Germany de.indymedia
Letter to MPs: 28 organizations oppose intelligence reform
Civil rights organizations warn that the secret service reform weakens the separation requirement, expands surveillance powers and provides too little control over the services. They demand a “no” from the A
Deutsch (original) ·Auto-translated to English
Civil rights organizations warn that the secret service reform weakens the separation requirement, expands surveillance powers and provides too little control over the services. They are calling for a “no” vote in Friday’s vote.
The Humanist Union, along with 27 other organizations, has onehttps://www.humanistische-union.de/pressemeldeen/ihre-stimme-gegen-die...Appeal written to the members of the German Bundestag, in which they call on politicians to take action against thehttps://netzpolitik.org/2026/kurz-vor-bundetagsabstimm-an-welchen-st...the federal government to reform the intelligence servicesagree. The vote will take place on Friday, November 13th.
The organizations, which include the Committee for Fundamental Rights and Democracy, the Republican Lawyers' Association (RAV) and the Association of Democratic Lawyers (VDJ), point out that the reform weakens the constitutional requirement of separation between police and secret services.
This separation requirement exists because of the historical experience of the secret police under National Socialism. The authors criticize that the Federal Intelligence Service and the Office for the Protection of the Constitution should be given police powers. In addition, the foreign secret service BND is to become even more active domestically than before.
More surveillance powers
They also warn against expanding the secret services' access to state and private video surveillance as well as biometric comparisons and analyzes with this data.
In the eyes of the 28 organizations, it is also dangerous that the federal government, together with the parliamentary control committee, will be able to secretly decide on the “special determination case” in the future. If this is decided, significantly deeper interference in fundamental rights by the intelligence services would be possible while at the same time significantly lower reporting and documentation requirements. Civil rights organizations fear a kind of secret state of emergency here.
Inadequate control
The letter also criticizes inadequate control mechanisms. The draft law stipulates that the Federal Data Protection Commissioner will largely be deprived of his control function. In contrast to the increasing powers of the services, control of the secret services would be restricted.
The weakening of the protection of those subject to professional secrecy such as lawyers, journalists or clergy is also dangerous. Although the law recognizes in principle that there are those subject to professional secrecy, if they obtain information relevant to the secret services in their professional activities, the protection of professional secrecy may no longer apply.
The signatories consider the reform to be fundamentally wrong because it paves the way for the transition to a surveillance state. They are calling on MPs not to vote for the draft.
The open letter
Dear Members of the German Bundestag,
The Bundestag is facing a far-reaching decision about the future of our fundamental rights and the democratic control of state security authorities. The planned “Law to Reform the Law of the Intelligence Services” will significantly expand the powers of the Federal Intelligence Service (BND) and the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV). This draft represents a paradigm shift in the security structure and far-reaching restrictions on fundamental rights. We consider the proposed law to be a threat to democracy, largely unconstitutional and irresponsible.
We therefore appeal to you: do not agree to this draft law!What is referred to as reform here means above allmore surveillance, data collection and opportunities for government intervention - while at the same time insufficient control.
The draft goes far beyond the adjustment of intelligence law required by the Federal Constitutional Court with regard to the intervention thresholds of the services.
Weakening of the separation requirement
The Federal Constitutional Court justified the constitutionality of the intelligence services by saying that they have more extensive powers to collect data, but no police rights to intervene (see the BVerfG, judgment of April 26, 2022 - 1 BvR 1619/17, BVerfGE 162, 1, paras. 154-156).This is the constitutional requirement of separation.
However, the draft law provides for operational powers to avert danger for the secret services. That would police the services. According to the draft law, both services will be allowed to sabotage IT systems in the future. They should be able to influence all objects, including digital data sets, software, digital infrastructures, etc. Such a regulation would automatically also affect the fundamental rights of uninvolved third parties. This is a disproportionate interference with the rights of those not involved. The BfV should be authorized to take measures that even the police are not allowed to take. The BND is given limitless jurisdiction. The draft law expands the BND's domestic activities several times. A physical (violent) impact would also be possible.
Expansion of surveillance and interference with personal rights
At the same time, the monitoring options are to be significantly expanded. This further pushes the boundaries of what the state is allowed to learn and evaluate about people.The range of these measures is huge and encroaches on the fundamental rights of uninvolved people on a massive scale.
The plan includes, among other things, extensive access to video surveillance of public spaces by both government and private bodies (even in real time), the use of publicly available image and video data for biometric comparisons, and comprehensive automated analysis of large data sets - also with the help of artificial intelligence. Mass biometric analysis would not even have to be based on a particular threat.
This combination is another big step towards a surveillance state.
We shouldn't get used to the fact that the state can know more and more about its citizens.
Artificial intelligence can even decide on operational measures
In particular, the use of AI to the extent and in the manner envisaged in the draft is in many respects neither compatible with the Basic Law nor with EU law. The automated systems of the BND and BfV should even be able to make operational decisions independently and trigger countermeasures automatically when defending against cyber attacks - without a person even having to be aware of them beforehand.
Vaguely formulated intervention thresholds
The draft law differentiates between three levels of intervention thresholds; the higher the threat potential, the more intensive the permitted interference with fundamental rights. But the thresholds themselves are not sufficiently defined and are too low: even minor crimes can be used to trigger a “significant need for observation”.
Special discovery case in secret
The draft also introduces a “special determination case”. This should occur if the defense or tension situation is imminent. With the consent of the Parliamentary Control Board, the Federal Government can determine this case in secret without the knowledge of the Bundestag (Section 125 Para. 3 BNDG‑E). The occurrence of the special determination case enables significantly deeper interference in fundamental rights by the intelligence services while at the same time significantly lower reporting and documentation obligations. There is no maximum time limit. Overall, this poses a risk that the state of emergency will turn into a permanent state in which fundamental rights will be encroached upon without a resolution from the Bundestag plenum.
Inadequate control mechanisms
It is worrying that the planned expanded powers are not accompanied by correspondingly strong control mechanisms. Control responsibilities should be pooled in the Independent Control Council, which is to be increased. Previous control perspectives, including those of the Federal Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information, lose their responsibility in the draft. Since a requirement for advance approval from the Independent Control Council only exists from the third stage (“particularly intrusive”) and the administrative control is not a case-by-case control, a large part of the activities will not be checked at all.
The control mechanisms are therefore not being sufficiently developed - in contrast to the growing competencies of the services.
Professional secrecy is greatly weakened
The protection of professional secrets must not become collateral damage of such a reform. In the draft law, various professional groups (lawyers, clergy, parliamentary members, journalists, medical professions) are named as having professional secrecy. However, if lawyers or journalists obtain information relevant to the secret services as part of their normal professional activities, the protection of professional secrecy may no longer apply. Other professions with professional secrecy (such as notaries or pregnancy conflict counselors) are not even mentioned in the BND draft. Professional secrecy is fundamental for a relationship of trust, for constitutional guarantees and freedom of the press.
We believe this development is fundamentally wrong.
In this letter we can only address some of the problems in the draft law. We fear that the interaction of the measures set out therein will result in a transition to a surveillance state. A balance between security and freedom is not achieved. We urge you to assume your responsibility as representatives of the population. Examine the draft law from the perspective of fundamental rights, the requirement of separation and democratic control of the intelligence services.
Vote against this bill.Instead, implement the requirements of the Federal Constitutional Court without expanding the powers of the BND and BfV at the expense of fundamental rights, the rule of law and democratic control.
Signatory organizations:
- Humanist Union e.V.
- anna elbe – vision for Hamburg
- Working Group of Critical Lawyers Freiburg
- Working group of critical lawyers in Cologne
- Working group of critical lawyers in Mannheim
- Working group of critical lawyers in Tübingen
- Association for Freedom of Thought Munich
- D 64 – Center for Digital Progress
- The Other Bavaria e.V.
- Datapoints e.V.
- German Association for Data Protection e.V. (DVD)
- the data protection officer Rhein Main
- Digital society
- freedom foo
- Green Legal Impact
- International League for Human Rights
- Committee for Fundamental Rights and Democracy e.V.
- Critical lawyers at the FU Berlin
- Critical lawyers Leipzig
- Cultural Association Isar Loisach e.V.
- LOAD e.V. – Association for liberal internet policy
- New Association of Judges
- Editorial team CILIP | Civil Rights & police
- Republican Lawyers Association RAV e.V.
- Red Help e.V.
- Topio e. v.
- Association of Democratic Lawyers (VDJ)
- Whistleblower Network e.V. (WBN)
–––
Your donation for digital freedom rights
We report on current internet policy developments, uncover scandals and initiate debates. We are completely independent. Because our fight for digital freedom rights is financed by donations from our readers.https://netzpolitik.org/spenden/?via=rss">Nowdonate.