Preview document (🔗 origineel)

---

COUNCIL OF

THE EUROPEAN UNION

Brussels, 8 September 2008





12622/08





EUROJUST 73



NOTE

From:	Joint Supervisory Body of Eurojust

To:	Article 36 Committee/COREPER/Council

Subject :	Activity Report of the Joint Supervisory Body of Eurojust for
the year 2007



1. 	Article 23(12) of the Council Decision of 28 February 2002 setting
up Eurojust reads "The Joint Supervisory Body shall submit an annual
report to the Council".

2. 	In the Annex please find the Activity Report of the Joint
Supervisory Body of Eurojust for the year 2007.

3. 	The Article 36 Committee is asked to request COREPER to invite
Council to take note of the report set out in the Annex and forward it
to the European Parliament for information in accordance with Article
32(2) of the Council Decision setting up Eurojust.

________________________

ANNEX

Activity Report

2007

Joint Supervisory Body 

of Eurojust

Contents

  TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u    HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670041"  Foreword	 
PAGEREF _Toc202670041 \h  4  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670042"  INTRODUCTION	  PAGEREF _Toc202670042 \h 
5  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670043"  1.	ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS	  PAGEREF
_Toc202670043 \h  6  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670044"  Permanent Members (‘troika’)	 
PAGEREF _Toc202670044 \h  6  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670045"  Appointees	  PAGEREF _Toc202670045 \h  6
 

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670046"  Meetings and visits to Eurojust	 
PAGEREF _Toc202670046 \h  6  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670047"  Administration	  PAGEREF _Toc202670047
\h  6  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670048"  2.	SUPERVISORY TASKS	  PAGEREF
_Toc202670048 \h  7  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670049"  Exchange of views with the Data
Protection Officer of Eurojust	  PAGEREF _Toc202670049 \h  7  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670050"  Annual survey carried out by the Data
Protection Officer	  PAGEREF _Toc202670050 \h  7  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670051"  Inspection	  PAGEREF _Toc202670051 \h  7
 

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670052"  3.	MATTERS DEALT WITH IN 2007	  PAGEREF
_Toc202670052 \h  8  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670053"  Rules of procedure	  PAGEREF
_Toc202670053 \h  8  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670054"  Third country agreements	  PAGEREF
_Toc202670054 \h  8  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670055"  Possible amendments of the Eurojust
Decision	  PAGEREF _Toc202670055 \h  8  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670056"  Draft Framework Decision on Data
Protection in the Third Pillar	  PAGEREF _Toc202670056 \h  9  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670057"  Eurojust Security Rules	  PAGEREF
_Toc202670057 \h  9  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670058"  Secure communications	  PAGEREF
_Toc202670058 \h  10  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670059"  E-POC III Project and Case Management
System	  PAGEREF _Toc202670059 \h  10  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670060"  4. APPEALS	  PAGEREF _Toc202670060 \h 
10  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670061"  Annex I    Appointees to the Joint
Supervisory Body	  PAGEREF _Toc202670061 \h  12  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670062"  Annex II  Opinion of the Joint
Supervisory Body of Eurojust on the draft agreement between Eurojust and
the Republic of Croatia	  PAGEREF _Toc202670062 \h  13  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc202670063"  Annex III  Opinion of the Joint
Supervisory Body of Eurojust on the draft accord on cooperation
arrangements between Eurojust and OLAF	  PAGEREF _Toc202670063 \h  14  

 



Foreword  XE "Foreword"  

As the current chair of the Joint Supervisory Body of Eurojust (JSB) I
have been a troika member throughout the year 2007. This possibly
qualifies me to give a few introductory words to the 2007 report.

First, I should note the commendable work of the Eurojust Data
Protection Officer and the Secretariat of the JSB and the very good
cooperation the troika had with them. The troika meets four or five
times a year and a thorough supply of information from the Data
Protection Officer is crucial for its work. Also, due to the
Secretariat, the work of the JSB in 2007 was organised very efficiently.

Second, although the qualifications of the national appointees to the
JSB are excellent and the threesome composition of the JSB is efficient,
the semi-annual change of its composition does not lead to adequate
continuity of its work. I am, therefore, glad that already in 2007 ideas
on making the composition of the JSB more permanent have appeared, which
have later led to the preparation of adequate amendments in the scope of
the procedure of amending the Eurojust Decision. Also, in this scope,
the need to increase the number of personal data Eurojust can process
and to make the Decision more flexible in this respect has been
identified by the JSB in 2007.

In 2007 the most important task of the JSB has been the inspection,
carried out in November of that year. The inspection team undertook a
thorough survey of personal data processing in Eurojust and of data
security procedures, both from a legal and technical point of view. The
inspection was organised and carried out efficiently without hindering
Eurojust operations.

Last, let me note that although the caseload of Eurojust is increasing
rapidly, the appeals to the JSB are practically non-existent. There was
one appeal in 2006, decided in 2007, and no new appeal in 2007. The
decision taken by the JSB in 2007 was very important and changed the
practice of informing personal data subjects on processing their
personal data. I am sure that to a certain extent this lack of appeals
may be attributed to the correct work of Eurojust, but still, if this
lack persists, the JSB should consider the reasons for it in more
detail.

Rajko Pirnat

Chair of the Joint Supervisory Body January – June 2008

30 June 2008



INTRODUCTION

The Joint Supervisory Body of Eurojust (hereinafter ‘JSB’) is an
independent body created by virtue of Article 23 of the Eurojust
Decision to monitor collectively the Eurojust activities referred to in
Articles 14 to 22 in order to ensure that the processing of personal
data is carried out in accordance with this Decision. In order to fulfil
these tasks, the JSB shall be entitled to have full access to all files
where such personal data are processed. 

The JSB is composed of three permanent members and, as provided for in
Article 23.4, ad hoc judges. In order to set up the JSB, each Member
State, acting in accordance with its legal system, shall appoint a judge
who is not a member of Eurojust, or, if its constitutional or national
system so requires a person holding an office giving him sufficient
independence, for inclusion on the list of judges who may sit on the JSB
as members or ad hoc judges.

In accordance with Article 23.12 of the Eurojust Decision, the JSB shall
submit an annual report to the Council.

Members of the Joint Supervisory Body at the plenary meeting in April
2007, accompanied by the Data Protection Officer and the Assistant to
the Data Protection Officer (right)



ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

Permanent Members (‘troika’)

During the first six months of 2007, Mr Tolksdorf (Chair, Germany), Mr
Campos Lobo (Portugal) and Mr Pirnat (Slovenia) were members of the
troika and during the second half Mr Campos Lobo (Chair, Portugal), Mr
Pirnat and Mr Gasse (France). 

Appointees

Following the enlargement of the European Union, at the end of the year
there were 27 official appointees in total. The JSB was pleased to
welcome Ms Pavlina Panova, who was appointed as the national
representative for Bulgaria on 4 July, and Ms Laura Marina Andrei for
Romania on 1 October. 

Mr Ulco van de Pol, appointee for the Netherlands and one of the first
chairmen of the JSB, was replaced by Ms Jannette Beuving and Mr José
Luis Piñar Mañas, appointee for Spain, was replaced by Mr Artemi Rallo
Lombarte. 

Meetings and visits to Eurojust

The members of the troika met on four occasions during the year (8
March, 26 April, 19 July and 15 November). The plenary meeting of all
the appointees took place on 26 April. 

Mr Peter Hustinx, European Data Protection Supervisor, was invited as a
guest speaker to the plenary meeting and provided an interesting
overview of recent developments in EU data protection.

The JSB members took part in two study visits to Eurojust on 29-30
January and 4 October in order to have the opportunity to meet various
members of the College and administration of Eurojust and have a closer
look at the various data processing activities. Following these visits,
it was decided that these study visits should be continued, as they
provided a useful occasion for the members to learn more about Eurojust
and its data processing activities. 

On 26 September Mr Campos Lobo attended, on behalf of the JSB, the
farewell event organised by Eurojust for the retirement of Mr Roelof-Jan
Manschot, Vice-President of Eurojust and National Member for the
Netherlands.

Administration

A total budget of €58,426 was allocated to the JSB, of which €43,746
was spent.   

As part of Eurojust’s future administrative planning, the JSB
secretariat prepared work programmes for the JSB for 2008 and 2009 which
were adopted by the members. These work programmes aimed to set out
objectives with related activities and financial resources needed to
reach these aims.

A new mission guide for the National Members and Members of the Joint
Supervisory Body, based on that of the European Commission, was
presented by the Administrative Director to the members at their meeting
in July.

SUPERVISORY TASKS

Exchange of views with the Data Protection Officer of Eurojust

At every meeting the JSB had the occasion to exchange views with Ms
Diana Alonso Blas, Data Protection Officer (hereinafter ‘DPO’), who
thoroughly informed the members of all ongoing matters and of the issues
which might require their attention during the following period.

Annual survey carried out by the Data Protection Officer

In accordance with Article 27 of the Rules of Procedure on the
Processing and Protection of Personal Data at Eurojust, Ms Diana Alonso
Blas conducted the second annual data protection survey at Eurojust in
July 2007. She interviewed the national desks of Estonia, Ireland,
France, Lithuania and Finland and presented the findings of her survey
to the JSB at its meetings in July and November. 

The JSB agreed that the survey had been carried out in accordance with
Article 27 of the Rules of Procedure on the Processing and Protection of
Personal Data at Eurojust and that its general conclusions were in line
with the findings of the previous inspection carried out by the JSB in
November 2005. The report provided by the DPO was considered a very
useful tool for the inspection team and the JSB in general.

Inspection

In accordance with Article 23.1 of the Eurojust Decision and Article 6
of the Act of the Joint Supervisory Body of Eurojust, an inspection was
carried out at Eurojust from 26 to 29 November. The inspection team was
headed by Mr Carlos Campos Lobo (JSB member for Portugal) and was
composed of leading legal and technical experts in the field of data
protection:  Mr Peter Michael (Data Protection Secretary, Council of
European Union), Ms Kostoula Kampouraki (Assistant at the Data
Protection Secretariat, Council of European Union), Mr Fernando Silva
(Portuguese Data Protection Authority), Ms Miroslava Matousava (Czech
Republic Data Protection Authority) and Ms Tonnie Gräve (Dutch Data
Protection Authority).  

The inspection team followed up the topics covered in the inspection
which took place in 2005 and addressed an extensive number of legal and
technical issues with several national desks and members of the Eurojust
administration. 

The final report with recommendations is expected to be addressed to
Eurojust at the beginning of 2008.

  MATTERS DEALT WITH IN 2007 

Rules of procedure 

In accordance with Article 31 of the Act of the Joint Supervisory Body
an evaluation of the rules of procedure took place at the plenary
meeting in April. On the initiative of Mr Tolksdorf, a discussion with
all the appointees took place and it was confirmed that they did not see
any need to make any changes to the rules for the time being and they
agreed to maintain the current rules of procedure.

Third country agreements

The JSB submitted a positive opinion on the draft agreement between the
Republic of Croatia and Eurojust to the College of Eurojust on 19 July
(Annex II). This agreement was subsequently approved by the Council of
Ministers of Justice and Home Affairs on 9 November. So far the
agreement has not entered into force, awaiting all legislative and
organisational measures that need to be taken in the Republic of Croatia
to comply with the agreement.

The JSB also submitted a positive opinion on the draft accord between
Eurojust and the Office Européen de Lutte Anti-Fraude (OLAF) to the
College of Eurojust on 10 May (Annex III). The discussions on that
agreement have continued in 2008. 

The JSB were kept informed of ongoing negotiations with other third
countries during the year through the DPO and the External Relations
team of Eurojust.

Possible amendments of the Eurojust Decision

Discussions took place at the JSB meetings on how to deal with the issue
raised in a recommendation of the inspection report of 2005: “In view
of the practical difficulties in complying with Article 15, Eurojust
should consider what further steps it can take to either ensure
compliance or seek to have the Article amended to provide greater
flexibility”. At the troika meeting in April, it was agreed to include
this point in the scope of the forthcoming inspection. 

The JSB followed with great interest the ongoing discussions regarding
the review of the Eurojust Decision and hoped that greater flexibility
was introduced in the text of this Article in order to ensure that
Eurojust may legally process all data necessary to perform its tasks,
not only on the basis of the Eurojust Decision but also in the context
of the Council Framework Decision on the European Arrest Warrant (EAW)
and the Council Decision of 20 September 2005 on the exchange of
information and cooperation concerning terrorist offences.

Draft Framework Decision on Data Protection in the Third Pillar

The JSB followed with interest the developments regarding the envisaged
draft framework decision on data protection in the third pillar, which
was discussed during the German and Portuguese presidencies. 

In response to a proposal put forward during the German presidency of
the European Union to merge the Joint Supervisory Bodies of the third
pillar (Schengen Information System, Europol, Eurojust and the Customs
Information System) into a single data protection supervisory body,
Eurojust defended the keeping of the current structure of the JSB of
Eurojust in a letter to the Federal Ministry of Justice in Berlin of 7
March. 

At a meeting of the Permanent Representatives Committee (COREPER) in
October in Brussels, an approach was agreed which transformed the
proposed merger into a mere mandate for examination included in a
Council declaration as to how the bodies could be merged. 

Eurojust Security Rules

The JSB was kept informed by Eurojust on the state of play of the
implementation of the security rules at Eurojust, which had been
officially adopted by the College of Eurojust in March 2007. 

A risk assessment framework was presented to the JSB at its meeting in
November which explained the practices and measures being adopted to
tackle security risks at Eurojust.

The JSB took note of both developments with satisfaction.



Secure communications

The JSB was kept informed regularly by Eurojust on the progress of the
technical implementation of a dedicated secure communication facility
between Eurojust and Europol and a pilot project with the Slovak
Republic, which was expected to be extended to all the 27 member states
in 2008. The JSB has often underlined the need to ensure that secure
communication facilities are made available to the national desks in
order to ensure efficient and secure exchange of case-related
information.

E-POC III Project and Case Management System 

The JSB was brought up to date by Eurojust on developments in the EPOC
III project (European Pool against Organised Crime), an EU co-funded
project with the Ministries of Justice of Slovenia, Romania, France,
Italy and Poland, CM Sistemi SpA (Italy) and Eurojust as partners. The
objective of this project was to develop the EPOC software which was
used at Eurojust as the Case Management System (hereinafter ‘CMS’),
to support the secure communication infrastructure and to implement the
Eurojust Data Protection rules, including exchange of data with third
parties. 

The troika attended a demonstration of the CMS during its study visit in
January. A further demonstration was made to all the members at their
plenary meeting.

4. 	APPEALS

According to Article 23 of the Eurojust Decision, the JSB shall examine
appeals submitted to it in accordance with Articles 19(8) and 20(2) and
carry out controls in accordance with paragraph 1, first subparagraph,
of this Article. If the JSB considers that a decision taken by Eurojust
or the processing of data by it is not compatible with this Decision,
the matter shall be referred to Eurojust, which shall accept the
decision of the JSB. Decisions of the JSB shall be final and binding on
Eurojust.

The JSB received its first ever appeal in October 2006. The applicant
had lodged a complaint against Eurojust’s reply to his/her request for
access to personal data that might be held in Eurojust databases.
Eurojust’s reply had been worded in accordance with the text of
Article 19 (7) of the Eurojust Decision. 

The JSB issued its final decision on the appeal to the College of
Eurojust on 26 April: “The JSB of Eurojust considers that in all cases
where an individual seeks access to personal data concerning him or
herself processed by Eurojust, including those cases where there are no
data processed, the College of Eurojust shall decide whether in the
specific case the disclosure of the data or of the non-existence of data
concerning the application processed by Eurojust may contravene any
interests of Eurojust or of one of the Member States. If this is not the
case, Eurojust shall reveal to the individual the requested data or
inform him that in fact there are no data concerning him”. The appeal
was referred to Eurojust for reconsideration in accordance with Article
23 (7) of the Eurojust decision.”

ANNEX I to ANNEX

Annex I  XE "Annex I"      Appointees to the Joint Supervisory Body

Country	Member	Date of appointment

Bulgaria	Ms Pavlina PANOVA	04/07/07

Belgium	Ms Nicole LEPOIVRE	09/01/03

Czech Republic	Mr Josef RAKOVSKÝ	14/04/04

Denmark	Ms Lena ANDERSON	19/09/02

Germany	Mr Klaus TOLKSDORF	10/07/02

Estonia	Mr Pavel GONTSHAROV	25/10/04

Greece	Mr Gerasimos FOURLANOS	21/05/02

Spain	Mr Artemi RALLO LOMBARTE	27/02/07

France	Mr Didier GASSE	25/03/04

Ireland	Mr William HAWKES	06/07/05

Italy	Mr Alfonso PAPA	06/02/03

Cyprus	Mr George EROTOCRITOU	16/09/04

Latvia	Ms Zane PĒTERSONE	27/09/04

Lithuania	Mr Egidijus BIELIŪNAS	06/12/04

Luxembourg	Ms Lotty PRUSSEN	06/05/02

Hungary	Ms Edit Mária VARGA	13/12/04

Malta	Mr Paul MIFSUD CREMONA	18/10/04

Netherlands	Ms Jannette BEUVING	01/01/07

Austria	Mr Gustav MAIER	26/08/02

Poland	Mr Dariusz ŁUBOWSKI	26/05/04

Portugal	Mr Carlos CAMPOS LOBO	01/04/06

Romania	Ms Laura-Marina ANDREI	15/10/07

Slovenia	Mr Rajko PIRNAT	01/12/04

Slovakia	Mr Ladislav DUDITŠ	10/05/04

Finland	Mr Antti RUOTSALAINEN	01/10/05

Sweden	Mr Hans FRENNERED	01/07/02

United Kingdom	Mr Richard THOMAS	16/03/03



ANNEX II to ANNEX

Annex II   XE "Annex I"   Opinion of the Joint Supervisory Body of
Eurojust on the draft agreement between Eurojust and the Republic of
Croatia

On the 5th of July 2007, the President of the College of Eurojust, Mike
Kennedy, submitted the draft agreement between Eurojust and the Republic
of Croatia to the Joint Supervisory Body for consideration. 

In accordance with Article 27.3 of the Eurojust Decision, the Joint
Supervisory Body will be consulted by Eurojust when concluding
agreements with third parties which contain provisions on the exchange
of personal data. 

At its meeting on the 19th of July 2007 the Joint Supervisory Body had a
useful exchange of views with the vice-chairman of the College team
dealing with external relations and the Data Protection Officer
concerning this draft agreement and was informed of all its relevant
aspects as well as of the fact-finding visit of the Data Protection
Officer to Croatia. 

The Joint Supervisory Body appreciates the fact that Eurojust has
provided it with extensive information and is pleased to observe that
the level of protection in Croatia has been checked carefully by the
Data Protection Officer. The JSB notes with satisfaction that the
recommendations contained in the DPO report of 1 June 2007 have been
taken on board in the text of the agreement. It would also like to take
the opportunity to stress the importance of a second visit by the DPO to
Croatia before the agreement enters into force.

After careful deliberation and discussion, the Joint Supervisory Body
concluded as follows:  

Considering that Croatia is candidate to the accession to the European
Union,

Considering the fact that the data protection legislation applicable in
Croatia seems to offer adequate protection,

Considering that the Office of the Attorney General in Croatia,
competent authority in the sense of Article 4 of the draft agreement, is
subject to the supervision of the Croatian Data Protection Authority
concerning data protection matters,

Considering the fact that additional safeguards have been included in
the text of the agreement to ensure proper oversight of its
implementation by the DPO and, where necessary, the JSB,

The Joint Supervisory Body considers the provisions on the exchange of
personal data contained in the draft agreement between Eurojust and the
republic of Croatia adequate and gives therefore a positive opinion on
the draft agreement as contained in the letter of Mike Kennedy of 5 July
2007.

Done at The Hague,

19 July 2007

Carlos Campos Lobo

Chairman of the Joint Supervisory Body 

ANNEX III to ANNEX

Annex III  XE "Annex I"    Opinion of the Joint Supervisory Body of
Eurojust on the draft accord on cooperation arrangements between
Eurojust and OLAF

On the 28th of March 2007, the President of Eurojust, Mike Kennedy,
submitted the draft accord on cooperation arrangements between Eurojust
and OLAF to the Joint Supervisory Body for consideration. 

In accordance with Article 27.3 of the Eurojust Decision, the Joint
Supervisory Body will be consulted by Eurojust when concluding
agreements with third parties which contain provisions on the exchange
of personal data. 

The Joint Supervisory Body has stressed in the past the need for
Eurojust to have a proper legal basis to exchange personal data with
OLAF, which is a very important partner for Eurojust. The Joint
Supervisory Body was therefore pleased to receive the draft accord and
welcomes this development.

At its meeting on the 26th April 2007 the Joint Supervisory Body had a
useful exchange of views with the chairman of the College team dealing
with OLAF matters, the Data Protection Officer and a representative of
the Eurojust Legal Service concerning this draft accord and was informed
of all its relevant aspects. The Joint Supervisory Body appreciates the
fact that Eurojust has provided it with extensive information through
the whole negotiation process.

After careful deliberation and discussion, the Joint Supervisory Body
concluded as follows:  

Considering the importance of OLAF as cooperation partner for Eurojust,

Considering the fact that Regulation EC 45/2001 of the European
Parliament and the Council on the protection of individuals with regard
to the processing of personal data by Community institutions and bodies
and on the free movement of such data applies to OLAF,

Considering that OLAF is subject to the supervision of the European Data
Protection Supervisor concerning data protection matters,

The Joint Supervisory Body considers the provisions on the exchange of
personal data contained in the draft accord between Eurojust and OLAF
adequate and gives therefore a positive opinion on the draft accord as
contained in the letter of Mike Kennedy of 28 March 2007.

Done at The Hague,

26 April 2007

Dr. Klaus Tolksdorf

Chairman of the Joint Supervisory Body 

___________________

 	Council Decision of 28 February 2002 setting up Eurojust with a view
to reinforcing the fight against serious crime  (2002/187/JHA) OJ L 63
of 06.03.02 p.1

 	Rules of Procedure on the Processing and Protection of Personal Data
at Eurojust (text adopted unanimously by the college of Eurojust during
the meeting of 21 October 2004 and approved by  the Council on 24
February 2005 (2005/C 68/01) OJ C 68 19.03.05 p.1

 	Act of the Joint Supervisory Body of Eurojust of 2 March 2004 laying
down its rules of procedure (2004/c 86/01) OJ C 86 of 06.04.04 p.1

 	“These rules of procedure shall be evaluated by the Joint
Supervisory Body between one and three years after their entry into
force, and in the light of experience”.

 	Council framework decision of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest
warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States
(2002/584/JHA), OJ L 190/1, 18.7.2002.

 	Council Decision 2005/671/JHA of 20 September 2005 on the exchange of
information and cooperation concerning terrorist offences, OJ L 253/22,
29.9.2005. 

 	Proposal  for a Council Framework Decision on the protection of
personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial
cooperation in criminal matters (Interinstitutional File 2005/02/02
(CNS), Article 18

 	“If access is denied or if no personal data concerning the applicant
are processed by Eurojust, the latter shall notify the applicant that it
has carried out checks, without giving any information which could
reveal whether or not the applicant is known”.

12622/08		HGN/lwp	  PAGE  1 

	DG H 2B	  EN

12622/08		HGN/lwp	  PAGE  11 

ANNEX	DG H 2B	  EN

12622/08		HGN/lwp	  PAGE  12 

ANNEX I TO ANNEX	DG H 2B	  EN

12622/08		HGN/lwp	  PAGE  13 

ANNEX II TO ANNEX	DG H 2B	  EN

12622/08		HGN/lwp	  PAGE  14 

ANNEX III TO ANNEX	DG H 2B	  EN

P.O. Box 16183

2500 BD The Hague

The Netherlands

Tel: +31 70 412 5512

Fax: +31 70 412 5515

E.mail:   HYPERLINK "mailto:jsb@eurojust.europa.eu" 
jsb@eurojust.europa.eu 

www.eurojust.europa.eu