
Court has confirmed coordinated raids of Zwiebelfreunde in Germany were illegal - rendx
https://blog.torservers.net/20180704/coordinated-raids-of-zwiebelfreunde-at-various-locations-in-germany.html#update
======
freeflight
A small remainder: German police also confiscated donor lists for anonymity
projects like Tails [0]

In that context, I consider it highly unlikely that this data wasn't already
shared with all kinds of institutions. Sure, CCC and Zwiebelfreunde can do a
bit of legal dance and make German police pretend nothing like that ever
happened, but one would be naive to take their word for it.

[0]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17483393](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17483393)

------
throwaway77384
I mean, I am really, really glad that at least it's been declared illegal, as
the whole thing is just insane (and reeks of the typical authoritarian
overreach as is custom in Bavaria), but the fact it happened in the first
place is still deeply disconcerting.

~~~
lallysingh
They'll probably do it again.

~~~
mg794613
I'm not a German, but Dutch. Doesn't this generate a lot of media attention
and precedence? I thought these kind of actions were especially sensitive in
Germany?

------
kodablah
Are there any consequences to prevent this from happening again? I am
unfamiliar w/ German approaches to illegal police activities (even if barely
illegal and retroactively determined), but I know in other countries the
absence of any consequences allows these things to repeatedly happen.

~~~
xashor
Effectively there will be no consequences. Technically Zwiebelfreunde could
file charges against the judge who signed the orders or the police who
executed them, but effectively they will not be prosecuted, let alone
convicted. Nearly all illegal police activity in Germany had no real
consequences, because there is a „high trust” in them by ruling parties.

Some examples from the last year:

[http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/justiz/g20-polizei-soll-
recht...](http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/justiz/g20-polizei-soll-rechtswidrig-
granatpistole-eingesetzt-haben-a-1176695.html)

[https://www.hessenschau.de/panorama/durchsuchung-des-asta-
st...](https://www.hessenschau.de/panorama/durchsuchung-des-asta-
studierendenhauses-war-rechtswidrig,rechtswidrige-durchsuchung-asta-100.html)

------
komali2
They're requesting in writing that no analysis was done, because then when
they get the equipment back and see that yup, analysis was done, they can then
I assume sue for... Something? How's that work in Germany?

~~~
clubm8
> _They 're requesting in writing that no analysis was done, because then when
> they get the equipment back and see that yup, analysis was done, they can
> then I assume sue for... Something?_

I'd assume if you're involved in a lawsuit against the police, and they make a
factual claim like "we did not analyze items not listed in the warrant", that
there's some sort of perjury type charge there.

While the police are allowed to lie to you, that's usually restricted to
interrogations ("your partner has already flipped") not lying to the lawyer
for the person suing you.

~~~
testvox
This isn't how it works in the United States at least. The police are allowed
to lie to you, your lawyer, the media, anyone they want to, as long as they
are not under oath. They may be held civilly liable for lies that cause
damages but only after overcoming their qualified immunity. Lieing to the
court even when not under oath could lead to a contempt change.

~~~
clubm8
>This isn't how it works in the United States at least. The police are allowed
to lie to you, your lawyer, the media, anyone they want to, as long as they
are not under oath.

That seems like you're playing semantics.

A __contempt charge __is a type of criminal charge. My contention is that if a
lawyer, during discovery, asks the police a question like "did you analyze the
data" and they lie they'd face issues.

So it looks like we're in agreement :)

~~~
mg794613
You are in spirit in agreement, but I don't think he played on words. Just
stating (how awful, personal opinion) how it is in the US.

------
nmcfarl
Google Translate of the German court text quoted in the blog post:

The challenged search and seizure orders and confiscation orders of the
district court of Munich were unlawful. As far as they were still valid, they
were therefore to be lifted. Moreover, their illegality was ascertained. The
applications for surrender of the confiscated objects were also to be granted
in this respect. The measures can no longer be considered covered by the Code
of Criminal Procedure. The investigating authorities are right to bring
proceedings against the persons responsible for the calls made on the websites
cited. However, the assumption made by the investigating authorities that
evidence can be found during the search of the data subjects or on the
confiscated data carriers is not justified in the known circumstances. There
is no sufficient probability of finding relevant data. There is no evidence
that those affected, their association onion friends e.V. or the grouping
"Riseup Networks" belong only to the environment of unknown offenders. It is
also not immediately apparent that they can find information on the
perpetrator environment or the perpetrators. The only connection point is the
fact that the unknown perpetrators had set up an e-mail account at "Riseup
Networks". However, "Riseup Networks" offers (as intended) anonymized Internet
services. The account can be set up anonymously (on recommendation). E-mail
traffic via the configured account is encrypted. Therefore, there is very
little chance of getting information about the perpetrators and acts via
"Riseup Networks" and its database. In addition, there is the additional
factor that according to the information available so far, those concerned
with their association "Zwiebelfreunde e.V." can not be equated with "Riseup
Networks". The link exists, as far as can be seen, only in the support of the
network by collecting donations

~~~
atVelocet
I think the translation from deepl.com is a bit better:

"The challenged search and seizure orders and seizure confirmation orders of
the Munich District Court were illegal. If they still existed, they were
therefore to be repealed. Moreover, their unlawfulness could be established.
The requests for surrender of the confiscated items were also to be granted in
this respect. The measures can no longer be regarded as covered by the Code of
Criminal Procedure.

The investigating authorities are right to take legal action against those
responsible for the calls on the websites cited. However, in the known
circumstances, it is not justified for the investigating authorities to assume
that evidence for these proceedings can be found during the search of the
persons concerned or on the confiscated data carriers. There is insufficient
probability of finding relevant data. There is no evidence that those
affected, their association Zwiebelfreunde e.V. or the grouping "Riseup
Networks" belong even to the environment of the unknown perpetrators. It is
also not immediately apparent that they contain information on the
perpetrators' environment or perpetrators. The only connection point is the
fact that the unknown perpetrators had set up an e-mail account at "Riseup
Networks". "However, "Riseup Networks" offers (as intended) anonymized
Internet services. The account can be set up anonymously (on recommendation).
E-mail traffic via the configured account is encrypted. Therefore, there is
very little probability of obtaining information about the perpetrators and
crimes via "Riseup Networks" and its database. In addition, according to the
information available to date, those affected with their association
"Zwiebelfreunde e.V." cannot be equated with "Riseup Networks". The only
connection, as far as is evident, is to support the network by collecting
donations."

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator

------
tinus_hn
It’s a good thing people are willing to risk this much to make an important
point.

