Confirmation of the North Rhine-Westphalia Police Law in Karlsruhe - Police law of North Rhine-Westphalia has been validated by authorities in Karlsruhe
German Court Upholds Controversial Surveillance Powers, Rejects Some Complaints
In a landmark ruling, the Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe has upheld several controversial surveillance powers of the North Rhine-Westphalia police, while rejecting some complaints made by Digitalcourage, a Bielefeld-based association advocating for data protection and civil rights.
The specific provision in the North Rhine-Westphalia Police Act at the heart of the case was § 20c, which regulates police powers to conduct telecommunications surveillance and source telecommunications surveillance (i.e., the use of state Trojans to secretly access data and communications on digital devices).
The constitutional challenge concerned whether § 20c violated fundamental rights, including the right to the protection of confidentiality and integrity of information technology systems and the fundamental right to privacy of telecommunications. The complainants argued that some terrorist offenses referenced through the law did not protect sufficiently weighty legal interests to justify such invasive surveillance.
The court recognized a possibility of fundamental rights violations in these respects but found other complaints insufficiently substantiated, such as claims of lack of specificity, legal clarity, or a violation of private life’s core protection.
Notably, Digitalcourage was successful in its complaint against the Code of Criminal Procedure regarding the use of TKÜ (telecommunications surveillance under encryption). The court declared the use of source TKÜ in the investigation of criminal offenses punishable by up to three years in prison to be unconstitutional and void.
However, the majority of Digitalcourage's complaints against the North Rhine-Westphalia Police Law were deemed inadmissible by the Federal Constitutional Court. The court described the challenged provisions as "fully compatible with the Basic Law," the German constitution.
The legislature can ensure the protection of weighty legal interests by linking them to sufficiently serious criminal offenses from the outset. Heavy secret surveillance of telecommunications is only permitted in the absence of an imminent danger to protect particularly weighty legal interests, such as personal liberty, the existence or security of the federation or a state.
Digitalcourage insists on the protection of privacy and continues to advocate for data protection and civil rights. The association filed two constitutional complaints against so-called "state trojans," spy software that can be secretly installed on smartphones or computers of suspects.
The provisions at issue in the court case concern preventive tasks of the police, i.e., the prevention of dangers to public safety and order, which are regulated in the police laws of the federal states. The court's decision underscores the delicate balance between public safety and individual privacy in the digital age.
- In light of the German Court's decision, it would be beneficial for EC countries to review their respective vocational training policies and legislation, aiming to ensure the balance between public safety and individual privacy in the digital age, particularly in the context of police powers such as telecommunications surveillance.
- Despite the rejection of some complaints by the German Federal Constitutional Court, ongoing debates around privacy and data protection in the context of policy-and-legislation and politics, as seen in the Digitalcourage association's advocacy, highlight the need for continuous general-news updates and public discussions on these crucial issues.
