How could the secret of the telecommunications be broken?

The secret of telecommunications, once considered an untouchable pillar of personal freedom and data protection, has undergone a profound change in the course of rapid technological development. While analog telecommunications dominated in the past and listening to telephone calls was technically and organizationally complex, the situation has become fundamental todaychanged. The traditional idea that a phone call is a largely private and protected act is a thing of the past. Nowadays, it can be assumed that almost every form of communication is potentially monitored – whether by legally authorized bodies in one’s own country or by foreign secret services with far-reaching technical possibilities.This makes the telecommunications secrecy in its original form appear largely lost.

Digitalization of everyday life and new forms of communication

In modern everyday life, digital communication is omnipresent. Whether downloading timetables, sending short messages or using social networks – communication takes place almost continuously on digital ways. Life without digital media is hard to imagine, and new applications such as the “Internet of Things” are expanding the possibilities ofnetworking. Smartphones, tablets and computers are not only work tools, but constant companions that enable communication in a variety of ways. The transition from classic analog telephony to digital transmission technology means that technical traces in the form of connection data, metadata and communication content are practically automatic and storedcan. This abundance of data makes it easier for authorities and secret services to understand and evaluate communication flows.

From analog reluctance to digital transparency

In the time before digitization, communication processes were much more discreet. The use of electromechanical relays and the analogue switching meant that after the listener was hung up, it was hardly understandable who had spoken to whom. Traces, for example to identify a caller in the context of extortion, required considerable technical andpersonnel effort. Today, on the other hand, data traces are automatically created with every digital transmission, which document exactly who communicated with whom and via which medium. Fixed-line and mobile phone connections, e-mails, Internet telephony (VoIP) and access to websites are completely traceable. The transition to digital communication has the possibilities of monitoringexpanded to a previously unknown level.

Legal basis and protection of privacy

Telecommunications secrecy is enshrined in Article 10 of the Basic Law and is one of the cornerstones of the protection of privacy in Germany. It not only protects the content of the communication, but also the so-called “traffic data” – i.e. information about when, where and with whom. The mere fact that communication has taken place is alsoprotected. In addition to classic telephone calls, all types of electronic messages, e-mails, Internet access and other non-public forms of communication are now included. Nevertheless, the Basic Law, under certain conditions, allows interventions in this right, especially if they are regulated by law and are necessary to defend against serious dangers.

Expansion of state surveillance powers

Already in the 1950s and 1960s, telephones were tapped on the basis of Allied regulations, for example during the Spiegel affair. Only with the emergency laws of 1968 was the legal basis for a targeted restriction of telecommunications secrecy. Since then, the catalog of offenses and situations in which monitoring is allowed has been continuously expanded.Today, far more offenses are covered by surveillance measures, so the threshold for the use of technical surveillance has steadily decreased. The Federal Network Agency records several thousand new telephone surveillance orders every year, with almost routine surveillance taking place, especially in the areas of serious crime such as drug trafficking. Practice shows thatSurveillance measures often do not sufficiently question whether milder means could also lead to the goal.

Secret and strategic monitoring in an international context

In addition to the police and law enforcement agencies, intelligence services such as the Federal Intelligence Service (BND), the Military Shield Service (MAD) and the Office for the Protection of the Constitution also have far-reaching powers for telecommunications surveillance. These are regulated in the G10 law, which provides for special control mechanisms, such as approval by a commission of the Bundestag. especially theSo-called strategic control, which relates to international data streams, allows the BND to monitor global communications traffic – especially with a view to terrorism, arms trafficking and drug trafficking. Modern technologies make it possible to automatically search and filter the communication content for keywords.

Global Surveillance and Economic Interests

The surveillance does not end at the national borders. Foreign secret services, especially in the context of international projects such as “Echelon”, specifically monitor the global telecommunications traffic. These activities serve not only state security interests, but also economic goals. The European Parliament has repeatedly confirmed the existence of such programs and thecriticized risks for economic espionage and the violation of civil rights. Radio connections and international satellite communication are particularly in the focus.

Preventive monitoring and constitutional limits

Another field that is becoming increasingly important is preventive telecommunications surveillance by police authorities. In contrast to criminal procedural measures that relate to crimes already committed, preventive measures apply even before the occurrence of a specific danger or criminal offense. This entails considerable risks for the rights of uninvolved persons. thatIn a groundbreaking judgment from 2005, the Federal Constitutional Court made it clear that monitoring measures are unconstitutional without sufficiently specific suspicions and appropriate certainty. The expansion and advancement of supervisory powers must always be critically assessed in the light of fundamental rights.

Conclusion: Challenges for data protection in the digital age

Digitization has revolutionized the communication landscape and at the same time significantly expanded the possibilities for monitoring. Telecommunications secrecy is under massive pressure and threatens to become a mere formality if technical and legal protection mechanisms are not further developed. Effective protection of privacy and informational self-determinationis more urgent than ever today. The progressive networking, the multitude of new services and global surveillance pose great challenges for society. A central task for politics, justice and society remains to maintain the balance between security interests and the protection of personal freedom rights and telecommunications secrecy even in the digital ageto protect effectively.