Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski gradski sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 21 April 2026 – Ministerstvo na vatreshnite raboti, Stolichna direktsia na vatreshnite raboti, Parvo rayonno upravlenie

(Case C-376/26, Parvo rayonno upravlenie)

(C/2026/3514)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Sofiyski gradski sad

Authority which made the application in connection with the pre-trial criminal proceedings

Ministerstvo na vatreshnite raboti, Stolichna direktsia na vatreshnite raboti, Parvo rayonno upravlenie

Question referred

Are Articles 10 and 54 of Directive 2016/680/EU (1) and the first paragraph of Article 47 of the Charter to be interpreted as meaning that they directly confer on an accused person the right to submit observations on an application by a police authority for judicial authorisation for the compulsory collection of biometric and genetic data, and the right to challenge any such judicial authorisation given, it being borne in mind (1) that, prior to the application by the police authority, the accused person was able to provide a written declaration in the form of the phrase ‘I do not consent’, and (2) that, following the adoption of the judicial decision authorising the compulsory collection of such data, national law does not afford that person any possibility of obtaining a judicial review of that authorisation [?]

(1)  Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA (OJ 2016 L 119, p. 89).