Joint Compendium: Demonstrating Gaps in e-Evidence RegulationComments Off on Joint Compendium: Demonstrating Gaps in e-Evidence Regulation

On 20 October 2021, CPME together with other 13 civil organisations co-authored a compendium of scenarios to contribute to the current debate at European level on the “e-Evidence” Regulation. We urge the European Parliament and the Council to uphold a high level of legal safeguards to protect fundamental rights during their negotiations.

This compendium showcases four different scenario in which the e-Evidence Regulation would lead to serious fundamental rights harms.

This publication demonstrate the disproportionate impact of the future Regulation (1) on the work of journalists, (2) the protection of sensitive health data, (3) the freedom to protest in Member States with systemic rule of law issues, and (4) the right to a fair trial – if some of its proposals remain in the final text.

CPME’s scenario focus on the cross-border access to health data either unintentionally or intentionally (where health data is required as proof). It also explains the necessary safeguards advocated for to mitigate these fundamental rights harms. 

The co-authoring organisations recommend the following:

  • Introduce a mandatory and automatic notification procedure for the executing State with suspensive effect, including (1) a duty to ensure all relevant immunities and privileges are properly considered and in case of violating orders, (2) an obligation to invoke grounds for refusal based on the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights;
  • Give a clear definition of immunities and privileges which encompasses rules related to media freedom, freedom of information, professional secrecy and medical confidentiality;
  • Involve the affected State in order to properly take into account the immunities and privileges when relevant;
  • Provide clear information immediately to the person whose data is sought, unless otherwise authorised by a court or an independent administrative authority;
  • Ensure access to effective remedies both in the issuing and executing States;
  • Give early access of the case-file to the defence and enable the use of e-Evidence orders on behalf of a suspected or accused person;
  • Provide the same level of protection for all types of data;
  • Ensure that every order contains a summary of the underlying facts and a description of the offence;
  • Give service providers the possibility to halt an order if orders are “manifestly abusive”, i.e. they are not restricted to a limited set of data, timeframe or the number of persons.

CPME would like to thank all organisations involved and give a special thank you to Chloé Berthélémy from EDRi for leading the work.

For further information: