Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-wpx69 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-12T20:40:49.527Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Data Screening as a Means of Preventing Islamist Terrorist Attacks on Germany

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

Wilhelm Achelpöhler  and
Holger Niehaus

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

After the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City, it was determined that some of the presumed perpetrators had lived in Germany where they had been studying technical subjects in particular. Public authorities supposed more potential assassins (so-called “sleepers”) were staying in Germany until they received an order to start their mission. In order to discover such persons, data screening was carried out in each federal state of Germany. In the course of it, all universities were obliged to hand over the data material concerning their enrolled students for data alignment by police authorities. Up until now, appeals of affected students against those measures have been successful in Hessen, Nordrhein-Westfalen and Berlin. Those events give reason for a critical reflection of the means of data screening by the police.

Type
Research Article
Information
German Law Journal , Volume 5 , Issue 5: Security, Democracy and the Future of Freedom: Assessing the Impact of War on Terror on Civil Liberties in Contemporary Democracies , 01 May 2004 , pp. 495 - 513
Copyright
Copyright © 2004 by German Law Journal GbR 

References

1 “Rasterfahndung”; a “rastrum” (lat.) is a rake, by which disordered things can be sorted or separated. Welp, Zur Legalisierung der Rasterfahndung, in Recht der Persönlichkeit 389 (Berlin 1996).Google Scholar

2 Niehaus, Katalogtatensysteme als Beschränkungen strafprozessualer Eingriffsbefugnisse 145 (Berlin 2001).Google Scholar

3 Welp, supra note l, at 389; Wittig, JuS 1997, 961, 968; Niehaus, supra note 2, at 145-6.Google Scholar

4 Welp, supra note 1, at 389.Google Scholar

5 Welp, supra note, at 389-90; Sokol, Polizei und Datenschutz, 188, 196 (in Bäumler, ed. Neuwied 1999); Niehaus, , supra note 2, at 146.Google Scholar

6 BVerfG 65, 1 (45).Google Scholar

7 Welp, supra note 1, at 389-90.Google Scholar

8 BVerfG 65, 1 (43); BVerfG 27, 1 (6).Google Scholar

9 BVerfG 65, 1 (43).Google Scholar

10 Id.Google Scholar

11 BVerfG 65, 1 (45).Google Scholar

12 Fabio, Di, Maunz / Dürig, Grundgesetz, (39th supplement, 2001), Art. 2, annotation 176.Google Scholar

13 Welp, supra note 1, at 392.Google Scholar

14 Welp, supra note 1, at 389, 414; Niehaus, supra note 2, at 200; Sokol, supra note 5, at 192.Google Scholar

15 BVerfG, 65, 1 (43).Google Scholar

16 Welp, supra note 1, at 389, 414; LG Wiesbaden, 4 T 707/01, 3 (6 Feb. 2002); Niehaus, , supra note 2, at 200.Google Scholar

17 Westfälische Nachrichten, (No. 31) 6 Feb. 2002, at RMS 1.Google Scholar

18 Welp, supra note 1, at 389, 414; Strate, ZRP 143-4 (1990); Wolter, GA 129 (1988); Möhrenschlager, , Wistra 1992, 326.Google Scholar

19 Art. 44 bay. PAG; § 40 bad-württ. PolG; § 47 ASOG (Berlin); § 46 PolG (Brandenburg); § 36 i BremPolG; § 23 Hamb. GesDatVPol; § 26 SOG Hessen; § 44 SOG M-V; § 45 a NGefAG (LT-Dr. 14/2730); § 31 PolG NRW; § 25 d POG (Rheinland-Pfalz); § 37 Saarl. PolG; § 47 Sächsisches PolG; § 31 SOG (Sachsen-Anhalt); § 195 a LVwG (Schleswig-Holstein, draft: LT-Dr. 15/1267, p. 4); § 44 PAG (Thüringen).Google Scholar

20 § 47 ASOG Berlin; § 46 PolG (Brandenburg); § 26 SOG Hessen; § 31 PolG NRW; § 31 SOG (Sachsen-Anhalt); § 195 a LVwG (Schleswig-Holstein, draft: LT-Dr. 15/1267, p. 4).Google Scholar

21 § 40 bad-württ. PolG; Art. 44 bay. PAG; § 36 i BremPolG; § 23 Hamb. GesDatVPol („Präses bzw. Staatsrat der für die Polizei zuständigen Fachbehörde“); § 45 a NGefAG; § 25 d POG (Rheinland-Pfalz); § 37 Saarl. PolG; § 47 Sächsisches PolG; § 44 PAG (Thüringen).Google Scholar

22 § 40 bad-württ. PolG; Art. 44 bay. PAG; § 36 i BremPolG; § 45 a NGefAG; § 47 Sächsisches PolG; § 44 PAG (Thüringen).Google Scholar

23 § 44 SOG M-V.Google Scholar

24 § 40 bad.-württ. PolG; Art. 44 bay. PAG; § 45 a NGefAG.Google Scholar

25 § 195 a LVwG Schleswig-Holstein.Google Scholar

26 § 47 ASOG Berlin; § 46 PolG Brandenburg; § 23 GesDatVPol Hamburg; § 26 SOG Hessen; § 44 SOG MV; § 31 PolG NRW; § 37 PolG Saarland; § 31 SOG Sachsen-Anhalt; § 195 a LVwG Schleswig-Holstein; § 44 PAG Thüringen.Google Scholar

27 § 40 bad-württ. PolG; Art. 44 bay. PAG; § 36 i BremPolG; § 45 a NGefAG; § 47 sächs. PolG.Google Scholar

28 § 25 d POG Rheinland-Pfalz.Google Scholar

29 E.g. § 31 (4), 3 PolG NRW.Google Scholar

30 § 40 bad-württ. PolG; Art. 44 bay. PAG; § 36 i BremPolG; § 23 Hamb. GesDatVPol; § 45 a NGefAG; § 25 d PolG Rheinland-Pfalz; § 37 Saarl. PolG; § 47 Sächsisches PolG; § 44 PAG (Thüringen).Google Scholar

31 Wiesbaden, LG, 4 T 707 / 01 (6 Feb. 2002).Google Scholar

32 BVerfG 20, 162 (187); Rudolphi, , introduction to § 94, in Systematischer Kommentar zur Strafprozessordnung, annotation 68; Welp, supra note 1, at 389, 411; Degener, Grundsatz der Verhältnismäßigkeit und strafprozessuale Zwangsmaßnahmen, Berlin 1985, p. 203; Niehaus, supra note 2, at 188.Google Scholar

33 LVerfG Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, 2 (98).Google Scholar

34 Sokol, , supra note 5, at 188, 192.Google Scholar

35 Welp, , supra note 1, at 407; Niehaus, supra note 2, at 169.Google Scholar

36 OLG Düsseldorf, 3 Wx 357 / 01, 5 (8 Feb. 2002); VerfGH Sachsen, JZ 1996, 957, (963-4).Google Scholar

37 Cf. VerfGH Sachsen, JZ 1996, 957 (963).Google Scholar

38 E.g. § 36 PolG NRW.Google Scholar

39 Therefore, subsequent legal protection has to be created through constitutional considerations by the courts (cf. OLG Düsseldorf, 3 Wx 357/01, 5 (8 Feb. 2002)).Google Scholar

40 Thommes, , StV 1997, 657, 660 and 664; Welp, Festschrift Mangakis, Athens 1999, pp. 809, 814; BT-Dr. 12 / 8396, p. 3; BT-Dr. 13 / 6689, p. 5; BT-Dr. 13 / 7341, p. 5.Google Scholar

41 Dencker, Organisierte Kriminalität und Verfassungsstaat, in: Rechtsstaat in der Bewährung, Vol. 33, 41, 55 (Albrecht & Dencker et. al., Heidelberg 1998); Welp, StV 1994, 161, 163. In the same way Götz, JZ 1996, 969, 970; Lisken / Mokros, NVwZ 1991, 609.Google Scholar

42 Wiesbaden, LG, 4 T 707 / 01, 4 (6 Feb. 2002).Google Scholar

43 Wiesbaden, AG, 71 GS 531/01 (25 Nov. 2001).Google Scholar

44 Rundschau, Frankfurter, (No. 242) 18 Oct. 2001, at 6.Google Scholar

45 Cf. Lisken & Denninger, Handbuch des Polizeirechts, chapter E, annonation 51.Google Scholar

46 Lisken, & Denninger, , supra note 45, at chapter E, annotation 47; LG Wiesbaden, 4 T 707/01, 3 (6 Feb 2002).Google Scholar

47 Lisken, & Denninger, , supra note 45, at chapter E, annotation 43.Google Scholar

48 Düsseldorf, AG, 151 Gs 4092 / 01 (2 Oct. 2001).Google Scholar

49 Düsseldorf, LG, 151 II 1/01 (29 Oct. 2001).Google Scholar

50 Düsseldorf, OLG, 3 Wx 351 / 01 (8 Feb. 2002).Google Scholar

51 Id.Google Scholar

52 Mainz, VG, 1 L 1106101.MZ (19 Feb. 2002).Google Scholar

53 Id. at 8.Google Scholar

54 Wiesbaden, LG, 4 T 707/01, 3 (6 Feb. 2002); LG Berlin, 84 T 8 / 02 (15 Jan. 2002); OLG Frankfurt, 20 W 55/02 (21 Feb. 2002).Google Scholar

55 See also Welp, quoted in Unicum No. 11 (2001), at 18; Gössner, Frankfurter Rundschau, (No. 85) 12 Apr. 2002, at 7.Google Scholar

56 Wiesbaden, LG, 4 T 707/01, p. 3 (6 Feb. 2002).Google Scholar

57 Frankfurt, OLG, 20 W 479 / 01, (8 Jan. 2002); OLG Frankfurt, 20 W 55/02, 4 (21 Feb. 2002); BVerfG, 83, 24.Google Scholar

58 Tegtmeyer, PolG NRW, 8th edition, § 31, annotation 6.Google Scholar

59 Mainz, VG, 1 L1106101.MZ, 9 (19 Feb. 2002).Google Scholar

60 Frankfurt, OLG, 20 W 55/02, 7 (21 Feb. 2002).Google Scholar

61 Id.Google Scholar

62 Id.Google Scholar

63 Düsseldorf, OLG, 3 Wx 357/01, 3 (8 Feb. 200).Google Scholar

64 Rundschau, Frankfurter, (No. 35) 11 Feb. 2002, at 3; Gössner, Frankfurter Rundschau, (No. 85) 12 Apr. 2002, at 7.Google Scholar

65 Düsseldorf, OLG, 3 Wx 357/01, 7 (8 Feb. 2002).Google Scholar

66 Frankfurt, OLG, 20 W 55 / 02, 8 (21 Feb. 2002). “material doubts.”Google Scholar

67 Welp, , supra note 55; Jansen, Frankfurter Rundschau, (No. 40) 16 Feb. 2002, at 5.Google Scholar

68 Rundschau, Frankfurter, (No. 40) 16 Feb. 2002, at 5; Westfälische Nachrichten, (No. 31) 6 Feb. 2002, at RMS 1.Google Scholar

69 Rundschau, Frankfurter, (No. 35) 11 Feb. 2002, at 1.Google Scholar

70 Düsseldorf, OLG, 3 Wx 357 / 01 (8 Feb 2002).Google Scholar

71 Id.Google Scholar

72 Rundschau, Frankfurter, (No. 37) 13 Feb. 2002, at 3.Google Scholar

73 Lisken, & Denninger, , supra note 45, at chapter E, annotation 155; Tegtmeyer, PolG NRW, § 1, annotation 39.Google Scholar

74 BGH 30, 329; Tröndle & Fischer, StGB, 50th edition, § 129 a, annotation 3, in conjunction with § 129, annotation 2.Google Scholar

75 Draft: BT-Dr. 14 / 7025, 4 Oct. 2001; adopted by the Bundestag on 26 Apr. 2002.Google Scholar

76 E.g. § 31 (3), 1 PolG NRW.Google Scholar

77 Nachrichten, Westfälische, (No. 31) 6 Feb. 2002, at RMS 1.Google Scholar

78 Rundschau, Frankfurter, (No. 40) 16 Feb. 2002, at 5.Google Scholar

79 Rundschau, Frankfurter, (No. 35) 11 Feb. 2002, at 1.Google Scholar

80 Aust, Der Baader-Meinhof-Komplex 203 (Berlin 1989).Google Scholar

81 Id. at 203-4.Google Scholar