THIRD ANNUAL ACTIVITY REPORT

March 98 – February 99

CONTENTS

Summary note 

SECTION 1: Introduction 
SECTION 2: JSA activities from March 1998 to February 1999

Chapter I: JSA OPINIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Chapter II: INSPECTION WORK
Chapter III: INFORMATION CAMPAIGN
Chapter IV: INTEGRATION INTO THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE JSA ACQUIS
Chapter V: JSA OPERATIONS

SECTION 3: JSA’s relations with Schengen and non-Schengen bodies

SECTION 4: REACTIONS OF THE SCHENGEN AUTHORITIES TO THE JSA’S ANNUAL REPORT

SECTION 5: The future of the JSA in its new institutional framework

Summary note

The 3^rd Annual Report of the Joint Supervisory Authority (March 1998 to February 1999) comes at a time in which Schengen’s institutional framework is changing as a result of the entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam.

This implies new rules and new rights, and greater transparency in the way Schengen is organized and the information system functions.

As in previous years, 1998 saw the Joint Supervisory Authority assert its independence as a body responsible for upholding the rights of its citizens with regard to the application of the Schengen Convention, in particular in terms of personal data protection.

The JSA launched a far-reaching campaign for greater transparency and information: the annual report was widely publicized, the "Schengen Information System concerns you" campaign was launched in various countries with the distribution of leaflets and posters on individuals’ rights and the first symposium on "Individuals’ rights vis-à-vis police information systems" was organized, together with a press conference to present the report.

The national data protection agencies submitted the annual report to their respective parliaments and some even published it on their Internet websites. The report was also presented to the Schengen bodies and sent to the European Parliament.

The JSA proposed new mechanisms for interacting and cooperating with the Schengen decision-making bodies to facilitate the exchange of information and for the first time the JSA intervened at an Executive Committee meeting in order to defend its point of view.

The JSA completed the work programme set at the start of the year. The authority delivered opinions, was informed of the study and the technical development of the future system and carried out its first full round of inspections at all the SIRENE Bureaux. This led to the drafting of recommendations aimed at enhancing the security provisions for exchanging additional information. In addition, the JSA’s activities and individuals’ rights were publicized. All of this was done in the interest of Schengen’s effectiveness.

The JSA decided to carry out a specific inspection as part of its work on monitoring the central system.

Despite all the initiatives and proposals put forward by the JSA, we did not see the Executive Committee adopt any of the measures to increase its human, technical and financial resources as promised. For there to be true democratic checks, it is not sufficient for there to be an independent authority, it is essential that that authority be given the necessary means and instruments to function. This is particularly important in view of developments in police information systems (Europol, Eurodac and the Customs Information System) and improvements in the means of cooperation available to combat large-scale organized crime.

It is therefore important that the means of cooperation between the Joint Supervisory Authorities, which are responsible for safeguarding the fundamental values of freedom and citizenship in relation to each system, be strengthened. It is vital that within the European Union, the correct formula be found to ensure the SIS remains secure and that there is effective and independent supervision of the system.

We urge that the Joint Supervisory Authority be integrated into the European Union in a harmonious fashion, without hindering the JSA’s ability to carry out continuous and independent checks. The JSA’s experience and acquis are essential for the future of European police systems.

At this time of change, I wish to thank all those who have participated over the years in the work of the Joint Supervisory Authority, the National Supervisory Authorities, the representatives of the Member States within the Executive Committee and the Central Group, together with the technical working groups and the Schengen Secretariat.

The work has been worth it for European integration, freedom, citizens´ rights and joint security.

March 1999

The Chairman

João Labescat 

 SECTION 1: Introduction

The Joint Supervisory Authority was set up on 26 March 1995. The authority’s permanent operations over the last four years constitute the first experience of an independent body, which jointly supervises a European police system. The JSA’s defence of individual rights – an area in which the authority has been active since day one – is especially relevant in 1998, which marks the fiftieth anniversary of the signing of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 

The JSA’s activities include monitoring all the operational changes that occur in the Schengen Information System, which currently contains data from Austria, Belgium, Germany, Greece, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain. The JSA’s activities in the past year provide ample proof that the authority has fulfilled the tasks it has been assigned by the Schengen States. 

Already back in June 1992, a Provisional Joint Supervisory Authority (PJSA) was set up on the basis of a ministerial decision and this authority took the first steps towards preparing the application of data protection principles. 

The Schengen Convention sets out to remove controls at the Member States’ internal borders thus creating an area of free movement of persons, while at the same time maintaining at least the same level of security that existed previously in this area. 

The countervailing measures laid down in the Schengen Convention designed to fulfil this objective include: harmonizing policy on the issue of visas; common policy on determining the State responsible for processing an asylum application, improving police and judicial cooperation; stepping up the fight against the illicit trafficking of drugs; harmonizing the level of control at Schengen’s external borders; and setting up a Schengen Information System (SIS). 

This joint system creates a link between all the States implementing the Schengen Convention and gives end-users (police departments; embassies and consulates; immigration offices, etc.) real-time access to information required for the performance of their duties, entered in the system by other States implementing the Convention. 

This information relates both to persons (wanted for arrest for the purpose of extradition; to whom entry should be refused; who are missing; wanted for the purpose of discreet surveillance, etc.) and to objects (vehicles, arms, documents, bank notes, which have been stolen, misappropriated or lost). 

The functioning of the Schengen Information System requires the establishment and operation of the Joint Supervisory Authority (JSA) to guarantee the protection of personal data and, in particular, to ensure compliance with the Schengen Convention’s provisions on the technical support function of the SIS (Article 115). This authority, which consists of two representatives from each Contracting Party’s national supervisory authority, has also been assigned an advisory role and the task of harmonizing legal practice and interpretation at national level. 

The JSA is made up of representatives from the ten countries that have data in the system. The authorities of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden also participate in the JSA’s activities as observers. 

In keeping with the Action Programme that had been approved in 1998, the JSA:

• carried out extensive inspections for the first time at the SIRENE Bureaux and made a series of recommendations in an effort to step up security;

• made preparations for a specific inspection of the C.SIS which is to take place during the first half of 1999;

• monitored development work on SIS I (+) and the preliminary studies on SIS II;

• defined its acquis for the purpose of Schengen’s integration into the European Union;

• launched the campaign "The Schengen Information System concerns you", based on the distribution of posters and an explanatory leaflet on individual rights, targeting points of entry to the Schengen area (airports, maritime borders etc.);

• delivered opinions, notably on according vehicle registration authorities access to data in the Schengen Information System;

• organized the first colloquium on "Individual Rights vis-à-vis Police Systems" (Lisbon).

An ongoing concern of the JSA was transparency about and information on its activities and individual rights. In a similar vein, the authority sought to put in place a more flexible system for information exchange between the Joint Supervisory Authority and the other Schengen bodies. To this end, it invited the chairmen of different working groups on various occasions to its meetings. 

At present, the SIS contains approx. nine million alerts that can be consulted from thousands of computer terminals, by thousands of police officers and judicial authorities in ten EU Member States. In 1998, the integration of Austria, Greece and Italy led to an increase in the volume of data held in the SIS.

SECTION 2: JSA activities from March 1998 to February 1999 

CHAPTER I: JSA OPINIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

I.1. Security at the SIRENE Bureaux: Coordinated action in all the Member States 

At its meeting of 12 December 1997, the Joint Supervisory Authority decided to undertake an evaluation of the security measures in place at the SIRENE Bureaux. This decision was taken in response to the discovery that documents had been leaked from a SIRENE Bureau in November 1997. 

The national supervisory authorities of the 10 States already applying the Convention subsequently inspected their SIRENE Bureaux.

The Presidency of the JSA in conjunction with the Belgian Data Protection Agency attended a meeting on 31 March 1998 with various Belgians in charge of international police cooperation. At the meeting, the JSA was informed of the measures taken and foreseen to strengthen security at the SIRENE Bureau where the leak was detected.

On the basis of the national reports, the JSA drafted a summary document on security at the SIRENE Bureaux. It was felt that the JSA had an important role to play in this area in terms of encouraging harmonization of security measures in each State.

The JSA stressed that the SIRENE Bureaux had to meet all the requirements laid down in Article 118 of the Schengen Convention (on security).

The JSA tabled a series of recommendations to be adopted by those States that had not yet done so. The main recommendations were as follows: 

• Maintain the highest possible level of physical security by updating the techniques currently used and step up security measures aimed at ensuring that access is limited to authorized staff;
• Encrypt data that is being exchanged and stored, determine common security rules to be complied with by staff of the different SIRENE Bureaux, and appoint an official to take charge of security;
• Promote training in information security for SIRENE Bureaux users;
• Draft regular reports on security to be submitted to the national supervisory authorities.

Finally, the JSA emphasized the cooperation between all the national bodies concerned and welcomed the fact that these checks, which were effectively coordinated in all the States, had greatly improved the level of data protection. This is a sine qua non for fostering our citizens and democratic institutions’ confidence in the Schengen system.

These recommendations were approved together with the summary report on 11 December 1998. This summary was sent on 8 January 1999 to the Executive Committee, the Central Group and the SIRENE Working Group. A press release summarizing this report was also adopted. The JSA is now awaiting the reactions of Schengen’s decision-making bodies.

I.2. Opinion on according vehicle registration authorities access to the SIS 

On 16 June, the Central Group sent the JSA a request for an opinion from the SIRENE Group. The request referred to the conditions for allowing vehicle registration authorities access to certain SIS data. They asked the JSA how it defined personal data. According to the SIRENE Group, personal data did not include vehicle chassis numbers. 

The request originated in a study carried out by the working group into the possibility of allowing vehicle registration authorities to consult the SIS in order to detect stolen vehicles, registered in the Schengen area, when a new request for registration was lodged in the original country of registration or in another Schengen State. 

In its opinion approved on 6 November 1998, the JSA found that access by the vehicle registration authorities to SIS data and database comparison would constitute a breach of Articles 101 and 102 (2) and (4) of the Schengen Convention in several Schengen States. However, if registration authorities in certain Schengen States met the criteria governing the powers and the purpose of the search imposed by the Schengen Convention and could apply the security measures imposed by Article 118 therein, the JSA considered such access acceptable. 

It was forwarded to the Central Group with the reference JSA Opinion No 98/5.

CHAPTER II: INSPECTION WORK

II.1. General guidelines for C.SIS visits and inspections 

The JSA, in conjunction with the French Ministry of the Interior, drafted a series of guidelines aimed at defining the arrangements for visits to and inspections of the C.SIS site. These guidelines correspond with the tasks provided for in Article 115 of the Schengen Convention. 

After lengthy negotiations, which included a meeting in Paris between the JSA and the French Ministry of the Interior, a specific proposal was drafted. This was examined on 29 June 1998 in the presence of representatives from the French Ministry of the Interior. 

Given that the latter had tabled a number of amendments, the JSA discussed the document again on 11 September 1998, and approved it at that meeting. The French Minister for the Interior approved the text on 6 November 1998 and this was submitted to the Schengen States for information purposes. 

The "General Guidelines for C.SIS visits and inspections" (annexed hereto) defines, for the JSA, the types of visit (fact-finding or inspection), the provisions for informing the Ministry of the Interior, the composition of the visiting/inspection teams, the procedure for inspection visits, access to documents and the procedure for examining technical reports and guaranteeing their confidentiality. 

The final version of this text was drafted to put an end to the restrictive interpretation of the JSA’s inspection duties and reflects the spirit of cooperation that the JSA was able to establish with the Ministry of the Interior. 

The Central Group was informed of the document at its meeting on 19 February 1999. 

II.2. C.SIS Inspection

In 1998, the JSA and the French Ministry of the Interior jointly drafted guidelines for C.SIS visits and inspections (see above). It has been decided that a new inspection is needed given the lapse of time since the last inspection and the fact that three new States have linked up to the system (Austria, Greece and Italy). The JSA decided to appoint a technical group, coordinated by the Luxembourg delegate. Experts from the national supervisory authorities met several times over the course of the year to prepare for this inspection, which will take place in the first half of 1999. The group drafted a checklist for the visit.

II.3. Technical groups and experts 

On 27 April 1998, the Chairman of the SIS Steering Committee and the PWP gave a progress report on the work carried out on renewing and improving the SIS (installing the SIRENE Phase II Network and the preparatory work on the SIS 1+ and the SIS II). As promised at that meeting, the JSA received in June 1998 various administrative and technical documents on the SIRENE Phase II Network and a CD-ROM on the C.SIS I +. 

The members of the JSA were sorry to note that, according to the chairman of the SIS Steering Committee, by the time the JSA had asked to be involved in the work, it was too late for them to amend the technical specifications to meet their requests. It was announced that they would however be borne in mind when the system was put into operation. 

They were also informed that security certification of the entire SIS II had not been requested to avoid delays and an increase in costs. It would be possible to ask for certification of each component at a later stage. 

On 20 November 1998, JSA experts attended a briefing session with representatives from IBM and experts from the Schengen working groups involved in the SIS II. The different options for the future architecture of the system had been presented, together with the evaluation criteria. The experts had therefore not received any technical information or information on security, or on the grounds for selecting three of the twelve architectures presented. It was therefore not possible at this stage to predict future choices. They were sorry to see that security aspects in particular had not yet been examined in detail by IBM. 

On the basis of a report on the meeting by its experts, the JSA asked for explanations regarding the selection of the three options, and for additional technical documents to be sent. 

The project coordinators responded to the JSA’s invitation and attended the meeting of 11 December 1998. The project coordinators gave an oral update on the SIS II preliminary study. They summed up the preparatory phases to the awarding of the contract for the preliminary study. The delegations were given detailed explanations on the substance of the studies submitted by IBM and the different solutions put forward. As for usurped identities, raised by the JSA and the subject of an opinion by the JSA, it was announced that a solution would be incorporated into the C.SIS I+. 

The JSA is now awaiting the technical specifications so that it can examine the criteria applied to the selection of the architectures and the security criteria. A decision was to be taken on the basis of a detailed study announced for 22 December 1998. The JSA had still not received this information at the end of February 1999. 

CHAPTER III: INFORMATION CAMPAIGN 

III.1. Information campaign on individuals’ rights vis-à-vis the SIS 

In 1997, the JSA decided to launch a Schengen-wide public information campaign entitled "The Schengen Information System concerns you". The campaign consisted of posters and leaflets on rights of access. The JSA had found that in practice it was difficult for the general public to exercise its rights, in particular its right to access and verify data. One of the reasons for this shortcoming was the fact that the general public was not sufficiently informed. 

The JSA therefore included the campaign in its work programme and budget, with the twofold aim of contributing to greater awareness of individuals’ rights enshrined in the Schengen Convention and to greater transparency and information about the Schengen Accords. 

The JSA prepared leaflets and posters to be displayed at the external borders of Schengen by the national authorities concerned. The leaflets and posters were presented at the annual meeting in Lisbon in June 1998. 

For practical reasons, the campaign could not be launched immediately. It began in some countries in December 1998/ start of 1999 (Spain, Greece, Germany, Portugal and Austria). The campaign is due to be launched in Belgium, Luxembourg and Italy, while the Netherlands had problems with funding the campaign. The competent authorities in France have refused to cooperate in any way with the French supervisory authority. 

It is worth remembering that at the start the Central Group gave its backing to the campaign and that extended to the printing and distribution of the leaflets. 

III.2. JSA Internet page

The JSA decided to create an Internet page in 1998, again with the aim of informing its citizens of their rights. The page will contain information on the JSA’s activities and on individuals’ rights. This tool should be finalized during the course of 1999.

III.3. Presentation of the annual report at the press conference in Brussels and the annual general meeting

The JSA presented the annual report at a press conference on 28 April 1998 at the Palais d`Egmont in Brussels. Journalists from international press agencies and two television stations were present. The report was sent beforehand to the Central Group.

The annual general meeting was held in Lisbon on 29 and 30 June 1998. In organizing this meeting, the JSA’s primary objective was to contribute to greater transparency in the way the Schengen Information System functioned, focusing in particular on individual rights. The JSA’s annual report was presented to the press. 

The JSA, in conjunction with the Portuguese Data Protection Agency, organized a symposium on "Individuals’ rights vis-à-vis police information systems, taking Schengen as an example"(30 June).

The speeches focused on the role of the JSA, Schengen’s integration into the European Union, cooperation between States, SIRENE information exchanges, the merger of police information systems, data protection and Europol and police information systems within the European Union. A member of the Portuguese government, the Deputy State Secretary at the Ministry of Internal Affairs (Armando Vara) attended and spoke at the opening session. Speeches were also delivered by the Chairman of the Central Group, the Director-General of JHA, the deputy-coordinator from Europol, the Chairman of the Portuguese Supervisory Authority and the Chairman of the JSA. There were additional contributions from the Director-General of the Portuguese Criminal Investigation Department, the Portuguese SIRENE Bureau coordinator and the coordinator for issues relating to the free movement of persons within Europe (Portugal). The meeting, which was open to the public, was published on the Internet and received widespread coverage in the papers and on television. Approximately 100 people attended the symposium, including high-ranking representatives of the Portuguese State (the Ombudsman, Secretary of State for the integration of minorities, Vice Attorney General, General Inspector of the Interior, Police Commissioners), representatives from the Central Group and from the Ministries of Justice of Italy, Austria, Norway and Sweden.

The Portuguese data protection agency published the minutes in Portuguese and in English. 

CHAPTER IV: Integration into the European Union and the JSA Acquis

At the request of the Central Group, the JSA drafted a list containing its acquis with a view to the integration of the Schengen acquis into the European Union. The task involved identifying all the decisions made within Schengen, which will form part of the rules that are to govern the way the JSA operates.

This list was drafted and sent directly by the JSA to the European Union following a meeting with the Director General of the Justice and Home Affairs Directorate on 14 February 1998. The list of documents that make up the JSA acquis, examined at the JSA meeting of 27 April 1998, was sent to the Council of the European Union (Presidency and DG JHA) on 18 May 1998. A copy was also sent to the Chairman of the Central Group. 

The list included the opinions delivered and the principles approved, which it considered to be part of the acquis. This included in particular opinions delivered when checks were made to determine whether the provisions of the Schengen Convention relating to the SIS were being correctly applied, or when assessing difficulties with implementing or interpreting certain provisions while operating the SIS, as well as principles confirming its independent status, which were approved by the Schengen authorities. The list of JSA decisions also includes the confidential report on the C.SIS inspection. 

As for the planned integration of the staff working for the Schengen Secretariat into the EU, the Joint Supervisory Authority called for this to be carried out in a balanced and fair manner. The JSA stressed that in the future it was important to not lose the know-how and experience gained over the years, which was deemed crucial for the work of the JSA. 

The JSA was informed at its meeting of 11 September 1998 that its opinions and recommendations would not be included in the Schengen acquis as such, but could be confirmed by way of a new decision. By February 1999 it had still not received any further official information.

According to the Protocol integrating the Schengen acquis into the European Union, provided for in the Treaty of Amsterdam, the acquis includes all decisions and declaration adopted by the Executive Committee and all acts adopted for the purpose of implementing the Convention by bodies which have been awarded decision-making powers by the Executive Committee. A number of these decisions relate to the JSA, in particular the recognition of its independent status, budget autonomy, annual budgets, and the JSA’s access to Schengen documents and information.

At its meeting of 11 December 1998, the JSA approved a note containing a reminder of the JSA’s institutional and operational acquis. This was forwarded to the Central Group and the Executive Committee (with a copy to Council), so that the acquis group could examine it at the start of 1999. The JSA awarded a mandate to its Chairman to outline the scope of this note at the Executive Committee meeting. As mentioned above, the Executive Committee, at its December 1998 meeting, entrusted the Central Group with the task. 

CHAPTER V: JSA Operations 

V.1. Meetings

Between March 1998 and March 1999, the JSA held seven plenary meetings. Two-day meetings were held on two occasions – one in Brussels, the other in Lisbon.

Technical meetings were held to prepare the inspection of the C.SIS and the JSA’s technicians met the persons in charge of drawing up the preliminary study on SIS II (Lisbon and Brussels). 

The Chairman of the JSA attended Central Group meetings (in Strasbourg and Ostend) as well as the Executive Committee meeting in Berlin. 

V.2. Election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman 

On 11 December 1998, the JSA unanimously re-elected Mr João Labescat as Chairman and Mr B de Schutter as Vice-Chairman.

V.3. JSA’s budget and the Secretariat’s assistance to the JSA 

The principle of a specific budgetary heading for the JSA is enshrined in a 1997 Executive Committee decision and is part of the acquis for the purpose of Schengen’s integration into the European Union.

The JSA adopted its draft budget at its meeting of 27 April 1998. It included in the budget an item to increase the Secretariat’s assistance to the JSA by hiring an additional member of staff on a full-time basis. Stringency was the watchword, the aim being to control expenditure. 

The JSA’s budget and the Secretariat’s assistance to the JSA are essential for it to fulfil its duties and be effective in its work. The decision-making bodies have denied the JSA the budgetary and human resources it requires to function independently. 

At its meeting in Lisbon on 29 June 1998, the JSA noted that its request for the 1999 budget had been forwarded to the relevant working group, which had placed the item on the agenda for the Central Group, informing it of the consequences that could arise as a result of Schengen’s possible integration into the Council of the European Union Secretariat in 1999. The JSA is of the opinion that the JSA budget should be approved without prejudice to the budgetary implications that such integration could have, in other words the need to transfer certain costs currently charged to the general budget. 

Despite the fact that at a meeting on 5 November 1998 between the JSA Presidency and the German Presidency of Schengen the latter had undertaken to support this request, the JSA learnt in December 1998 that the Central Group had approved the JSA budget for 1999 with the exception of the item on increasing the Secretariat’s assistance. It was therefore agreed that the Chairman of the JSA should attend the Executive Committee meeting on 16 December 1998 in Berlin to defend the JSA’s position. The Chairman explained inter alia the reasons why the JSA wanted an additional budget to increase the amount of support it received from the Secretariat. It also outlined the note from the JSA assessing the overall operating costs, without taking into account the advantageous economies of scale produced by holding Schengen meetings at the Benelux premises (institutional and operational acquis, see above). The Ministers refused the additional budget. 

The budget request was rejected despite the fact that it amounted to less than 1% of the overall budget. If one compares the level of Secretarial support which the JSA received in 1997 and 1998, it can be seen that the support has fallen. Although there is a Secretariat of 70 members of staff, the JSA receives assistance from just one person (only 1/5 of his overall work), who assists other working groups at the same time.

Unfortunately, the Executive Committee in its decisions did not take account of the tasks attributed to the JSA by way of the Convention. 

The JSA, worried by this blatant lack of support from Schengen’s decision-making bodies, continues to call for the human, technical and financial resources it requires to correctly fulfil its tasks both today and in its future institutional set-up.

V.4. Rules of Procedure

The JSA amended its Rules of Procedure on 27 April 1998 to include the JSA’s own budget. A new Article 11 "the Budget" was added to the Rules of Procedure (see SCH/Aut-cont (95) 25 rev 6). The article enshrines the principle of an independent budgetary heading approved by the Executive Committee, the amount of which should be commensurate with the annual tasks of the JSA.

SECTION 3: JSA’s relations with Schengen and non-Schengen bodies

1. With the European Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties

As long ago as 1997, the JSA chairman in office contacted the Presidency of the European Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties to suggest presenting the JSA’s annual report to the committee. This offer was renewed in 1998. The JSA has received no response.

Several copies of the annual report were sent to the parliamentary committee in question.

2. With the Central Group and the Executive Committee 

A JSA delegation was invited by the Schengen Presidency to the Central Group meeting in Strasbourg on 4 March 1998. A visit of the C.SIS was organized for the occasion. The JSA were able to note the progress made in upgrading the SIS and work on implementing the SIRENE Phase II Network at the Strasbourg meeting. 

The Chairman of the JSA thanked the Chairman of the Central Group for the invitation in his letter of 12 March 1998, addressed to the Central Group (SCH/Aut-cont/Lettre (98) 4). This was the first time the JSA had met with the Central Group in full. The JSA was able to express its point of view on the role the JSA planned to play in relation with the other Schengen bodies, in particular regarding the future of the SIS.

The Central Group agreed to involve the JSA in the preliminary study on the SIRENE Phase II Network and the SIS I +. This would enable the JSA to ensure that the technical specifications necessary for the JSA to carry out its checks pursuant to the Convention were duly taken into consideration for the future. 

The JSA confirmed that it would continue, as it had done in the past, to send its opinions and decisions to the Presidency of the Central Group as soon as they had been approved. JSA minutes, once approved, would also be made available to the Central Group.

The Central Group and the technical groups, for their part, agreed to provide the JSA with as much documentation as possible, in particular by drafting a list of technical documents that had been approved by the working groups and which could be of interest to the JSA.

On 27 April 1998, the JSA invited the Central Group troika to its meeting. The Chairman, alone, was able to attend. 

The Chairman of the Central Group confirmed that he set great store by the JSA’s activities, that the authority’s information campaign had its full support and that he would ensure that the opinions and recommendations of the JSA were studied by the relevant working groups. As for the follow-up to the recommendations delivered by the JSA following the inspection in 1996, the JSA would soon receive a draft reply that the Central Group had approved on 20 April 1998. The Central Group had also noted the JSA’s request for extra assistance, which he would support, and the PAC would consider this matter at its next meeting. 

At the request of the Central Group Presidency, the Chairman attended the "SIS Workshop" on 24 June 1998 in Ostend. He was therefore able to add to the information given by the Chairman of the SIS Steering Committee to the CEECs regarding the personal data protection requirements laid down in the Convention and the existence of independent national supervisory authorities. 

The Chairman of the JSA attended the Executive Committee meeting in Berlin (16.12.98). He was thus able to present the different documents to the Ministers (request for an additional JSA budget to increase the amount of support it currently received from the Secretariat and the document on the JSA’s organizational acquis). As mentioned above, the first request was turned down while the JSA’s organizational acquis, which the JSA had asked to be appraised and sent to the EU "Schengen acquis group", was referred back to the Central Group.

3. Permanent Standing Committee on the application of the Schengen Convention 

The Executive Committee has set up a visiting committee to assess whether the Convention is being correctly implemented by the Schengen States. Germany is the first country to be visited by the committee. One of the survey teams appointed for this purpose will carry out various checks at the German SIRENE Bureau and on the SIS terminals. The JSA reminded the Central Group of the tasks conferred upon the JSA by way of the Convention, and asked as a result to be involved in the checks. In response, the Chairman of the JSA was invited to attend the meeting between the SIS survey team and the German Supervisory Authority. 

At its meeting of 12 February 1999, the JSA agreed further pressure should be applied on the Presidency of the Central Group with the aim of allowing the representatives of the German data protection authority to accompany the Standing Committee throughout the whole of its visit. The checks were due to be carried out on aspects covered by Article 126 et seq. of the Convention, which were clearly the responsibility of the national supervisory authority. The Central Group turned down this request at its meeting of 19 February 1999. 

In the light of the Central Group’s refusal, the JSA protested formally to the Chairman of the Executive Committee, drawing his attention to the fact that ad-hoc investigative powers in the area of data protection have been conferred upon a special committee forgetting that the Convention has its own mechanism for guaranteeing such principles. Checks and investigations are to be carried out, without taking into consideration the very bodies that are responsible for such tasks. These checks cannot be seen as a sum of the individual parts, they form a whole that includes the N.SIS, the C.SIS and the SIRENE Bureaux.

The JSA stressed how strange it would be if the JSA and the national data protection agencies, all independent bodies, were to be left out of an inspection of personal files and information, while delegations that did not yet participate in the system and consequently did not have data in the system were able to have access to personal information. 

Section 4: reactions of the Schengen authorities to the JSA’s annual report

In 1998, the Central Group responded to the JSA by way of a report, indicating progress made within the working groups in implementing the JSA’s opinions or, in certain cases, indicating what follow-up had been given. It emerged from this progress report that many of the JSA’s opinions gave rise to technical problems, which could not be overcome or at least not until the SIS had been renewed. The JSA did not wish to embark upon a pointless controversy and therefore simply acknowledged the report.

The reply, which had been drafted by the Belgian Presidency (1^st half of 1998), was sent to the JSA a year after the JSA presented its first report to the Schengen decision-making bodies - the reply obviously took far too long. Apparently, certain recommendations concerning the C.SIS inspection in October 1996 were discussed by the SIS Steering Committee on 22 July 1997 and the JSA was informed of this only nine months later. The JSA noted that a number of the recommendations on the JSA’s list of recommendations had not been acted on/implemented on account of technical/financial problems (despite the fact that, according to the information available, these recommendations had been taken into account in the planned system development).

The JSA believes that it should be informed in good time of the evaluation stage reached by its Schengen partners and that it should not have to wait a year before being notified of decisions concerning its proposals. Delays like this are irreconcilable with the JSA’s supervisory function.

Moreover, the JSA found it strange that the Central Group intended to emulate the idea of an annual reply used by the Council of Europe. The Schengen Information System functions 24 hours/day, 365 days/year and the JSA has supervisory powers over the system. The JSA’s function is not to hold hearings, it is an authority.

The JSA felt that decisions relating to the authority’s remit should be communicated as soon as the relevant Schengen groups adopted them.

The Chairman of the JSA made this position clear to the Central Group at the Bonn meeting of 5 November.

On 11 December 1998, the JSA acknowledged the SIS Steering Committee’s report which commented on the second annual report of the JSA (SCH/OR-SIS (98) 133 rev 2)(March 1997 to March 1998). The Central Group had approved this report on 24 November 1998.

The JSA noted that the report made several, in what was their view, false statements. The SIS Steering Committee stated that the JSA was not responsible for harmonizing procedures, yet that power is clearly attributed to the JSA by way of Article 115 (3) of the Convention. The SIS Steering Committee seems to feel that it is their duty.

Moreover, the response said that the Convention did not lay down any obligation to implement the JSA’s recommendations, and refused to give the JSA its own user account for the sole purpose of auditing the computer system, which ran counter to the provisions of Article 115 (2). It is in fact essential that this function exist when carrying out checks on a system such as the SIS, as the idea of independent controls requires the inspector to be independent of the party being inspected.

The participants approved a response that was sent to the Central Group on 3 February 1999 (SCH/Aut-cont-Lettre (98) 1).

The response reiterated the fact the JSA found it unacceptable that it received the response to its annual report 12 months after its publication, as was the case with the 1996 report, or 8 months after its publication as was the case with the 1997 report.

Section 5: the future of the JSA in its new institutional framework

The Treaty of Amsterdam will enter into force in approximately two months time. Schengen’s institutional framework will change for the better with a strengthening of citizens’ rights, the democratic checks of the European Parliament and the effective legal safeguards of the European Court of Justice. This is a major step for European citizenship and joint security.

Within the Union, changes to the way in which police information systems work and methods of independent supervision operate are still under discussion.

The JSA, on request, submitted what it considered to be its acquis to the European Union and to the Central Group. Likewise, it informed the authorities in question of its work programme for the immediate term, including a budget estimate, secretariat requirements and an estimate of the number of meetings per year.

As for the acquis, most of the questions relating to the way the JSA operates are directly covered by the Schengen Convention (i.e. its tasks and powers) or are governed by Executive Committee decisions (e.g. independent budget, budget commensurate with its tasks, access to documents and information).

The SIS’s integration into the Community structure should not prevent the JSA from continuing to independently monitor the system and its activities should not be affected by integration. According to a representative from the JHA DG (EU), who attended a JSA meeting, a smooth transition would be guaranteed.

It is worth remembering that information systems in Europe will undergo major changes over the forthcoming year. Implementation of the Europol and Customs Conventions and the Eurodac system are imminent, it is therefore extremely important that the right formula be found to enable all these systems to function in harmony, with independent and effective supervision.

The legislative framework for data protection is undergoing far-reaching changes at the moment throughout the European Union.

Legislative harmonization within Europe and the strengthening of cooperation between national supervisory authorities, and between them and the EU, will undoubtedly lead to greater effectiveness in the way the systems function and a more consistent mechanism for safeguarding individuals’ rights.

DECLARATION OF THE JSA OBSERVER STATES

Having observer status in the JSA, the Nordic countries share the concerns of the full members as expressed in the annual report. They also share the main viewpoints expressed in the opinions referred. Among other things, it is of greatest importance that the advice and opinions given is observed and respected by the central as well as the national bodies in the Schengen system.

The presence of the Nordic national data and privacy protection commissions in the JSA is of utmost importance in the efforts aiming at ensuring common, public acceptance and support of the important work done in accordance with the Schengen Convention. The Nordic observers are of the opinion that the JSA need to have its resources strengthned in the future and hope that the integration in EU will enable this, without compromising the JSA status as an independent authority.