After spy operation | Bremen secret service receives 500 requests for information – all at once

“The Office for the Protection of the Constitution strengthens right-wing structures instead of protecting people from them,” says Caroline Breuer, and she also has arguments for this. Photo: IMAGO/Eibner Does the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution actually know about you?

I don't know what the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution knows about me - and that is the core of the problem. In any case, I have never made an inquiry to the Office for the Protection of the Constitution. As people involved in Bremen, we have had many conversations in this city in the last few months: with people we are friends with, with people who are involved here and are committed to a diverse society. For many of them, the question arose again and again as to what the Office for the Protection of the Constitution actually knows about them.

In Bremen it has reached such an extent that people who have simply bought a book in the "Golden Shop" are wondering whether the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution is now also watching them. We then decided to turn it into a campaign and to give political expression to this mistrust of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution and this uncertainty in the city with 500 requests for information.

Caroline Breuer is press spokeswoman for the “Bremen will not be a Trump country” alliance. It was founded at the beginning of the year to defend fundamental rights against secret services and the shift to the right.

What happened in the “Golden Shop”?

In the spring of this year it became known that, on the instructions of Wolfgang Weimer, the Federal Government Commissioner for Culture and Media, three bookstores were excluded from the German Bookstore Prize because they allegedly had "information relevant to the protection of the constitution." The fact that an institution that can hardly be controlled democratically interferes in artistic freedom to such an extent clearly crosses borders and once again reinforces our mistrust of the domestic secret service.

Who belongs to your alliance? Only groups that are monitored by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution?

No, it is Bremen civil society groups that have come together for this campaign. Part of the campaign are the Bremen regional association of Die Linke, the AStA of the University of Bremen, the base group Antifascism, the Studis against the right, the Bremen Refugee Council, the Interventionist Left, the Red Aid, the Green Youth, the Jusos and the Bremen Peace Forum. This is the current status.

The campaign runs against the background of the undercover agent affair against the interventionist left. What else has come out since the beginning of January?

Dîlan S. spied on large parts of Bremen's civil society. He was active in various groups and had a very broad base and was also involved in democracy protests a year and a half ago. We therefore demand that Interior Senator Eva Högl, who is superior to the Office for the Protection of the Constitution, take political responsibility for this.

There was a confrontational conversation in which Dîlan S. became suspicious. There was lawyer Anatol Anuschewski, who later resigned as deputy judge at the State Court after an apparent media-driven campaign. What's wrong with a lawyer accompanying such a conversation?

First of all, nothing. Not only do we as an alliance say this, but also the Hanseatic Bar Association, for example: it is part of a lawyer's job to take part in such discussions. At the same time, we see this as an intervention by the secret service in the judiciary. We see that the Office for the Protection of the Constitution is not doing what it is supposed to do - for example, protecting us from right-wing structures - but, as we have seen in countless other examples, strengthening these right-wing structures. That's why we see it as a fundamental threat to democracy, especially in times of a shift to the right. We join the demand of the Left Party here in Bremen to disband the Office for the Protection of the Constitution.

Some observers suspect an orchestrated campaign by the CDU as the reason for Anuschewski's resignation.

I can't give a final assessment of that. But we see that the CDU is massively involved in discrediting us and preventing us from using our rights. In response to our requests for information, the CDU has currently made a small inquiry to Bremen's citizens as to whether the use of a right - we ask the Office for the Protection of the Constitution what it knows about us - paralyzes its work. The CDU is therefore part of authoritarian developments in this society.

The resignation of Anuschewski and later his colleague Lea Voigt was largely drummed up by “Spiegel”. There are indications that the paper received information from security circles.

Information has been leaked that comes either from the Office for the Protection of the Constitution itself or from the Parliamentary Control Committee. We don't know where exactly. The Bremen public prosecutor's office is investigating unknown persons.

When informants are exposed, it is often a huge catastrophe for those in their immediate vicinity. How do people deal with it, what fractures and injuries does it leave behind?

You have to ask the interventionist left in particular. In any case, that left a lot of hurt and a lot of uncertainty. That's exactly why it's important to address this politically now. That's why the Interventionist Left is part of our alliance: We have to counter the use of spies politically and dismantle the Office for the Protection of the Constitution.

Dissolve because it cannot be reformed?

We have seen countless examples - be it Hans-Georg Maaßen, the former head of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, who is now monitored by his own agency; be it the NSU, whose exposure is now 15 years old: the Office for the Protection of the Constitution strengthens right-wing structures instead of protecting people from them. The problem cannot be reformed because it is inherent in the protection of the constitution. In times of a huge shift to the right, it poses a significant danger to people in a democracy.

There is a lawsuit regarding the deployment of Dîlan S. before the Bremen Administrative Court. What is being requested?

The lawsuit aims to clarify whether the surveillance of the interventionist left was even legally permissible. In particular, Dîlan S. has had close relationships with members of the group for years and the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution has spied on the core area of ​​​​privacy.

On Thursday you want to submit the requests for information together and have sent an invitation to the SPD Interior Senator Högl. What was the answer?

We received an answer from the Interior Senate that we are allowed to submit our requests for information with two of us; press representatives are not allowed in. 500 people from Bremen want to know from the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution what it has stored about them. We strongly criticize the fact that the Senator for the Interior obviously does not think it is necessary to accept this personally.

Is there any experience in Bremen of how the Office for the Protection of the Constitution responds to such requests?

We assume that he will provide information, as he has already done so in the past. But it probably won't be incredibly detailed. If the Office for the Protection of the Constitution completely denies the right to information, that would be illegal. But we are prepared for this, be it with lawsuits or further public relations work.

Their alliance is called “Bremen will not be a Trump country.” What is the Trump reference?

We see parallels between the authoritarian restructuring that is currently happening in the USA and the developments here in Bremen: that the secret service is intervening in parts of the judiciary, is expanding its agitation, and is not adhering to the rule of law. This is well advanced in the USA, so we have to take action against it now.

This article cost you nothing. Us: research, production and technology. We saved on office rent as well as printing and distribution. And we gave up salary. Nevertheless, the calculation doesn't work without you. We need 300,000 euros by the end of the year. You pay what you can, in return we keep writing.

No paywall, no small print, just one goal: that nd stays.