The regulations are largely based on a draft bill from October 2024, but were fundamentally modified during the legislative process.
The motion questions the constitutionality of six regulations - including AI-supported facial recognition, extended video surveillance in public spaces, the use of drones for telecommunications surveillance and the doubling of preventive detention. According to Dr Fiete Kalscheuer and Dr Nicolas Harding, who are representing the parliamentary group before the State Court, the encroachments on fundamental rights resulting from the new regulations are largely unjustified. In particular, the constitutional lawyers criticise the incompatibility of the new regulations with the fundamental right to informational self-determination and personal freedom. In addition, the majority of the new regulations are too vague with regard to the intensity of the interference they entail.
Furthermore, the Hessian legislator has included a protective purpose in the HSOG with the "feeling of security of the population", which is alien to police and regulatory law and cannot be used to justify massive encroachments on fundamental rights. Dr Fiete Kalscheuer and Dr Nicolas Harding criticise the fact that the legislator - also according to the explanatory memorandum - is largely concerned with symbolic effects. However, these are not capable of legitimising the encroachments on fundamental rights in question.
The pleading is here available here.
The lawyers Dr Fiete Kalscheuer and Dr Nicolas Harding are part of the team specialising in constitutional law at BROCK MÜLLER ZIEGENBEIN.