editor in the policy.F. A. Z.
The scheme was too broad and violated the owner of telephone and Internet connections in their informational self-determination and the constitutionally protected phone secret, said in a on Friday published a decision. Thus, the Federal constitutional court declared the provision to a first decision in 2012, once again, to be unconstitutional.
the core of the dispute is the question of how worthy of protection the so-called inventory data from Telecommunications operators. Unlike in the case of the connection data, which can be seen when someone with whom and from where was on the phone, include the inventory data is only General information about the user, the save the telecommunications company. This includes Name, date of birth or phone number, but also further customer data such as Bank details of the user or by the telephone service provider assigned access data. In addition, the assignment of an IP address including falls to a certain user. Police, prosecutors and intelligence services to query the information, to crimes, to educate or suspected attack plans. Just the inference of an IP address to a specific Person for the investigator is often essential to get criminal offenders on the track.
engagement less serious
Because data are commonly considered to be less sensitive than, for example, the connection data or even the content of communication, has been taken by the legislature to the access of public authorities so far, quite far. The phone provider may provide, according to Paragraph 113 of the TKG to the police and the judicial authorities and the intelligence services of information, when they need the information to fulfil their statutory duties. After the old provision in 2012, had been declared unconstitutional, had introduced in the legislature a judge of title in certain cases.
But also against the new version complained the pirate-politician Patrick Breyer and Katharina Nocun. Nearly 6000 people gathered behind their constitutional complaint.
For the judges this was the opportunity, a couple of basic things clarified. Accordingly, the transmission powers served to legitimate purposes – namely, effective law enforcement, security, as well as the fulfilment of the tasks of the intelligence services. However, the Constitution fulfilled the legal requirements only when the legislature defining the purposes of each of the powers is clear.
the result is: Even if the information about inventory data, whose validity and use are ways manageable, no engraving, engagement present, you may not be admitted to the just "into the blue". The transmission power of the paragraphs 113 to be due to its large range disproportionately. The legislature should create clear legal conditions.Updated Date: 17 July 2020, 12:20