The new anti-terror proposals put forth by Interior Minister Otto Schily are the second such measures to go before parliament. But what passed through smoothly the first time around is generating criticism today.

Interior Minister Otto Schily’s first anti-terror package was introduced within weeks of the September 11 attacks. It won broad support and passed through the German parliament without difficulty in the beginning of November. Both opposition parties, the Christian Democrats (CDU) and the Liberals (FDP), endorsed the tightened security measures. The Bundesrat, the upper house of German parliament, followed up quickly, giving its solid approval.

But that was then, and this is now.

The second package is expected to pass through parliament with a significant majority, but the debate will be considerably harder and the criticism louder.

Based on statements issued earlier in the week, the discussion will focus on fundamental rights and the protection of privacy, issues that were only marginally addressed back in October.

First package

The first package was widely accepted by nearly all parties. The anti-terror measures proposed reflected what most Germans regarded as long-overdue security improvements.

More money was appropriated for the police, military and security agencies. A loop whole in the religious protection law was closed, making it more difficult for extremist groups to pose as religious organizations while enjoying government protection. And the government was allowed more freedom to persecute money laundering crimes.

There were no unusually restrictive elements in the first anti-terror package, nothing that would infringe on the normal citizen’s rights.

Second package

The second package, however, goes a few steps further – too far, some members of parliament are saying. The FDP and the former communist party, PDS, have both vowed to vote against the new proposals which include changes to 17 laws and five new regulations. Civil rights’ activists and proponents of privacy protection have also come out strongly against the package’s restrictive measures.

Earlier in the week, the Social Democrats (SPD) had been forced to loosen up their original proposals to reflect the interests of the Greens. One of the most controversial points, a measure allowing for the detainment and extradition of foreigners on the basis of suspicion alone, has been removed from the package. Other critical points still remain, however.

Security

The second anti-terror package expands the areas of responsibility covered by the police, security forces and intelligence agencies. It calls for better protection of high-risk institutions and the employment of so-called sky marshals on airplanes.

Under the new law, the Federal Crime Investigation Agency (BKA) will be responsible for tracking members or supporters of foreign terrorist groups. The BKA will also be responsible for investigating internet crime.

The Federal Agency for Internal Security will be permitted to gather information from credit institutions, aviation authorities, the post office and telecommunications providers. This information, previously protected under stringent privacy laws, will only be made available when there is concrete proof of criminal involvement.

Foreigners

The new anti-terror measures call for tighter coordination among the different agencies responsible for foreigners’ affairs as well as closer monitoring of the foreigners themselves.

In the future, fingerprints and other personal identity information will be kept on record for ten years in a central data base. The religious orientation of foreigners, an optional category, will also be saved in the data base. In the case of asylum seekers, language identity tests will also be permitted when applicants refuse to reveal their country of origin.

Under the new laws, police and other security agencies will have increased access to the central foreigners’ data base and will be allowed to perform automatic searches of it whenever necessary.

The proposal gurantees that foreigners will only be extradited if there is substantial proof showing that the they endanger the democratic principles and security of Germany by engaging in violent activities or participating in terrorist organizations.

Personal identity

One of the most controversial points in the new anti-terror package focuses on personal identity issues.

In the future passports and identity cards, which are required of all German citizens and foreign residents, may include "in addition to a photograph and signature, other bio-metric characteristics from the fingers, hand or face of the holder".

These characteristics, virtually unheard of until the recent debate, can only be used for verifying the identity of an individual or the authenticity of an identity card. Bio-metric information will not be recorded in a central data base.

The anti-terror package calls for the creation of a new federal law outlining exactly which bio-metric data will be used and how it will be gathered.

Fundamental criticism

Only the FDP and the PDS stand in the way of a smooth passage of the package through parliament.

The PDS rejects what it calls "draconian" measures designed to limit the rights and freedoms of people living in Germany.

The FDP criticizes the invasion of privacy and the coalition government for pushing the anti-terror measures through too quickly.

According to the FDP, there has not been enough time for a thorough discussion of the fundamental points raised in the proposal. The final form of the package was not presented until Tuesday, and members of the parliament were only given three days to review the package before debate began today. Next Thursday the Bundesrat will be required to make a final vote on the laws.

FDP party leader, Guido Westerwelle, described the rapid pace at which the second package was being brought forth as unconstitutional. In a statement published Friday in the "Hamburger Abendblatt", he warned that the FDP would bring the matter before the constitutional court.

"We will have to discuss the constitutionality of the way this law is being dealt with," Westerwelle said.

The FDP accuses the government of quickly signing off laws without allowing for necessary debate or requested changes submitted from other parties.

The FDP is especially concerned about the unclear role of intelligence agencies and their expanded responsibilities to monitor the activities of people they deem a risk to national security.

"Now every citizen will have to reckon with the secret service," Westerwelle said.