Recommendations to statutory bodies and security directors:

Appropriate procedure in the event that a person designated pursuant to Act No. 148/1998 Coll., on the protection of classified information, as amended, (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") has been notified of a criminal charge:

Pursuant to Section 14(1) of the Act, the designated person is obliged to report any criminal charges brought against him or her, according to his or her competence to carry out a security check, either to the NSA or to the Police of the Czech Republic or to the intelligence service. This is a change in the data in the first additional part of the security questionnaire under point (d) of Section 33(4) of the Act, which such a person is obliged to report. Under Section 23(3)(b) of the Act, ongoing criminal proceedings may also pose a security risk and the authority that issued the certificate is obliged to respond to this fact - to evaluate such a fact in relation to the possible lapse of validity of the certificate and the procedure under Section 36(5), (7) and (8) of the Act.

It often happens that the designated person does not comply with this legal obligation; is concerned about the negative consequences of this step. In order to comply with all the principles of the protection of classified information, it is for the statutory body, if it becomes aware of such a fact from a credible source, itself to inform the authority which issued the certificate to that designated person of this fact. In doing so, the statutory body fulfils its obligation under Section 12(2)(d) of the Act and also demonstrates compliance with the obligation under point (h) of the same provision. On the contrary, failure to comply with this obligation exposes the statutory body itself to possible sanctions for breach of the obligations laid down by law with the consequence pursuant to Section 71 et seq. of the Act. It is an error if the statutory body, after an interview with the designated person, merely provides oral assurance that it has notified the competent authority of the above and does not act on its own.

The indictment in criminal proceedings against the proposed person is, of course, not automatically a ground for expiration of the validity of the certificate under the law and does not create a legal obligation for the statutory body to revoke the designation of the designated person to deal with classified information. However, it is undoubtedly a serious signal for the statutory body to pay increased attention to the performance of its duties in protecting classified information, as is apparent from Section 12(2)(h) of the Act.

Once the certificate of a designated person expires, the statutory body is obliged to revoke its designation and take all necessary measures to ensure that such a person can no longer become acquainted with the classified information.

Ensuring the protection of classified information is a priority duty of each statutory body (Section 12(1) of the Act). For the fulfilment of this priority, it is not an error if the statutory body cancels the designation of the person accused in criminal proceedings and stops allocating classified information to him or her without at the same time invalidating the certificate. These are measures of an employment-law nature resulting from the staffing powers of the statutory body. For the designated person, such a measure does not have any negative consequences in terms of remuneration, as it does not give rise to a ground for dismissal or other changes in employment law, but only for as long as it is strictly necessary for him to have access to classified information. It is advisable for such a designated person to complete work tasks related to acquaintance with classified information, but his other work tasks will be of the kind that his access to classified information is not necessary (see § 17 para. 1 of the law).

Once it has been established from the development of the criminal proceedings that the integrity of the designated person is not affected, there is nothing to prevent the statutory body from re-designating that person as being in contact with classified information. On the other hand, if a security risk is identified either in ongoing criminal proceedings or as a result thereof, the statutory body has taken all measures to ensure that the protection of classified information is not jeopardised.