German court rules that data retention “violates fundamental right to privacy”

March 19th, 2009

Good news from our friends in the German Working Group against Data Retention:

As the first German court, the Administrative Court of Wiesbaden has found the blanket recording of the entire population’s telephone, mobile phone, e-mail and Internet usage (known as data retention) disproportionate.

The decision published today by the Working Group on Data Retention (decision of 27.02.2009, file 6 K 1045/08.WI) reads: “The court is of the opinion that data retention violates the fundamental right to privacy. It is not necessary in a democratic society. The individual does not provoke the interference but can be intimidated by the risks of abuse and the feeling of being under surveillance [...] The directive [on data retention] does not respect the principle of proportionality guaranteed in Article 8 ECHR, which is why it is invalid.”

The Working Group on Data Retention which has initiated a class action of over 34,000 citizens against the total logging of the entire population’s communications and movements welcomes the court decision very much. It calls on social democrats and christian democrats to reject the latest government project to allow Internet service providers to record everybody’s Internet surfing habits.

“We call on all citizens to contact their MPs now in order to protest against the proposed retention of web surfing habits,” says Werner Hülsmann, member of the board of the forum of computer scientists for peace and social responsibility and actively working in the Working Group on Data Retention. To stop the project, which the Bundestag will debate on Thursday in the first reading, the Working Group on Data Retention has set up a campaign page on the Internet. In early March, the Federal Council of Germany (Bundesrat) also warned that the proposed “storage of all Internet usage data without a specific cause or with blanket coverage [...] violates” the Constitution.

“The recent criticism by Federal Minister of the Interior Wolfgang Schäuble (CDU) of the Constitutional Court’s preliminary decision on data retention proves that his surveillance mania is limitless”, criticizes Patrick Breyer of the Working Group on Data Retention. “It is not ‘a matter for the legislature’ to keep eroding our constitutional guarantees protecting us from errors and abuses by the authorities. We urgently need to establish a Fundamental Rights Agency to have all existing powers and programs of the security authorities systematically and scientifically reviewed as to their effectiveness, cost, adverse effects, alternatives and compatibility with our fundamental rights.”

Granted, this isn’t the end of the matter in Germany. It’s a decision of one court but may be appealed, while the highest court in Germany (the Constitutional Court) has yet to make a final ruling. It is, however, a very encouraging sign – particularly as the Constitutional Court has already indicated a provisional view that data retention may be invalid. It’s also very helpful for our own case with its finding that data retention is disproportionate and unnecessary.

Entry Filed under: Data Retention, Mass surveillance

4 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Ivor Sweeney  |  April 12th, 2009 at 1:30 pm

    Surely we in Ireland can object to this 1984 Style Big Brother law?
    Can we start a petition, lobby an MEP? Bring a case to the high court?

    Obviously our government has let us down again.

    I don’t mean to sound alarmist ….. but this is the end of Irish democracy!

  • 2. TJ  |  April 12th, 2009 at 4:03 pm

    DRI is already bringing a High Court challenge. It would certainly be a good idea to let your MEP know that you value privacy – especially as they shortly face re-election. Contact details for sitting MEPs here:
    http://www.europarl.ie/irish.html

    Voting record of sitting MEPs:

    Proinsias De Rossa voted for data retention.
    Mary Lou McDonald, Gay Mitchell, and Marian Harkin voted against.
    Eoin Ryan, Liam Aylward, Avril Doyle, Mairead McGuinness,
    Simon Coveney, Brian Crowley, Kathy Sinnott, Jim Higgins, and
    Sean O’ Neachtain abstained.

  • 3. That’s it. | The Du&hellip  |  April 27th, 2009 at 8:49 pm

    [...] After last year’s sueing of Eircom by four of the major record companies in this country, this April’s conviction of the Pirate Bay operators, I was shocked today to read a statement of the German minister for family affairs where she condems all internet users able of using a search engine as “possible pedophiles”. This makes one thing clear: in times when most people are considered lucky in still having a job and have other things on their minds than worrying about the internet, menaces to what we consider guaranteed will crawl from whatever dark space their were inhabiting before. Either major record and gaming companies unable to adjust their business models to reality (jaysus, they are still thinking there’s money to be made with CD’s), or governments who were unable to tighten their grip on their citizens with the fear of terror will come up with even more phoney reasons why the internet should be better “controlled” and made more “safe”. [...]

  • 4. Digital Rights Ireland &r&hellip  |  October 9th, 2009 at 9:38 am

    [...] with the German decisions against data retention, this isn’t directly applicable to our High Court challenge. But it is extremely useful as [...]

Leave a Comment

Required

Required, hidden

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Contribute

Please support our important work!

Calendar

March 2009
M T W T F S S
« Feb   May »
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  

Most Recent Posts