Exchange of blows in the Bundestag: New data retention moves closer

Contents

Representatives of the CDU/CSU and SPD parliamentary groups on the one hand and the FDP and Greens on the other made serious accusations in the plenary session on Thursday in the dispute over a new edition of suspicion-independent data retention –, this time initially limited to IP addresses. Günter Krings, legal policy spokesperson for the CDU and CSU, for example, brought out the big guns, saying that the now failed "traffic light" had been denying law enforcement agencies the necessary tools to "save children from the hell of sexual abuse" for three years. Helge Limburg (Greens) countered that the CDU/CSU and the SPD were "perfidiously using the worst criminal offenses" without weighing them up against other legal interests. This would discredit all opponents of the measure, which encroaches on fundamental rights.

FDP wants to prevent a new edition of data retention

Three draft bills on the subject are currently before MPs. The FDP parliamentary group has introduced a bill "to introduce a security order for traffic data in the Code of Criminal Procedure". The Liberals want to implement the quick freeze approach. The traffic lights had actually agreed on this in principle, but it had never progressed beyond the status of a draft bill from the Ministry of Justice. The FPD now wants to get down to business and at the same time prevent a new edition of the general and indiscriminate retention of connection and location data.

The Bundesrat has tabled a bill with which the federal states are campaigning for a one-month "minimum retention" of IP addresses to combat serious crime. The CDU and CSU have gone one step further with their own bill: they are pushing for the three-month logging of IP addresses and port numbers without cause as well as more options for radio cell queries, aka cell phone dragnet investigations.

Rhein criticizes "systemic impunity"

During the heated debate on core time, Andrea Lindholz (CSU) castigated the failure of the FDP, the Greens and Federal Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD), who had gone over the head of Federal Minister of the Interior Nancy Faeser (SPD) to swap IP address retention in favor of a longer rent freeze in a horse trade. In recent rulings, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has expressly permitted the logging of IP addresses regardless of suspicion in the fight against almost any crime. We "absolutely must use this option in the interests of victims and law enforcement".

With reference to child sexual abuse, Hesse's Minister President Boris Rhein (CDU) spoke on behalf of the state parliament of a "mass phenomenon", the investigation of which is often down to chance with the help of IP addresses. Those who are not in favor of a minimum retention period "de facto prevent the identification of the perpetrators" and allow them "systemic impunity". The conservative dismissed Quick Freeze as a fraudulent label. The Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) had shown that a one-month retention period would increase the detection rate by 90 percent.

Sebastian Fiedler (SPD) criticized the "sabotage policy of the FDP". In view of "penetrated babies" and live streaming of such images around the world, the victims were being mocked. The extent of this indescribable crime is "pandemic". He asked: "Does there always have to be blood on the streets first, like after Solingen?" Fiedler's parliamentary group colleague Peggy Schierenbeck also emphasized that the Social Democrats could not and would not rely on access providers voluntarily saving their data. Quick Freeze "alone" was not a sufficient alternative. SPD politicians Pars Marvi and Daniel Baldy pointed out that, according to the ECJ, data retention must be limited to what is absolutely necessary. Three months would be risky, one month would be better.

Always a dead end

In principle, the SPD decided in September to examine new data retention "with an open mind". However, Faeser continues to fight for the logging of IP addresses without suspicion and expressed confidence on Wednesday before the conference of federal and state interior ministers that an agreement with the CDU and CSU could be reached quickly.

Only Quick Freeze is legally secure and compliant with fundamental rights and European law, emphasized FDP MPs Thorsten Lieb and Manuel Höferlin. This is an order to freeze not only existing traffic data, but also traffic data that will be generated in the future. Höferlin emphasized that the grand coalition had failed several times with its legislative decisions on data retention. This instrument, which ultimately undermines trust in state organizations due to its excessiveness, has therefore never worked and has never been applicable.

Left and AfD against data retention

Data retention affects almost everyone in this country – including children on the internet and all innocent people, explained Limburg from the Greens. Such a breach of the constitution must not be allowed to continue. The CDU/CSU were also making window-dressing speeches, as Rhein & Co. had blocked more powers for law enforcement officers in the Bundesrat with the security package "for cheap party tactical considerations". His party colleague Marcel Emmerich pointed out that the Child Protection Association also wanted a legally secure solution and therefore Quick Freeze. Anything else would simply be the wrong approach.

"Democracy and mass surveillance do not go together," said Anke Domscheit-Berg from the left, rejecting the initiatives of the CDU/CSU and the federal states. Stephan Brandner rejected their legislative initiatives on behalf of the AfD "out of hand", as they wanted to "create the perfect surveillance state" and saw every citizen as a potential criminal. The drafts will now be discussed further in the committees before an ad hoc coalition, at least a black-red one, could get down to business – before the federal elections in February.

(mack)