UK-EU cooperation on cross-border policing could end if proposed
changes to EU rules on police database information sharing enter
into force without a deal to update the Trade and Cooperation
Agreement, according to the European Scrutiny Committee.
If the UK Government does not align with the EU’s proposed ‘Prüm
2’ proposals, UK police could be locked out of EU-wide databases
and blocked from accessing critical biometric information on
criminals operating in Europe, the European Scrutiny Committee
has said. This could have significant consequences for the
Government’s ability to target organised crime operating across
borders.
In the Committee’s latest analysis of new or proposed EU laws
that could impact the UK, Chairman has written to the Security Minister, , requesting clarity on how the Government
intends to respond to the EU’s Prüm 2’ proposals and whether the
status quo of cooperation remains an option. He asks the
Government to confirm that it will publish a full impact
assessment before taking any decision on changes to the TCA and
underlines the need for effective Parliamentary scrutiny.
Since leaving the European Union, the UK has remained aligned
with the EU on police cooperation through its trade agreement
with the bloc, which replicates the earlier ‘Prüm 1’ rules. The
EU’s proposed ‘Prüm II’ Regulation would expand cross-border
police cooperation to include digital facial images, police
records and possibly driving licences.
Under the terms of the UK/EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement
(TCA) the EU may suspend existing Prüm cooperation if the if the
EU rules are “substantially” changed and the UK does not agree to
have those changes reflected in the TCA.
In his letter, Sir William also raises concerns about the
expanded scope of the ‘Prüm 2’ proposals. The proposed changes
“would increase the amount of personal data that could be
searched by automated means and shared with the UK’s law
enforcement counterparts in the EU,” he writes. “As the pool of
searchable data increases, so too does the risk of false matches
and wrongful incrimination.”
