Collection of signatures against the revised surveillance law BÜPF

The opponents of the revised surveillance law BÜPF have begun collecting signatures for the referendum. On Tuesday they presented their arguments. The opponents say no to the associated violations of fundamental rights and freedoms, especially but not only the methods described in the BÜPF, such as the smuggling of a state Trojan, are a thorn in the side of the opponents.

In the spring session, parliament approved the revised law on the surveillance of postal and telecommunications traffic (BÜPF). The aim is to adapt the monitoring of suspects in criminal proceedings to technological developments. The law enforcement authorities are likely to smuggle Trojans into computers, for example, in order to monitor them and, for example, to be able to listen in on Skype calls. In other words, if the revised BÜPF is waved through, the state may use the methods of hackers and crackers and thus restrict the basic rights and freedoms of Swiss citizens. How many things are nowadays absolutely disproportionate, as not only we think.

An action alliance, to which young parties from the right and left belong, is opposed: the Young SVP, the Young Liberals, the Young Green Liberals and the JUSO. Then there are the Greens, the Pirate Party, organizations such as the Verein Grundrechte, the digital society Switzerland or Operation Libero and the IT industry. Specifically, the opponents criticize that the law enforcement authorities will be allowed to install surveillance software on computers or smartphones to prosecute criminal offenses - not only for murder or terrorism, but also for relatively minor offenses such as theft. From the opponent's point of view, this is not only disproportionate, but also dangerous: security loopholes would have to be exploited for installation. This creates a legal black market for security loopholes that criminals can also use.

According to the opponents, the state Trojans are also problematic because they not only monitor the system, but also influence it or even change data. Evidence could be manipulated, the state cannot guarantee that this will not happen. In addition, state Trojans are unnecessary, argues the action alliance. It is also possible to intercept encrypted communication in other ways. For example, Skype and other providers work together with the authorities on a court order. The authorities could also infiltrate groups on the Internet - such as a child pornography ring - in order to obtain information. The BÜPF opponents are of the opinion that the fact that the legal assistance process takes a long time and the infiltration is complex does not speak against such methods: Perhaps that is not bad at all, because it reduces the risk that the authorities monitor too often. The action alliance also criticizes the fact that telephone edge data is saved so that the law enforcement authorities can access it if necessary. Such data provide information about who has been on the phone with whom and for how long. Everything remains the same here: the data would - contrary to what was initially planned - with the revised law no longer stored than it is today. However, in the eyes of the opponents, data retention should generally be abolished. At least the data should have to be stored in Switzerland.

The opponents now have until July 7th to collect 50 signatures, which they will hopefully succeed in doing. Anyone who wants to actively help to get the signatures together will find Stop BÜPF everything you need for this, signature sheets, pedestrian baffles and brochures. I wish you success!