European Ombudsman

• How the European Data Protection Board adopted its opinion on the use of facial recognition in airports

  The complainant raised concerns with how the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) adopted an opinion on the use of facial recognition in airports. In particular, the complainant asserted that the EDPB had negatively affected the rights and interests of stakeholders by failing to consult with interested parties before adopting its opinion.

  The Ombudsman opened an inquiryand asked the EDPB to set out how it assessed the need to carry out a public consultation and on what basis it concluded it was not necessary to do so. She also asked to inspect the EDPB’s internal documentation concerning this assessment.

• The failure of the Delegation of the European Union to Lebanon to reply to administrative complaints from former local agents requesting interest on late payment of the severance grant

  [...]

• How the European Data Protection Board adopted its opinion on the use of facial recognition in airports

  Chair of the European Data Protection Board European Data Protection Board

   

  Dear Ms X,

  I have received a complaint against the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) concerning how it adopted its Opinion 11/2024 on the use of facial recognition in airports.

  The complainant claims, among others, that, in preparing the opinion, the EDPB failed to consult interested parties as set out in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)[1], thereby negatively affecting the rights and interests of relevant stakeholders.

  I have decided to open an inquiry into this aspect of the complaint to obtain clarifications from the EDPB on this matter.

  The GDPR provides that, where appropriate, the EDPB has to consult interested parties.[2] The EDPB rules of procedure use the same general wording.

• How the European Commission dealt with a request for public access to documents concerning its InvestAI initiative

  [...]

• The European Commission's failure to communicate to the complainant its preliminary assessment of an infringement complaint

  [...]