Slashdot Mirror
German Data Retention Law Ruled Unconstitutional
mseeger writes "The German Federal Constitutional Court has ruled the country's current data retention law unconstitutional. All stored telephone and email communication data, previously kept for six months in case it was needed by law enforcement, now must be deleted as soon as possible. The court criticized the lack of data security and insufficient restrictions for access to the data. The president of the court said continuing to retain the data would 'cause a diffusely threatening feeling of being under observation that can diminish an unprejudiced perception of one's basic rights in many areas.' While it doesn't disallow data retention in general, the imposed restriction demands a complete reworking of the law."
An anonymous reader contributes the Court's press release and more information on the ruling, both in German.
Now only if the rest of The West would follow suit.
Most ignorance is vincible ignorance. We don't know because we don't want to know. --Aldous Huxley
Unfortunately, the explanations given by the Federal Constitutional Court can be read as an instruction manual on how to create a data retention law 2.0 that will pass the courts muster. Shouldn't take those politicians too long to come up with the new version. :/
In my story submission, I included a few more details. 35,000 citizens filed a class-action against this law and now after two years we finally see this law voided.
The "Bundesverfassungsgericht" has once again proven that is the most significant institution in Germany that protects citizens' constitutional rights - in this case the right of informational self-determination.
Data retention without prior suspicion hasn't been ruled unconstitutional, so we've stepped onto the slippery slope and opened Pandora's box. From now on, we're only going to be haggling over how much data can be retained and what it can be used for. This is not a victory.
If only the US court system was this intelligent!
I wonder if this could cause conflict with EU ACTA negotiations. I would expect data retention would be necessary for much of the copyright legislation (eg 3 strikes and similar)
Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
Hey, maybe SETI can use this to finally find those little green men they're after. "We made a guge breakthrough today when we partially reconstructed a piece of alien porn from some noise near Centauri!"
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Although this ruling is what us IT guys would expect from any reasonable court, the fact of the matter is that judges know shit. The Chaos Computer Club worked their asses off providing expertise to the court, while also mobilizing the German IT scene and putting out pressure on opposing (governmental) parties. This is their success and I salute them. Guess I should get around to finally apply for membership myself...
blow your mind already
Posted this in the wrong place. But, yeah, good for you Germany!
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
There can be only logical solution: Change the constitution.
Anyone taking bets that this will be the solution rather than to throw the unconstitutional domestic spying out the door?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
It's dangerous to praise a decision with political ramifications - something good can be twisted into something bad on the next iteration. Still and all, the language is encouraging, and poses the rhetorical question:
"How messed up is the US when we have to take cues on privacy laws from, of all people, the Germans?"
As another poster pointed out about informational self-determination, the Germans are discussing the implications of privacy. US courts are still diddling over whether privacy expectation is even "constitutional".
Cool! I wish the US could get a constitution like that.
"...a diffusely threatening feeling of being under observation... can diminish an unprejudiced perception of one's basic rights in many areas."
^^ This.
Someone gets it.
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
Soon all social networking networks will be based in Germany providing new jobs and revenue.
Undetectable Steganography? Yep, there's an app fo
Posted this in the wrong place. But, yeah, good for you Germany!
No, you didn't. The little green men were using Germany's lax data retention laws to track people down for their brain scanning.
Your perceived mistake was implanted in your head in an attempt to keep you from posting the truth. Fortunately for us, they were a little slow and you posted just in time to warn us.
Beware! They may be doing more things to your brain as you read this!
I do not have first hand experience of many other countries, but this is just a stepping stone for the government - it will not deter the government from continuing in the same direction. In the last decade or so, it has been my distinct impression that there has been rise of cases where the German government first pushes through some (partially harsh) legislation, only to have it challenged at the Bundesverfassungsgericht and just continuing on with however much the judges let them get away with.
All this leads to is the politicians just putting the burden of finding out what the maximum restrictive law can be to the judges of the highest court.
No attempt is made at trying to find workable laws, but instead they try and overreach 'in the name' of terrorism or child porn in trying to control what people can do.
I laud the judges for their rebuke of the law, but I also mourn that our politicians still aren't considering educating themselves of what is possible, what is useful, what is sensible; or trying to find other ways of mitigating problems rather than just following the first impulse of prohibiting whatever the problem is perceived to be.
Germany, to me, is not that far off needing to take some guidance from a recent TED talk: 4 ways to fix a broken legal system:
http://www.ted.com/talks/philip_howard.html
All this means is that the standard for corporations and government are even farther apart.
Sure it protects personal privacy, but this protects corporations from lawsuits, and their bottom line even more.
I was having a conversation with a consultant on Risk/Threat assessment of an IMS project we are working on. The difference in retention is amazing. Because I work in government, we are expected to keep stuff around for YEARS, usually 5 to 7 locally, and then maybe decades in an archive. This is for transparency, and to keep records of exactly of what was done, when, by whom. We get sued, and this material gets dredged up and used against us in court. However in the private sector, the retention is measured in Days, usually 5 to 7, and then Deleted/Destroyed. This is for liability, so people cannot use this information against them in court.
So next time you are thinking of making fun about how much waste is in government, or how much more it costs, or how much longer it takes to develop in government, understand this is but ONE of many differences of extra things we HAVE to do by LAW for ALL of our systems, and the reason behind it is accountability. Government is accountable for their actions and people have a right to know about it. Corporations have to be accountable to their shareholders in that they must produce as much profit in the least time possible. The two are radically different enviroments and so it should be no surprise that the procedures used to do anything are vastly different also.
That said, there is waste in government, just like there is in corporations. Much of ours seems to be based on past actions being penalized. Basically some arm of the government many years ago, will have done something bad. Rather than punish directly those involved, they punish everyone else by subjecting them to policies that will supposedly "prevent this from happening in the future". Thus we end up with standards about how many foundation documents above and beyond reason, and when looking for vendors, you have to go through a long process, etc... And while it might prevent people from wasting money, it generally makes the project twice as long and twice as expensive, which essentially means you are sort of wasting money and time anyway, and limits the kinds of projects you can do, as some are just too expensive now.
Anyway that is my government/corporate rant including retention.... Vent!
See, the difference is that in Germany the people own their society and their politicians are accountable to the people. In North America, it is the opposite - the Corporate owns the politicians and the society, the people are just a mass of slaves.
Ours sucks!
While I would have preferred them to find long data retention unconstitutional in general, I can live with that. I'm opening a bottle of champagne.
And a really huge thanks to Prof. Papier, the Chief Justice, who will retire soon. Thank you, man. That guy has been one of the few people in our republic who constantly held up civil liberties.
Maybe we could gain better traction when backing this success for personal liberties by talking also about how it makes us safer from organized crime, foreign governments, etc. Not only can law enforcement use this data, but if there are any holes in security of such systems, so can the (evil) hackers and those that wish a nation harm.
'the Internet is right.'
n/t
How long will it take our wonderful, freedom-loving United States government to pull a few strings and make this 'dangerous terrorist-supporting precedent' go away quietly?