploit the advantages that the digital transformation, new technologies 1 , globalisation and mobility bring about, including the inter-connectivity and blurring of the boundaries between the physical and digital world. 2 Recent events 3 have once again shown that terrorism remains a significant threat to the freedom and way of life of the European Union and its citizens. The COVID-19 crisis adds to this, as criminals have quickly seized opportunities to exploit the crisis by adapting their modes of operation or developing new criminal activities . 4 Although the full impact of the COVID-19 crisis on security is not yet apparent, it is expected to shape the landscape of serious and organised crime in the EU in mid- and long-term. 5 These evolving security threats call for effective EU level support to the work of national law enforcement authorities. These threats spread across borders, cut across a variety of crimes that they facilitate, and manifest themselves in poly-criminal organised crime groups 6 that engage in a wide range of criminal activities. As action at national level alone does not suffice to address these transnational security challenges , Member States’ law enforcement authorities have increasingly made use of the support and expertise that Europol, the EU agency for law enforcement cooperation, offers to counter serious crime and terrorism. Europol is the centrepiece for EU-level support to Member States in countering serious crime and terrorism. The agency offers support and expertise to national law enforcement authorities in preventing and combating serious crime affecting two or more Member States, terrorism and forms of crime which affect a common interest covered by a Union policy. Since the entry into application of the 2016 Europol Regulation 7 , the operational importance of the agency’s tasks has changed substantially. For example, the operational support provided by Europol’s European Counter-Terrorism Centre has increased fivefold over recent years (from 127 operational cases supported in 2016 to 632 cases in 2019). The Centre is now part of almost every major counter-terrorism investigation in the EU. The threat from terrorism in Europe remains high. 8 In a joint statement by the EU Home Affairs Ministers of 13 November 2020 on the recent terrorist attacks in Europe, Ministers “ invite the Commission to submit a proposal revising the Europol mandate with a strong legal basis for the handling of large datasets. Europol and especially its European Counter Terrorism Centre are of fundamental importance for effectively supporting the Member States in their prevention and prosecution of terrorist crimes, and need to be bolstered. ” 9 The threat environment also changes type of the support Member States need and expect from Europol to keep citizens safe, in a way that was not foreseeable when the co-legislators negotiated the current Europol mandate. The December 2019 Council Conclusions acknowledge “ the urgent operational need for Europol to request and receive data directly from private parties ”, calling on the Commission to consider adapting the schedule for the review of the Europol Regulation “ in view of the need for European law enforcement to address ongoing technological developments ”. 10 There is a pressing social need to counter serious crimes prepared or committed with the use of cross-border services offered by private parties 11 , notably cybercrimes. Whereas this challenge is partially addressed by the e-evidence package 12 , there are situations where Europol’s support is necessary to counter the threats posed by cybercrime and cyber-enabled crimes effectively, notably when private parties seek to report such crimes. A July 2020 European Parliament Resolution also calls for reinforcing Europol, stating that “ strengthening Europol’s capacity to request the initiation of cross-border investigations, particularly in cases of serious attacks against whistleblowers and investigative journalists who play an essential role in exposing corruption, fraud, mismanagement and other wrongdoing in the public and private sectors, should be a priority.” 13 Given the changing security landscape, Europol needs to have the capabilities and tools to support Member States effectively in countering serious crime and terrorism. In response to pressing operational needs, and calls by the co-legislators for stronger support from Europol, the Commission Work Programme for 2020 announced a legislative initiative to “ strengthen the Europol mandate in order to reinforce operational police cooperation ”. This is also a key action of the July 2020 EU Security Union Strategy. 14 In line with the call by the Political Guidelines 15 to “ leave no stone unturned when it comes to protecting our citizens ”, this legislative initiative addresses those areas where stakeholders ask for reinforced support from Europol to help Member States keeping citizens safe. To that end, this proposal seeks to strengthen the mandate of Europol within the mission and tasks of the agency as laid down in the Treaty 16 , notably by: · enabling Europol to cooperate effectively with private parties, addressing lack of effective cooperation between private parties and law enforcement authorities to counter the use of cross-border services, such as communication, banking, or transport services, by criminals; · enabling Europol to effectively support Member States and their investigations with the analysis of large and complex datasets, addressing the big data challenge for law enforcement authorities; · strengthening Europol’s role on research and innovation, addressing gaps relevant for law enforcement; · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with third countries in specific situations and on a case-by-case basis for preventing and countering crimes falling within the scope of Europol’s objectives; · clarifying that Europol may request, in specific cases where Europol considers that a criminal investigation should be initiated, the competent authorities of a Member State to initiate, conduct or coordinate an investigation of a crime which affects a common interest covered by a Union policy, without the requirement of a cross-border dimension of the crime concerned; 17 · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO); · further strengthening the data protection framework applicable to Europol; · further strengthening parliamentary oversight and accountability of Europol. This legislative initiative is linked to a legislative proposal amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1862 on the establishment, operation and use of the Schengen Information System (SIS) in the field of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters to enable Europol to enter data into the SIS. Subject to consultation of the Member States, this would enable Europol to enter data into the SIS on the suspected involvement of a third country national in an offence in respect of which Europol is competent. This legislative initiative is part of a package of measures presented by the Commission on 9 December 2020 to reinforce the Union’s response to the threat posed by terrorism. 
Revised version (Article 58 Establishment of the budget):
1. Each year the Executive Director shall draw up a draft statement of estimates of Europol's revenue and expenditure for the following financial year, including an establishment plan, and shall send it to the Management Board. 2. The Management Board shall, on the basis of the draft statement of estimates, adopt a provisional draft estimate of Europol's revenue and expenditure for the following financial year and shall send it to the Commission by 31 January each year. 3. The Management Board shall send the final draft estimate of Europol's revenue and expenditure, which shall include a draft establishment plan, to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission by 31 March each year. 4. The Commission shall send the statement of estimates to the European Parliament and the Council, together with the draft general budget of the Union. 5. On the basis of the statement of estimates, the Commission shall enter in the draft general budget of the Union the estimates that it considers necessary for the establishment plan and the amount of the contribution to be charged to the general budget, which it shall place before the European Parliament and the Council in accordance with Articles 313 and 314 TFEU. 6. The European Parliament and the Council shall authorise the appropriations for the contribution from the Union to Europol. 7. The European Parliament and the Council shall adopt Europol's establishment plan. 8. Europol's budget shall be adopted by the Management Board. It shall become final following the final adoption of the general budget of the Union. Where necessary, it shall be adjusted accordingly. 9. Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/715 shall apply to any building projects that are likely to have significant implications for Europol’s budget.
Article 59 Implementation of the budget
1. The Executive Director shall implement Europol's budget. 2. Each year the Executive Director shall send to the European Parliament and the Council all information relevant to the findings of any evaluation procedures.
Article 60 Presentation of accounts and discharge
1. Europol's accounting officer shall send the provisional accounts for the financial year (year N) to the Commission's accounting officer and to the Court of Auditors by 1 March of the following financial year (year N + 1). 2. Europol shall send a report on the budgetary and financial management for year N to the European Parliament, the Council and the Court of Auditors by 31 March of year N + 1. 3. The Commission's accounting officer shall send Europol's provisional accounts for year N, consolidated with the Commission's accounts, to the Court of Auditors by 31 March of year N + 1. 4. On receipt of the Court of Auditors' observations on Europol's provisional accounts for year N pursuant to Article 148 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 25 ) , Europol's accounting officer shall draw up Europol's final accounts for that year. The Executive Director shall submit them to the Management Board for an opinion. 5. The Management Board shall deliver an opinion on Europol's final accounts for year N. 6. Europol's accounting officer shall, by 1 July of year N + 1, send the final accounts for year N to the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission, the Court of Auditors and national parliaments, together with the Management Board's opinion referred to in paragraph 5. 7. The final accounts for year N shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union by 15 November of year N + 1. 8. The Executive Director shall send to the Court of Auditors, by 30 September of year N + 1, a reply to the observations made in its annual report. He or she shall also send the reply to the Management Board. 9. The Executive Director shall submit to the European Parliament, at the latter's request, any information required for the smooth application of the discharge procedure for year N, as laid down in Article 109(3) of Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1271/2013. 10. On a recommendation from the Council acting by a qualified majority, the European Parliament shall, before 15 May of year N + 2, grant a discharge to the Executive Director in respect of the implementation of the budget for year N.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Europe faces a security landscape in flux, with evolving and increasingly complex security threats. Criminals exploit the advantages that the digital transformation, new technologies 1 , globalisation and mobility bring about, including the inter-connectivity and blurring of the boundaries between the physical and digital world. 2 Recent events 3 have once again shown that terrorism remains a significant threat to the freedom and way of life of the European Union and its citizens. The COVID-19 crisis adds to this, as criminals have quickly seized opportunities to exploit the crisis by adapting their modes of operation or developing new criminal activities . 4 Although the full impact of the COVID-19 crisis on security is not yet apparent, it is expected to shape the landscape of serious and organised crime in the EU in mid- and long-term. 5 These evolving security threats call for effective EU level support to the work of national law enforcement authorities. These threats spread across borders, cut across a variety of crimes that they facilitate, and manifest themselves in poly-criminal organised crime groups 6 that engage in a wide range of criminal activities. As action at national level alone does not suffice to address these transnational security challenges , Member States’ law enforcement authorities have increasingly made use of the support and expertise that Europol, the EU agency for law enforcement cooperation, offers to counter serious crime and terrorism. Europol is the centrepiece for EU-level support to Member States in countering serious crime and terrorism. The agency offers support and expertise to national law enforcement authorities in preventing and combating serious crime affecting two or more Member States, terrorism and forms of crime which affect a common interest covered by a Union policy. Since the entry into application of the 2016 Europol Regulation 7 , the operational importance of the agency’s tasks has changed substantially. For example, the operational support provided by Europol’s European Counter-Terrorism Centre has increased fivefold over recent years (from 127 operational cases supported in 2016 to 632 cases in 2019). The Centre is now part of almost every major counter-terrorism investigation in the EU. The threat from terrorism in Europe remains high. 8 In a joint statement by the EU Home Affairs Ministers of 13 November 2020 on the recent terrorist attacks in Europe, Ministers “ invite the Commission to submit a proposal revising the Europol mandate with a strong legal basis for the handling of large datasets. Europol and especially its European Counter Terrorism Centre are of fundamental importance for effectively supporting the Member States in their prevention and prosecution of terrorist crimes, and need to be bolstered. ” 9 The threat environment also changes type of the support Member States need and expect from Europol to keep citizens safe, in a way that was not foreseeable when the co-legislators negotiated the current Europol mandate. The December 2019 Council Conclusions acknowledge “ the urgent operational need for Europol to request and receive data directly from private parties ”, calling on the Commission to consider adapting the schedule for the review of the Europol Regulation “ in view of the need for European law enforcement to address ongoing technological developments ”. 10 There is a pressing social need to counter serious crimes prepared or committed with the use of cross-border services offered by private parties 11 , notably cybercrimes. Whereas this challenge is partially addressed by the e-evidence package 12 , there are situations where Europol’s support is necessary to counter the threats posed by cybercrime and cyber-enabled crimes effectively, notably when private parties seek to report such crimes. A July 2020 European Parliament Resolution also calls for reinforcing Europol, stating that “ strengthening Europol’s capacity to request the initiation of cross-border investigations, particularly in cases of serious attacks against whistleblowers and investigative journalists who play an essential role in exposing corruption, fraud, mismanagement and other wrongdoing in the public and private sectors, should be a priority.” 13 Given the changing security landscape, Europol needs to have the capabilities and tools to support Member States effectively in countering serious crime and terrorism. In response to pressing operational needs, and calls by the co-legislators for stronger support from Europol, the Commission Work Programme for 2020 announced a legislative initiative to “ strengthen the Europol mandate in order to reinforce operational police cooperation ”. This is also a key action of the July 2020 EU Security Union Strategy. 14 In line with the call by the Political Guidelines 15 to “ leave no stone unturned when it comes to protecting our citizens ”, this legislative initiative addresses those areas where stakeholders ask for reinforced support from Europol to help Member States keeping citizens safe. To that end, this proposal seeks to strengthen the mandate of Europol within the mission and tasks of the agency as laid down in the Treaty 16 , notably by: · enabling Europol to cooperate effectively with private parties, addressing lack of effective cooperation between private parties and law enforcement authorities to counter the use of cross-border services, such as communication, banking, or transport services, by criminals; · enabling Europol to effectively support Member States and their investigations with the analysis of large and complex datasets, addressing the big data challenge for law enforcement authorities; · strengthening Europol’s role on research and innovation, addressing gaps relevant for law enforcement; · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with third countries in specific situations and on a case-by-case basis for preventing and countering crimes falling within the scope of Europol’s objectives; · clarifying that Europol may request, in specific cases where Europol considers that a criminal investigation should be initiated, the competent authorities of a Member State to initiate, conduct or coordinate an investigation of a crime which affects a common interest covered by a Union policy, without the requirement of a cross-border dimension of the crime concerned; 17 · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO); · further strengthening the data protection framework applicable to Europol; · further strengthening parliamentary oversight and accountability of Europol. This legislative initiative is linked to a legislative proposal amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1862 on the establishment, operation and use of the Schengen Information System (SIS) in the field of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters to enable Europol to enter data into the SIS. Subject to consultation of the Member States, this would enable Europol to enter data into the SIS on the suspected involvement of a third country national in an offence in respect of which Europol is competent. This legislative initiative is part of a package of measures presented by the Commission on 9 December 2020 to reinforce the Union’s response to the threat posed by terrorism. 
Revised version (Article 60 Presentation of accounts and discharge):
1. Europol's accounting officer shall send the provisional accounts for the financial year (year N) to the Commission's accounting officer and to the Court of Auditors by 1 March of the following financial year (year N + 1). 2. Europol shall send a report on the budgetary and financial management for year N to the European Parliament, the Council and the Court of Auditors by 31 March of year N + 1. 3. The Commission's accounting officer shall send Europol's provisional accounts for year N, consolidated with the Commission's accounts, to the Court of Auditors by 31 March of year N + 1. 4. On receipt of the Court of Auditors’ observations on Europol’s provisional accounts for year N pursuant to Article 246 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 18 ), Europol’s accounting officer shall draw up Europol’s final accounts for that year. The Executive Director shall submit those final accounts to the Management Board for an opinion. 5. The Management Board shall deliver an opinion on Europol's final accounts for year N. 6. Europol's accounting officer shall, by 1 July of year N + 1, send the final accounts for year N to the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission, the Court of Auditors and national parliaments, together with the Management Board's opinion referred to in paragraph 5. 7. The final accounts for year N shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union by 15 November of year N + 1. 8. The Executive Director shall send to the Court of Auditors, by 30 September of year N + 1, a reply to the observations made in its annual report. He or she shall also send the reply to the Management Board. 9. Upon the request of the European Parliament, the Executive Director shall submit to it any information required for the smooth application of the discharge procedure for year N, in accordance with Article 106(3) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/715. 10. On a recommendation from the Council acting by a qualified majority, the European Parliament shall, before 15 May of year N + 2, grant a discharge to the Executive Director in respect of the implementation of the budget for year N.
Article 61 Financial rules
1. The financial rules applicable to Europol shall be adopted by the Management Board after consultation with the Commission. They shall not depart from Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1271/2013 unless such a departure is specifically required for the operation of Europol and the Commission has given its prior consent. 2. Europol may award grants related to the fulfilment of tasks as referred to in Article 4. 3. Europol may award grants without a call for proposals to Member States for performance of their cross-border operations and investigations and for the provision of training relating to the tasks referred to in points (h) and (i) of Article 4(1). 4. In respect of the financial support to be given to joint investigation teams' activities, Europol and Eurojust shall jointly establish the rules and conditions upon which applications for such support are to be processed.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Europe faces a security landscape in flux, with evolving and increasingly complex security threats. Criminals exploit the advantages that the digital transformation, new technologies 1 , globalisation and mobility bring about, including the inter-connectivity and blurring of the boundaries between the physical and digital world. 2 Recent events 3 have once again shown that terrorism remains a significant threat to the freedom and way of life of the European Union and its citizens. The COVID-19 crisis adds to this, as criminals have quickly seized opportunities to exploit the crisis by adapting their modes of operation or developing new criminal activities . 4 Although the full impact of the COVID-19 crisis on security is not yet apparent, it is expected to shape the landscape of serious and organised crime in the EU in mid- and long-term. 5 These evolving security threats call for effective EU level support to the work of national law enforcement authorities. These threats spread across borders, cut across a variety of crimes that they facilitate, and manifest themselves in poly-criminal organised crime groups 6 that engage in a wide range of criminal activities. As action at national level alone does not suffice to address these transnational security challenges , Member States’ law enforcement authorities have increasingly made use of the support and expertise that Europol, the EU agency for law enforcement cooperation, offers to counter serious crime and terrorism. Europol is the centrepiece for EU-level support to Member States in countering serious crime and terrorism. The agency offers support and expertise to national law enforcement authorities in preventing and combating serious crime affecting two or more Member States, terrorism and forms of crime which affect a common interest covered by a Union policy. Since the entry into application of the 2016 Europol Regulation 7 , the operational importance of the agency’s tasks has changed substantially. For example, the operational support provided by Europol’s European Counter-Terrorism Centre has increased fivefold over recent years (from 127 operational cases supported in 2016 to 632 cases in 2019). The Centre is now part of almost every major counter-terrorism investigation in the EU. The threat from terrorism in Europe remains high. 8 In a joint statement by the EU Home Affairs Ministers of 13 November 2020 on the recent terrorist attacks in Europe, Ministers “ invite the Commission to submit a proposal revising the Europol mandate with a strong legal basis for the handling of large datasets. Europol and especially its European Counter Terrorism Centre are of fundamental importance for effectively supporting the Member States in their prevention and prosecution of terrorist crimes, and need to be bolstered. ” 9 The threat environment also changes type of the support Member States need and expect from Europol to keep citizens safe, in a way that was not foreseeable when the co-legislators negotiated the current Europol mandate. The December 2019 Council Conclusions acknowledge “ the urgent operational need for Europol to request and receive data directly from private parties ”, calling on the Commission to consider adapting the schedule for the review of the Europol Regulation “ in view of the need for European law enforcement to address ongoing technological developments ”. 10 There is a pressing social need to counter serious crimes prepared or committed with the use of cross-border services offered by private parties 11 , notably cybercrimes. Whereas this challenge is partially addressed by the e-evidence package 12 , there are situations where Europol’s support is necessary to counter the threats posed by cybercrime and cyber-enabled crimes effectively, notably when private parties seek to report such crimes. A July 2020 European Parliament Resolution also calls for reinforcing Europol, stating that “ strengthening Europol’s capacity to request the initiation of cross-border investigations, particularly in cases of serious attacks against whistleblowers and investigative journalists who play an essential role in exposing corruption, fraud, mismanagement and other wrongdoing in the public and private sectors, should be a priority.” 13 Given the changing security landscape, Europol needs to have the capabilities and tools to support Member States effectively in countering serious crime and terrorism. In response to pressing operational needs, and calls by the co-legislators for stronger support from Europol, the Commission Work Programme for 2020 announced a legislative initiative to “ strengthen the Europol mandate in order to reinforce operational police cooperation ”. This is also a key action of the July 2020 EU Security Union Strategy. 14 In line with the call by the Political Guidelines 15 to “ leave no stone unturned when it comes to protecting our citizens ”, this legislative initiative addresses those areas where stakeholders ask for reinforced support from Europol to help Member States keeping citizens safe. To that end, this proposal seeks to strengthen the mandate of Europol within the mission and tasks of the agency as laid down in the Treaty 16 , notably by: · enabling Europol to cooperate effectively with private parties, addressing lack of effective cooperation between private parties and law enforcement authorities to counter the use of cross-border services, such as communication, banking, or transport services, by criminals; · enabling Europol to effectively support Member States and their investigations with the analysis of large and complex datasets, addressing the big data challenge for law enforcement authorities; · strengthening Europol’s role on research and innovation, addressing gaps relevant for law enforcement; · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with third countries in specific situations and on a case-by-case basis for preventing and countering crimes falling within the scope of Europol’s objectives; · clarifying that Europol may request, in specific cases where Europol considers that a criminal investigation should be initiated, the competent authorities of a Member State to initiate, conduct or coordinate an investigation of a crime which affects a common interest covered by a Union policy, without the requirement of a cross-border dimension of the crime concerned; 17 · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO); · further strengthening the data protection framework applicable to Europol; · further strengthening parliamentary oversight and accountability of Europol. This legislative initiative is linked to a legislative proposal amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1862 on the establishment, operation and use of the Schengen Information System (SIS) in the field of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters to enable Europol to enter data into the SIS. Subject to consultation of the Member States, this would enable Europol to enter data into the SIS on the suspected involvement of a third country national in an offence in respect of which Europol is competent. This legislative initiative is part of a package of measures presented by the Commission on 9 December 2020 to reinforce the Union’s response to the threat posed by terrorism. 
Revised version (Article 61 Financial Rules):
1. The financial rules applicable to Europol shall be adopted by the Management Board after consultation with the Commission. They shall not depart from Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/715 unless such a departure is specifically required for the operation of Europol and the Commission has given its prior consent. 2. Europol may award grants related to the achievement of its objectives and tasks. 3. Europol may award grants without a call for proposals to Member States for performance of activities that fall within Europol’s objectives and tasks. 4. Where duly justified for operational purposes, following authorisation by the Management Board, financial support may cover the full investment costs of equipment and infrastructure. The financial rules referred to in paragraph 1 may specify the criteria under which financial support may cover the full investment costs referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph. 5. In respect of the financial support to be given to joint investigation teams’ activities, Europol and Eurojust shall jointly establish the rules and conditions upon which applications for such support are to be processed.
Article 62 Legal status
1. Europol shall be an agency of the Union. It shall have legal personality. 2. In each Member State Europol shall enjoy the most extensive legal capacity accorded to legal persons under national law. Europol may, in particular, acquire and dispose of movable and immovable property and be a party to legal proceedings. 3. In accordance with Protocol No 6 on the location of the seats of the institutions and of certain bodies, agencies and departments of the European Union, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU (‘Protocol No 6’), Europol shall have its seat in The Hague.
Article 63 Privileges and immunities
1. Protocol No 7 on the privileges and immunities of the European Union, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, shall apply to Europol and its staff. 2. Privileges and immunities of liaison officers and members of their families shall be subject to an agreement between the Kingdom of Netherlands and the other Member States. That agreement shall provide for such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the proper performance of the tasks of liaison officers.
Article 64 Language arrangements
1. The provisions laid down in Regulation No 1 ( 26 ) shall apply to Europol. 2. The Management Board shall decide by a majority of two-thirds of its members on the internal language arrangements of Europol. 3. The translation services required for the functioning of Europol shall be provided by the Translation Centre for the bodies of the European Union.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Europe faces a security landscape in flux, with evolving and increasingly complex security threats. Criminals exploit the advantages that the digital transformation, new technologies 1 , globalisation and mobility bring about, including the inter-connectivity and blurring of the boundaries between the physical and digital world. 2 Recent events 3 have once again shown that terrorism remains a significant threat to the freedom and way of life of the European Union and its citizens. The COVID-19 crisis adds to this, as criminals have quickly seized opportunities to exploit the crisis by adapting their modes of operation or developing new criminal activities . 4 Although the full impact of the COVID-19 crisis on security is not yet apparent, it is expected to shape the landscape of serious and organised crime in the EU in mid- and long-term. 5 These evolving security threats call for effective EU level support to the work of national law enforcement authorities. These threats spread across borders, cut across a variety of crimes that they facilitate, and manifest themselves in poly-criminal organised crime groups 6 that engage in a wide range of criminal activities. As action at national level alone does not suffice to address these transnational security challenges , Member States’ law enforcement authorities have increasingly made use of the support and expertise that Europol, the EU agency for law enforcement cooperation, offers to counter serious crime and terrorism. Europol is the centrepiece for EU-level support to Member States in countering serious crime and terrorism. The agency offers support and expertise to national law enforcement authorities in preventing and combating serious crime affecting two or more Member States, terrorism and forms of crime which affect a common interest covered by a Union policy. Since the entry into application of the 2016 Europol Regulation 7 , the operational importance of the agency’s tasks has changed substantially. For example, the operational support provided by Europol’s European Counter-Terrorism Centre has increased fivefold over recent years (from 127 operational cases supported in 2016 to 632 cases in 2019). The Centre is now part of almost every major counter-terrorism investigation in the EU. The threat from terrorism in Europe remains high. 8 In a joint statement by the EU Home Affairs Ministers of 13 November 2020 on the recent terrorist attacks in Europe, Ministers “ invite the Commission to submit a proposal revising the Europol mandate with a strong legal basis for the handling of large datasets. Europol and especially its European Counter Terrorism Centre are of fundamental importance for effectively supporting the Member States in their prevention and prosecution of terrorist crimes, and need to be bolstered. ” 9 The threat environment also changes type of the support Member States need and expect from Europol to keep citizens safe, in a way that was not foreseeable when the co-legislators negotiated the current Europol mandate. The December 2019 Council Conclusions acknowledge “ the urgent operational need for Europol to request and receive data directly from private parties ”, calling on the Commission to consider adapting the schedule for the review of the Europol Regulation “ in view of the need for European law enforcement to address ongoing technological developments ”. 10 There is a pressing social need to counter serious crimes prepared or committed with the use of cross-border services offered by private parties 11 , notably cybercrimes. Whereas this challenge is partially addressed by the e-evidence package 12 , there are situations where Europol’s support is necessary to counter the threats posed by cybercrime and cyber-enabled crimes effectively, notably when private parties seek to report such crimes. A July 2020 European Parliament Resolution also calls for reinforcing Europol, stating that “ strengthening Europol’s capacity to request the initiation of cross-border investigations, particularly in cases of serious attacks against whistleblowers and investigative journalists who play an essential role in exposing corruption, fraud, mismanagement and other wrongdoing in the public and private sectors, should be a priority.” 13 Given the changing security landscape, Europol needs to have the capabilities and tools to support Member States effectively in countering serious crime and terrorism. In response to pressing operational needs, and calls by the co-legislators for stronger support from Europol, the Commission Work Programme for 2020 announced a legislative initiative to “ strengthen the Europol mandate in order to reinforce operational police cooperation ”. This is also a key action of the July 2020 EU Security Union Strategy. 14 In line with the call by the Political Guidelines 15 to “ leave no stone unturned when it comes to protecting our citizens ”, this legislative initiative addresses those areas where stakeholders ask for reinforced support from Europol to help Member States keeping citizens safe. To that end, this proposal seeks to strengthen the mandate of Europol within the mission and tasks of the agency as laid down in the Treaty 16 , notably by: · enabling Europol to cooperate effectively with private parties, addressing lack of effective cooperation between private parties and law enforcement authorities to counter the use of cross-border services, such as communication, banking, or transport services, by criminals; · enabling Europol to effectively support Member States and their investigations with the analysis of large and complex datasets, addressing the big data challenge for law enforcement authorities; · strengthening Europol’s role on research and innovation, addressing gaps relevant for law enforcement; · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with third countries in specific situations and on a case-by-case basis for preventing and countering crimes falling within the scope of Europol’s objectives; · clarifying that Europol may request, in specific cases where Europol considers that a criminal investigation should be initiated, the competent authorities of a Member State to initiate, conduct or coordinate an investigation of a crime which affects a common interest covered by a Union policy, without the requirement of a cross-border dimension of the crime concerned; 17 · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO); · further strengthening the data protection framework applicable to Europol; · further strengthening parliamentary oversight and accountability of Europol. This legislative initiative is linked to a legislative proposal amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1862 on the establishment, operation and use of the Schengen Information System (SIS) in the field of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters to enable Europol to enter data into the SIS. Subject to consultation of the Member States, this would enable Europol to enter data into the SIS on the suspected involvement of a third country national in an offence in respect of which Europol is competent. This legislative initiative is part of a package of measures presented by the Commission on 9 December 2020 to reinforce the Union’s response to the threat posed by terrorism. 
Revised version (Article 64 Language arrangements):
1. The provisions laid down in Regulation No 1 ( 19 ) shall apply to Europol. 2. The Management Board shall decide by a majority of two-thirds of its members on the internal language arrangements of Europol. 3. The translation services required for the functioning of Europol shall be provided by the Translation Centre for the bodies of the European Union.
Article 65 Transparency
1. Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 shall apply to documents held by Europol. 2. By 14 December 2016, the Management Board shall adopt the detailed rules for applying Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 with regard to Europol documents. 3. Decisions taken by Europol under Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 may be the subject of a complaint to the European Ombudsman or of an action before the Court of Justice of the European Union, in accordance with Articles 228 and 263 TFEU respectively. 4. Europol shall publish on its website a list of the Management Board members and summaries of the outcome of the meetings of the Management Board. The publication of those summaries shall be temporarily or permanently omitted or restricted if such publication would risk jeopardising the performance of Europol's tasks, taking into account its obligations of discretion and confidentiality and the operational character of Europol.
Article 66 Combating fraud
1. In order to facilitate the fight against fraud, corruption and any other illegal activities under Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013, Europol shall, by 30 October 2017, accede to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 25 May 1999 between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities concerning internal investigations by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) ( 27 ) and shall adopt appropriate provisions applicable to all employees of Europol, using the template set out in the Annex to that Agreement. 2. The Court of Auditors shall have a power of audit, on the basis of documents and on-the-spot checks, over all grant beneficiaries, contractors and subcontractors who have received Union funds from Europol. 3. OLAF may carry out investigations, including on-the-spot checks and inspections, with a view to establishing whether there has been fraud, corruption or any other illegal activity affecting the financial interests of the Union in connection with a grant or a contract awarded by Europol. Such investigations shall be carried out in accordance with the provisions and procedures laid down in Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 and in Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96 ( 28 ) . 4. Without prejudice to paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, working arrangements with Union bodies, authorities of third countries, international organisations and private parties, contracts, grant agreements and grant decisions of Europol shall contain provisions expressly empowering the Court of Auditors and OLAF to conduct the audits and investigations referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3, in accordance with their respective competences.
Article 67 Rules on the protection of sensitive non-classified and classified information
1. Europol shall establish rules on the obligations of discretion and confidentiality and on the protection of sensitive non-classified information. 2. Europol shall establish rules on the protection of EU classified information which shall be consistent with Decision 2013/488/EU in order to ensure an equivalent level of protection for such information.
Article 68 Evaluation and review
1. By 1 May 2022 and every five years thereafter, the Commission shall ensure that an evaluation assessing, in particular, the impact, effectiveness and efficiency of Europol and of its working practices is carried out. The evaluation may, in particular, address the possible need to modify the structure, operation, field of action and tasks of Europol, and the financial implications of any such modification. 2. The Commission shall submit the evaluation report to the Management Board. The Management Board shall provide its observations on the evaluation report within three months from the date of receipt. The Commission shall then submit the final evaluation report, together with the Commission's conclusions, and the Management Board's observations in an annex thereto, to the European Parliament, the Council, the national parliaments and the Management Board. Where appropriate, the main findings of the evaluation report shall be made public.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Europe faces a security landscape in flux, with evolving and increasingly complex security threats. Criminals exploit the advantages that the digital transformation, new technologies 1 , globalisation and mobility bring about, including the inter-connectivity and blurring of the boundaries between the physical and digital world. 2 Recent events 3 have once again shown that terrorism remains a significant threat to the freedom and way of life of the European Union and its citizens. The COVID-19 crisis adds to this, as criminals have quickly seized opportunities to exploit the crisis by adapting their modes of operation or developing new criminal activities . 4 Although the full impact of the COVID-19 crisis on security is not yet apparent, it is expected to shape the landscape of serious and organised crime in the EU in mid- and long-term. 5 These evolving security threats call for effective EU level support to the work of national law enforcement authorities. These threats spread across borders, cut across a variety of crimes that they facilitate, and manifest themselves in poly-criminal organised crime groups 6 that engage in a wide range of criminal activities. As action at national level alone does not suffice to address these transnational security challenges , Member States’ law enforcement authorities have increasingly made use of the support and expertise that Europol, the EU agency for law enforcement cooperation, offers to counter serious crime and terrorism. Europol is the centrepiece for EU-level support to Member States in countering serious crime and terrorism. The agency offers support and expertise to national law enforcement authorities in preventing and combating serious crime affecting two or more Member States, terrorism and forms of crime which affect a common interest covered by a Union policy. Since the entry into application of the 2016 Europol Regulation 7 , the operational importance of the agency’s tasks has changed substantially. For example, the operational support provided by Europol’s European Counter-Terrorism Centre has increased fivefold over recent years (from 127 operational cases supported in 2016 to 632 cases in 2019). The Centre is now part of almost every major counter-terrorism investigation in the EU. The threat from terrorism in Europe remains high. 8 In a joint statement by the EU Home Affairs Ministers of 13 November 2020 on the recent terrorist attacks in Europe, Ministers “ invite the Commission to submit a proposal revising the Europol mandate with a strong legal basis for the handling of large datasets. Europol and especially its European Counter Terrorism Centre are of fundamental importance for effectively supporting the Member States in their prevention and prosecution of terrorist crimes, and need to be bolstered. ” 9 The threat environment also changes type of the support Member States need and expect from Europol to keep citizens safe, in a way that was not foreseeable when the co-legislators negotiated the current Europol mandate. The December 2019 Council Conclusions acknowledge “ the urgent operational need for Europol to request and receive data directly from private parties ”, calling on the Commission to consider adapting the schedule for the review of the Europol Regulation “ in view of the need for European law enforcement to address ongoing technological developments ”. 10 There is a pressing social need to counter serious crimes prepared or committed with the use of cross-border services offered by private parties 11 , notably cybercrimes. Whereas this challenge is partially addressed by the e-evidence package 12 , there are situations where Europol’s support is necessary to counter the threats posed by cybercrime and cyber-enabled crimes effectively, notably when private parties seek to report such crimes. A July 2020 European Parliament Resolution also calls for reinforcing Europol, stating that “ strengthening Europol’s capacity to request the initiation of cross-border investigations, particularly in cases of serious attacks against whistleblowers and investigative journalists who play an essential role in exposing corruption, fraud, mismanagement and other wrongdoing in the public and private sectors, should be a priority.” 13 Given the changing security landscape, Europol needs to have the capabilities and tools to support Member States effectively in countering serious crime and terrorism. In response to pressing operational needs, and calls by the co-legislators for stronger support from Europol, the Commission Work Programme for 2020 announced a legislative initiative to “ strengthen the Europol mandate in order to reinforce operational police cooperation ”. This is also a key action of the July 2020 EU Security Union Strategy. 14 In line with the call by the Political Guidelines 15 to “ leave no stone unturned when it comes to protecting our citizens ”, this legislative initiative addresses those areas where stakeholders ask for reinforced support from Europol to help Member States keeping citizens safe. To that end, this proposal seeks to strengthen the mandate of Europol within the mission and tasks of the agency as laid down in the Treaty 16 , notably by: · enabling Europol to cooperate effectively with private parties, addressing lack of effective cooperation between private parties and law enforcement authorities to counter the use of cross-border services, such as communication, banking, or transport services, by criminals; · enabling Europol to effectively support Member States and their investigations with the analysis of large and complex datasets, addressing the big data challenge for law enforcement authorities; · strengthening Europol’s role on research and innovation, addressing gaps relevant for law enforcement; · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with third countries in specific situations and on a case-by-case basis for preventing and countering crimes falling within the scope of Europol’s objectives; · clarifying that Europol may request, in specific cases where Europol considers that a criminal investigation should be initiated, the competent authorities of a Member State to initiate, conduct or coordinate an investigation of a crime which affects a common interest covered by a Union policy, without the requirement of a cross-border dimension of the crime concerned; 17 · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO); · further strengthening the data protection framework applicable to Europol; · further strengthening parliamentary oversight and accountability of Europol. This legislative initiative is linked to a legislative proposal amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1862 on the establishment, operation and use of the Schengen Information System (SIS) in the field of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters to enable Europol to enter data into the SIS. Subject to consultation of the Member States, this would enable Europol to enter data into the SIS on the suspected involvement of a third country national in an offence in respect of which Europol is competent. This legislative initiative is part of a package of measures presented by the Commission on 9 December 2020 to reinforce the Union’s response to the threat posed by terrorism. 
Revised version (Article 68 Evaluation and review):
1. By 29 June 2027 and every five years thereafter, the Commission shall carry out an evaluation, in particular, of the impact, effectiveness and efficiency of Europol and of its working practices. That evaluation may, in particular, address the possible need to modify the structure, operation, field of action and tasks of Europol, and the financial implications of any such modification. 2. The Commission shall submit the evaluation report to the Management Board. The Management Board shall provide its observations on the evaluation report within three months from the date of receipt. The Commission shall then submit the final evaluation report, together with the Commission's conclusions, and the Management Board's observations in an annex thereto, to the European Parliament, the Council, the national parliaments and the Management Board. Where appropriate, the main findings of the evaluation report shall be made public. 3. By 29 June 2025, the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council, evaluating and assessing the operational impact of the implementation of the tasks provided for in this Regulation, in particular in Article 4(1), point (t), Article 18(2), point (e), Article 18(6a), and Articles 18a, 26, 26a and 26b, with regard to Europol’s objectives. The report shall assess the impact of those tasks on fundamental rights and freedoms as provided for by the Charter. It shall also provide a cost-benefit analysis of the extension of Europol’s tasks.
Article 69 Administrative inquiries
The activities of Europol shall be subject to inquiries by the European Ombudsman in accordance with Article 228 TFEU.
Article 70 Headquarters
The necessary arrangements concerning the accommodation to be provided for Europol in the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the facilities to be made available by the Kingdom of the Netherlands, together with the specific rules applicable there to the Executive Director, members of the Management Board, Europol's staff and members of their families, shall be laid down in a headquarters agreement between Europol and the Kingdom of the Netherlands, in accordance with Protocol No 6.
Article 71 Legal succession
1. Europol as established by this Regulation shall be the legal successor in respect of all contracts concluded by, liabilities incumbent upon and properties acquired by Europol as established by Decision 2009/371/JHA. 2. This Regulation shall not affect the legal force of agreements concluded by Europol as established by Decision 2009/371/JHA before 13 June 2016, or of agreements concluded by Europol as established by the Europol Convention before 1 January 2010.
Article 72 Transitional arrangements concerning the Management Board
1. The term of office of the members of the Management Board as established on the basis of Article 37 of Decision 2009/371/JHA shall terminate on 1 May 2017. 2. During the period from 13 June 2016 to 1 May 2017, the Management Board as established on the basis of Article 37 of Decision 2009/371/JHA shall: (a) exercise the functions of the Management Board in accordance with Article 11 of this Regulation; (b) prepare the adoption of the rules relating to the application of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 with regard to Europol documents as referred to in Article 65(2) of this Regulation, and of the rules referred to in Article 67 of this Regulation; (c) prepare any instrument necessary for the application of this Regulation, in particular any measures relating to Chapter IV; and (d) review the internal rules and measures which it has adopted on the basis of Decision 2009/371/JHA so as to allow the Management Board as established pursuant to Article 10 of this Regulation to take a decision pursuant to Article 76 of this Regulation. 3. The Commission shall without delay after 13 June 2016 take the measures necessary to ensure that the Management Board established pursuant to Article 10 starts its work on 1 May 2017. 4. By 14 December 2016, the Member States shall notify the Commission of the names of the persons whom they have appointed as member and alternate member of the Management Board, in accordance with Article 10. 5. The Management Board established pursuant to Article 10 shall hold its first meeting on 1 May 2017. On that occasion it shall, if necessary, take decisions as referred to in Article 76.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Europe faces a security landscape in flux, with evolving and increasingly complex security threats. Criminals exploit the advantages that the digital transformation, new technologies 1 , globalisation and mobility bring about, including the inter-connectivity and blurring of the boundaries between the physical and digital world. 2 Recent events 3 have once again shown that terrorism remains a significant threat to the freedom and way of life of the European Union and its citizens. The COVID-19 crisis adds to this, as criminals have quickly seized opportunities to exploit the crisis by adapting their modes of operation or developing new criminal activities . 4 Although the full impact of the COVID-19 crisis on security is not yet apparent, it is expected to shape the landscape of serious and organised crime in the EU in mid- and long-term. 5 These evolving security threats call for effective EU level support to the work of national law enforcement authorities. These threats spread across borders, cut across a variety of crimes that they facilitate, and manifest themselves in poly-criminal organised crime groups 6 that engage in a wide range of criminal activities. As action at national level alone does not suffice to address these transnational security challenges , Member States’ law enforcement authorities have increasingly made use of the support and expertise that Europol, the EU agency for law enforcement cooperation, offers to counter serious crime and terrorism. Europol is the centrepiece for EU-level support to Member States in countering serious crime and terrorism. The agency offers support and expertise to national law enforcement authorities in preventing and combating serious crime affecting two or more Member States, terrorism and forms of crime which affect a common interest covered by a Union policy. Since the entry into application of the 2016 Europol Regulation 7 , the operational importance of the agency’s tasks has changed substantially. For example, the operational support provided by Europol’s European Counter-Terrorism Centre has increased fivefold over recent years (from 127 operational cases supported in 2016 to 632 cases in 2019). The Centre is now part of almost every major counter-terrorism investigation in the EU. The threat from terrorism in Europe remains high. 8 In a joint statement by the EU Home Affairs Ministers of 13 November 2020 on the recent terrorist attacks in Europe, Ministers “ invite the Commission to submit a proposal revising the Europol mandate with a strong legal basis for the handling of large datasets. Europol and especially its European Counter Terrorism Centre are of fundamental importance for effectively supporting the Member States in their prevention and prosecution of terrorist crimes, and need to be bolstered. ” 9 The threat environment also changes type of the support Member States need and expect from Europol to keep citizens safe, in a way that was not foreseeable when the co-legislators negotiated the current Europol mandate. The December 2019 Council Conclusions acknowledge “ the urgent operational need for Europol to request and receive data directly from private parties ”, calling on the Commission to consider adapting the schedule for the review of the Europol Regulation “ in view of the need for European law enforcement to address ongoing technological developments ”. 10 There is a pressing social need to counter serious crimes prepared or committed with the use of cross-border services offered by private parties 11 , notably cybercrimes. Whereas this challenge is partially addressed by the e-evidence package 12 , there are situations where Europol’s support is necessary to counter the threats posed by cybercrime and cyber-enabled crimes effectively, notably when private parties seek to report such crimes. A July 2020 European Parliament Resolution also calls for reinforcing Europol, stating that “ strengthening Europol’s capacity to request the initiation of cross-border investigations, particularly in cases of serious attacks against whistleblowers and investigative journalists who play an essential role in exposing corruption, fraud, mismanagement and other wrongdoing in the public and private sectors, should be a priority.” 13 Given the changing security landscape, Europol needs to have the capabilities and tools to support Member States effectively in countering serious crime and terrorism. In response to pressing operational needs, and calls by the co-legislators for stronger support from Europol, the Commission Work Programme for 2020 announced a legislative initiative to “ strengthen the Europol mandate in order to reinforce operational police cooperation ”. This is also a key action of the July 2020 EU Security Union Strategy. 14 In line with the call by the Political Guidelines 15 to “ leave no stone unturned when it comes to protecting our citizens ”, this legislative initiative addresses those areas where stakeholders ask for reinforced support from Europol to help Member States keeping citizens safe. To that end, this proposal seeks to strengthen the mandate of Europol within the mission and tasks of the agency as laid down in the Treaty 16 , notably by: · enabling Europol to cooperate effectively with private parties, addressing lack of effective cooperation between private parties and law enforcement authorities to counter the use of cross-border services, such as communication, banking, or transport services, by criminals; · enabling Europol to effectively support Member States and their investigations with the analysis of large and complex datasets, addressing the big data challenge for law enforcement authorities; · strengthening Europol’s role on research and innovation, addressing gaps relevant for law enforcement; · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with third countries in specific situations and on a case-by-case basis for preventing and countering crimes falling within the scope of Europol’s objectives; · clarifying that Europol may request, in specific cases where Europol considers that a criminal investigation should be initiated, the competent authorities of a Member State to initiate, conduct or coordinate an investigation of a crime which affects a common interest covered by a Union policy, without the requirement of a cross-border dimension of the crime concerned; 17 · strengthening Europol’s cooperation with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO); · further strengthening the data protection framework applicable to Europol; · further strengthening parliamentary oversight and accountability of Europol. This legislative initiative is linked to a legislative proposal amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1862 on the establishment, operation and use of the Schengen Information System (SIS) in the field of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters to enable Europol to enter data into the SIS. Subject to consultation of the Member States, this would enable Europol to enter data into the SIS on the suspected involvement of a third country national in an offence in respect of which Europol is competent. This legislative initiative is part of a package of measures presented by the Commission on 9 December 2020 to reinforce the Union’s response to the threat posed by terrorism. 
Revised version (Article 72 Transitional arrangements concerning the Management Board):
1. The term of office of the members of the Management Board as established on the basis of Article 37 of Decision 2009/371/JHA shall terminate on 1 May 2017. 3. The Commission shall without delay after 13 June 2016 take the measures necessary to ensure that the Management Board established pursuant to Article 10 starts its work on 1 May 2017. 4. By 14 December 2016, the Member States shall notify the Commission of the names of the persons whom they have appointed as member and alternate member of the Management Board, in accordance with Article 10. 5. The Management Board established pursuant to Article 10 shall hold its first meeting on 1 May 2017. On that occasion it shall, if necessary, take decisions as referred to in Article 76.
Article 73 Transitional arrangements concerning the Executive Director, the Deputy Directors and staff
1. The Director of Europol appointed on the basis of Article 38 of Decision 2009/371/JHA shall, for the remaining period of his or her term of office, be assigned the responsibilities of Executive Director, as provided for in Article 16 of this Regulation. The other conditions of his or her contract shall remain unchanged. If the term of office ends between 13 June 2016 and 1 May 2017, it shall be extended automatically until 1 May 2018. 2. Should the Director appointed on the basis of Article 38 of Decision 2009/371/JHA be unwilling or unable to act in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article, the Management Board shall designate an interim Executive Director to exercise the duties assigned to the Executive Director for a period not exceeding 18 months, pending the appointment provided for in Article 54(2) of this Regulation. 3. Paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article shall apply to the Deputy Directors appointed on the basis of Article 38 of Decision 2009/371/JHA. 4. In accordance with the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants, the authority referred to in the first paragraph of Article 6 thereof shall offer employment of indefinite duration as a member of the temporary or contract staff to any person who, on 1 May 2017, is employed under a contract of indefinite duration as a local staff member concluded by Europol as established by the Europol Convention. The offer of employment shall be based on the tasks to be performed by the servant as a member of the temporary or contract staff. The contract concerned shall take effect at the latest on 1 May 2018. A staff member who does not accept the offer referred to in this paragraph may retain his or her contractual relationship with Europol in accordance with Article 53(1).
Article 74 Transitional budgetary provisions
The discharge procedure in respect of the budgets approved on the basis of Article 42 of Decision 2009/371/JHA shall be carried out in accordance with the rules established by Article 43 thereof.
Article 75 Replacement and repeal
1. Decisions 2009/371/JHA, 2009/934/JHA, 2009/935/JHA, 2009/936/JHA and 2009/968/JHA are hereby replaced for the Member States bound by this Regulation with effect from 1 May 2017. Therefore, Decisions 2009/371/JHA, 2009/934/JHA, 2009/935/JHA, 2009/936/JHA and 2009/968/JHA are repealed with effect from 1 May 2017. 2. With regard to the Member States bound by this Regulation, references to the Decisions referred to in paragraph 1 shall be construed as references to this Regulation.
Article 76 Maintenance in force of the internal rules adopted by the Management Board
Internal rules and measures adopted by the Management Board on the basis of Decision 2009/371/JHA shall remain in force after 1 May 2017, unless otherwise decided by the Management Board in the application of this Regulation.
Article 77 Entry into force and application
1. This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union . 2. It shall apply from 1 May 2017. However, Articles 71, 72 and 73 shall apply from 13 June 2016.