On discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the- European Public Prosecutors Office for the financial year 2024

OPINION

The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs calls on the Committee on Budgetary Control, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following into its motion for a resolution:

1.Notes a consequential increase in the caseload of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) reaching 2 666 active investigations in 2024, out of which almost 30% carried a cross-border dimension and the achievement of a substantial increase indictment rates (47%) and asset freezes obtained by European Delegated Prosecutors;

2. Notes that in 2024 the EPPO processed 6 547 crime reports which represents an increase of 56 % compared with 2023 and is mainly driven by a significant rise in reports from private parties (up by 85 %) and national authorities (up by 12 %) and demonstrates improved detection of fraud affecting the Union’s financial interests in participating Member States and greater public awareness of the EPPO’s role;

3. Points to the increasing number of cases related to cross-border VAT fraud, which account for over half of estimated damage in EPPO cases; notes furthermore a substantial increase of investigations relating to the implementation of funding of NextGenerationEU (25% increase);

4. Emphasizes that vast majority of the investigations into fraud and other crimes against the EU budget continue to be hampered by divergent national legislation and uneven enforcement efforts by the Member States;

5. Stresses that its workload was considerably underestimated in the initial budgetary framework, leaving the EPPO structurally underfunded and understaffed; underlines that the increasing volume of investigations cannot be managed without adequate staffing and proper resources in order to ensure that funding is accompanied by stronger accountability mechanisms and periodic performance reviews to guarantee efficient use of EU taxpayers’ money; calls on the Commission to engage with EPPO and provide an updated assessment of EPPO needs in view of the next multiannual financial framework, which should also take into account the extension of the EPPO’s territorial competence to Sweden and Poland; recalls that EPPO is one of the few EU bodies bringing resources for the EU budget in the context of the protection of the EU's financial interests;

6. Emphasises that the review of the legislative framework governing Europol, Eurojust, OLAF and EPPO should offer opportunities to maximise the efficiency in pursuing common objectives in particular in the fight against fraud, financial crime, corruption and other criminal damage to the EU's financial interest, while avoiding duplication of efforts; highlights that closer operational cooperation and shared analytical capacities with other EU agencies such as Europol, Eurojust and OLAF could generate important economies of scale and improve overall efficiency; calls on the EPPO to establish solid cooperation with other agencies pursuing shared objectives and offering high potential of complementarity; points in this regard in particular to the newly established Anti-Money Laundering Authority (AMLA) and the future European Customs Authority; stresses that effective detection of fraud and financial crime depends on genuine data-driven cooperation and information-sharing among all actors within the EU’s anti-fraud architecture; stresses that this cooperation needs to operate in full compliance with data protection rules and procedural safeguards;

7. Recalls the commitment of the Commission to accelerate the review of the EPPO's mandate and expects such review to lead an extension of its competence; emphasizes its repeated calls to expand the EPPO's jurisdiction to other areas of the serious crime, such as EU sanctions violation; but stresses that such an expansion must be preceded by a full impact assessment and sufficient budgetary and human resources to ensure operational effectiveness;

8. Acknowledges the need for EPPO to develop, with appropriate resources, autonomous digital systems to deal with increasingly complex cross-border financial crimes, with enhanced sophistication involving emerging digital technologies; expresses concern about delays in the development of its Case Management System; notes the important amount of data EPPO collects during investigations in particular in complex financial, organized crime and money-laundering cases and which remains under-utilized due to the lack of internal analytical capacity; welcomes the adoption of the EPPO cyber-security strategy and cyber-security framework and calls for its swift and comprehensive implementation; encourages the EPPO to prioritise interoperability and data security in its digital transformation, ensuring compatibility with Europol and Eurojust systems while protecting fundamental rights;

9. Urges the Member States that have not yet joined the EPPO to do so without delay, in order to ensure a truly pan-European system of criminal justice capable of protecting the Union’s financial interests and responding effectively to cross-border organised crime and corruption; stresses that the fragmentation resulting from non-participation undermines the coherence and efficiency of the EU’s judicial architecture, and that full participation by all Member States would significantly strengthen the Union’s capacity to detect, investigate and prosecute serious offences affecting the EU budget; recalls that participation in the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) represents a cornerstone of the Union’s common judicial and anti-fraud architecture, ensuring the effective protection of the EU’s financial interests and the integrity of its institutions; calls for participation in EPPO to be required of all future Member States as part of the EU accession process, in order to ensure a uniform level of accountability, judicial cooperation and enforcement across the Union;

10. Stresses the need for a continuous and structured dialogue with the Member States already participating in the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) in order to address the practical challenges they face in combating breaches of the rule of law and corruption; calls on the European Commission to support these Member States in the concrete implementation of the recommendations contained in the annual Rule of Law Reports and to ensure that the lessons learned within the EPPO framework contribute to a stronger and more coherent Union-wide approach to judicial integrity and accountability.

ANNEX: DECLARATION OF INPUT

Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur for opinion declares that she included in her opinion input on matters pertaining to the subject of the file that she received, in the preparation of the opinion, prior to the adoption thereof in committee, from the following interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register, or from the following representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies:

The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur for opinion.

INFORMATION ON ADOPTION BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION