«Brussels, 27.3.2013 COM(2013) 173 final 2013/0091 (COD) Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on the European Union ...»
EN EN To streamline the decision making process, the Management Board may also decide to establish an Executive Board. Such a small-sized Executive Board, with the presence of a Commission representative, could be more closely involved in the monitoring of Europol’s activities with a view to reinforcing supervision of administrative and budgetary management, in particular on audit matters.
In order to ensure efficient day-to-day functioning of Europol, the Executive Director is its legal representative and manager. The Executive Director is completely independent in the performance of his/her tasks and ensures that Europol carries out the tasks foreseen in this Regulation. In particular, the Executive Director is responsible for preparing budgetary and planning documents submitted for the decision of the Management Board, implementing the annual and multiannual work programmes of Europol and other planning documents.
4. BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONThe full merger of CEPOL and EUROPOL will lead to synergies and efficiency gains. The savings achieved are assessed at the level of €17.2 million over the period 2015-2020 and 14 full time staff equivalent (FTE).
Although this proposal will take advantage of these savings and build on existing resources, additional resources will be required for Europol to implement the new tasks related to training of law enforcement officials, and to process and analyse the expected increase in information flows, including through the European Cybercrime Centre. The operation and further development of the European Cybercrime Centre has by far the most significant impact on resources. In parallel to these needs for new resources, CEPOL and Europol also participate in the current 5% reduction in staff numbers across all EU agencies, as well as contributing staff posts to a pool for redeployment in EU agencies in favour of new tasks and start-up phase agencies.
An additional 12 FTE will be needed to implement the new tasks related to training of law enforcement officials, i.e. the activities needed to implement the European Law Enforcement Training Scheme proposed in parallel with this Regulation. The human resources for the new training activities will be obtained as a result of the merger of CEPOL into Europol, which will result in savings amounting to 14 posts, representing €10.1m over the period 2015-2020.
By discontinuing 14 posts, CEPOL should comply with the request to cut staff by 5% and to contribute to the redeployment pool. In addition, an estimated €7.1m will be saved as a result of lower costs of building, equipment and management board expenses over the same period.
The relocation of around 40 staff from CEPOL’s current site in Bramshill, UK, to the Europol site in The Hague, the Netherlands, is expected to result in limited one-off costs, estimated at €30 000. However, the UK has announced its intention to close the Bramshill site, CEPOL will therefore in any event have to be relocated.
An additional 3 FTE will be needed for increased information processing requirements that will result from the expected rise in the quantity of information supplied to Europol as a result of this proposal (which combines a strengthened obligation upon Member States to provide relevant data to Europol, financial support to individual investigations and monitoring reports). These will be gradually recruited between 2015 and 2017 resulting in an estimated €1.8m in staffing costs over the period 2015-2020. However, approximately two thirds of these costs will be offset by the savings resulting from the merger of CEPOL: two (2) FTE will be secured from the remaining 2 posts out of the 14 saved as a result of the CEPOL merger.
For the European Cybercrime Centre, an additional 41 FTE will be recruited over the period 2015-2020. The tasks for which that staff is needed are identified in an accompanying EN EN Commission Staff Working Document. The non–staff costs for the European Cybercrime Centre have been estimated at €16.6m over the same period. In 2013, 44 FTE had already been assigned to the European Cybercrime Centre through internal redeployment within Europol and an additional 17 FTE were requested by Europol as a part of the Draft Budget 2014.
In order to comply with the request to cut staff by 5% and to contribute to the redeployment pool, 34 FTE should be discontinued within Europol between 2015 and 2018 on top of the 12 FTE to be discontinued already in 2014.
Finally, this proposal will require additional resources for the European Data Protection Supervisor estimated at the equivalent of 1 FTE. The change in data protection supervision arrangements will create savings of €3m for Europol between 2015 and 2020, no longer needing to provide support to the current Joint Supervisory Body, and additional costs of €1.5m for EDPS over the same period.
In total, therefore, the budgetary impact of the legislative proposal amounts to €623m for the merged agency over the period 2015-2020, as well as the €1.5m needed for the EDPS.26 The final number of posts and the overall budget are subject to the outcome of both an internal Commission review of the resource needs of decentralised agencies for the period 2014-2020 and the MFF negotiations with especial regard to an assessment of ‘real needs’ in the context of competing demands for very limited budget resources and in view of respecting the 5% staff cut in Agencies.
on the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation and Training (Europol) and repealing Decisions 2009/371/JHA and 2005/681/JHA
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 88 and Article 87(2)(b) thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission, After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national Parliaments, After having consulted the European Data Protection Supervisor, Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure,
Europol was set up by Decision 2009/371/JHA27 as an entity of the Union funded from the (1) general budget of the Union to support and strengthen action by competent authorities of the Member States and their mutual cooperation in preventing and combating organised crime, terrorism and other forms of serious crime affecting two or more Member States. Decision 2009/371/JHA replaced the Convention based on Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, on the establishment of a European Police Office (Europol Convention).28 (2) Article 88 of the Treaty provides for Europol to be governed by a regulation to be adopted in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure. It also requires the establishment of procedures for the scrutiny of Europol’s activities by the European Parliament, together with national Parliaments. Therefore, it is necessary to replace the Decision 2009/371/JHA by a regulation laying down rules on parliamentary scrutiny.
The European Police College (‘CEPOL’) was established by Decision 2005/681/JHA29 to (3) facilitate cooperation between national police forces by organising and coordinating training activities with a European policing dimension.
The ‘Stockholm Programme – An open and secure Europe serving and protecting citizens’30 (4) calls for Europol to evolve and become a “hub for information exchange between the law enforcement authorities of the Member States, a service provider and a platform for law enforcement services.” On the basis of an assessment of Europol’s functioning, further enhancement of its operational effectiveness is needed to meet this objective. The Stockholm OJ L 121, 15.05.2009, p. 37.
OJ C 316, 27.11.1995, p. 1.
OJ L 256, 1.10.2005, p. 63.
OJ C 115, 4.5.2010, p. 1.
EN EN Programme also sets the aim of creating a genuine European law enforcement culture by setting up European training schemes and exchange programmes for all relevant law enforcement professionals at national and Union level.
(5) Large-scale criminal and terrorist networks pose a significant threat to the internal security of the Union and to the safety and livelihood of its citizens. Available threat assessments show that criminal groups are becoming increasingly poly-criminal and cross-border in their activities.
National law enforcement authorities therefore need to cooperate more closely with their counterparts in other Member States. In this context, it is necessary to equip Europol to support Member States more in Union-wide crime prevention, analyses and investigations. This has also been confirmed in the evaluations of Decisions 2009/371/JHA and 2005/681/JHA.
(6) Given the links between the tasks of Europol and CEPOL, integrating and rationalising the functions of the two agencies would enhance the effectiveness of operational activity, the relevance of training and the efficiency of Union police cooperation.
(7) Decisions 2009/371/JHA and 2005/681/JHA should therefore be repealed and replaced by this regulation, which draws on the lessons learnt from the implementation of both Decisions.
Europol as established by this regulation should replace and assume the functions of Europol and CEPOL as established by the two repealed Decisions.
(8) As crime often occurs across internal borders, Europol should support and strengthen Member State actions and their cooperation in preventing and combating serious crime affecting two or more Member States. As terrorism is one of the most important threats for the security of the Union, Europol should assist Member States in facing common challenges in this regard. As the EU law enforcement agency, Europol should also support and strengthen actions and cooperation on tackling forms of crime that affect the interests of the EU. It should also offer support in preventing and combating related criminal offences which are committed in order to procure the means, to facilitate, to carry out or to ensure the impunity of acts in respect of which Europol is competent.
(9) Europol should ensure better quality, coherent and consistent training for law enforcement officers of all ranks within a clear framework in accordance with identified training needs.
(10) Europol should be able to request Member States to initiate, conduct or coordinate criminal investigations in specific cases where cross-border cooperation would add value. Europol should inform Eurojust of such requests.
(11) To increase the effectiveness of Europol as a hub for information exchange in the Union, clear obligations for Member States to provide Europol with the data necessary for it to fulfil its objectives should be laid down. While implementing such obligations, Member States should pay particular attention to providing data relevant for the fight against crimes considered to be strategic and operational priorities within relevant policy instruments of the Union. Member States should also provide Europol with a copy of bilateral and multilateral exchanges of information with other Member States on crime falling under Europol’s objectives. At the same time, Europol should increase the level of its support to Member States, so as to enhance mutual cooperation and sharing of information. Europol should submit an annual report to all Union institutions and to national Parliaments on the extent to which individual Member States provide it with information.
(12) To ensure effective cooperation between Europol and Member States, a national unit should be set up in each Member State. It should be the principal liaison between national law enforcement authorities and training institutes and Europol. To ensure continuous, effective EN EN exchange of information between Europol and national units and to facilitate their cooperation, each national unit should second at least one liaison officer to Europol.
(13) Taking into account the decentralised structure of some Member States and the need to ensure in certain cases rapid exchanges of information, Europol should be allowed to cooperate directly with law enforcement authorities in Member States in individual investigations, while keeping Europol national units informed.
(14) To ensure that Union-level law enforcement training is of high quality, coherent and consistent, Europol should act in line with Union law enforcement training policy. Union-level training should be available to law enforcement officers of all ranks. Europol should ensure that training is evaluated and that conclusions from training needs assessments are part of planning to reduce duplication. Europol should promote the recognition in Member States of training provided at Union level.
(15) It is also necessary to improve the governance of Europol, by seeking efficiency gains and streamlining procedures.
(16) The Commission and the Member States should be represented on the Management Board of Europol to effectively supervise its work. To reflect the dual mandate of the new agency, operational support and training for law enforcement, the full members of the Management Board should be appointed on the basis of their knowledge of law enforcement cooperation, whereas alternate members should be appointed on the basis of their knowledge of training for law enforcement officers. Alternate members should act as full members in the absence of the full member and in any case when training is discussed or decided. The Management Board should be advised by a scientific committee on technical training issues.
(17) The Management Board should be given the necessary powers, in particular to set the budget, verify its execution, adopt the appropriate financial rules and planning documents, establish transparent working procedures for decision-making by the Executive Director of Europol, and adopt the annual activity report. It should exercise the powers of appointing authority towards staff of the agency including the Executive Director. To streamline the decision making process, and to reinforce supervision of administrative and budgetary management, the Management Board should be also entitled to establish an Executive Board.