Politics · de.indymedia · · 56m
Bundestag debate on secret service reform: Between shredding and improving
Deutsch (original) · Auto-translated to English
Symbolbild · Ansgar Koreng / CC BY-SA 3.0 de · Wikimedia Commons
The secret service reform has reached the Bundestag. In an initial debate, the gap was large: While Interior Minister Dobrindt takes it for granted that German secret services should be given operational capabilities, parts of the opposition warn of dangers to democracy.
“Today we are bringing the largest amendment to the law governing our country’s intelligence services into parliamentary deliberation,” said Federal Chancellery Minister Nina Warken (CDU) at the beginning of her speech at the first reading of the intelligence reform in the Bundestag. And many other speakers didn’t hold back with superlatives.
This is not surprising given the hundreds of pages of legislation that is intended to fundamentally transform the Federal Intelligence Service and the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution. When the federal government presented its drafthttps://netzpolitik.org/2026/geheimdienstreform-zeitenwende-fuer-spione/...July submitted, it quickly became clear: the reform was a break. Above all, a break with the separation requirement, which is supposed to separate the work of the police and secret services in Germany.
The separation requirement, according to the left's domestic policy spokeswoman Clara Bünger, "is the direct lesson from the crimes of the German fascists." Anyone who wants to abolish it “wants a new German secret police.” And that, according to Bünger, “never went well”. Her speech was accompanied by numerous heckling as she accused the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution of complicity in the NSU murders.
Federal Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt (CSU) did not even try to defend himself against the separation requirement accusation. “Yes, intelligence agencies are becoming real intelligence agencies,” he replied. Gathering information about threats becomes real defense. Operational skills? “Of course,” says Dobrindt. This is also “protection of the country, population and democracy”.
Understanding and criticism of excessive plans
Konstantin von Notz, long-time member of the Parliamentary Control Committee and deputy leader of the Green Party in the Bundestag, expressed understanding for the expansion of powers - especially at the BND. The fact that the explosives-laden drone did not trigger a “fire inferno” at Halle/Leipzig Airport was “only due to chance”.
He supports the fact that the BND can work on an equal footing with other services in these “rough times”. But at the same time, von Notz did not skimp on criticism, particularly of the “excessive plans” for the Office for the Protection of the Constitution. According to von Notz, some of the package is incompatible with the “foundation pillars of freedom”. And we should never question that when it comes to defending that very freedom. He warned that the package would end up “100 percent in Karlsruhe”. “It has to hold there.” But a lot still needs to be done and the time for Parliament to “get the best out of the reform” is short.
What von Notz means by this: A reform of the secret service laws originally became necessary due to the requirements of the Federal Constitutional Court. That had abouthttps://freiheitsrechte.org/ueber-die-gff/presse/pressemitigungen-der-...objected to, how the BND deals with internal German communication and that full-time, judicial-like control is needed. The deadline for these improvements expires at the end of the year.
Beware of an uncontrollable apparatus
In her speech, Clara Bünger from the Left was certain that the Federal Constitutional Court would also object to the currently planned law. It will stop the law, said Bünger. “But by then it may be too late.” She accuses the federal government of creating an “uncontrollable state apparatus”. “Now of all times they are making this security apparatus ready for the AfD. And they just need to grab it,” said the domestic politician. Their demand: to “put the law through the shredder”.
–––
The work of netzpolitik.org is financed by donations from our readers.
Become part of this unique community and support our public interest-oriented, advertising- and tracking-free journalismhttps://netzpolitik.org/spenden/?via=rss">nowwith a donation.
–––
https://netzpolitik.org/2026/geheimdienstreform-zeitenwende-fuer-spione/...for spies
Another speaker, Daniel Baldy from the SPD, sees the draft law as the “right answer” to the threats posed by terrorist organizations and other hostile states such as Russia and China.
However, he also sees a need for improvement: in dealing with those subject to professional secrecy, such as journalists and doctors, and in parliamentary control. He is looking forward to the parliamentary debate and the fact that the “security coalition” will be continued.
What happens next
After the first parliamentary discussion, the secret service law still has several stages ahead of it. The Interior Committee is responsible for the law, and experts will probably also give their assessment of the draft at a hearing.
Comments that had already been received on the federal government's draft under great time pressure with a deadline of just one week can be submittedhttps://netzpolitik.org/2026/stellungnahme-zur-geheimdienstreform-ein-e...Expect criticism. The Society for Freedom Rights (GFF) saw “the entire constitutional structure of the security authorities” being called into question, and the Federal Commissioner for Data Protection warned that the expansion of powers and control were disproportionate.
However, as von Notz indicated, time is short for fundamental and careful revisions.
–––
The work of netzpolitik.org is financed by donations from our readers.
Become part of this unique community and support our public interest-oriented, advertising- and tracking-free journalismhttps://netzpolitik.org/spenden/?via=rss">nowwith a donation.
Read the full story at the source
Source: de.indymedia