Additional register may not be secret, so it’s not necessarily legal anymore

Image parsucco de Pixabay

My article in the half of April, surprisingly, did not cause much excitement. Only when Maître Vogel agreed to this matter and the CSV came up with an elaborate question parliamentary did the public become interested in the subject. In the meantime, a number of people have already reported to me as well. There you hear and read such a lot, for example additional explanations, as far as the 1992 law is concerned. In Article 2, speeches go from “research”, then “documentary” and finally “archive”. Certain data land after ‘x’ in that archive after a while. This means in concrete terms: if people now ask what is on their file, the information may already be in the archive; they will not learn anything about it. The police maintain that access to it. Therefore, if one is to submit his request, one should specify that even under “Archive” be checked !! From the law’s point of view, it would rather be this full archive, which could be illegal, because the police, when they are no longer ‘used’, do not have to destroy it!

An attendant remains the CSV on this plan and Gilles Roth and Laurent Mosar come up with a further parliamentary question:

Luxembourg, 10 June 2019

Monsieur Fernand Etgen Président de la Chambre des Députés



Mister President,

We hereby have the honor to inform you that, in accordance with article 83 of the Standing Orders of the Chamber of Deputies, we would like to ask a series of questions to the Prime Minister and Minister of State, to the Ministers of Justice and Internal Security concerning the drafting of reports or opinions by the Grand-Ducal police on the basis of files or databases specific to the police.

In his response to a parliamentary question from the Honorable Member Laurent Mosar on the existence of a secret criminal record or a database containing information similar to that which may be contained in a criminal record of April 17, 2019 (document 0640), the government has denied, inter alia, the existence of such a register or such a database.

However, according to the explanations of a retired police officer conveyed on social networks, not only would such police-specific files exist, but the Grand-Ducal police would use them in the context of reports or opinions that she would write. It would thus seem that the police have based and continue to rely on their own files, which are of an illegal nature, in order to draw up reports or other opinions, particularly in the context of a pardon, or even investigations carried out by the authorities. in view of the establishment of a certificate of character.

In this context we would like to ask the Prime Minister and Minister of State, as well as the Ministers of Justice and Homeland Security, the following questions:

  • Has the government confirmed the existence of practices such as those described above, that is, the drafting of opinions or reports using information from police-specific files or databases?
  • If so, what is the legal basis for these reports or opinions?
  • For what business or in what area are these reports or opinions written?
  • Do these practices comply with the principles of personal data protection? If not, why do these reports or opinions continue to be written?
  • Are those involved in the investigation aware of the existence and content of these reports or opinions? Can they express their point of view with regard to any observations contained in the reports or opinions?



Please accept, Mr. President, the expression of our full consideration.








Gilles Roth                                                                          Laurent Mosar

Député                                                                                   Député




Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here