On 22 May 2012, the European Parliament and the Council adopted Directive 2012/13/EU on the right to information in criminal proceedings. The directive is the second measure ("measure B") in application of the Roadmap on procedural rights, which was adopted by the Council in 2009.
The directive is evidence that Member States are in favour of measures enhancing the procedural rights of suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings, contrary to what is sometimes said. Indeed, the directive provides a good example of legislation where the Council, together with the European Parliament, has taken a very much "pro-rights" approach, by establishing even more extensive and protective rights than those proposed by the European Commission.
This article describes the genesis of the directive and provides a short description of its contents.

Undoubtedly, the fight against corruption is no easy job, mainly because of the very secretive nature of such an offence that, at times, makes it next to impossible to detect, especially when hardly anyone files a report with the law enforcement authorities. Hence, new methods need to be identified and devised to fight corruption at a national level and in the European Union whilst at the same time safeguarding human rights, especially the right to a fair and public trial as well as the right to privacy. This is indeed an arduous task for all the public authorities involved in… Read more

The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) is charged with protecting the EU’s financial interests by investigating fraud, corruption, and other illegal activities. OLAF’s daily work involves the processing of large amounts of sensitive1 personal data. As a service of the European Commission, OLAF is subject to Regulation (EC) 45/2001 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by Community institutions and bodies (data protection regulation) and is thus under the supervisory powers of the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS). OLAF conducts administrative investigations in full independence, both internally – concerning the EU institutions and bodies –… Read more

The article examines the “data protection gap” in EU law concerning the transfer of personal data from private companies to law enforcement authorities for criminal investigations. While commercial data processing falls under the proposed regulation and police/judicial processing under the proposed directive, transfers between the two remain unregulated. The author analyses how such transfers affect core data protection principles, including accuracy, reliability, purpose limitation, necessity, and security, drawing on Europol’s practices and existing EU–US agreements. She argues that the proposed directive should explicitly cover these transfers, with complementary obligations for private companies under the proposed regulation, to ensure effective protection while enabling criminal investigations.