German government plans major changes to Freedom of Information rights

Germany's federal government is considering far-reaching changes to the country's Freedom of Information Act (Informationsfreiheitsgesetz or IFG), a law that currently allows individuals and organisations to request access to government documents.

The plans emerged following a coalition committee agreement announced on July 2nd and have since been confirmed by the Federal Interior Ministry, led by Alexander Dobrindt (CSU).

According to reports, the proposed reforms would restrict who can submit requests, require applicants to demonstrate a "legitimate interest", increase fees and potentially exclude some foreign residents from using the law altogether.

The proposals have prompted strong objections from journalists' groups, transparency organisations, opposition politicians and media freedom advocates, who argue the move would significantly weaken public oversight of government decision-making.

What is Germany's Freedom of Information Act?

Germany's federal Freedom of Information Act has been in force since 2006. It was introduced after years of campaigning for greater government transparency and represented a major shift in how individuals and organisations could access official information.

Before the law was introduced, people generally had to justify why they wanted access to government records. The IFG reversed that principle by making access to official information the default unless a specific exemption applied.

Currently, anyone can submit a request to federal authorities for documents, contracts, administrative records and official correspondence.

While some information can still be withheld – for example on national security or privacy grounds – people requesting information don’t need to explain why they want it and IFG fees are capped at €500.

How does the government want to change the law?

The government says the proposed changes are intended to reduce bureaucracy and make access to information "more understandable and transparent".

In practice, this appears to mean that applicants would no longer have an automatic right to information. Instead, they would have to show a "legitimate interest" in the information and demonstrate that it could not be obtained through another legal route.

In addition, only "natural persons" would be able to make requests. In legal jargon, a natural person means an individual. This contrasts with a "legal person", such as a company, charity, foundation, association or media organisation.

If adopted, the proposals would therefore mean that groups such as Amnesty International, Deutsche Umwelthilfe and FragDenStaat could lose the ability to submit requests in their own name.

The government is also said to be examining whether eligibility should be limited to German citizens and EU citizens living in Germany.

Other proposals are reported to include:

• removing the current €500 fee cap
• allowing authorities to charge fees on a cost-recovery basis
• redacting the names of government employees from released documents
• introducing broader restrictions for areas such as critical infrastructure, counter-terrorism, counter-intelligence and scientific research.

What has the reaction been?

The German Journalists' Association (DJV), Reporters Without Borders, Netzwerk Recherche, Correctiv and Berlin's Freedom of Information Commissioner Meike Kamp have all already publicly objected to the plans.

Senior figures in the Green and Left parties have also spoken out, arguing that the proposed reforms would make it more difficult for journalists, campaign groups and members of the public to scrutinise government decision-making.

"Under the pretext of having to adapt to new security threats, (the government) is fundamentally undermining the legal foundations of government transparency," said Konstantin von Notz, deputy chair of the Green Party parliamentary group.

Since the law came into force, IFG requests have played an important supporting role in the scrutiny of several major political controversies.

One prominent example is the Augustus Intelligence affair. Through Freedom of Information disclosures and investigative reporting, internal documents revealed how CDU politician Philipp Amthor had advocated for the US start-up Augustus Intelligence within the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs while simultaneously holding stock options and a position with the company.

Amthor himself later served as lead negotiator in the working group that discussed changes to the IFG during coalition talks.

IFG requests also contributed to public scrutiny of the COVID-19 associated with former Federal Health Minister Jens Spahn (CDU).

Similarly, IFG requests played a role in scrutinising (CSU). 

According to figures cited by the DJV, more than 300,000 IFG requests have been submitted since the law came into force, including around 19,000 last year alone.