The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

"Homework" for the traffic light: Green politician Künast wants to improve NetzDG - but the EU and FDP stand in the way

2022-02-14T16:30:34.449Z


"Homework" for the traffic light: Green politician Künast wants to improve NetzDG - but the EU and FDP stand in the way Created: 02/14/2022, 17:18 By: Cindy Boden Renate Künast (Greens): The Greens politician has been fighting hate on the internet for years. © Bernd von Jutrczenka/dpa (Montage) The Greens complained a lot about NetzDG. There are still shortcomings in the fight against hate. No


"Homework" for the traffic light: Green politician Künast wants to improve NetzDG - but the EU and FDP stand in the way

Created: 02/14/2022, 17:18

By: Cindy Boden

Renate Künast (Greens): The Greens politician has been fighting hate on the internet for years.

© Bernd von Jutrczenka/dpa (Montage)

The Greens complained a lot about NetzDG.

There are still shortcomings in the fight against hate.

Now the party has government power - what about it now?

Questions to Renate Künast.

Munich/Berlin – Green* politician Renate Künast has been following German politics from the Bundestag for two decades.

She was already parliamentary group leader, party leader and federal minister.

She has been fighting publicly against hatred on the internet for a long time.

Only recently she reached a groundbreaking judgment before the Federal Constitutional Court.

In an interview with

IPPEN.MEDIA

, Künast makes it clear where she still wants to fight.

Because the Network Enforcement Act still has shortcomings.

Künast reveals here how and when these should be removed.

Interview with Renate Künast on NetzDG: What about it now?

Ms. Künast, if you had a list of important political issues that the traffic light parties and the Bundestag should address quickly, where would the Network Enforcement Act (NetzDG) ​​be in this ranking?

Quite far ahead in meaning.

But now comes the little but: We have the intermediate step that the Digital Services Act (DSA) is being discussed at European level.

That would be a kind of European network enforcement law, it's not just about hate crime*.

For me, the most urgent thing is that the federal government gets involved in these consultations in such a way that our NetzDG or the protection of minors do not have to be scaled back, but that the shortcomings that still exist can then be remedied when implementing European law.

What time frame are we talking about?

of years?

Actually, the French Presidency wants this trilogue to be ready by Easter or shortly after Easter.

Then the legislative packages could be completed and passed in the first six months.

This is of course followed by implementation periods of several years for the individual member states.

But then at the latest we would know the minimum standards and be able to tackle this urgent issue in Germany in a timely manner.

Network Enforcement Act and Digital Services Act

The

Network

Enforcement Act aims to combat crime and hate speech online*.

It has been in force since October 2017 but has already been amended.

Social networks should process complaints quickly and delete criminal content quickly.

The reporting channel must be easy to find for users.

In addition, the NetzDG requires platform providers to submit transparency reports on how they deal with hate crime.

Violations of the obligations can be punished with fines.

The

Digital Services Act 

is a proposed digital services law in Europe.

Among other things, the EU wants to oblige Internet companies to take stronger action against hate messages.

The EU Parliament has already voted for stricter regulation of online companies.

Renate Künast recognizes deficiencies in the Network Enforcement Act: "We would have imagined a different system"

You say there are still shortcomings in the German NetzDG.

Which one?

We still have one or two old homework.

Point one: A reporting obligation has been standardized in our NetzDG.

This means that it is not just us as users who report posts to the services and ask them to be deleted.

Since February 1, 2022, the services have had to report to the Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA).

Unfortunately, the old government did poorly crafted work, which is now being criticized by Google, Facebook and others, partly because it is almost half data retention.

I hope that the court will come to a decision soon and that we will then adjust the law if necessary.

As Greens, we would have imagined a different system.

Namely?

That a check is first carried out to determine whether it is a criminal offense from the point of view of a state agency, and only then is the data previously frozen by the platform passed on to the BKA.

The BKA then has to react quickly and say: "I want the data, I assume it's slander, for example." This would prevent the BKA from creating a huge collection of data that does not represent criminal acts.

This is not in the interest of data protection.

But now we have a law that, because of the poor craftsmanship, does not have to be implemented by the big platforms until a court decision is made.

What is homework number two?

A democracy promotion law.

The whole fight against these right-wing extremist, systematically orchestrated activities needs an active civil society.

There is so much local engagement that people can turn to, be protected, get legal help.

We have to finance that too.

Such a law has been prevented for years, especially by the CDU* and CSU*.

This is a priority for me this year. 

Platforms are supposed to report criminal content and pass on data - but they are complaining

From February 1, 2022, a provision of the new NetzDG should take effect.

However, it is not yet used in some cases.

The question is whether large-scale digital platforms must report user data from suspected criminals and possible hate postings to the BKA.

Several companies are suing.

A fundamental legal decision is pending.

NetzDG and Telegram - how do they belong together?

Green politician Künast urgently wants to change something

Another construction site is Telegram.

It is not clear whether the service falls under the NetzDG or not.

Why doesn't the legislator simply write messenger services quickly into the law?

We, the Greens, applied for this twice during the entire deliberations - it was always rejected.

Then why don't you write messenger services now as the governing party?

We are now in a situation where it makes sense to await the deliberations on the DSA in the EU.

Then we will have to revise the national regulations anyway.

But for me it is clear that it has to be changed.

Simply expecting good will from Telegram is not enough. 

In your opinion, Germany should only support this European NetzDG if it says so clearly?

Legislative procedures are not that simple.

First of all, it is urgently necessary to achieve a regulation for the European internal market.

I expect that the federal government and the French presidency will ensure appropriate regulations in the trialogue.

Child protection and manipulation through advertising are part of this.

One must not back down when these social media say: "What, do we have to hire new staff?" We must not protect business models that end up systematically violating people's dignity and personal rights through insufficient regulation.

Green politician Künast: "We are moving there in periods of three or four years"

Green applications have also called for urgent procedures to improve civil law.

Many years ago, I fought for a right to information so that legal action to protect personal rights is possible at all.

This is also the case with the proceedings that have just ended at the Federal Constitutional Court.

However, we are moving within periods of three or four years.

But the law is empty.

There must be an urgent procedure for this, because a slander or a fake quote has already been in orbit three times before you even get any information.

Why is it that it is currently taking so long?

It's the general burden of the courts.

Here we must demand that the power of hatred on the Internet be seen and that there is therefore a need for urgency. 

Yes, I have very high expectations.

If the European Union made a bad law that didn't meet the requirements, then it wouldn't do justice to the problems in society.

Renate Künast (Green Party)

You said in a Bundestag debate in 2017 that you "still have the feeling that the appeal of deleting is greater than the appeal of upholding the law and freedom of expression".

Do you still see it that way today, almost five years later?

That was correct at the time, that was my impression.

In the meantime, I have learned that social platforms protect themselves at various points.

Within what the NetzDG wants, they act relatively cleanly.

But now there are a few gaps: If, for example, a false quote has been recognized as such and deleted, then in my opinion all other identical or essentially identical false quotes should also be deleted.

In that regard, I think they should have to look for it themselves.

This must be ensured under European law. 

Overall, you have high expectations of the European negotiations.

Yes, I have very high expectations.

If the European Union* made a bad law that does not meet the requirements, then it does not do justice to the problems in society and it is a bad example for others.

We have to manage the balancing act between freedom of expression and personal rights.

Renate Künast (Greens) on NetzDG: "In this legislature"

The attitude of the FDP to the NetzDG

The FDP has been critical of NetzDG from the start and even called for its abolition.

However, the party emphasized that the fight against hatred is important.

It only requires effective prosecution of criminal offenses on the Internet, the "inclusion of a regulatory approach that protects freedom of expression" and measures that those affected can use to take action against violations of personal rights.

Not the commercial services should decide such questions, but prosecutors.

According to the FDP, some provisions of the NetzDG are to be transferred to the Telemedia Act.

Back to the national level: The governing parties FDP and Greens have very different ideas about NetzDG.

Have you spoken to your traffic light colleagues or Federal Minister of Justice Buschmann about the subject?

Of course we are in talks and the first thing we have to do is watch how the negotiations are going at European level.

We agreed on a few things.

Everyone knows that the FDP* has a different concept of freedom than we do.

For me, freedom does not mean that one person can always say everything, but freedom is that of everyone.

The key now is to ensure that good decisions are taken at European level.

Should anything else be achieved in this legislature?

Yes, in this legislature.

The Democracy Promotion Act soon anyway.

The digital world is moving fast and all states are very late with regulation.

The future of democracy will be decided online.

We are already noticing that aggression is increasing in everyday life.

We won't recognize our own democracy if we just let it run wild.

It starts with people withdrawing, not expressing themselves, not getting involved.

If commitment is no longer possible because people say I won't subject my family and myself to this torture, then the basis of democracy is gone. 

The interview was conducted by Cindy Boden.

*Merkur.de is an offer from IPPEN.MEDIA.

Source: merkur

All news articles on 2022-02-14

You may like

News/Politics 2024-02-15T11:21:02.855Z

Trends 24h

News/Politics 2024-03-28T06:04:53.137Z

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.