The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

Bundestag expands anti-terrorism regulations from 2002

2020-11-05T22:17:35.197Z


The practical needs have been evaluated several times: The Bundestag has extended a number of information obligations that were introduced in the course of September 11, 2001. Experts raised constitutional concerns.


Icon: enlarge

The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution in Cologne

Photo: Oliver Berg / dpa

Aviation companies, telecommunications providers and financial service providers must continue to provide information to the secret services when it comes to warding off a terrorist threat.

In order to combat international terrorism, the Bundestag has made a number of regulations from 2002 permanent and permanent.

The "practical need for these regulations and their appropriate use" has been confirmed in repeated evaluations, it was said to justify.

Specifically, it is primarily a matter of information obligations to the constitution protection, the Federal Intelligence Service and the military counterintelligence.

This involves, for example, passing on cell phone numbers.

The regulations had initially been introduced for a limited period under the impression of the 9/11 attacks.

They were then continuously extended.

BKA: Indispensable when there is a current terrorist threat

At a hearing in the Home Affairs Committee, some experts raised constitutional concerns.

However, the Federal Criminal Police Office supported the federal government's draft law.

The BKA argued that in view of the current terrorist threat, the intelligence services' findings are also indispensable for police investigations and prosecution.

Icon: The mirror

bah / dpa / AFP

Source: spiegel

All news articles on 2020-11-05

You may like

News/Politics 2024-02-01T09:40:05.871Z
News/Politics 2024-03-26T15:26:53.023Z

Trends 24h

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.