Internal security: Bundestag accepts “security package”, Bundesrat partly not

After a controversial debate, the Bundestag approved the so-called security package – but a little later the Federal Council stopped part of it. While tightening of residence and weapons laws has been initiated, plans for more internet powers for the security authorities are on hold for the time being.

The coalition of SPD, Greens and FDP launched the package after the knife attack in Solingen. They also largely agreed to the new regulations, while the CDU/CSU, AfD, Left and BSW voted against it.

What the Federal Council rejected

The law, which the Federal Council has now rejected, is about more options for the security authorities. They should be given the authority to match biometric data on the Internet in certain cases. However, searching for faces and voices using an automated application should only be permitted if the President of the Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) or his representative has this approved by a court. If there was imminent danger, the BKA boss or one of the three deputies themselves would have had to make the order for a maximum of three days.

Federal Interior Minister Nancy Faeser reacted with dismay and called the rejection “completely incomprehensible and irresponsible.” The SPD politician explained: “The Union is denying our investigative authorities powers that are absolutely necessary in view of the current threats.”

Baden-Württemberg’s Interior Minister Thomas Strobl (CDU) criticized “Bild” (Saturday): “Of the tough announcements, especially in the area of ​​combating terrorism and powers for our security authorities, nothing more than a dust remains.” The population is being deceived with the package. His Green-Black government abstained from the Federal Council.

What has been decided

Asylum seekers for whose requests for protection another European country is responsible under the so-called Dublin rules should be excluded from state benefits – if it is legally and actually possible for them to leave the country. There should be exceptions if children are affected.

In addition, migrants should in future be more easily excluded from protection in Germany if they have committed crimes – namely crimes “with an anti-Semitic, racist, xenophobic, gender-specific, sexual orientation or other inhumane motive.”

In addition, gun laws should be tightened. It is now made clear that the ban on carrying weapons at folk festivals or sporting events also applies to knives, which should be explicitly mentioned at this point in the weapons law in the future. However, there should be exceptions, for example for certain professional groups.

“We ban knives at public events and enable countries to issue more extensive knife bans. And this can also be monitored without cause,” said Faeser.

What happens next?

In order for them to come into force, all laws must be signed by the Federal President – which he usually does. This step is still pending, including for those regulations that have passed the Federal Council.

With the now failed “Law to Improve Counter-Terrorism” the Bundestag and the Federal Government could still make a rescue attempt and appeal to the Mediation Committee. The committee is made up of representatives from the Bundestag and Bundesrat and can look for solutions in such cases.

Some criticism also in the Bundestag

The Union faction would have liked more far-reaching regulations. “This so-called security package is largely ineffective,” said domestic policy spokesman Alexander Throm (CDU). The AfD complained about what they saw as a failed migration policy. Clara Bünger (Left Party), on the other hand, spoke of ineffective pseudo-solutions against extremism and Islamism.

FDP parliamentary group deputy Konstantin Kuhle admitted that the package did not go far enough, but was a step in the right direction. Green Party deputy Konstantin von Notz defended the innovations as sensible and appropriate. The Union’s demands in migration policy for blanket rejections at the German borders endangered Europe.

The refugee organization Pro Asyl condemned the plans. “This proposed law leads to intentionally caused homelessness and impoverishment among those seeking protection,” she explained. Among other things, it is intended that people whose asylum procedures would be handled by another European state can be returned there more easily.

The trigger

The suspected Islamist-motivated knife attack at a city festival on August 23rd in Solingen sparked a heated debate. Three people were killed and eight others injured. The suspected Syrian was actually supposed to be deported to Bulgaria in 2023, but that failed.

After the attack, the federal government agreed to tighten migration and weapons laws as well as more powers for investigators. After a hearing with experts, the coalition partners made cuts to the plans. The traffic light factions SPD, Greens and FDP are behind the package – at least more or less.

How many votes were there from the SPD and the Greens?

There were concerns among the SPD and the Greens that the project went too far. The three traffic light factions together make up 415 of 733 members of the Bundestag. So you have 48 votes more than the absolute majority.

The regulations for more powers for security authorities, which failed shortly afterwards in the Federal Council, were largely supported by the traffic light factions. The SPD had 178 yes votes, 7 no votes and 22 votes not cast. There were also clear majorities for the Greens and FDP, with 3 votes against and 2 abstentions each, as well as a few votes not cast.

The second part of the package on migration and knife bans looked similar, but with 15 no votes from the SPD compared to 171 yes votes. For the Greens, 101 MPs agreed and 6 opposed. The FDP voted for it with 85 representatives. There were abstentions in all three groups.

Bundestag on the topic Bundesrat on the approved law Bundesrat on the rejected law