In a ruling dated October 6th, 2020, the Higher Administrative Court (OVG) of Lower Saxony (Az.: 11 LC 149/16) declared years of unprovoked video surveillance by cameras from the Hanover Police Department to be unlawful. The decision brings to an end a legal dispute that has been going on for nine years. The lawsuit was filed by a member of the freiheitsfoo initiative from Hanover, who had already successfully sued the Hanover Administrative Court (VG) in 2010 and 2011 to ban the use of various cameras.
The subject of the proceedings that have now been decided were a total of 78 cameras in 2011, which were operated by the Hanover Police Department for no reason and in some cases around the clock. After the VG Hannover had already ordered the labeling of a number of cameras and banned the use of 56 cameras in judgments of July 14, 2011 and June 9, 2016, the PD Hannover switched off the majority of the cameras in question or handed them over to the Lower Saxony State Authority for Road Construction and Transport for use there. Nevertheless, the PD Hannover appealed to the Higher Administrative Court because of the use of one permanent and seven temporary cameras, the operation of which had been prohibited by the administrative court. The OVG has now confirmed that the use of these cameras is illegal. According to this, the cameras are not identified or only insufficiently identified and the annual police crime statistics do not justify the need for temporary cameras, as the court explained in the oral reasons for the judgment.
“ We are convinced that the Lower Saxony Police Act (“NPOG”) also contradicts constitutional requirements with regard to camera surveillance without cause. The lack of identification of the surveillance and the inadequate justification for the surveillance are just two of our many criticisms of the surveillance without cause, ” says Michael Ebeling, who led the lawsuit on behalf of the freiheitsfoo initiative. “ But even though we would have liked to submit the legal basis to the Federal Constitutional Court for review, this judgment is a huge success. ” continued Ebeling. “ Criminologists have recently proven again in a study that police cameras essentially have no preventive effect, i.e. preventing crime. That alone should be enough reason to question the use of stationary police cameras per se. “
“ The police department must now switch off all the cameras that are still the subject of the dispute and also completely redesign the identification of other cameras that were not yet the subject of the lawsuit and check the cameras for their necessity, ” explains the Göttingen lawyer Sven Adam, who is representing the plaintiff legally before the OVG represented the importance of the procedure. “ Currently, no stationary camera used by the police in Hanover is likely to meet the legal requirements, ” concluded Adam.
If you have any questions, please contact Michael Ebeling (mobile: 01577 / 39 19 170) and attorney Sven Adam using the contact details mentioned.
