The government’s proposal comes in the wake of a tragic stabbing incident in the city of Solingen, which has been used as a catalyst to strengthen asylum laws and grant greater powers to the police authorities. However, what has caused shock is that these measures seem to contradict the government’s coalition agreement, as well as existing European regulations and the German Constitution.
The plan envisions that authorities can identify suspects by comparing biometric data, such as audio, video, and images, with publicly available information on the internet. This practice could have profound implications on fundamental rights, allowing for extensive tracking of individuals in sensitive situations, such as political demonstrations, thus opposing privacy and data protection principles.
Furthermore, the project faces direct conflicts with the recently adopted European Union Artificial Intelligence Regulation, which restricts the use of facial recognition systems to expand biometric databases. Despite expectations that the German government would adopt a more restrictive stance on the matter, the security package suggests an openness and expansion of these practices.
Among the additional concerns is the proposal for law enforcement to use data mining technologies to develop “predictive policing” practices. This strategy could deepen inequalities and open the door to racial discrimination, given the disparities in the performance of facial recognition systems on individuals of different ethnicities.
At a digital level, the German government has highlighted the importance of using the EU Digital Services Act, demanding that online platforms share user data with the police in cases of violent crimes. While aiming to strengthen security, this provision could threaten freedom of expression online, indicating a possible deprioritization of the protection of fundamental rights.
In response to this situation, thousands of citizens have taken to the streets in Berlin to protest, expressing their rejection of government initiatives. Various expert voices and civil society groups emphasize that these measures undermine fundamental rights, urging the administration to reconsider its approach and prioritize previously acquired legal and moral commitments.
Referrer: MiMub in Spanish
