German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/206, pp. 25918-25919.
Frau President. Esteemed colleagues.
For over two years now we have waited for the IT security law 2.0. The threatening situation in the area of IT security has clearly increased. The defense of the critical infrastructure – energy, water, telecommunications – must be heightened and the newest developments adapted. Ever again we of the opposition have asked about the state of the law, ever again were we put off. Presently, just before Christmas, was it then so far and then all must go quite quickly; for the legislature draws to an end.
So came what must come. It no more sufficed as a really thought through draft law. I feel myself reminded of the Federal government’s digital strategy. Also here: No clear concept, no definition of protection goals, no real strategy for improving the security situation; only a happy coexistence of the expiring wishes of the authorities, activity purely for its own sake, garnished with a bit of helplessness.
At the same time it would have been able to be so simple. The most important of all is the evaluation of the IT security law 1.0 which we of the AfD demand. This is prescribed in the first draft of the law, that of 2015, yet you have simply ignored that in the well known way. To examine what has functioned in the first law and what has not, what has made sense and what not, where failures were made which we now in the new edition can prevent, that would have been really significant.
Yet to reach decisions based on exact data and realities, that apparently is not your thing, esteemed Federal government. You have also demonstrated that in regards the internet enforcement law: That was intensified before it was evaluated. So that the next IT security law cannot again be rubbed under your nose, you have now simply let the evaluation run out entirely. It can thus also be done.
The second opportunity which you have let slip is the inclusion of civil society organizations. You had given them one day to read the law and react to it – one day for a law which will have considerable effects upon the economy. The Chaos Computer Club called that a purposeful sabotage of democratic procedures. The AG KRITIS goes even further and speaks of a “middle-finger in the face of civil society”. Both are right. This kind of relations is an impossibility, ladies and gentlemen, and may not be thus repeated.
We come to the BSI. The Federal Office for Security in Information Technology will by means of this law be equipped with wide-ranging powers and develop itself into a kind of police authority including a license to hack, the active intervention into the IT security of businesses, the expansion of storage of protocol data, and the withholding of information with reference to security lapses. All of this we of the AfD regard critically; certainly the latter contains great dangers. Who knowingly leaves unsettled security lapses, so as to provide access to the authorities, endangers the entire IT security, ladies and gentlemen. Such lapses must, as soon as they are discovered, be passed on to the firms so as to guarantee the maximum security of the IT system.
Last point. You have quite knowingly avoided reaching a clear and conclusive political decision as to whether network equipment providers close to the government in undemocratic countries will be allowed to participate in 5G construction; for example, Huawei. Do we really want to lay our critical infrastructure in the hands of the Chinese when we still have good, European alternatives? You are almost always for the EU! How so not in this case where exceptionally for once it would really make sense, ladies and gentlemen? Does that perhaps therein lie that Huawei sponsors your party days, dear CDU and dear SPD?
The fact is: The draft law put forward endangers a rapid and legally secure construction of the networks. Here finally a clear decision must be reached. Still look around a bit. Perhaps you may in some way yet receive, ja, the courage to reach a clear decision prior to the passage of this law.
Conclusion: The law is Ein Kessel Buntes. The speed with which it has been cobbled together is to be distinctly noted. We see a considerable need for repair and thus will not agree to it.
Many thanks.
[trans: tem]
