The Conference of Interior Ministers (IMK) is putting further pressure on the federal government to monitor Internet users without reason. “Data retention of IP addresses must finally be introduced,” insisted Brandenburg Interior Minister Michael Stübgen (CDU) at the conclusion of a meeting of federal and state interior ministers in Potsdam on Friday. “We owe this to the victims of terrorism, sexual abuse and other forms of hate and violence.” At the same time, the chairman indicated that access to stored Internet IDs and port numbers should be possible for the full range of crimes, regardless of suspicion. So far, Stübgen has justified the appeal mainly by saying that “we are not exhausting our options to protect children from such terrible crimes.”
Advertisement
The IMK now “considers the quick-freeze procedure for telecommunications data inadequate,” Stübgen now explained. He clarified: “If there is nothing in the freezer, nothing can be frozen.” Already in April, the Christian Democrats stressed on behalf of their counterparts: “The European Court of Justice also considers data retention necessary to determine the identity of the offender who has acquired, distributed, passed on or made available on the Internet child pornography.”
500,000 books disappeared from Internet Archive due to copyrightIn principle, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has repeatedly rejected data retention without justification. However, according to recent rulings by Luxembourg judges, general and indiscriminate storage of IP addresses may be permitted “limited to the period absolutely necessary to protect national security, combat serious crime and prevent serious threats to public safety.”
Federal Justice Minister Marco Buschmann (FDP) introduced a proposal to freeze traffic data in suspicious cases a year and a half ago. According to other liberals, this quick freeze is “legal, accurate and protects fundamental rights”. Federal Interior Minister Nancy Fesser (SPD) has been fighting for the storage of IP addresses and port numbers without reason and has long been blocking Buschmann’s draft. She has support from the ranks of the Social Democrats.
Separate criminal offence for cyberbullying
The IMK has also advocated a separate criminal offence for cyberbullying. The conference of genuinely responsible justice ministers should therefore examine whether the corresponding step is necessary or whether current criminal provisions need to be adjusted. Bullying in the virtual space, for example through insults, threats or exposure on social media, is “a growing phenomenon that has been underestimated so far,” Stubgen said, justifying the initiative. It “leads to serious consequences for victims in many areas of life.” In the digital sphere, insults are sometimes seen by hundreds of people. According to a recent study by the World Health Organization (WHO), one in six schoolchildren is a victim of cyberbullying.
The Bundestag passed a bill in 2021 with which it replaced the Criminal Code (StGB) and thus wanted to enable a more effective fight against stalking and to better catch online stalking. This includes withholding information in addition to unauthorized spying on data. Particularly intense and prolonged stalking should be prosecuted by the state. In such particularly serious cases, which also involve the use of “stalkerware”, there is a risk of up to five years in prison. Publishing intimate photos of a former relationship partner is also a punishable offense.
In 2022, the EU Commission proposed criminalising cyberstalking and bullying, sharing intimate images without consent, and inciting hatred or violence online across the EU. It has introduced a “minimum maximum sentence” of up to two years in prison.
E-Ankle Cuffs for Violent Offenders
The interior minister also wants victims of domestic violence to be better protected and perpetrators to be deterred. There should therefore be a “national legal regulation” on the use of electronic ankle bracelets. The device is intended to sound an alarm if the wearer, as a convicted violent offender, ignores the ban on contact or proximity. The measure is controversial because it is not ordered by the courts, but by the state police themselves, however, the rules on this vary between states. Federal Interior Minister Nancy Fesser (SPD) emphasized that it was also about protecting women with mandatory anti-violence training for perpetrators.
(MKI)
Federal election: EU Commission warns against Russian influence
