In the case of a data protection officer ordered by a court, these tasks shall not refer to the action of the court acting in its judicial capacity.

(2) The Federal Commissioner shall not be competent to supervise processing operations of federal courts acting in their judicial capacity.

(4) Even after his or her official relationship has ended, the Federal Commissioner shall be obligated to secrecy concerning matters of which he or she is aware by reason of his or her official duties. This obligation shall not apply to official communications or to matters which are common knowledge or which by their nature do not require confidentiality. The Federal Commissioner shall decide at his or her due discretion whether and to what extent he or she will testify in or outside court or make statements concerning such matters; if he or she is no longer in office, the permission of the Federal Commissioner in office shall be required. This shall not affect the legal obligation to report crimes and to uphold the free and democratic order wherever it is threatened. Sections 93, 97, 105 (1), Section 111 (5) in conjunction with Section 105 (1) and Section 116 (1) of the German Fiscal Code shall not apply to the Federal Commissioner or his or her staff. The fifth sentence shall not apply where the financial authorities require such knowledge in order to conduct legal proceedings due to a tax offence and related tax proceedings, in the prosecution of which there is compelling public interest, or where the person required to provide information or persons acting on his or her behalf have intentionally provided false information. If the Federal Commissioner determines that data protection provisions have been violated, he or she shall be authorized to report the violation and inform the data subject accordingly.

If the testimony concerns ongoing or completed processes which are or could be considered core aspects of executive responsibility, the Federal Commissioner may testify only with the approval of the Federal Government. Section 28 of the Federal Constitutional Court Act shall remain unaffected.

(1) Recourse to the administrative courts shall be provided for disputes between natural or legal persons and a supervisory authority of the Federation or a Land concerning rights according to Article 78 (1) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Section 61. The first sentence shall not apply to administrative fine proceedings.

(2) The Code of Administrative Court Procedure shall be applied in compliance with subsections 3 to 7.

(3) For proceedings pursuant to subsection 1, first sentence, the administrative court in whose district the supervisory authority is located shall be locally competent.

2. the supervisory authority as defendant or respondent. Section 63 nos. 3 and 4 of the Code of Administrative Court Procedure shall remain unaffected.

(7) With respect to an authority or its legal entity, the supervisory authority shall not order immediate execution in accordance with Section 80 (2), first sentence, no. 4 of the Code of Administrative Court Procedure.

(1) If a supervisory authority believes that an adequacy decision of the European Commission or a decision on the recognition of standard protection clauses or on the general validity of approved codes of conduct, on the validity of which a decision of the supervisory authority depends, violates the law, the supervisory authority shall suspend its procedure and lodge an application for a court decision.

(2) Recourse to the administrative courts shall be provided for proceedings pursuant to subsection 1. The Code of Administrative Court Procedure shall be applied in compliance with subsections 3 to 6.

(3) The Federal Administrative Court shall decide in the first and last instance on an application by the supervisory authority pursuant to subsection 1.

(4) In proceedings pursuant to subsection 1, the supervisory authority shall be competent to take part. The supervisory authority shall be a party to proceedings pursuant to subsection 1 as applicant; Section 63 nos. 3 and 4 of the Code of Administrative Court Procedure shall remain unaffected. The Federal Administrative Court may give the European Commission the opportunity to comment within a period of time to be determined.

(5) If a proceeding to review the validity of a European Commission decision pursuant to subsection 1 is pending at the European Court of Justice, the Federal Administrative Court may order its proceeding to be suspended until the proceeding at the European Court of Justice has been concluded.

(6) In proceedings pursuant to subsection 1, Section 47 (5), first sentence and (6) of the Code of Administrative Court Procedure shall apply accordingly. If the Federal Administrative Court finds that the European Commission’s decision pursuant to subsection 1 is valid, it shall state this in its decision. Otherwise it shall refer the question as to the validity of the decision in accordance with Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to the European Court of Justice.

4. processing is necessary to prosecute criminal or administrative offences, to carry out or enforce punishment or measures as referred to in Section 11 (1) no. 8 of the Criminal Code or educational or disciplinary measures as referred to in the Juvenile Court Act or to enforce fines;

3. processing is necessary to prosecute crimes or administrative offences, to carry out or enforce punishment or measures as referred to in Section 11 (1) no. 8 of the Criminal Code or educational or disciplinary measures as referred to in the Juvenile Court Act or to enforce fines.

(1) Unless this Act provides otherwise, the provisions of the Administrative Offences Act shall apply accordingly to violations pursuant to Article 83 (4) to (6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Sections 17, 35 and 36 of the Administrative Offences Act shall not apply. Section 68 of the Administrative Offences Act shall apply on the condition that the regional court shall decide if the administrative fine exceeds the amount of one hundred thousand euros.

(1) Proceedings against a controller or a processor for a violation of data protection law within the scope of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 or the rights of the data subject contained therein may be brought by a data subject before the court in the place where the controller or processor has an establishment. Proceedings pursuant to the first sentence may also be brought before the court in the place where the data subject has his or her habitual residence.

The provisions of this Part shall apply to the processing of personal data by public bodies competent for the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal or administrative offences or the execution of criminal or administrative penalties, as far as they process data for the purpose of carrying out these tasks. The public bodies shall be regarded in that case as controllers. The prevention of criminal offences as referred to in the first sentence shall include protection against and prevention of threats to public security. The first and second sentences shall also apply to those public bodies responsible for executing penalties, measures as referred to in Section 11 (1) no. 8 of the Criminal Code, educational or disciplinary measures as referred to in the Juvenile Court Act or fines. As far as this Part contains provisions for processors, it shall also apply to them.

(1) Without prejudice to any other administrative or judicial remedy, every data subject shall have the right to lodge a complaint with the Federal Commissioner, if the data subject believes that the processing by public bodies of personal data relating to him or her for the purposes listed in Section 45 infringes his or her rights. This shall not apply to the processing of personal data by courts, if they have processed these data in the context of their judicial activities. The Federal Commissioner shall inform the data subject of the progress and the outcome of the complaint and of the possibility of a judicial remedy pursuant to Section 61.

“Section 42b Application of the supervisory authority for a court decision if it believes that a decision by the Commission violates European law”

5. The following Section 42b shall be added after Section 42a: “Section 42b Application of the supervisory authority for a court decision if it believes that a decision by the European Commission violates the law

(1) If a supervisory authority believes that an adequacy decision of the European Commission or a decision on the recognition of standard protection clauses or on the general validity of approved codes of conduct, on the validity of which a decision of the supervisory authority depends, violates the law, the supervisory authority shall suspend its procedure and lodge an application for a court decision.

(2) Recourse to the administrative courts shall be provided for proceedings pursuant to subsection 1. The Code of Administrative Court Procedure shall be applied in compliance with subsections 3 to 6.

(3) The Federal Administrative Court shall decide in the first and last instance on an application by the supervisory authority pursuant to subsection 1.

(4) In proceedings pursuant to subsection 1, the supervisory authority shall be competent to take part. The supervisory authority shall be a party to proceedings pursuant to subsection 1 as applicant; Section 63 nos. 3 and 4 of the Code of Administrative Court Procedure shall remain unaffected. The Federal Administrative Court may give the European Commission the opportunity to comment within a period of time to be determined.

(5) If a proceeding to review the validity of a European Commission decision pursuant to subsection 1 is pending at the European Court of Justice, the Federal Administrative Court may order its proceeding to be suspended until the proceeding at the European Court of Justice has been concluded.

(6) In proceedings pursuant to subsection 1, Section 47 (5), first sentence and (6) of the Code of Administrative Court Procedure shall apply accordingly. If the Federal Administrative Court finds that the European Commission’s decision pursuant to subsection 1 is valid, it shall state this in its decision. Otherwise it shall refer the question as to the validity of the decision in accordance with Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to the European Court of Justice.”