Referral C-570/26 (Ariel, 28 May 2026)

Is it compatible with recitals 27 and 29 and Article 7 of Directive 2016/343, 1 and with the third to fifth sentences of recital 35 of Directive 2016/680, 2 to interpret national law – Article 146(3) of the Nakasatelno-protsesualen kodeks – as meaning that:

1. it is permissible to make use of powers of compulsion in order to obtain voice and speech samples from a suspect?

2. If so, what forms of compulsion are permitted to be used against the suspect?

3. Are [the following measures] permissible forms of compulsion:

3.1. the obligation to answer non-incriminating questions;

3.2. compulsory attendance in the event of failure to appear and the imposition of a fine in the event of refusal to answer non-incriminating questions;

3.3. threatening criminal-law consequences in the event of refusal to provide such samples?

____________

1 Directive (EU) 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings (OJ 2016 L 65, p. 1).
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).