Privacy of Communications Case [The Klass Case]
Federal Republic of Germany Federal Constitutional Court
30 BVerfGE 1 (1970)
- Written by Mary Katherine Cunningham, JD
Facts
Upon enactment, Article 10 of the Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany) provided that the secrecy of the mail, posts, and telecommunications was inviolable. The original Article 10 text provided that the government could restrict or breach the privacy of an individual’s mail or telecommunications only pursuant to a law. The federal government then proposed an amendment to Article 10’s provision regarding the inviolability of the mail and telecommunications. The amendment provided that an individual would not necessarily be informed that the government was reviewing their mail or telecommunications if the government was surveilling that individual in order to protect the free democratic order or to protect the existence or security of West Germany. The proposed amendment also provided that any recourse sought by the individual for the government’s violation of their privacy would occur in auxiliary bodies appointed by Parliament, rather than in the courts. The Länd of Hesse and the Free Hanseatic City of Bremen challenged the constitutionality of the proposed amendment, arguing the proposed amendment unconstitutionally infringed on rights granted in Articles 1 and 20 of the Basic Law.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
Dissent (Geller, J)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
