The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (Bundesverfassungsschutz, BfV) and the Federal Intelligence Service (Bundesnachrichtendienst, BND) are secret services. Both operate covertly — the former domestically, the latter abroad. They have long complained that they have fewer powers than their counterparts in other countries.

To better defend Germany against internal and external threats, the cabinet approved a draft bill on Wednesday. Parliamentary approval is still pending; the MPs' summer recess ends in early September. However, it is considered a mere formality that the Bundestag, the lower house of parliament, with the government majority of conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and Christian Social Union (CSU) and center-left Social Democrats (SPD), will give it the green light.

Germany's largest intelligence reform since World War II

A new era for the German intelligence services is then expected to begin in early 2027. Their scope of operations would extend far beyond their current powers. It would then be possible, for example, to counter a cyberattack by neutralizing enemy IT systems.

Should a state of tension or military defense arise, the Federal Intelligence Service (BND) could carry out acts of sabotage abroad. In addition, the BND, like the Office for the Protection of the Constitution, would be given the ability to manipulate or delete data. Proponents and opponents alike agree that this reform would be the largest in German history since the end of World War II in 1945.

Intelligence services and police: Will they remain separate?

After World War II, as a lesson learned from the atrocities committed by the Secret State Police (Gestapo) during the Nazi era, separate areas of responsibility were established in West Germany. Since then, intelligence services have been primarily responsible for gathering information, while the police handle threat prevention and law enforcement. This so-called principle of separation is now in jeopardy.

Germany's Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt (CSU) speaks of "real intelligence agencies" and hopes that the planned reform will result in a more stable security architecture.

"Sabotage, espionage, cyberattacks and covert operations by foreign powers require new responses," Dobrindt said.

The agencies would be granted operational capabilities and active powers to effectively combat modern state terrorism and extremist violence.

Is the draft bill unconstitutional?

The BND and the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution are also set to be granted new powers in their traditional core mission of collecting and analyzing information. These include the analysis of large volumes of data using artificial intelligence (AI) and the cross-referencing of biometric data with the internet. Data retention periods are also set to be extended.

The Society for Civil Rights(GFF) considers large parts of the federal government's draft bill — which spans more than 700 pages — to be unconstitutional. With regard to the domestic intelligence service, the far-reaching access to private and public video surveillance in real time is seen as particularly problematic, GFF expert Kai Dittmann replied in response to a written inquiry from DW.

The donation-funded nonprofit GFF believes the same applies to biometric matching against publicly available images on the internet and the training of AI using data collected by intelligence agencies.

"There are no sufficient and clearly defined limits for such far-reaching intrusions, which above all affect countless innocent people," Dittmann criticizes.

The GFF argues the planned additional powers for the BND would violate constitutional rights: The foreign intelligence service would no longer be limited to gathering intelligence, but would also be tasked with warding off threats, operating domestically and carrying out active cyber operations.

"This blurs the constitutional boundaries between intelligence services, the police and the military," Dittmann says.

Will there still be parliamentary control?

The GFF also has serious concerns regarding the proposed reform of intelligence agency oversight, which is to be consolidated under the Independent Oversight Council. At the same time, there are plans to largely strip the Federal Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information (BfDI) of its authority to oversee intelligence activities. Dittmann's conclusion: "The agencies are gaining significantly more power, while oversight is likely to be weakened."

Clara Bünger, the domestic policy expert for the opposition socialist Left Party in the Bundestag, echoes this sentiment: "Because the intelligence agencies will no longer be required to inform those affected in many cases, effective legal protection is no longer guaranteed."

Bünger announced that the Left Party will oppose what they see as authoritarian restructuring of the state. "There must never again be a secret police in Germany," she said.

The Association of the Internet Industry (eco) has also expressed concerns: In light of the changing security landscape, intelligence agencies need modern technical capabilities, emphasizes board member Klaus Landefeld.

"But the line is crossed when the state develops an interest in keeping security gaps open so it can continue to have access. Vulnerabilities must be closed and must not become a tool for intelligence agency access," Landefeld added.

Meanwhile, Marc Henrichmann, chairman of the Parliamentary Oversight Committee for the Intelligence Services, has no such concerns. 

"I believe it's time to trust our own government, including our own security agencies," the Christian Democrat said in a Table Media podcast.

Germany has the best-regulated intelligence services in the world, he said, and that should remain the case.

This article has been translated from German.