Secret service reform following suspicion of espionage: New criticism of the planned increase in power

After the arrest of ex-BND chief August Hanning for suspected treason, a debate broke out about the federal government's planned intelligence reform. The legislative package is intended to give both the BND and the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution new surveillance options and also allow both organizations to carry out active sabotage operations. In view of the massive allegations against a former head of the BND, the question now arises as to whether such an increase in power is responsible for the services.

Hanning was arrested on Tuesday and taken into custody. He is accused of having his former office manager continue to supply him with sensitive information from the BND after his career ended. Hanning runs a consulting agency for security issues. In one case, he is said to have passed on the data to another secret service, the Azerbaijani service DTX.

One of Hanning's suspected motives could have been financial problems: from his time on the supervisory board of the Latvian bank PNB Banka, which went bankrupt in 2021, there were apparently claims against him in the double-digit million range.

For the federal government, all of this is not only an embarrassment, but also a threat to the intelligence reform it is planning. This was first discussed in the Bundestag in September and the legislative package is currently being discussed in committees.

Since Hanning's arrest, politicians from the Left and the Greens renewed and intensified their criticism of the plans. The left-wing faction's domestic policy spokeswoman, Clara Bünger, said: "It is fatal that the secret services are now to be given even more powers, and a new German secret police is to be created in November."

The Green Party's deputy parliamentary group leader Konstantin von Notz said that it is now important to "immediately remedy the problems that have become apparent and to position the service better and stronger for the future with the upcoming reform of the intelligence services."

In fact, the reform provides for an expansion of secret service powers that has never been seen before in the history of the Federal Republic. The core goal is to allow the services to take active measures for the first time. In the case of the BND, for example, this could be the sabotage of a Russian arms factory, or a hacker attack on government agencies in response to a cyber attack originating there.

In the case of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, which operates domestically, this involves, among other things, permission to secretly break into homes in order to tap into computers or thwart attack plans. This would mean that for the first time the Office for the Protection of the Constitution would enter an area of ​​activity that was previously strictly reserved for the police.

This is also tricky because the strict separation between actively intervening police and passively monitoring intelligence services is a lesson from German history. During National Socialism, the Secret State Police combined both areas of responsibility and was therefore one of the central instruments of the German policy of murder and persecution against Jews, other minorities and political opponents. The state security in the GDR was also involved as a secret police with the suppression of opposition members.

In addition to the new active interventions, the secret services' existing surveillance options are also being expanded. For example, they should be able to automatically compare photos with data from the internet, evaluate information using AI and access all surveillance cameras in Germany. At the same time, the reform weakens the control bodies, for example the Federal Data Protection Commissioner will no longer play a role in monitoring the services in the future.

There is so far no indication that the federal government is now planning serious changes to the reform because of the Hanning case. The vice-chair of the SPD parliamentary group, Sonja Eichwede, simply said that the Hanning case shows “how important and fundamental the control of the services by parliament and the independent control council is”. “In the upcoming reform of the intelligence services, we will ensure that these control bodies are given extensive control rights.”

It does not seem impossible that the reform will be supplemented by smaller regulations that are intended to prevent cases like Hanning's in the future. Eichwede had recently called for an unlimited waiting period after the end of his career, at least for top positions in the secret services. To date, high-ranking intelligence officers have often founded consulting and lobbying agencies like the Hannings after leaving government service.

The organization Lobbycontrol calls for a lifelong waiting period for all people who have worked in security-related professions. This is necessary “to protect Germany’s security interests and the integrity of our democracy,” said Lobby Control spokesman Timo Lange.

However, it seems questionable whether such waiting regulations are really enough to keep the secret services out of the headlines in the future. In any case, a look at the last few years suggests that the services have a much more fundamental problem with personnel selection. The best example is Hans-Georg Maaßen, who headed the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution between 2012 and 2018. He attracted attention with right-wing statements while in office and is now being monitored by his own former authority for right-wing extremist activities.