The Cour d’appel de Paris has referred several questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) regarding the interpretation of Directive 2016/680 in the context of criminal proceedings against an individual, HW, involving the collection of identification data by French authorities: Case C-371/24, Comdribus. These questions arise from criminal proceedings where HW challenges the legality of the systematic collection of their identification data by French authorities. The Cour d’appel de Paris seeks clarification on whether such practices align with EU law, specifically Directive 2016/680, which governs the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of prevention, investigation, detection, or prosecution of criminal offenses. Key questions referred to include the following: (A) Is Article 10 of Directive 2016/680, (2) read in conjunction with Article 4(1)(a) to (c) and Article 8(1) and (2) of that directive, to be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as Article 55-1 of the French Code of Criminal Procedure, which provides for the systematic gathering of identification data (fingerprints and photographs) from persons who are suspected on one or more grounds of having committed or attempted to commit an offence?; (B) Is Article 10 of Directive 2016/680, read in conjunction with Article 4(1)(a) to (c) and Article 8(1) and (2) of that directive, to be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as Article 55-1 of the French Code of Criminal Procedure, which allows the prosecution and conviction on a standalone basis of a person who has refused to consent to the gathering of identification data even though that person is not prosecuted for or convicted of the offence which formed the basis of the measure for gathering identification data?