The EU Law Enforcement Directive: Where It Stands Today
summary
Recent CJEU rulings and pending referrals change how states collect, store and reuse biometric and criminal‑justice data: Politeni Presidium (C‑57/23) allows systematic biometric collection only with article 4/10 safeguards and periodic three‑year necessity reviews; C‑371/24 bars blanket fingerprinting without individual strict‑necessity reasons and allows penalising refusal only if proportional. Ongoing cases test whether FIUs and courts fall under the LED, and Europol’s article 33A plus AI model governance and human‑oversight rules shape practical compliance.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (6)
- 0:00Introduction
- 3:05Case law developments
- 20:21Commission’s report
- 37:05EDPS oversight of AI
- 50:25Directive vs AI Act
- 1:05:26Q&A
related talks
01h 17mThe Law Enforcement Directive A Closer Look at the Current State...
01h 13mLaw Enforcement Directive – Unpacking GDPR’s Little Brother
04mProspects for reform of the EU Data Protection Directive
01h 15mUS and Transatlantic Debates: Government And Law Enforcement Use Of Data.
01h 15mTHE RIGHT OF ACCESS TO POLICE DATABASES
01h 12mACADEMIC SESSION 1
01h 10mWhat about data retention?
01h 11mProactive processing of data for criminal investigations