During 2025, Eurojust continued to provide support and advice to national authorities throughout the life cycle of the EIO, from the drafting to the execution phase. 6 711 Eurojust cases, including 2 751 new cases involved a European Investigation Order, a close to 7% rise from the previous year. While in 2020, a little over one third of Eurojust cases involved an EIO, this ratio rose to close to half by 2025, showing that Eurojust's support is getting increasingly important for this instrument.

Eurojust assisted in obtaining clarifications or additional information prior to the execution of an EIO or, where the information provided was insufficient, even before its transmission to the executing authorities.

Eurojust also facilitated the execution of several urgent EIOs, where its role was critical given the need for imminent action. In multilateral cases, the Agency ensured coordinated execution of EIOs in several Member States, alongside other judicial cooperation instruments such as freezing orders and EAWs.

Eurojust supported cases in which legal or practical issues arose, in particular:

• the hearing of suspects and the applicable formalities and procedural guarantees, which may differ across Member States;
• the interception of telecommunications, which is subject to varying conditions and procedures across Member States;
• the use of technical devices tracking movements and recording sound and images (e.g. bugging a car), which are not clearly regulated in the EIO Directive and therefore give rise to practical challenges, especially regarding the possibility of an ex post authorisation.
   

Hearing of an accused person by videoconference or temporary transfer

CRIME: A person is being prosecuted in Italy for participating in a criminal organisation and for drug trafficking. He does not appear in court, but he is represented by a lawyer and is found to have been in custody in Belgium.

JUDICIAL ISSUE: The Italian court issues an EIO to hear the accused by videoconference. The Belgian Public Prosecutor's Office refuses to execute the EIO, stating that Belgian law does not permit the hearing of an accused person by videoconference in the course of that person's trial, as it would be contrary to the right to a fair hearing.

EUROJUST'S ROLE: The referring Italian court asks Eurojust for assistance. The Agency suggests a temporary transfer of the accused person to Italy, which the Belgian authorities refuse.

CJEU JUDGMENT: Eurojust further supports the Italian court in referring the case to the CJEU for a preliminary ruling. The CJEU decides with its judgment of 18 December 2025 (C-325/24) on the interpretation of the EIO Directive meaning that Member States' judicial authorities may issue an EIO for the temporary transfer of or the hearing by videoconference of an accused person during his or her trial for evidentiary purposes, and further that such a measure not being available in a domestic case is not a reason for refusal to execute the EIO.

Throughout 2025, Eurojust continued to examine legal issues related to the interception of telecommunications and other surveillance measures, providing streamlined information on the fundamental legal requirements applicable in other jurisdictions concerning such measures.

Similarly, Eurojust worked on the admissibility of evidence transmitted via EIOs, in particular data obtained from encrypted communication networks (e.g. Sky ECC and EncroChat), by monitoring relevant national case-law and advising national authorities.

As a result of years of monitoring, Eurojust published the first comprehensive overview of CJEU case-law on the EIO in 2025, offering a structured and accessible reference tool for legal practitioners and judicial authorities. The report will be regularly updated.

Based on the recommendations in the final report on the 10th round of mutual evaluations on the EIO, the Commission started work on a potential revision of the EIO Directive. Eurojust contributed to this at every step of the process in 2025, participating in expert group meetings and at the High Level Forum on the Future of EU Criminal Justice, both organised by the Commission. Eurojust also contributed a written position to the targeted consultation by the Commission in November.