Austrian authorities are poised to expand their surveillance capabilities, allowing public prosecutors and police to monitor encrypted messenger communications of suspects. This initiative, articulated by Gerhard Karner, Austria’s Conservative interior minister, has been described as a “sensible” approach to enhancing national security. However, the ultimate decision rests with the justice ministry.
Surveillance Powers in Focus
Currently, these proposed surveillance powers are primarily aimed at combating terrorism. Karner’s remarks came in response to calls from the association of public prosecutors and the Austrian federal criminal police, who are advocating for similar surveillance capabilities in the prosecution of various crimes, akin to those planned for the Austrian State security agency.
The impetus for this initiative was tragically underscored by a school shooting in Graz on June 10, where an ex-pupil claimed ten lives. In the aftermath, Austria’s three-party government coalition reached a consensus on Karner’s long-standing proposal for a “federal trojan” – a software tool designed to enable security agencies to monitor communications on social media and messaging platforms.
This proposal has ignited a fervent debate among NGOs and opposition parties, who argue that such measures represent an unwarranted invasion of privacy with questionable efficacy in countering terrorism. Karner’s suggestion to broaden the scope of messenger surveillance beyond terrorism to encompass “ordinary” crimes has faced significant pushback from coalition partners, including the Social Democrats (SPÖ) and the left-leaning Liberal Neos party.
Yannick Shetty, chairman of the Neos party, firmly stated, “We will not extend the monitoring of dangerous persons to other offences during the entire government term.” In contrast, Justice Minister Anna Sporrer (SPÖ) offered a more nuanced perspective. On June 27, she clarified that there were no immediate plans to broaden the surveillance framework, emphasizing that the federal government aims to implement constitutionally compliant monitoring specifically targeting dangerous individuals to enhance protection against terrorist threats.
However, Sporrer did not entirely dismiss the possibility of future expansions. She indicated that after an initial trial phase, during which the State security agency could familiarize itself with the new tools, discussions about potential extensions could be warranted. “Only then does a discussion about whether and how to expand make sense at all,” she remarked.
In a critical response, Süleyman Zorba, a spokesperson for the opposition Greens party, expressed concerns that the federal trojan represents a significant shift in surveillance policy. He remarked, “First the interior minister tells us that surveillance should only be possible in a very narrow area of terrorist threats with very high penalties, shortly afterwards he drops the mask and calls for an expansion before the law has even been passed. Once the tracks for surveillance have been laid, they will be utilized to an ever-greater extent.”
