MEP Prebilič submits question to the European Commission on whether the proposed laws on internal affairs and the National Security Agency are aligned with EU law
MEP Prebilič submits question to the European Commission on whether the proposed laws on internal affairs and the National Security Agency are aligned with EU law
Member of the European Parliament Vladimir Prebilič, from the Greens/European Free Alliance Group, informed Human Rights Action (HRA) that he had submitted a parliamentary question to the European Commission regarding the Commission’s opinion delivered to the Government of Montenegro on the alignment with EU law of the Law on Internal Affairs and the Law on the National Security Agency, which were recently adopted by the Parliament of Montenegro.
Prebilič is also a member of the delegation to the European Union–Montenegro Stabilisation and Association Parliamentary Committee.
The question is published below this press release, while the opinion of the European Commission is available here.
Under Rule 144 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament, the European Commission has 30 days to respond to a parliamentary question. Questions and answers are published publicly and represent an important mechanism of transparency and political accountability of EU institutions.
Question for written answer to the Commission Rule 144
Vladimir Prebilič (Verts/ALE)
Subject: Concerns regarding Law on Internal Affairs (LIA) and Law on the National Security Agency (LNSA) in Montenegro
The Draft Law on Internal Affairs (LIA) and the Draft Law on the National Security Agency (LNSA) in Montenegro raise concerns regarding their compatibility with EU fundamental rights standards.
They allow for the dismissal of police officers on the basis of so-called “security obstacles”, relying on classified information which the affected officer may neither access nor effectively challenge.
Furthermore, the Draft LNSA maintains powers allowing the National Security Agency to access citizens’ data, including location data and private databases, without prior judicial authorisation.
In this context:
In light of the right to be heard, the rights of defence and the principle of effective judicial protection under Article 41 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, how does the Commission assess the compatibility of the Draft LIA with EU fundamental rights standards, as well as with the GDPR and the Law Enforcement Directive (LED)?
Are provisions allowing security authorities to access citizens’ data without prior judicial authorisation compatible with EU standards?
In light of the Commission’s role in monitoring compliance with the EU acquis in the accession process, how does it assess the compatibility of these draft laws with EU fundamental rights standards?
English