Menu Content/Inhalt




Wir speichern nicht - Weitere Informationen hier...

SPD-Zustimmung zur Vorratsdatenspeicherung wäre Betrug am Wähler (22.03.2015)

Der Arbeitskreis Vorratsdatenspeicherung geht mit der SPD-Führung hart ins Gericht. Hintergrund ist die Ankündigung von SPD-Justizminister Heiko Maas, schnell ein Gesetz zur Vorratsdatenspeicherung vorlegen zu wollen. Die Bürgerrechtler sehen darin einen Betrug am Wähler.

"Im Vorfeld der Europawahl haben wir auf Anfrage beim SPD-Parteivorstand klar ablehnende Positionen zur Vorratsdatenspeicherung erhalten ", sagt Kai-Uwe Steffens vom Arbeitskreis. "In ihrer Antwort betont die Parteiführung die Unvereinbarkeit einer flächendeckenden anlasslosen Speicherung mit europäischen Grundrechten, und fordert die Aufhebung aller VDS-Gesetze in den EU-Mitgliedstaaten. Das Verabschieden eines neuen Gesetzes stünde im direkten Widerspruch zu diesen Aussagen und würde somit eine Wählertäuschung darstellen."

Bürgerrechtler fordern nach Urteilen den endgültigen VDS-Verzicht (13.03.2015)

Der Arbeitskreis Vorratsdatenspeicherung begrüßt die Aufhebung mehrerer europäischer Gesetze zur Vorratsdatenspeicherung und fordert einen endgültigen Verzicht auf eine Einführung in Deutschland.

Act now!
Freedom not fear

This is what you can do to help stop the indiscriminate collection of information regarding our communications:

5 minute summary: Data Retention

The EU data retention directive aims at enabling the retracing of who contacted whom via telephone, mobile phone or e-mail for a period of 6 to 24 months. In the case of mobile calls or text messages via mobile phone, the user's location is also to be logged.

 The data that is collected about the entire population allows our movements to be traced, any calls or communications with personal and business contacts to be monitored and removes privacy in our personal relationships. Information regarding the content of communications can be deduced relating to personal interests and the individual life circumstances of the persons communicating. Access to the data is granted to the police, public prosecutors, secret services and foreign states which hope for better prosecution of crimes.

Until 2007, telecommunications providers were permitted to retain only data required for billing purposes. This is not the case with location data and information regarding e-mails, for example. Customers could request the deletion of billing data as soon as the monthly invoice had been sent out. By using a flat rate, one could prevent the collection of traffic data altogether, which can be important for journalists, counselors and others.

What is the problem?

The current scheme regarding the collection of information about citizens' communication, movements and use of media constitute the greatest threat yet to our right to an independent and private life.

We are all suffering from data retention:

  • Data retention constitutes an excessive invasion into our personal privacy.
  • Data retention disrupts professional activities (e.g. in the fields of medicine, law, clergy, journalism) as well as political and business activities that rely on discretion. It ultimately harms our free society itself.
  • Data retention doesn't prevent terrorism or crime. It is unnecessary and can easily be circumvented by criminals.
  • Data retention violates the human right to privacy and informational self-determination.
  • Data retention puts a financial strain both on businesses and consumers.
  • Data retention discriminates against users of telephone, mobile phone and internet services in comparison to other means of communication. Data retention constitutes an excessive invasion into our personal privacy.

Current situation

Most EU member states have introduced data retention legislation while some have no such legislation in place. The European Commission is currently reviewing the data retention directive. We are lobbying for the abolition of the EU requirements regarding data retention.

Act now:

Read more: