Palantir has long divided opinions. In the eyes of its proponents and opponents, the analysis tools made by the publicly traded US company which are in-demand worldwide are either a silver bullet or the devil's work. Against this backdrop, a media report has emerged in Germany: according to information from the Süddeutsche Zeitung newspaper, as well as public broadcasters NDR and WDR, the country's Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz, BfV) has decided against using Palantir.
According to reports, Germany's domestic intelligence agency has instead settled on a product from French company ChapsVision. However, there is no official confirmation of this — neither from the software company nor the BfV. A spokesperson from the German Ministry of the Interior told DW that the BfV generally does not comment publicly on operational matters, arguing it "could pose a security risk that would allow conclusions to be drawn about the working methods of the BfV."
The decisicion on which software to use is based on the technology available, the spokesperson continued. "There is no focus on a particular manufacturer."
Rather, the capabilities of the analytical tools offered are determinant in who is awarded the final contract. The BfV says it needs such powerful AI-based programs for counterintelligence and counterterrorism, as well as the surveillance of any kind of political and religious extremism.
To fulfil these duties, the domestic security agency wants to, in the words of its president Sinan Selen, expand its "toolbox". Other German security agencies are also pushing for this, especially the Federal Intelligence Service (Bundesnachrichtendienst, BND) for foreign intelligence and the Federal Criminal Police Office (Bundeskriminalamt, BKA).
For agencies to be able to expand their technical capabilities and operational capacity, extensive legal reforms are still required. Germany's federal government has long been drafting laws to be brought before Germany's parliament, the Bundestag. Elected lawmakers will have the final say on the matter.
Controversial elements include the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and facial recognition software. The opposition Left party strongly rejects any such plans. "Swapping Palantir for ChapsVision is false marketing," the Left's interior affairs spokesperson Clara Bünger told DW.
"The real problem is not where the software comes from, but the logic behind it: namely, the automated merging and scanning of massive amounts of data by an intelligence agency." Bünger, referring to relevant rulings by the Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht, BVerfG), advocates for clear legal regulations with strict limits and effective oversight. "Otherwise, fundamental rights are violated," she said.
The Left party lawmaker said that what is marketed as "digital sovereignty" today could be the tool of authoritarian forces tomorrow.
The German Society for Civil Rights (GFF), a Berlin-based non-profit association, has already launched legal proceedings against the unrestricted use of Palantir software by German security agencies. The group's constitutional complaint against amendments to the Hessian Police Act Police Act and Constitutional Protection Act law in the state of Hesse was successful in 2023, when the Constitutional Court essentially declared indiscriminate automated data evaluation unconstitutional.
The law was subsequently reformed, but the GFF thought it did not go far enough. That is why the organization filed a new constitutional complaint in 2024. The following year it filed another complaint against the state of Bavaria. Both cases are still awaiting judgements from the Constitutional Court.
Franziska Görlitz is a lawyer and case coordinator for the GFF. She supports the reported refusal of the domestic intelligence service BfV to use Palantir. In an interview with DW, the lawyer welcomed the idea of German authorities taking digital sovereignty into consideration when examining potential software products.
But the same applies to other software producers, as well. "These tools are black boxes," Görlitz pointed out. "We do not know how they reach their conclusions. For us, it is not clear what they are capable of. How much do they encroach on fundamental rights?"
"Regardless of the software provider, data analyses are serious encroachments on fundamental rights," the GFF expert explained. New knowledge can be generated, for example, by building a personality profile or evaluating specific circumstances with the help of AI. "That is a big risk, because people could be targeted by the authorities due to mistakes or discrimination."
Analysis tools can also have an intimidating effect, Görlitz warned "It can cause people to change their behavior for fear of of ending up in databases. That could mean that they might not attend a particular protest, or they might break off contact with certain people if they fear they are perhaps being watched by the BfV."
The US-based company Palantir, which has faced criticism from many sides, is paying close attention to the debate in Germany. In an interview with the German tabloid Bild, Palantir CEO Alex Karp spoke about what he described as a mix of restraint and rejection. He remarked how he did not believe Germany could afford to do without his company's expertise, and said critical German debate on AI-driven softare sounded to him "as if they were speaking of withcraft."
On the other hand, critics such as Dutch political scientist Cas Mudde have accused Palantir of pursuing a form of technofascism. The reason for this accusation is Karp's book, The Technological Republic. Mudde considers it a manifesto that promotes a world controlled by surveillance companies led by an authoritarian US. Therefore, in a post on LinkedIn, Mudde appealed to Europe to end all cooperation with Palantir.
This article was translated from German.
此内容由惯性聚合(RSS阅读器)自动聚合整理，仅供阅读参考。 原文来自 — 版权归原作者所有。