Veil search

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the case of the veil manhunt , covert ("veiled") checks are carried out in the form of a general manhunt that is independent of suspicion . In some cases, there is also talk of event-independent, event-independent or - in the case of the Federal Police - situation-oriented identity checks. As a developer, among other things, the true Undercover Gosbert Dölger , the 1995 chief of police in Aschaffenburg was. The term veil manhunt was published at the end of the 20th century by lawyers such as the then Bavarian Interior Minister Günther Beckstein or the publicist Sebastian Cobler .

history

The veil manhunt was included in the Police Task Act in Bavaria (Art. 13 Para. 1 No. 5 PAG) in 1995 and was first applied in the same year. The state police and the federal police are allowed to control . The control units traffic routes (KEV) and control units border (KEG) of the Federal Customs Administration also use the tactics of veil search. In doing so, they carry out checks that are independent of suspicion within the scope of the Customs Administration Act (ZollVG).

The veil manhunt was introduced in Baden-Württemberg on September 1, 1996 and is carried out by the state police, motorway police and federal police.

In Schleswig-Holstein, the veil manhunt has been allowed to be carried out by the police and employees of municipal regulatory authorities since 2006. In addition to establishing identity , the police were also allowed to carry out visual checks , but not to carry out searches (Sections 180, 181 LVwG old version). In 2017 the veil search was abolished again.

Bremen and North Rhine-Westphalia have not introduced a veil search authorization. In 2004 the veil manhunt was abolished in Berlin . According to this, the following federal states are authorized to carry out personal checks regardless of the occasion:

state Legal basis Powers requirements
Baden-Württemberg Section 26 Paragraph I No. 6 PolG BW Identity verification
  • Stay in a legally determined, dangerous place
  • Earmarking of the measure to the fight against cross-border crime
Bavaria Art. 13 Para. I No. 5 PAG

Art. 21 Para. I No. 3 PAG

Art. 22 Paragraph I No. 4 PAG

Identity verification

Search the person

Search of items carried

  • Stay in a legally determined, dangerous place
  • Earmarking of the measure to the fight against cross-border crime and certain violations with international reference
  • only in the event of a search: there is an increased abstract risk
Brandenburg Section 11 Paragraph III BbgPolG Identity verification

Inspection of items carried

  • Stay in public traffic
  • Existence of certain knowledge of the situation
  • Earmarking of the measure to the preventive fight against cross-border crime
  • Order of the measure by the police chief or his representative in office
Hamburg § 4 paragraph II 1 PolDVG Hmb Identity verification

Inspection of items carried

Search of items carried

Identity verification and inspection of items carried:
  • Stay in public space in a certain area,
  • Knowledge of the situation on the basis of which it can be assumed that criminal offenses of considerable importance are being committed in this area and that the measures to prevent the offenses are required

Identity determination and search of items carried:

  • Staying in places where guns are prohibited / restricted
  • Existence of certain knowledge of the situation based on which it can be assumed that the person is carrying prohibited weapons or dangerous objects
Hesse Section 18 (II) No. 6, HSOG

Section 36 (II) HSOG

Section 37 HSOG

Identity verification

Search the person

Search of items carried

  • Stay in a legally determined, dangerous place
  • Existence of certain knowledge of the situation or assumptions based on police experience
  • Earmarking in the preventive fight against cross-border crime
Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania Section 27a SOG MV Inspection of vehicles carried
  • Stay in a legally determined, dangerous place or in public traffic areas
  • Existence of certain knowledge of the situation
  • When staying in public traffic areas: earmarked for the preventive fight against criminal offenses of considerable importance, order of the measure by the head of the authority
  • When staying in a dangerous place: earmarked for preventive action against cross-border crime or preventing unauthorized residence
Lower Saxony Section 12 Paragraph VI Nds. SO-CALLED Identity verification

Inspection of items carried

  • Stay in public traffic
  • Existence of certain knowledge of the situation
  • Earmarking of the measure to the prevention of significant criminal offenses with international reference
Rhineland-Palatinate § 9a Paragraph IV POG RhPf Identity verification

Inspection of items carried

  • Stay in a legally determined, dangerous place
  • There are indications that it is necessary to combat criminal offenses of considerable importance or to combat cross-border crime as a preventive measure or to prevent illegal residence
Saarland § 9a paragraph I SPolG Identity verification

Inspection of items carried

  • Stay in a legally determined, dangerous place
  • Earmarking of the measure to the preventive fight against cross-border crime
Saxony Section 19 (I) No. 5 SächsPolG

Section 24 No. 7 Sächs PolG

Identity verification

Search of items carried

  • Stay in a legally determined, dangerous place
  • Earmarking of the measure to the preventive fight against cross-border crime
Saxony-Anhalt § 14 SOG LSA, Law on Public Safety and Order of the State of Saxony-Anhalt Identity verification

Inspection of items carried

  • Stay in a legally determined, dangerous place
  • Earmarking of the measure to the preventive fight against cross-border crime
Thuringia Section 14 Paragraph I No. 5 ThürPAG

Section 23 Paragraph I No. 4 ThürPAG

Section 24 Paragraph I No. 4 ThürPAG

Identity verification

Search the person

Search of items carried

  • Stay in a legally determined, dangerous place
  • Earmarking of the measure to the fight against cross-border crime and the prevention or suppression of certain violations with international reference

After the Schengen Agreement came into force , intra-European border controls were reduced and the veil search increased. It should compensate for the abolished border controls. But it also takes place at the external borders of the Schengen signatory states.

The EU Commission is opposed to the veil search because it suspects concealed border controls. The German interior ministers have rejected this EU criticism. At the beginning of 2006, the European Council approved the framework conditions created by the European Parliament for the introduction of identity checks independent of suspicion in an area of ​​30 kilometers along the Schengen internal borders.

The Bavarian State Criminal Police Office emphasizes the importance of the veil manhunt as an “indispensable instrument in the fight against drug smugglers and other criminals.” From July 2015, the Free State of Bavaria will increase the veil manhunt by 500 police officers. According to Interior Minister Joachim Herrmann (CSU), this is a consequence of the large number of apprehensions during border controls during the G7 summit at Schloss Elmau . Herrmann sees the veil search method as a model for success.

Since the end of 2019, the Federal Police have been using veil searches along a 30 km corridor at the German federal border for migration and security reasons.

criticism

The constitutional admissibility of the veil search is controversial. It is sometimes viewed as unconstitutional because it is disproportionate and violates the principle of equality . In police practice, for example, people who look “foreign” are checked, which is known as racial profiling . Some see this as unequal treatment on the basis of cultural or ethnic affiliation, which is fundamentally inadmissible under Article 3 (3) sentence 1 of the Basic Law . Others, especially the Bavarian Constitutional Court , do not see the right under Article 3 (3) of the Basic Law as being affected. In a decision of March 28, 2003 ( DVBl . 13/2003, p. 861 ff), the Bavarian Constitutional Court confirmed the constitutionality of the identity check in the context of the veil search (with regard to the Bavarian constitution ). The Constitutional Court of the Free State of Saxony made a similar decision on July 10, 2003. The State Constitutional Court of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, however, ruled differently (case no.

The search of the person and / or the property carried along without suspicion is also problematic as part of the veil search, since this is a much more serious encroachment on fundamental rights than the determination of identity. The search of objects carried by the Bavarian Constitutional Court, expressly permitted in Art. 22 Para. I No. 4 PAG in conjunction with Art. 13 Para. I No. 5 PAG, was therefore approved by the Bavarian Constitutional Court in its judgment of 7 February 2006 (Az. 69-VI-04) at least partially restricted. The constitutional interpretation requires the presence of an “increased abstract risk” and the reading of the purpose limitation to the dangers mentioned in Art. 13 (1) No. 5 PAG as unwritten factual features.

In addition to the federal or state constitutional admissibility of the veil search, the compatibility with European law is also in question. The European Court of Justice ruled on June 22, 2010 (Az. C ‑ 188/10 or C ‑ 189/10) that the Schengen Borders Code contradicts national rules, “the identity of every person regardless of their behavior and the existence of special circumstances from which there is a risk of damage to public order, [...] without this regulation providing the necessary framework for this authority, which ensures that the actual exercise of the authority cannot have the same effect as border controls ”. On October 22, 2015, the Stuttgart Administrative Court ruled that Section 23 (1) No. 3 of the Federal Police Act does not meet these requirements and that the Federal Police are therefore fundamentally not entitled to establish identity on the basis of this standard in the border area to another Schengen state (Ref. 1 K 5060/13).

See also

literature

  • Christian Krane: To establish identity in dangerous places . Comment on the judgment of the HbgOVG of 23.8.2002 - 1 Bf 301/00 -. In: Journal for Public Law in Northern Germany . 2003, ISSN  1435-2206 , p. 106 ff .
  • Reinhard Scholzen: Veil search - the historical development . From the Schengen Agreement to the new search strategy. In: Deutsches Polizeiblatt . Specialist magazine for education and training in the federal and state levels. No. 5 , 2004, ISSN  0175-4815 , p. 2 ff .
  • Pascal Förster / Fabian Toros: The veil manhunt in Bavaria and now also in NRW? . In: Deutsches Polizeiblatt. Specialized journal for education and training in the federal and state levels. No. 3, 2019, ISSN 0175-4815, p. 5 ff.

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. a b A textbook from the father of the veil search. Regulatory law: New edition by police chief Dölger and his ex-administrative chief package. In: echo-online.de. January 13, 2011, archived from the original on January 16, 2011 ; accessed on July 6, 2018 .
  2. Veil search. In: Alternative dictionary. Leopold Faulhaber, accessed on July 6, 2018 .
  3. a b Philip Grassmann: Righteousness does not protect against the veil search. Baden-Württemberg's police will in future be allowed to carry out identity checks regardless of suspicion. In: welt.de. Stefan Aust, July 22, 1996, accessed July 6, 2018 .
  4. ↑ The end of the veil search met with sharp criticism. Retrieved June 18, 2019 .
  5. Laws and jurisdiction Schleswig-Holstein § 181 LVwG | State standard Schleswig-Holstein | - Identity verification | General administrative law for the state of Schleswig-Holstein (Landesverwaltungsgesetz - LVwG -) in the version published on June 2, 1992 | valid from: 01/27/2017. Retrieved June 18, 2019 .
  6. a b VerfGH Bavaria: decision of February 7, 2006 (Ref. Vf. 69-VI-04). February 7, 2006, accessed July 6, 2018 .
  7. 500 additional police officers. Veil search. In: br.de. June 23, 2015, archived from the original on June 24, 2015 ; accessed on July 6, 2018 .
  8. Michael Kubitza: Potentially suspect since 1995. 20 years of veil manhunt. In: br.de. January 7, 2015, accessed July 6, 2018 .
  9. Andreas Lünser, DER SPIEGEL: SPIEGEL TV on the Federal Police's veil search by helicopter - DER SPIEGEL - Panorama. Retrieved February 5, 2020 .
  10. LVerfG Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania: judgment v. October 21, 1999. (pdf) (Az. LVerfG 2/98). Retrieved July 26, 2020 .
  11. Fabian Toros / Pascal Förster: Limits for the veil manhunt? In: Deutsches Polizeiblatt . No. 3 , 2019, p. 1 ff .
  12. ECJ: judgment of 22. June 2010. (Cases C ‑ 188/10 and C ‑ 189/10; ECLI: EU: C: 2010: 363 ). Retrieved July 6, 2018 .
  13. VG Stuttgart: judgment v. October 22, 2015. (Ref. 1 K 5060/13; ECLI: DE: VGSTUTT: 2015: 1022.1K5060.13.0A ). October 22, 2015, accessed July 6, 2018 .