Pachetul legislativ E-evidence al Uniunii Europene. Evoluțiile înregistrate in timpul președințiilor austriacă si română la Consiliul Uniunii Europene
E-evidence legislative package of the European Union. Developments recorded during the Austrian and Romanian Presidencies of the Council of the European Union

Summary/Abstract: This article follows the evolution of the procedure for the adoption of the European Union E-evidence legislative package, from April 17, 2018, when the European Commission sent to the European Parliament and the Council the Proposal for a Regulation on the orders on European Production and Preservation Orders for electronic evidence in criminal matters and the Proposal of the Directive laying down harmonized rules on the appointment of legal representatives for the purpose of gathering evidence in criminal proceedings and up to now, insisting on the new paradigm of the principle of mutual recognition of judgments and judicial decisions, which is required by the Legislative Package, namely the compliance with the production and preservation orders by IT service providers, directly, without involving, in principle, a judicial enforcement authority. The contributions of the Austrian Presidency of the Council of the European Union, from the second semester of 2018, as well as of the Romanian Presidency, from the first semester of 2019 are highlighted, underlining the changes made by the Council on the Commission's Proposals through the general approaches on the Proposal of Regulation, its completion with its three annexes and the Proposal of the Directive. The article places particular emphasis on the elements of the general approach of the Council on the Draft Regulation that reflects the governmental interests of not losing national control over electronic data transfers, focusing on the newly introduced procedure for notification of production orders, of situations in which the production of electronic evidence is limited or hindered by the immunities or privileges, limitations or exclusion of criminal liability for journalists or for reasons of public order. Another issue analysed is that of the possible conflict between the jurisdictions of the European Union member states and those of the third states in relation to the production of electronic evidence, in particular by the lack of coordination of the provisions of the E-evidence legislative package with those of the US law, Cloud Act.

• Details
• Contents