Slashdot Mirror


German Court Abolishes German Snooping Law

Robert writes to mention that Germany's highest court has imposed limitations on the amount of spying governmental bodies can do on a suspect's computer. The ruling comes in response to a state law on North Rhine Westphalia that had allowed secret services to peer into a citizen's computer. "Court President Hans-Juergen Papier said that using such software contravened rights enshrined in Germany's constitution, adding that the decision would serve as a precedent across the country. The ruling emphasized that cyber spying by the authorities would have to receive the permission of a judge. The German government has described cyber spying as a vital tool in fighting terrorism."

5 of 201 comments (clear)

  1. Other European Spy Stuff by gnick · · Score: 4, Informative

    Also interesting is the article linked in TFA which gives an overview of domestic spying in Germany, Italy, the UK, and Greece, France, and Denmark.

    I have newfound respect for the Greeks.

    --
    He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
  2. My Fiancee's a German Lawyer by stevedcc · · Score: 4, Informative

    1) Germany doesn't have case law - there's no such thing as a precedent under German Law. This court's job is to rule on the legality of laws; the court can interpret how the law should be applied, then that becomes the law: another interpretation can't arise from another court

    2) This is Germany's Constitutional court - there's no higher or lower instance for this type of law.

    IANAL etc.

    --
    todo - The developer's equivalent of confession: "Forgive me Father, for I have sinned..."
  3. Re:Crazy World by Knuckles · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's not a tax as such. The state just collects the member fees of the catholic church on the church's behalf. If you don't pay your membership fees, you are not a catholic, as far as the church is concerned. However, I am opposed to the practice because it violates the complete separation of state and church which should be common practice among modern states.

    --
    "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
  4. Re:Ummmm.... by saibot834 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Dude, where/when are you living? I happen to live in Germany and I can tell you that there is only a tiny minority of extremists (US has this probably, too). Educate yourself just a tiny bit, please. Imho the amount of assholes in the world is fairly distributed around the world. But prejudice never seems to vanish...

    Now a few words about the actual story: First, it's only partially a victory for privacy. Both the supporters and the opponents of strict security laws count this judgment a success. That's because the Bundesverfassungsgericht (Federal Constitutional Court of Germany) didn't forbid online spying in principle. They found this specific law to be against the constitution, and they ruled that there have to be some security measures (such as authorization by judge in each case), but in principle it is possible for the German government to spy on people.

    On the other hand, they ruled for the first time, that there is a Grundrecht auf Vertraulichkeit und Integrität informationstechnischer Systeme (something like basic right for trust and integrity of IT systems) even though I am not really sure what consequences this will have.

  5. Re:Crazy World by Knuckles · · Score: 4, Informative

    the whole free speech thing regarding neo-nazis

    A few things to consider::

    These laws stem from the post-war time, and while I am fuzzy on the details in Germany, I would imagine that the US had a bigger hand in creating these (IMHO just) laws than the locals, who would have preferred to ignore the whole unhappy Holocaust incident. I certainly was that way in my home country, Austria. Post-war, these laws also had practical application, you really couldn't have Nazi ex-leaders clamoring for support in the streets. (I would think the US Army sees it similarly in Iraq right now, probably somewhat less appropriately.)

    Later, the rights of the Jews and other survivors of the Nazi atrocities had to be considered, of whom many still lived in Germany and Austria, though sadly (but understandably) many chose to stay the hell away -- Germany and Austria not exactly inviting them back, either. It's kind of hard to deal with random (or not so random) Germans/Austrians now living in your house, from which the Nazis had dragged you away into camps in the middle of the night. Those who chose to stay or come back to contribute to the Nazis' successor states' economic and moral resurrection had every right not to be subjugated to dribbling Nazis and neo-nazis in the streets and on the media, denying the Holocaust, etc. In any case, the Nazis had certainly forfeited their right to free speech, don't you think?

    The situation could change now and I am pretty sure that over a number of years, Germany would come to the conclusion that this exception should be removed. However, pretty strong neonazi parties have managed to enter several federal states' governments. These currently do not form a credible political force but are disturbing nonetheless, especially because their success clusters around (but is not strictly exclusive to) the post-GDR eastern federal states. Consequently, this pending discussion in Germany (and Austria) is delayed. In any case, IMHO the German neonazis also have forfeited their free speech rights, through voluntary association with mass murderers and through approx. 70 court-ruled violent crimes per year against foreigners, punks, leftists, jews, etc., the number of reported and unreported cases of course much much higher (dunno the numbers for Austria right now, I'd figure they are way lower per capita).

    --
    "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns