Under the new rules, the criteria for determining whether a cross-border complaint is admissible have been harmonised so that admissibility is assessed on the same basis – regardless of where a complaint is filed. Common procedural safeguards have also been introduced, including clear rights for complainants and organisations under investigation to be heard and to see preliminary findings. For straightforward cases, data protection authorities will have the option to use a simplified cooperation procedure without invoking the full set of cooperation mechanisms. The Regulation also imposes time limits: regular investigations are expected to conclude within 15 months, with possible extensions for complex cases, and simpler procedures within 12 months.

Regulation 2025/2518 entered into force on 1 January 2026 and it will apply from 2 April 2027.

The Executive Director is responsible for the day-to-day management of the agency, its strategic development, and the implementation of its mandate in accordance with the Europol Regulation. The position is subject to the supervision of the Management Board and requires accountability to the Management Board, the European Parliament, and the Council.

The recruitment procedure is governed by the Europol Regulation, the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union, the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union, and the Management Board rules.

The Europol Management Board will establish a selection committee to review applications and conduct interviews. Candidates must be nationals of a Member State of the European Union, hold a university degree, and demonstrate at least 20 years of postgraduate professional experience, including a minimum of five years in a senior executive management function.

The recruitment procedure is scheduled to take place during the second, third, and fourth quarters of 2026.

The publication, edited by Dominik Brodowski and Sebastian Trautmann, provides substantive insights into the work, constraints and role of the EPPO in the EU area of freedom, security and justice within the current framework. It also offers suggestions for the institution's future positioning. They may feed into the upcoming EU-level discussion about adjusting the 2017 EPPO Regulation.

The investigation concerns the European Union Diplomatic Academy, a nine-month training programme for junior diplomats from the Member States. It was awarded to the College of Europe in Belgium for the period 2021–2022 by the European External Action Service (EEAS) following a tender procedure. The investigation's focus is on whether the College of Europe and/or their representatives were informed in advance about the selection criteria for the tender procedure and had sufficient reason to believe that they would be awarded the implementation of the project prior to official publication of the tender notice by the EEAS.

Before the searches took place, the EPPO requested that the immunity of several suspects be lifted, which was granted. The rector and a senior staff member of the College of Europe as well as a senior official of the European Commission were detained. The accusations concerned procurement fraud and corruption, conflict of interest, and breach of professional secrecy.

Following an analysis of the draft legislation, the European Chief Prosecutor concluded that it contains several elements that cannot be reconciled with the principles of the rule of law as set out in Regulation (EU) 2020/2092 of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the budget of the European Union.

In particular, the proposed amendments would restrict whistle-blower protection for certain categories of persons, notably those who are not directly employed by the entity whose alleged misconduct is reported. The letter states that a failure to ensure adequate protection for all whistle-blowers, including members of police forces, would significantly limit the detection, reporting, and investigation of corruption. The proposal would also introduce the retroactive application of the amendments, which, if adopted, would directly affect ongoing cases handled by EPPO. Therefore, the European Chief Prosecutor informed the European Commission in accordance with Recital 16 of Regulation (EU) 2020/2092 that, should the amendments be adopted, they would have a negative impact on the efficiency of criminal investigations into breaches of the law in general and on the overall level of protection of the financial interests of the EU.

The initiative is co-financed by the European Commission under EU justice funding programmes, supporting a two-year training effort that includes seminars, webinars, e-learning modules, and publicly available materials. The materials are designed to address the growing number of cross-border criminal proceedings, where knowledge of national law alone may be insufficient. The training package includes:

• Background documentation on EU criminal law topics;
• Self-paced e-learning modules;
• Recorded webinars and video lectures.

Subjects covered range from mutual recognition instruments and legal privilege to digitalisation in criminal justice, including e-evidence and video-conferencing. The modules also explain the roles of EU agencies involved in criminal cooperation, including Europol, Eurojust, and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.

The project reflects broader EU efforts to enhance mutual trust and consistent application of European criminal law through practitioner training and cooperation.

The operation targeted and dismantled three critical pillars of the fraud infrastructure:

• Authorities shut down fraudulent cryptocurrency investment platforms and associated call-centre operations that used social engineering to extract funds from victims;
• The network’s financial laundering infrastructure was disrupted through coordinated seizures of bank accounts, cryptocurrency wallets, cash, and digital devices used to obscure illicit flows across blockchains and exchanges;
• Investigators neutralised the affiliate marketing and online advertising infrastructure that generated victims at scale, including companies behind deceptive social media campaigns using impersonation and deepfake content.

The operation resulted in multiple arrests and seizures, including bank accounts worth €800,000 and €415,000 in cryptocurrencies. Law enforcement authorities will continue to track the criminal organisation’s assets in the countries where it has operated.

The coordinated action resulted in the detection of 64 cases of irregular border crossings and the seizure of 261 falsified or fraudulent travel and identity documents, including passports, ID cards, residence permits, and driving licences. Authorities also intercepted more than 420,000 counterfeit items spanning textiles, footwear, cosmetics, electronics, toys, and automotive parts.

The numbers underscore the continued scale of cross-border IP infringement: Significant excise and financial crime outcomes were recorded, with over 17.5 million cigarettes and 6500 e-cigarettes seized, alongside €1.156 million in undeclared cash. Enforcement activity was further extended to narcotics and weapons trafficking, resulting in the seizure of 1,698 kg of marijuana, 1.2 kg of methamphetamine, 148 pistols, 179 magazines, and 122 cartridges. Additional undeclared goods included pharmaceutical products, luxury watches, and foodstuffs.

The Joint Action Days “Pirates 3” took place within the framework of EMPACT — the European Multidisciplinary Platform Against Criminal Threats. It prioritises the fight against the most important threats posed by serious and organised international crime affecting the EU (→eucrim 2/2025, 142).

At the beginning of November 2025, the EDPS announced that the EFRGB had issued a new guidance note on how to ensure an applicant's right to an effective judicial remedy in the context of ETIAS. The guidance note clarifies the procedural obligations that apply when negative ETIAS decisions are taken – in line with Art. 47 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and relevant CJEU case law. It also addresses key requirements, e.g., providing clear reasons for decisions, granting access to files, and ensuring transparency when decisions rely on sensitive data or algorithmic profiling. This guidance is now being examined by national authorities and EU agencies as they prepare ETIAS for entry into operation.