The committee adopted the report by Evelyne GEBHARDT (PES, D) amending the redrafted proposal on which it was being reconsulted. Although Council had incorporated some of the amendments adopted by Parliament in May 2001, the committee nevertheless tabled a large number of amendments to the new proposal, including some from first reading. It said that Eurojust needed to have access to sensitive information from Member States (i.e. from criminal records) and the Schengen Information System, in order for it to be able to do its job. However, the committee also said that the personal data which may be processed by Eurojust relating to individuals subject to an investigation or prosecution should not include driving licences or bank accounts, except in duly justified exceptional cases, as these were usually not fundamental to investigations. Moreover, the committee objected to the use of data revealing racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, trade union membership and data concerning health or sex life, even if such data were used only when deemed necessary for an investigation.
The committee wanted identical provisions to be applicable to all national members of Eurojust and therefore reinstated the amendment providing for a 4-year term of office for each national member, which could be renewable. It also repeated its call for the objectives assigned to Eurojust to include helping to foster the mutual recognition of court judgments in the field of criminal law and the more widespread use of modern technologies. Another point taken up from the first report was that personal data stored by Eurojust should be subject to a regular review every two years.
Finally, the committee wanted Parliament to be kept fully informed and consulted about Eurojust's activities and to be able to request specific reports or information. It also wanted the Court of Justice to have jurisdiction regarding Eurojust and its operations. �