At the Justice Council in Luxembourg on Thursday 12 October, European justice ministers will discuss the proposal to improve exchange of information about the police records of people from non-EU countries.
The proposal unveiled by the European Commission at the end of June (see EUROPE 11819) aims to update the European information system on police records (ECRIS) that was set up in 2012, and to create a centralised ECRIS-TCN (third country nationals) system. The centralised system will allow speedy checks of whether a member state holds centralised system for the identification of member states holding conviction information on third country nationals and stateless persons (TCN).
An Estonian Presidency working document seen by this newsletter will form the basis of the discussion. It details the member states’ initial positions and the presidency’s suggestions and questions that will need to be addressed in future meetings.
The first stumbling block between the Commission and Council is, according to the document, about achieving the ECRIS-TCN system. The current text foresees automatic use of the system to identify member states holding information about the police records of non-EU nationals.
France says that such an obligation could be damaging for the individual since it could lead to the individual being kept in custody if there is a delay in receiving the answer to a request for information, even for minor cases. The Netherlands says member states should have room for manoeuvre when it comes to deciding whether to use the system for specific cases due to proportionality.
Following these observations, backed by Germany and Italy, the Estonian Presidency suggested adding a new paragraph to the text indicating that ‘the competent authorities may decide not to use the ECRIS-TCN system in minor cases, where using the system is not necessary or not proportionate in the circumstances of the case.’
But the Commission seems to be sticking to its guns, explains the document, feeling that decisions should be taken based on all the available information and consulting the ECRIS-TCN system should therefore be compulsory.
The second area of divergence is the suggested membership of the programme’s management committee, namely eight representatives from the member states, the chair of the system’s advisory group and a member appointed by the European Commission. Several countries, including Sweden (which has issued a scrutiny reservation) expressed concern about the fact that only eight member states would be represented. The document says that the Commission responds that all member states would be involved in the system at the technical level and that in terms of managing the system, a representative from each member state wasn’t needed.
The implementation timeline for the regulation is another matter of concern for the member states. Germany, Spain, the Netherlands and Sweden says that application of the system 24 months after it comes into force would not allow enough time to adjust. Poland suggests that the adjustment period should only begin after finalisation of the implementation acts or, if necessary, it should be extended to 36 months.
Finally, the document highlights three particular issues that will require future talks at Council level: - how ‘third country national’ is defined; - the information contained in the system, such as the question of digital fingerprints; - member states’ responsibility in terms of how the information is used. (Original version in French by Marion Fontana)