The European Union’s law enforcement agency wants to speed up how it gets its hands on artificial intelligence tools to fight serious crime, a top official said.

Criminals are having “the time of their life” with “their malicious deployment of AI,” but police authorities at the bloc’s Europol agency are weighed down by legal checks when trying to use the new technology, Deputy Executive Director Jürgen Ebner told POLITICO.

Authorities have to run through data protection and fundamental rights assessments under EU law. Those checks can delay the use of AI by up to eight months, Ebner said. Speeding up the process could make the difference in time sensitive situations where there is a “threat to life,” he added.

Europe’s police agency has built out its tech capabilities in past years, ranging from big data crunching to decrypting communication between criminals. Authorities are keen to fight fire with fire in a world where AI is rapidly boosting cybercrime. But academics and activists have repeatedly voiced concerns about giving authorities free rein to use AI tech without guardrails.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has vowed to more than double Europol’s staff and turn it into a powerhouse to fight criminal groups “navigating constantly between the physical and digital worlds.” The Commission’s latest work program said this will come in the form of a legislative proposal to strengthen Europol in the second quarter of 2026. 

Speaking in Malta at a recent gathering of data protection specialists from across Europe’s police forces, Ebner said it is an “absolute essential” for there to be a fast-tracked procedure to allow law enforcement to deploy AI tools in “emergency” situations without having to follow a “very complex compliance procedure.”

Assessing data protection and fundamental rights impacts of an AI tool is required under the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and AI Act. Ebner said these processes can take six to eight months. 

The top cop clarified that a faster emergency process would not bypass AI tool red lines around profiling or live facial recognition.

Law enforcement authorities already have several exemptions under the EU’s Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act). Under the rules, the use of real-time facial recognition in public spaces is prohibited for law enforcers, but EU countries can still permit exceptions, especially for the most serious crimes.

Lawmakers and digital rights groups have expressed concerns about these carve-outs, which were secured by EU countries during the law’s negotiation.

Digital policing powers

Ebner, who oversees governance matters at Europol, said “almost all investigations” now have an online dimension.  

The investments in tech and innovation to keep pace with criminals is putting a “massive burden on law enforcement agencies,” he said.

The Europol official has been in discussions with Europe’s police chiefs about the EU agency’s upcoming expansion. He said they “would like to see Europol doing more in the innovation field, in technology, in co-operation with private parties.” 

“Artificial intelligence is extremely costly. Legal decryption platforms are costly. The same is to be foreseen already for quantum computing,” Ebner said. Europol can help bolster Europe’s digital defenses, for instance by seconding analysts with technological expertise to national police investigations, he said.

Europol’s central mission has been to help national police investigate cross-border serious crimes through information sharing. But EU countries have previously been reluctant to cede too much actual policing power to the EU level authority. 

Taking control of law enforcement away from EU countries is “out of the scope” of any discussions about strengthening Europol, Ebner said.

“We don’t think it’s necessary that Europol should have the power to arrest people and to do house searches. That makes no sense, that [has] no added value,” he said.  

Pieter Haeck contributed reporting.