Expanded camera access under constitutional revamp
In a move that has sparked controversy, the Berlin Senate is planning a reform of the state's constitution protection law. The proposed changes, due to decisions by the Federal Constitutional Court on the constitution protection laws of Bavaria and Hesse, could significantly alter the way video surveillance is conducted in public spaces and the role of the Verfassungsschutz (VS), the domestic intelligence agency.
At the heart of the controversy is a draft law that proposes a "simple observation necessity" for video surveillance in public spaces. Critics, including the GFF expert, consider this plan dystopian and unconstitutional, arguing that it could lead to anyone moving in Berlin's public spaces being permanently observed by the VS.
Dietmar Marscholleck from the Federal Ministry of the Interior believes the draft law establishes the VS as an effective intelligence agency. Marscholleck proposes including the threat from "foreign powers" like Russia and China in the highest category of observation necessity per se. However, critics argue that the threshold for intervention by the VS is insufficient, and there's no clear judicial oversight.
The plan also allows for the deployment of undercover employees and informants, and the VS could potentially demand an interface for all cameras in train stations. This raises concerns about the potential for broad and intrusive surveillance, with the VS using the data for observing activities against the free democratic basic order (FDGO).
Another criticism is the lack of regulation on when the VS may carry out which measures, and the changes would not meet the requirements of the constitutional court. The new law requires a "heightened observation necessity" for particularly long and intrusive deployments, but this is already the case for crimes with a maximum sentence of three years imprisonment.
Moreover, the draft law makes it easier for the VS to monitor contact and accompanying persons, even if they themselves do not meet the criteria for observation. Conversations with the "wrong" sources could lead to observation by the VS, establishing a kind of contact liability that could have a paralyzing effect on political life.
The data protection officer of the State of Berlin, Meike Kamp, was not involved at an early stage in the drafting of the law, and believes her expertise could have been useful. The GFF had filed suit in both cases, arguing that the plan violates federal data protection law, as data from video surveillance can only be processed for averting danger or pursuing criminal offenses.
Notably, the name of the Berlin domestic intelligence chief mentioned in the draft law concerning the redefinition of the observation powers of the Verfassungsschutz is Sinan Selen. Despite the controversies, the final decision on the draft law lies with the Berlin Senate, and the public awaits further developments with keen interest.
One point of reassurance for some is that journalists are not given any special protection in the new draft law, ensuring that the principles of press freedom are maintained. However, the overall concern remains that the proposed reform could lead to a significant expansion of VS powers, with potential implications for individual privacy and civil liberties.
Read also:
- United States tariffs pose a threat to India, necessitating the recruitment of adept negotiators or strategists, similar to those who had influenced Trump's decisions.
- Weekly happenings in the German Federal Parliament (Bundestag)
- Southwest region's most popular posts, accompanied by an inquiry:
- Discussion between Putin and Trump in Alaska could potentially overshadow Ukraine's concerns
