FantasticSearch

(1) Transnational criminal activities pose a significant threat to the internal security of the Union and call for a coordinated, targeted and adapted response. While national authorities operating on the ground are on the frontline in the fight against crime and terrorism, action at Union level is paramount to ensuring efficient and effective cooperation as regards the exchange of information. Furthermore, organised crime and terrorism, in particular, are emblematic of the link between internal and external security. Transnational criminal activities spread across borders and manifest themselves in organised crime and terrorist groups that engage in a wide range of increasingly dynamic and complex criminal activities. There is, therefore, a need for an improved legal framework to ensure that competent law enforcement authorities can prevent, detect and investigate criminal offences in a more efficient manner.

(2) For the development of an area of freedom, security and justice, which is characterised by the absence of internal border controls, it is essential that competent law enforcement authorities in one Member State have, within the framework of the applicable Union and national law, the possibility to obtain equivalent access to the information available to their colleagues in another Member State. In that regard, competent law enforcement authorities should cooperate effectively and across the Union. Therefore, police cooperation on the exchange of relevant information for the purpose of preventing, detecting or investigating criminal offences is an essential component of the measures that underpin public security in an interdependent area without internal border controls. The exchange of information on crime and criminal activities, including terrorism, serves the overall objective of protecting the security of natural persons and safeguarding important interests of legal persons protected by law.

(3) The majority of organised crime groups are present in more than three countries and are composed of members with multiple nationalities who engage in various criminal activities. The structure of organised crime groups is ever more sophisticated, with strong and efficient communication systems and cooperation between their members across borders.

(4) To fight cross-border crime effectively, it is of paramount importance that competent law enforcement authorities swiftly exchange information and cooperate operationally with one another. Although cross-border cooperation between the competent law enforcement authorities has improved in recent years, certain practical and legal hurdles continue to exist. In that respect, Council Recommendation (EU) 2022/915 will assist the Member States in further enhancing cross-border operational cooperation.

(5) Some Member States have developed pilot projects to strengthen cross-border cooperation, focusing, for example, on joint patrols by police officers from neighbouring Member States in border regions. A number of Member States have also concluded bilateral or even multilateral agreements to strengthen cross-border cooperation, including the exchange of information. This Directive does not limit such possibilities, provided that the rules on the exchange of information set out in such agreements are compatible with this Directive where it applies. On the contrary, Member States are encouraged to exchange best practice and lessons learnt from such pilot projects and agreements and to make use of available Union funding in that regard, in particular from the Internal Security Fund, established by Regulation (EU) 2021/1149 of the European Parliament and of the Council .

(6) The exchange of information between Member States for the purpose of preventing and detecting criminal offences is regulated by the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985 , adopted on 19 June 1990, in particular Articles 39 and 46 thereof. Council Framework Decision 2006/960/JHA partially replaced those provisions and introduced new rules for the exchange of information and intelligence between competent law enforcement authorities.

(7) Evaluations, including those carried out under Council Regulation (EU) No 1053/2013 , have indicated that Framework Decision 2006/960/JHA is not sufficiently clear and does not ensure the adequate and rapid exchange of relevant information between Member States. Evaluations have also indicated that that Framework Decision is scarcely used in practice, in part due to the lack of clarity encountered in practice between the scope of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement and the scope of that Framework Decision.

(8) Therefore, the existing legal framework should be updated with a view to eliminating discrepancies and to establishing clear and harmonised rules to facilitate and ensure the adequate and rapid exchange of information between the competent law enforcement authorities of different Member States and to allow the competent law enforcement authorities to adapt to the rapidly changing and expanding nature of organised crime, including in the context of the globalisation and digitalisation of society.

(9) In particular, this Directive should cover the exchange of information for the purpose of preventing, detecting or investigating criminal offences, thereby fully superseding, in so far as such exchanges are concerned, Articles 39 and 46 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement and providing the necessary legal certainty. In addition, the relevant rules should be simplified and clarified in order to facilitate their effective application in practice.

(10) It is necessary to lay down harmonised rules governing the crosscutting aspects of the exchange of information between Member States under this Directive at different stages of an investigation, from the phase of gathering criminal intelligence to the phase of criminal investigation. Those rules should include the exchange of information through Police and Customs Cooperation Centres set up between two or more Member States on the basis of bilateral or multilateral arrangements for the purpose of preventing, detecting or investigating criminal offences. However, those rules should not include the bilateral exchange of information with third countries. The rules laid down in this Directive should not affect the application of rules of Union law on specific systems or frameworks for such exchanges, such as Regulations (EU) 2016/794 , (EU) 2018/1860 , (EU) 2018/1861 and (EU) 2018/1862 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Directives (EU) 2016/681 and (EU) 2019/1153 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and Council Decisions 2008/615/JHA and 2008/616/JHA .

(11) ‘Criminal offence’ is an autonomous concept of Union law as interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union. For the purposes of this Directive, in the interest of effectively combating crime, ‘criminal offence’ should be understood as referring to any conduct punishable under the criminal law of the Member State that receives information, either pursuant to a request or pursuant to an own-initiative provision of information in accordance with this Directive, irrespective of the penalty that can be imposed in that Member State and irrespective of whether the conduct is also punishable under the criminal law of the Member State that provides information, without prejudice to the grounds for refusal of requests for information set out in this Directive.

(12) This Directive is without prejudice to the Convention drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, on mutual assistance and cooperation between customs administrations (Naples II).

(13) Since this Directive does not apply to the processing of information in the course of an activity which falls outside the scope of Union law, activities concerning national security do not fall within the scope of this Directive.

(14) This Directive does not govern the provision and use of information as evidence in judicial proceedings. In particular, it should not be understood as establishing a right to use the information provided in accordance with this Directive as evidence and, consequently, it does not affect any requirement provided for in the applicable law to obtain the consent of the Member State providing the information for such use. This Directive does not affect Union legal acts on evidence, such as a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on European Production and Preservation Orders for electronic evidence in criminal proceedings and for the execution of custodial sentences following criminal proceedings, Directive 2014/41/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council and a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised rules on the designation of designated establishments and the appointment of legal representatives for the purpose of gathering electronic evidence in criminal proceedings. Consequently, even though they are not required to do so under this Directive, Member States providing information under this Directive should be allowed to consent, at the time of providing the information or thereafter, to the use of that information as evidence in judicial proceedings, including, where necessary under national law, through the use of instruments regarding judicial cooperation in force between the Member States.