Karlsruhe examines data collection: Permitted for counter-terrorism?

Justice - Karlsruhe examines data collection: Permitted for counter-terrorism?

Security authorities in Germany have far-reaching powers to prevent terrorist attacks and organized crime. However, some believe that these violate the fundamental rights of those affected. The Federal Constitutional Court should provide clarity here.

President Stephan Harbarth said that it was about the tension between the state's security mandate and the protection of individual civil liberties.

The focus is on the possibilities that the legislator grants the Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) in particular - for example to collect data and exchange it with police authorities in the federal states and to secretly monitor contact persons of suspects. The Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte (GFF) has lodged a constitutional complaint against the BKA Act, which was amended in 2017. A ruling by the highest German court is not expected for several months. (Ref. 1 BvR 1160/19)

Plaintiff: No conviction, but serious consequences

In Karlsruhe, lawyer Bijan Moini pointed out the possible consequences of an entry in the police databases on behalf of the GFF: Those affected would sometimes be publicly stigmatized, missed appointments, police measures would become harsher, consequences for the job were conceivable. People are often not even convicted of crimes. People who are checked more frequently also end up in databases more often, said Moini, referring to people with a foreign appearance.

The GFF, a non-profit association, believes that the rules on the retention and use of data are too vague and far-reaching. It is a structural problem, said Moini, and not a "legislative mishap". The plaintiffs are demanding specific constitutional standards for the collection and storage of data. In this respect, the constitutional complaint breaks new ground.

Faeser: Data exchange serves the security of the population

Federal Minister of the Interior Nancy Faeser, on the other hand, defended the law as constitutional. The police authorities had to keep pace with developments in order to be able to investigate effectively. "They have to be up to date." The SPD politician said that it must be possible to link data as part of police work. "That is the hallmark of good police work." The BKA Act also provides for numerous review mechanisms in connection with the Federal Data Protection Act to ensure that data is not stored without cause, she said. "The law is robust against misuse."

According to the Minister, the exchange of data between police authorities is in particular a lesson learned from the case surrounding the right-wing terrorist group "National Socialist Underground" (NSU). "This serves to protect the security of the population," she said. The authorities needed the opportunity to exchange data so that terrorists could not commit acts undetected for years, as was the case back then.

Before the hearing, Faeser told journalists about the current global situation, the danger of Islamist terrorist attacks in Germany and the war in Europe. Germany often relies on foreign services, she said. Therefore, the necessary measures are needed in Germany "so that we can improve there". It is about prevention in the fight against terrorists and organized crime. "This does not stop at borders."

Senate has already objected to parts of the law once before

This is not the first time that Germany's highest court has dealt with the issue. In 2016, it imposed new limits on the security authorities in the fight against terrorism and declared some of the BKA's extensive powers to combat terrorism to be unconstitutional. The First Senate found "disproportionate interference in a number of individual provisions". (Ref. 1 BvR 966/09, 1 BvR 1140/09)

In order to prevent terrorist attacks, the BKA has been allowed to bug homes and spy on them with cameras since 2009. The state is also allowed to use Trojans, i.e. specially developed software that skims data from a suspect's computer hard drive.

According to the ruling at the time, all of this is compatible with fundamental rights in principle. It recognizes the importance of the fight against terrorism for democracy and fundamental rights. However, the court judged the specific design of the powers to be insufficient in various respects. In particular, the core area of private life was not sufficiently protected in some cases.

The BKA Act therefore had to be amended. The new version has been in force since May 2018. The GFF is now concerned with a "gap in constitutional law that has not yet been clarified", as it explained when presenting the constitutional complaint.

Read also:

• Year of climate records: extreme is the new normal
• Precautionary arrests show Islamist terror threat
• UN vote urges Israel to ceasefire
• SPD rules out budget resolution before the end of the year

1. The BKA, part of Germany's security authority, has expanded powers for counter-terrorism and organized crime prevention, but these are deemed a violation of rights by some.
2. The Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe will decide if these powers are constitutional, as they relate to the tension between security and civil liberties.
3. The focus of the dispute is the BKA Act, specifically the authority to collect data and share it with state police, along with secret monitoring of suspects' contacts.
4. The Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte (GFF) has lodged a constitutional complaint against these practices, claiming they are too vague and far-reaching.
5. Lawyer Bijan Moini, representing the GFF, argued that potential consequences for individuals include stigmatization, harsher police measures, and job implications.
6. According to Moini, the plaintiff's case breaks new ground by demanding specific constitutional standards for data collection and storage.
7. Federal Minister of the Interior Nancy Faeser supports the law, arguing that police authorities need updated powers to investigate effectively and prevent terrorism.
8. Faeser defended the law as constitutional, citing numerous review mechanisms under the Federal Data Protection Act to prevent misuse of data.
9. The Justice Minister emphasized the importance of data exchange between police authorities, using the 'National Socialist Underground' (NSU) case as an example to protect the population's security.

Source: www.stern.de