BÜPF: Swico would support referendum
The trade association of ICT providers, Swico, intends to support a possible referendum against the law on telephone and telecommunications surveillance.
The National Council, as the second chamber, passed the law concerning Telephone and telecommunication surveillanceBÜPF for short. As in the Council of States, the well-founded criticism and justified objections from youth parties, society and the ICT industry bounced off the parliamentarians, as the Swico writes. The law - if it comes into force - would result in drastic restrictions on civil rights, but also massive cost consequences for the ICT industry, according to the association of ICT providers. The Swico board therefore voted by a large majority to actively support a possible referendum, provided it is carried out on a non-partisan basis.
The fact is that law enforcement agencies must continue to develop their arsenal in order to keep pace with technological progress and respond to new forms of crime. However, such an expansion of the toolkit must always keep in mind the principles of an open and democratic society as well as the individual rights and privacy of citizens. Not everything that would be technically feasible and desirable from the point of view of the law enforcement authorities is compatible with society and citizens, as Swico emphasizes. According to the association, the mandatory introduction of surveillance measures that are not or rarely used in practice is objectionable and burdens the economy, especially the ICT economy.
The bill as a whole is one-sided and excessive in content. It places law enforcement above civil rights and the right to privacy without being able to sufficiently justify their necessity. The message rides on the wave of a diffuse fear of crime of all kinds and the unease of the state authorities about the enormous (positive and negative) potential of the Internet. The twelve-month data retention period, the introduction of state Trojans, and the blanket dragnet via IMSI catchers are hardly effective and at the same time disproportionate and cost-intensive encroachments on our civil liberties, as the association writes in conclusion.
