EU Police Cooperation and Cross-Border Law Enforcement

EU Police Cooperation and Cross-Border Law Enforcement

Introduction

Police cooperation is an essential component of the European Union’s Area of Freedom, Security and Justice. It responds to a practical reality of modern criminal activity: offenders, criminal organisations, financial transactions, digital evidence, and victims do not necessarily remain within the territory of one state. A criminal network may recruit victims in one Member State, transport them through another, coordinate its activities online from a third, and transfer the proceeds of crime to accounts in several jurisdictions.

National police forces, however, remain organised under national law and exercise their powers primarily within their own territories. A police officer in one Member State cannot ordinarily exercise the coercive powers of that office in another simply because an investigation has a European dimension. Effective cross-border law enforcement therefore requires legal arrangements that enable national authorities to exchange information, coordinate operations, conduct certain activities across borders, and obtain support from specialised European agencies.

The EU has developed a framework combining operational cooperation, common information systems, joint investigative arrangements, and institutional support. Its central participants include national police and other competent law-enforcement authorities, the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol), the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training (CEPOL), and the European Commission. The Schengen framework provides additional mechanisms for cooperation in an area where internal border controls have largely been removed.

This system does not create a single European police force. Europol cannot independently arrest suspects, conduct coercive investigations, or command national police units. Operational responsibility remains with Member States. European institutions and agencies provide the legal, analytical, technical, and organisational infrastructure through which national authorities can act more effectively together.

The Treaty foundation is principally found in Articles 87–89 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). These provisions address police cooperation, information exchange, training, operational cooperation, and the conditions under which authorities of one Member State may operate in another.

The subject is closely connected with judicial cooperation in criminal matters, but the two should be distinguished. Judicial cooperation concerns matters such as the European Arrest Warrant, recognition of criminal judgments, and the European Investigation Order. Police cooperation focuses more directly on the prevention, detection, and investigation of crime, the exchange of intelligence, operational coordination, and the practical activities of law-enforcement authorities.

1. Constitutional and Legal Foundations of EU Police Cooperation

1.1 Article 87 TFEU: Police cooperation

Article 87 TFEU establishes the principal legal basis for police cooperation involving all competent authorities of Member States, including police, customs, and other specialised law-enforcement services in relation to the prevention, detection, and investigation of criminal offences.

Article 87(1) provides for police cooperation involving all competent authorities of Member States. Article 87(2) authorises the European Parliament and the Council, acting through the ordinary legislative procedure, to establish measures concerning:

• The collection, storage, processing, analysis, and exchange of relevant information.
• Support for the training of staff and cooperation concerning the exchange of staff, equipment, and research in criminalistics.
• Common investigative techniques in relation to the detection of serious forms of organised crime.

Article 87(3) provides a special legislative procedure for measures concerning operational cooperation between competent authorities. The Council acts unanimously after consulting the European Parliament.

This distinction is constitutionally important. The EU has broader legislative possibilities concerning information exchange and institutional support, but measures involving the operational activities of national law-enforcement authorities are subject to a more demanding decision-making procedure.

1.2 Article 88 TFEU: Europol

Article 88 establishes the Treaty basis for Europol. It provides that the agency’s mission is to support and strengthen action by Member States’ police authorities and other law-enforcement services, as well as their mutual cooperation in preventing and combating serious crime affecting two or more Member States, terrorism, and forms of crime affecting a common interest covered by a Union policy.

The Treaty also limits Europol’s operational authority. Any operational action by Europol must be carried out in liaison and agreement with the authorities of the Member State or states whose territory is concerned. The application of coercive measures remains the exclusive responsibility of the competent national authorities.

This provision prevents the development of Europol into an autonomous European police force.

1.3 Article 89 TFEU: Cross-border operational cooperation

Article 89 provides the legal basis for establishing conditions and limitations under which competent authorities of one Member State may operate within the territory of another Member State in liaison and agreement with that state’s authorities.

The provision recognises that certain investigations require more than the exchange of information. Surveillance, urgent interventions, and coordinated operations may require officers to cross national borders or work alongside officers from another jurisdiction.

Such activities must nevertheless respect the territorial sovereignty and national law of the state in which they take place.

The three Treaty provisions can be consulted in the official consolidated Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

1.4 The relationship with the Schengen framework

The Schengen system is particularly important for police cooperation. The removal of routine internal border controls created a need for compensatory security arrangements, including stronger police cooperation, information exchange, and surveillance mechanisms.

The Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement of 1990 contains provisions on cross-border police assistance, surveillance, and hot pursuit. These arrangements were subsequently incorporated into the EU legal framework.

The absence of routine internal border checks does not remove national police powers or create unrestricted authority for officers to act throughout the Schengen Area. It makes cooperation mechanisms more important because national authorities must be able to respond to criminal activity that moves rapidly between jurisdictions.

The European Commission’s overview of law-enforcement cooperation explains the principal operational and information-sharing mechanisms used by Member States. Migration and Home Affairs+1

2. The Institutional Structure of European Police Cooperation

EU police cooperation is based on a network of national authorities and specialised European bodies. Their functions overlap in practice, but their legal powers are distinct.

2.1 National police and law-enforcement authorities

National authorities remain the principal operational actors. Each Member State determines the organisation, powers, and internal responsibilities of its police forces and other competent services, subject to applicable EU and international obligations.

Depending on national arrangements, cross-border cooperation may involve:

• National police forces and specialised criminal investigation units.
• Border guards.
• Customs authorities.
• Financial intelligence and anti-money-laundering authorities.
• Cybercrime and digital forensic units.
• Authorities responsible for combating terrorism and organised crime.
• Other specialised services designated under national law.

The authority competent to exchange information or participate in an operation may differ from the authority empowered to arrest a suspect, search premises, seize property, or conduct surveillance. Cooperation must therefore respect both the EU framework and the allocation of powers under domestic law.

2.2 Europol

The Europol is the principal EU agency supporting police cooperation. Based in The Hague, it provides analytical, technical, operational, and coordination support to national authorities.

Its work focuses on serious and organised crime, terrorism, cybercrime, migrant smuggling, trafficking in human beings, drug trafficking, financial crime, and other threats within its legal mandate.

Europol’s principal functions include facilitating information exchange, analysing criminal intelligence, identifying connections between investigations, preparing threat assessments, supporting joint investigation teams, and assisting national authorities in coordinated operations.

The agency also maintains specialised information systems and analytical capabilities through which information supplied by competent authorities can be compared, linked, and assessed.

Europol is not a European FBI. It has no general autonomous power to arrest suspects, conduct coercive investigative measures, or independently direct police operations. Its staff may provide operational support at the request of national authorities, but investigative measures must be carried out by competent national authorities under the applicable legal rules.

This limitation is expressly reflected in the Europol Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2016/794, as amended, including by Regulation (EU) 2022/991. Europol+2

2.3 CEPOL: Training and professional cooperation

The CEPOL is the EU agency responsible for developing, implementing, and coordinating training for law-enforcement officials.

Its work supports a shared professional understanding of cross-border cooperation. Officers may need to understand unfamiliar national procedures, common investigative techniques, information-sharing systems, human rights requirements, and the practical operation of EU legal instruments.

CEPOL’s training activities cover serious and organised crime, terrorism, cybercrime, financial investigations, leadership, cooperation between authorities, and emerging security threats.

Its role is not to conduct criminal investigations or exercise police powers. It strengthens the ability of national authorities to cooperate effectively through education, professional development, and the exchange of expertise.

CEPOL’s current strategic priorities are set out in its 2023–2027 strategy and training programme. Migration and Home Affairs+1

2.4 The European Commission and EU-LISA

The European Commission develops policy, proposes legislation, supports implementation, and monitors the application of EU law. It also coordinates initiatives designed to improve information exchange and operational cooperation.

The European Union Agency for the Operational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, known as eu-LISA, manages operational aspects of specified large-scale EU information systems. These include systems relevant to border management, migration, and security.

The distinction between policy coordination and operational policing is important. The Commission and EU agencies provide the institutional and technological infrastructure for cooperation, while national authorities remain responsible for police action.

2.5 Eurojust and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office

Although Eurojust and the EPPO belong principally to the field of judicial cooperation, their work is closely connected with police operations.

Eurojust supports coordination between national prosecutors and judicial authorities, including in complex cross-border investigations. It may help resolve conflicts of jurisdiction and facilitate the establishment of joint investigation teams.

The EPPO investigates and prosecutes offences affecting the financial interests of the EU within its defined competence. It relies on cooperation with national investigative authorities and may require police assistance in gathering evidence, tracing assets, and carrying out investigative measures.

The distinction remains that Europol supports police cooperation and criminal intelligence, Eurojust supports judicial coordination, and the EPPO exercises defined prosecutorial powers. Their activities are complementary, not interchangeable.

3. Operational Police Cooperation Across Borders

Information exchange is only one part of police cooperation. In some cases, authorities need to coordinate physical operations, conduct surveillance across a border, or respond immediately when a suspect crosses into another state.

EU and Schengen rules provide mechanisms for these activities, but they do not confer unrestricted extraterritorial police powers.

3.1 Cross-border surveillance

Cross-border surveillance allows officers conducting an investigation in one state to continue observing a person into another state under prescribed conditions.

The mechanism is particularly relevant where a suspect is being monitored in connection with serious criminal activity and crosses an internal border during the surveillance operation.

Article 40 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement provides the traditional legal framework for cross-border surveillance. It establishes conditions concerning the nature of the investigation, notification of the competent authorities, the conduct of surveillance, and the powers of officers operating in the territory of another state.

In general, officers must obtain prior authorisation or comply with the applicable notification procedure. Urgent circumstances may permit surveillance to continue temporarily across the border, but the competent authority of the state entered must be informed without delay.

Foreign officers must respect the law of the state in which surveillance takes place and follow the instructions of its competent authorities. They do not acquire general powers of arrest or coercion merely because surveillance has been authorised.

The legal basis and practical conditions must be checked against the applicable Schengen rules and national implementing legislation.

3.2 Hot pursuit

Hot pursuit is a mechanism allowing officers pursuing a person in connection with specified serious offences to continue the pursuit across an internal border, subject to the conditions established by the Schengen framework and national law.

Article 41 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement provides for this possibility. It is intended for situations in which delay in obtaining ordinary authorisation could allow a suspect to escape.

The mechanism is subject to important restrictions. The offences covered, territorial conditions, duration, and powers of pursuing officers are determined by the applicable rules and any declarations or arrangements made by the states concerned.

Depending on the applicable national arrangements, officers may be required to contact the competent authorities of the state entered, terminate the pursuit when instructed, and hand the person over to local authorities.

Hot pursuit does not create a general right for foreign officers to exercise their domestic police powers abroad. It is a limited exception designed to prevent a border from immediately frustrating a lawful pursuit.

3.3 Joint patrols and joint operations

Member States may organise joint patrols and other joint law-enforcement operations. These can be particularly useful in border regions, major public events, transport hubs, and areas affected by organised criminal activity.

Officers from different states may work together, exchange information in real time, and coordinate responses to incidents. Their respective powers remain governed by the applicable legal arrangements and national law.

Council Recommendation (EU) 2022/915 sets out standards for operational law-enforcement cooperation. It addresses urgent cross-border interventions, surveillance, joint operations, communication, and the work of Police and Customs Cooperation Centres.

Although a Council recommendation does not have the same binding legal status as a regulation or directive, it provides an important common operational framework and encourages consistent national practice.

3.4 Police and Customs Cooperation Centres

Police and Customs Cooperation Centres bring together representatives of authorities from neighbouring states to facilitate practical cooperation.

They are particularly valuable in border regions where authorities frequently deal with cross-border movement, vehicle crime, trafficking, smuggling, and other offences.

These centres can support information exchange, coordinate operational contacts, assist with requests, and improve understanding of neighbouring countries’ procedures. They do not replace national command structures or the competent judicial authorities.

The Commission reports that such centres operate across the Schengen area and in cooperation with countries in the wider European region. Migration and Home Affairs+1

3.5 Joint Investigation Teams

A Joint Investigation Team (JIT) is a formal arrangement through which competent authorities from two or more states conduct a specific criminal investigation together.

JITs are particularly useful where criminal conduct involves several countries and separate national investigations would create unnecessary delays or duplication.

A team may exchange information directly, coordinate investigative measures, and work together within the legal framework established by the participating states. Officers from one state may be authorised to participate in investigative activities in another, subject to the relevant national rules and the terms of the JIT agreement.

Europol and Eurojust may support JITs through analytical, logistical, legal, and coordination assistance.

The legal framework is based principally on Article 13 of the 2000 Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters between EU Member States and Framework Decision 2002/465/JHA on joint investigation teams.

The distinction between a JIT and an ordinary information exchange is significant: a JIT establishes a structured investigative arrangement for a particular case rather than relying solely on separate requests between national authorities.

4. Information Exchange and the Schengen Information System

Effective police cooperation depends on the timely availability of reliable information. A national authority may need to know whether a person is wanted elsewhere, whether a vehicle has been reported stolen, or whether an object is connected with a criminal investigation.

The EU has developed several systems to facilitate such exchanges. The most important operational instrument in the Schengen framework is the Schengen Information System.

4.1 The Schengen Information System

The Schengen Information System (SIS) is a large-scale information system through which competent national authorities enter and consult alerts concerning specified persons and objects.

Its legal framework in the field of police and judicial cooperation is Regulation (EU) 2018/1862. Separate regulations govern its use for border checks and return-related purposes.

SIS enables authorised authorities to identify people and objects during lawful checks and to receive instructions about the action to be taken when an alert produces a match.

Police-related alert categories include:

• Persons wanted for arrest for surrender or extradition.
• Missing persons, including children requiring protection.
• Persons sought to assist with judicial procedures.
• Persons and objects subject to discreet, inquiry, or specific checks.
• Unknown wanted persons identified through certain biometric data.
• Objects sought for seizure or use as evidence in criminal proceedings.

The system also contains alerts relevant to border and immigration authorities, including return decisions and refusals of entry or stay.

SIS is not a general database in which authorities may freely enter any information they consider useful. Alerts must fall within legally defined categories and satisfy the applicable conditions.

The renewed SIS became operational in March 2023, introducing additional alert categories and improved capabilities, including enhanced biometric functions. EUR-Lex+2

4.2 SIRENE Bureaux

The SIS alert is not always sufficient to explain the circumstances of a case or coordinate the action required. Additional information may need to be exchanged between national authorities.

Each country using SIS has a national SIRENE Bureau. SIRENE stands for Supplementary Information Request at the National Entries.

These bureaux act as national contact points for supplementary information relating to SIS alerts. They facilitate communication, verify relevant details, and coordinate the practical steps that may follow when an alert is identified.

For example, where a person wanted for arrest is located in another Member State, the SIRENE Bureau may facilitate the exchange of information necessary for the competent authorities to proceed under the applicable surrender arrangements.

SIRENE cooperation is therefore an essential operational complement to the information stored in SIS.

4.3 Access, accuracy, and retention

SIS access is restricted to authorised national authorities acting within their legal responsibilities. The system must be used only for the purposes permitted by the relevant legislation.

Information must be accurate, relevant, and proportionate. Alerts cannot be retained indefinitely merely because they have once been entered. The issuing state must review them within the prescribed periods and delete them when their purpose has been achieved or the legal basis for retention no longer exists.

Individuals have rights concerning personal data held in SIS, including rights of access, rectification, and erasure where the legal conditions are satisfied. They may also seek judicial or administrative remedies and, where appropriate, compensation.

The Commission’s SIS information and data-rights pages explain the system’s alert categories, national contact points, and individual safeguards. Migration and Home Affairs+1

5. The Prüm Framework and Automated Police Information Exchange

The Prüm framework provides another important mechanism for cross-border police cooperation. It enables participating national authorities to search certain categories of data held in other Member States’ databases through automated procedures.

The original framework was established through the Prüm Treaty of 2005 and subsequently incorporated into EU law through Council Decisions 2008/615/JHA and 2008/616/JHA.

Its central purpose is to make it possible for national authorities to determine whether relevant information exists in another participating state’s database without requiring a conventional request for every initial search.

5.1 The original Prüm system

The original framework focused principally on automated searches involving:

• DNA profiles.
• Fingerprint data.
• Certain vehicle registration data.

The system generally follows a two-stage process. An authority conducts an automated search to determine whether a corresponding record exists in another national database. If a match is identified, further personal and case-related information must be obtained through the applicable legal and administrative procedures.

A match is therefore an investigative lead, not proof that a person has committed an offence. A DNA or fingerprint match must be assessed in its evidential context, including the possibility of contamination, mistaken identification, or an innocent explanation for the presence of biological material.

5.2 Prüm II: Regulation (EU) 2024/982

The framework was modernised by Regulation (EU) 2024/982, known as the Prüm II Regulation.

Prüm II expands and improves automated information exchange. Its framework covers searches involving DNA profiles, dactyloscopic data, certain vehicle registration data, facial images, and police records. It also establishes rules for the exchange of core data following a confirmed biometric match.

The Regulation introduces a more centralised technical architecture through a router and the European Police Records Index System (EPRIS). The aim is to simplify connections between national systems and improve the speed and reliability of searches.

The system remains subject to safeguards concerning fundamental rights, privacy, and personal data. Access and use must be connected with the purposes authorised by the Regulation, and the exchange of additional information must follow the prescribed procedures.

Prüm II is particularly relevant to investigations involving organised crime, terrorism, cross-border vehicle theft, and unidentified perpetrators of serious offences.

It should not be confused with a single European criminal database containing every citizen’s biometric or police information. The framework enables defined searches and exchanges between national systems under specific legal conditions.

The Regulation entered into force in April 2024 and is directly applicable, although its operational implementation involves technical measures and transitional arrangements. The official text is available through Regulation (EU) 2024/982. EUR-Lex+2

6. Europol’s Information and Analytical Systems

Europol’s practical contribution depends heavily on its ability to process and analyse information supplied by competent authorities.

National investigations may produce large volumes of data that are difficult to assess separately. Information about the same criminal network may be held by different police forces, financial intelligence units, customs authorities, and judicial bodies. Europol can help identify connections that might otherwise remain unnoticed.

6.1 Europol’s information-processing role

Under Regulation (EU) 2016/794, Europol may process information for the purposes of supporting Member States in preventing and combating crime within its mandate.

Its analytical work may involve identifying links between suspects, criminal groups, financial transactions, communication patterns, locations, and investigative cases.

Europol can provide analytical reports, operational assessments, technical assistance, and intelligence products to national authorities. It can also facilitate the exchange of information between Member States and relevant international partners, subject to the applicable legal rules.

The agency’s databases and systems are not intended to replace national criminal records or national investigative files. They support cooperation by enabling competent authorities to compare and analyse information across borders.

6.2 The European Criminal Records Information System

The European Criminal Records Information System (ECRIS) facilitates the exchange of information on criminal convictions between Member States.

It is principally a judicial cooperation mechanism rather than a general police intelligence database. Nevertheless, it is relevant to law enforcement because information about previous convictions may be important in criminal proceedings and certain lawful checks.

The original ECRIS system was established by Framework Decision 2009/315/JHA and Council Decision 2009/316/JHA. Directive (EU) 2019/884 amended the framework, including arrangements for exchanging information on third-country nationals convicted in Member States through ECRIS-TCN.

ECRIS should be distinguished from SIS and Europol systems. It concerns criminal conviction information and operates through national central authorities, whereas SIS contains defined alerts and Europol supports intelligence analysis and police cooperation.

6.3 The role of interoperability

The EU has also developed an interoperability framework for certain large-scale information systems used in border management, migration, and security.

Regulations (EU) 2019/817 and 2019/818 establish arrangements intended to improve the ability of authorised authorities to search and compare information held in different EU systems.

The framework includes technical components such as a European Search Portal, a shared Biometric Matching Service, and a Common Identity Repository, subject to the scope and conditions of the relevant legislation.

Interoperability is not equivalent to unrestricted access. The fact that systems are technically connected does not mean that every authority can consult every category of data. Access remains governed by the legal purpose, the authority’s competence, and the applicable safeguards.

The legal challenge is to improve the ability to identify relevant information without creating an indiscriminate surveillance infrastructure.

7. Passenger Information and Travel Data

Travel information can be important in investigations involving terrorism, trafficking, organised crime, and other serious offences. The EU has therefore established rules for the processing and exchange of passenger information.

Two concepts must be distinguished: Passenger Name Record (PNR) data and Advance Passenger Information (API).

7.1 Passenger Name Record data

PNR data consists of information collected by airlines during the reservation and booking process. It may include a passenger’s name, travel dates, itinerary, seat information, baggage details, contact information, and payment details.

Directive (EU) 2016/681 regulates the transfer and processing of PNR data for the prevention, detection, investigation, and prosecution of terrorist offences and serious crime.

Member States establish Passenger Information Units (PIUs), which receive and process PNR data. The information may be analysed against predetermined criteria or compared with relevant databases, subject to the Directive’s conditions.

PNR processing is not intended to establish a general presumption of criminality against travellers. Its use is restricted by purpose, retention, review, and data-protection requirements.

The Court of Justice has also imposed important limits on the general and indiscriminate retention and use of passenger data, emphasising the need for proportionality and adequate safeguards.

7.2 Advance Passenger Information

API data generally concerns information obtained from travel documents, such as a passenger’s name, date of birth, and nationality.

It is primarily useful for identity verification and border-management purposes, although the EU framework also provides for specified law-enforcement uses.

The API framework has been updated through Regulation (EU) 2025/12 on the collection and transfer of advance passenger information for the purposes of enhancing and facilitating external border checks, and Regulation (EU) 2025/13 concerning the use of API data for the prevention, detection, investigation, and prosecution of terrorist offences and serious crime.

The distinction between API and PNR is important. API is principally identity information derived from travel documents, while PNR contains broader booking and itinerary information.

The relevant legal framework is explained in the Council’s passenger data overview and the Commission’s travel information pages. Consilium+1

8. EMPACT: Coordinating the Fight Against Serious and Organised Crime

The European Multidisciplinary Platform Against Criminal Threats (EMPACT) is the EU’s principal framework for coordinating action against serious and organised international crime.

It brings together Member States, EU institutions and agencies, and relevant international partners to identify criminal threats, establish priorities, and coordinate operational responses.

EMPACT operates through four-year policy cycles. The participating authorities identify priority crime areas and develop operational action plans designed to address specific threats.

Its work is multidisciplinary. Police forces may cooperate with customs authorities, border agencies, judicial bodies, financial intelligence services, and other public or private partners where their involvement is relevant.

8.1 Crime priorities and operational action plans

EMPACT addresses a range of serious threats, including:

• High-risk criminal networks and organised crime.
• Trafficking in human beings and migrant smuggling.
• Drug trafficking.
• Cybercrime and online fraud.
• Money laundering and criminal finances.
• Firearms trafficking.
• Environmental crime.
• Terrorism and violent extremism.

The priorities are not simply broad policy statements. They are translated into operational action plans, joint activities, information exchange, and coordinated investigations.

The 2025–2029 cycle continues this approach, with Member States and EU agencies working together to address identified threats.

8.2 Europol’s role in EMPACT

Europol provides strategic and operational support, including intelligence analysis, coordination, and information exchange. Other agencies contribute according to their mandates.

For example, Frontex may contribute expertise relevant to external border management, Eurojust may support judicial coordination, and CEPOL may provide training.

EMPACT is therefore not a separate European police force. It is a coordinated framework through which national authorities and EU bodies organise joint action against criminal threats.

The Council describes EMPACT as the EU’s main framework for combating serious and organised crime. Its official overview provides information about its policy cycles and operational results. Consilium+1

9. Data Protection and Fundamental Rights in Police Cooperation

Police cooperation involves the collection and exchange of highly sensitive information. Data may concern criminal suspects, convicted persons, witnesses, victims, missing persons, or individuals who are not suspected of any offence but are connected with an investigation.

The expansion of information exchange therefore raises important questions about privacy, accuracy, retention, access, and the possibility of misuse.

EU law recognises that effective law enforcement and personal data protection are not mutually exclusive. Cooperation must operate within a legal framework that protects individual rights while permitting necessary and proportionate processing.

9.1 Directive (EU) 2016/680

Directive (EU) 2016/680, commonly called the Law Enforcement Directive, regulates the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of preventing, investigating, detecting, or prosecuting criminal offences and executing criminal penalties.

It establishes principles concerning:

• Lawfulness and fairness of processing.
• Specified and legitimate purposes.
• Data minimisation.
• Accuracy and updating of information.
• Storage limitation.
• Security and confidentiality.
• Accountability of competent authorities.

The Directive also establishes rights for individuals whose data are processed, including rights of access, rectification, and erasure, subject to lawful restrictions necessary for criminal investigations and other legitimate purposes.

It is distinct from the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The GDPR generally governs personal data processing by organisations and authorities outside the specific law-enforcement context covered by the Directive. The Law Enforcement Directive provides the specialised framework for competent authorities processing personal data for criminal-law purposes.

9.2 The Charter of Fundamental Rights

Several Charter provisions are particularly relevant to police cooperation:

• Article 7: Respect for private and family life.
• Article 8: Protection of personal data.
• Article 47: Right to an effective remedy and a fair trial.
• Article 48: Presumption of innocence and rights of the defence.
• Article 49: Principles of legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties.

Police authorities must also respect the prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 4 and the right to liberty and security under Article 6.

The Charter applies to Member States when they implement EU law. National authorities must therefore ensure that police cooperation measures falling within the scope of EU law comply with its fundamental rights requirements.

9.3 Oversight and remedies

The Law Enforcement Directive requires Member States to provide independent supervisory authorities responsible for monitoring compliance with data protection rules.

The European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) supervises the processing of personal data by EU institutions, bodies, and agencies, including Europol within the applicable legal framework.

Individuals must have access to appropriate remedies where their data protection rights are infringed. These may include complaints to supervisory authorities, judicial proceedings, and claims for compensation where the legal requirements are satisfied.

The purpose of these safeguards is not to obstruct legitimate investigations. It is to ensure that information is collected and used lawfully, that errors can be corrected, and that law-enforcement powers remain accountable.

The Council’s overview of data protection in law enforcement explains the relationship between effective police cooperation and individual privacy. Consilium+1

10. Cross-Border Police Cooperation and National Sovereignty

A defining feature of EU police cooperation is the continued importance of territorial sovereignty.

National police officers exercise powers under national law. Their authority to arrest, search, seize property, conduct surveillance, or use force is not automatically recognised outside their state.

Cross-border operations therefore depend on legal authorisation, cooperation with the competent authorities of the state concerned, and compliance with its domestic rules.

This arrangement reflects the EU’s constitutional structure. The Union facilitates cooperation but does not generally replace national police forces with a centralised law-enforcement authority.

10.1 The limits of foreign police powers

A foreign officer participating in a joint operation may be permitted to perform certain tasks, but the precise powers available depend on the relevant legal instrument and national implementing legislation.

For example, an officer participating in a joint patrol may assist in identifying a suspect or communicating information to local authorities. Whether that officer may arrest the person, use force, or conduct a search depends on the applicable legal arrangements.

The distinction is essential to legal accountability. An operation must identify which authority is responsible for the conduct of officers, which law governs their actions, and which courts or supervisory bodies may review alleged misconduct.

10.2 National responsibility and European support

The Commission and EU agencies can provide analytical, logistical, technical, and financial support. They can also establish common standards and facilitate cooperation.

They cannot, however, assume the ordinary executive responsibilities of national police authorities.

This means that the effectiveness of EU police cooperation ultimately depends on national implementation, administrative capacity, trust between authorities, and the willingness to share information promptly.

11. Challenges in European Police Cooperation

The EU framework has become considerably more sophisticated, but several structural difficulties remain.

11.1 Different national legal systems

Member States have different police structures, criminal procedures, evidential rules, and institutional cultures. A measure that can be carried out directly by one authority in one country may require judicial authorisation or involvement from a different institution in another.

These differences can delay cooperation and create uncertainty about the competent authority or applicable procedure.

11.2 Information quality and interoperability

Information exchange is only effective when the data are accurate, sufficiently complete, and capable of being understood and used by the receiving authority.

Errors in names, identity records, biometric information, or criminal intelligence can have serious consequences. Interoperability may improve the ability to locate information, but it does not automatically resolve problems of accuracy, context, or legal admissibility.

11.3 Cybercrime and digital evidence

Criminal networks increasingly operate through encrypted communications, cloud services, digital payment systems, and online platforms.

Investigators may face difficulties identifying the relevant jurisdiction, preserving evidence, obtaining information from service providers, and ensuring that electronic evidence can lawfully be used in criminal proceedings.

Police cooperation must therefore evolve alongside technology while maintaining safeguards for privacy, confidentiality, and the rights of individuals.

11.4 Fundamental rights and proportionality

The availability of increasingly powerful databases and analytical tools creates a risk that information may be collected or retained beyond what is necessary for a legitimate purpose.

Biometric searches, passenger data analysis, and intelligence systems must be subject to clear legal limits, independent oversight, and effective remedies.

The challenge is not simply to increase the quantity of information available to police authorities. It is to ensure that information is relevant, reliable, lawfully obtained, and used proportionately.

11.5 Operational coordination and institutional resources

Cross-border cooperation requires trained personnel, secure communication systems, sufficient funding, and practical knowledge of partner authorities.

The Commission’s 2026 assessment of the Schengen framework notes that police cooperation structures are broadly established but that their operational potential remains underused in some areas. It identifies difficulties in turning information-sharing centres and joint operations into consistently effective operational cooperation. Migration and Home Affairs

This demonstrates that the existence of legal instruments is not enough. Their effectiveness depends on implementation, training, institutional trust, and the ability to translate information into lawful action.

12. Facts: Principal Legal Instruments and Institutions

Instrument or institution	Principal function
Articles 87–89 TFEU	Treaty framework for police cooperation
Regulation (EU) 2016/794	Europol’s mandate and institutional framework
Regulation (EU) 2022/991	Amendments to Europol’s powers and data processing
Regulation (EU) 2018/1862	SIS for police and judicial cooperation
Regulations (EU) 2018/1860 and 2018/1861	SIS for return and border-control purposes
Regulation (EU) 2024/982	Prüm II automated data exchange
Directive (EU) 2016/680	Data protection in law enforcement
Directive (EU) 2016/681	Passenger Name Record data
Regulations (EU) 2019/817 and 2019/818	Interoperability of specified EU information systems
Regulation (EU) 2015/2219	CEPOL and EU law-enforcement training
Council Recommendation (EU) 2022/915	Operational police cooperation
Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement, Articles 40–41	Cross-border surveillance and hot pursuit
Framework Decision 2002/465/JHA	Joint Investigation Teams
EMPACT	Coordination against serious and organised crime

13. Key Takeaways

• Articles 87–89 TFEU establish the Treaty foundation for police cooperation, Europol, and cross-border operational activity.
• National authorities remain responsible for policing. The EU supports cooperation but has not created a single European police force.
• Europol provides analytical, technical, and operational support, but it cannot independently arrest suspects or conduct coercive investigative measures.
• CEPOL strengthens cooperation through professional training and the development of a shared law-enforcement culture.
• The Schengen framework facilitates cross-border police activity, including surveillance and hot pursuit, subject to strict legal conditions.
• Joint patrols and Police and Customs Cooperation Centres facilitate practical cooperation, particularly in border regions.
• Joint Investigation Teams enable authorities from several states to conduct a specific criminal investigation within a coordinated legal framework.
• SIS allows authorised authorities to consult alerts concerning wanted or missing persons and specified objects. It is not an unrestricted general police database.
• SIRENE Bureaux coordinate supplementary information exchange relating to SIS alerts.
• Prüm II expands automated police information exchange to include additional biometric and police-record categories, subject to legal safeguards.
• Europol’s information systems support criminal intelligence analysis, while ECRIS serves the separate purpose of exchanging criminal conviction information.
• PNR and API data are different categories of travel information, subject to distinct legal frameworks and safeguards.
• EMPACT coordinates action against serious and organised crime through multiannual priorities and operational action plans.
• Directive (EU) 2016/680 protects personal data processed for law-enforcement purposes, complementing the GDPR.
• Fundamental rights and proportionality limit police cooperation. Information must be lawfully obtained, relevant, accurate, and used for authorised purposes.
• Cross-border police powers are not unlimited. Foreign officers must operate under the applicable legal arrangements and respect the territorial authority of the state concerned.

14. Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is police cooperation in the European Union?

It is the framework through which national police and other law-enforcement authorities cooperate in preventing, detecting, and investigating crime. It includes information exchange, joint operations, cross-border surveillance, automated searches, and support from EU agencies.

2. What is the legal basis for EU police cooperation?

The principal Treaty provisions are Articles 87–89 TFEU. Article 87 concerns police cooperation generally, Article 88 establishes Europol, and Article 89 provides the basis for operational cooperation involving authorities operating in another Member State.

3. Does the EU have a European police force?

No. The EU has Europol, which supports national police authorities, but it does not have a general European police force with autonomous powers of arrest or coercive investigation. National authorities remain responsible for operational policing.

4. What is Europol’s role?

Europol supports national authorities through intelligence analysis, information exchange, operational coordination, specialist expertise, and technical assistance. It helps identify links between criminal investigations and supports action against serious cross-border crime.

5. Can Europol officers arrest suspects?

No. Europol has no autonomous coercive powers. Its staff may provide operational support to national authorities, but they cannot independently arrest suspects or execute investigative measures.

6. What is the Schengen Information System?

SIS is a large-scale European information system containing legally defined alerts on persons and objects. It allows authorised authorities to identify wanted or missing persons, locate certain objects, and receive instructions concerning the action to be taken when an alert is found.

7. What are SIRENE Bureaux?

SIRENE Bureaux are national contact points responsible for exchanging supplementary information and coordinating action relating to SIS alerts. They help national authorities communicate and respond when a person or object identified through SIS is located.

8. What is the Prüm II Regulation?

Regulation (EU) 2024/982 modernises automated police information exchange. It provides a framework for searches involving DNA profiles, fingerprints, certain vehicle registration data, facial images, and police records, subject to specified legal conditions.

9. What is cross-border surveillance?

It is a procedure allowing officers conducting a lawful investigation in one state to continue surveillance into another state under the conditions established by the Schengen framework and national law. It requires appropriate authorisation or compliance with the applicable urgent-procedure rules.

10. What is hot pursuit?

Hot pursuit allows officers pursuing a person in connection with specified serious offences to continue the pursuit across an internal border, subject to strict conditions. It does not confer unrestricted police powers in the state entered.

11. What are Joint Investigation Teams?

JITs are formal arrangements through which authorities from two or more states cooperate in a specific criminal investigation. They facilitate direct information exchange and coordinated investigative measures.

12. What is EMPACT?

EMPACT is the EU’s principal framework for coordinating action against serious and organised international crime. It brings together Member States, EU agencies, and other partners to establish priorities and carry out operational action plans.

13. What is the difference between PNR and API data?

PNR data consists of broader information collected during airline booking, including itineraries and reservation details. API data generally consists of identity information taken from travel documents, such as a passenger’s name, date of birth, and nationality.

14. Does police cooperation allow unrestricted exchange of personal data?

No. Data exchange is governed by purpose limitations, data protection rules, access restrictions, retention periods, and safeguards. Directive (EU) 2016/680 provides the principal framework for personal data processed by competent authorities for law-enforcement purposes.

15. Can an individual challenge information held in SIS?

Yes. Individuals have rights to seek access to personal data relating to them, request correction of inaccurate information or deletion of unlawfully stored data, and pursue appropriate judicial or administrative remedies, subject to the applicable legal conditions.

16. What is the difference between Europol and Eurojust?

Europol supports police and law-enforcement cooperation, particularly through intelligence analysis and operational assistance. Eurojust supports coordination between national judicial and prosecuting authorities. Neither replaces national courts or national police forces.

17. What is the relationship between EU police cooperation and national sovereignty?

National authorities retain responsibility for policing and coercive powers within their territories. EU law establishes mechanisms for cooperation, but cross-border activities must respect the territorial authority and legal requirements of the state concerned.

18. Does the EU framework apply to all Member States in exactly the same way?

Not always. Certain measures have specific participation arrangements, transitional provisions, or territorial limitations. The application of each instrument must be assessed individually, particularly in relation to Schengen participation and the special Treaty positions of Denmark and Ireland.

Conclusion

EU police cooperation is a practical and institutional response to the increasingly transnational character of criminal activity. The removal of routine internal border controls, the expansion of the internal market, digital communication, and the international organisation of criminal networks have made it increasingly difficult for national authorities to address serious crime through isolated domestic action.

The Union has responded by developing a system that connects national law-enforcement authorities through common information systems, operational cooperation arrangements, joint investigative mechanisms, and specialised agencies. Europol supports the analysis and coordination of criminal intelligence; CEPOL strengthens professional capacity; SIS and Prüm II facilitate information exchange; and EMPACT provides a framework for coordinated action against serious and organised crime.

Nevertheless, this system remains fundamentally based on national responsibility. The EU does not possess a general power to arrest individuals, conduct police searches, or direct national police operations. Cross-border surveillance, hot pursuit, joint patrols, and other operational measures must take place within clearly defined legal arrangements and with respect for the authority of the state concerned.

The growing importance of digital information and automated searches makes the protection of fundamental rights particularly significant. Information systems can improve the ability of authorities to identify suspects and prevent criminal activity, but they also create risks of inaccurate records, excessive retention, inappropriate access, and disproportionate interference with privacy. The Law Enforcement Directive, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and independent supervisory mechanisms provide essential safeguards.

The European model is therefore neither a centralised police system nor a loose collection of bilateral arrangements. It is a structured network of national authorities, European agencies, common information systems, and legal instruments. Its effectiveness depends on the quality of cooperation between its participants, the reliability of information, and the ability to translate shared intelligence into lawful operational action.

Ultimately, the legitimacy of European police cooperation rests on the same principle that underpins the broader Area of Freedom, Security and Justice: security must be pursued through law. Cross-border crime should not be able to exploit national borders, but the response to it must remain subject to legality, accountability, proportionality, and respect for individual rights.

Primary Legal Sources and Further Reading

Treaty foundations and institutional framework

• Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – Articles 87–89
• Regulation (EU) 2016/794 – Europol
• Regulation (EU) 2022/991 – Amendment of the Europol Regulation
• Regulation (EU) 2015/2219 – CEPOL

Operational and information cooperation

• Convention Implementing the Schengen Agreement – Articles 40 and 41
• Council Recommendation (EU) 2022/915 – Operational Police Cooperation
• Regulation (EU) 2018/1862 – SIS for Police and Judicial Cooperation
• Regulation (EU) 2024/982 – Prüm II
• Framework Decision 2002/465/JHA – Joint Investigation Teams

Data protection and travel information

• Directive (EU) 2016/680 – Law Enforcement Data Protection
• Directive (EU) 2016/681 – Passenger Name Record Data
• Regulation (EU) 2019/817 – Interoperability of EU Information Systems
• Regulation (EU) 2019/818 – Interoperability in Police and Judicial Cooperation

Official institutional resources

• European Commission – Law Enforcement Cooperation
• Europol
• CEPOL
• European Commission – Schengen Information System
• Council of the EU – EMPACT and the Fight Against Crime
• Council of the EU – Data Protection in Law Enforcement

This article is intended for educational and informational purposes. The exercise of police powers in cross-border situations depends on the applicable EU instrument, Schengen arrangements, national implementing legislation, and the circumstances of the operation.