Germany: `Internal security' laws
01 January 1991
Germany: `Internal security' laws
artdoc June=1994
`Internal security' laws:
moral panic and election campaigns
Since 1980 the German Penal and Penal Procedural Law has
undergone about 30 changes introducing new offences, increasing
punishment for some offences, and, most importantly, giving
greater powers to the police and prosecution agencies. In
addition new regulations for the secret services were introduced
in 1990 and new police laws for the Lands (regions). Despite all
of these changes a new wave of proposed internal security bills
have been produced by the political parties in the context of the
1994 election campaign. Both the government (conservatives and
liberals) and the social democratic opposition (SPD) are basing
their election campaigns on the supposed danger of organised
crime, which has been the main justification for increased police
powers over the past few years.
Bugging
In 1992 the first `Law against illicit drug traffic and other
forms of organised crime' was passed by the two chambers of the
federal government (Bundestag - Commons, Bundesrat - representing
the Länder governments) with the support of the SPD. The law not
only introduced `money laundering' as a new offence but also
legalised a range of proactive police methods: informers,
undercover agents, long term observation, police electronic
surveillance, and computer matching. The law gave police
practices a legal basis in the penal procedural code - the
results of surveillance can now be used in court where previously
they were sometimes restricted.
Almost immediately the then Minister of the Interior, Rudolf
Seiters, declared that these new surveillance techniques would
not be good enough to combat organised crime. He called for new
powers of bugging, and legitimating crimes committed by police
undercover agents. Bugging has been introduced as a police method
in most of the Land police codes, but the information gained
cannot be used in court. This would require a new law and a
restriction being placed on the inviolability of people's homes
which is guaranteed in Article 13 of the constitution. To amend
the constitution requires a two-thirds majority of the MPs and
therefore needs the support not just of the governing parties but
also of parts of the SPD. The party conference of the SPD has
accepted the need for this change but the government's coalition
partners the Free Democrats have, so far, not.
With both sides in the election trying to present themselves
as the toughest defenders of internal security, with little
consideration of the civil liberties implications, the situation
has become quite confused. The SPD has presented a bill for a
`Second Law against organised crime' including bugging whereas
the government coalition has presented a `Crime Fighting Bill
1994' without bugging.
Crime Fighting Bill 1994
The Bill is presented as a measure to combat mass delinquency,
political extremism and organised crime. It covers:
- restrictions on the evidence which can be presented to speed
up court proceedings; immediate imprisonment to avoid the
repetition of offences in cases of serious physical injury and
arson (apparently to repress neo-nazi and racist attacks);
- widening offences for which convicted foreigners can be
deported (eg: drug dealing and use); foreigners who have been
deported (generally for having entered illegally or staying
without a visa) will not be able to get a visa for five years
(even if they fulfil all the required conditions); smuggling
foreigners into the country or presenting a false asylum
application will become criminal offences and if committed
through an organised group will be punishable with from 6 months
(minimum) up to 10 years in prison (and the police will be
empowered to use telephone tapping against a suspected person);
- the offences under 1992 law regarding the forfeiture of assets
is to be broadened to include tho