The German authority criticizes the federal government's plans to massively restrict the right of access to information
The Conference of Information Freedom Delegates in Germany (IFK) strongly opposes the federal government's plan to significantly restrict the Freedom of Information Act.
According to decisions published on July 1, 2026, the plan proposes to condition the right of access to information on the justification of a legitimate interest and to limit it to natural persons of German nationality or Union citizens residing in Germany. It also involves increasing fees and generally excluding entire sectors, such as critical infrastructures or scientific research, from the scope of the law, instead of a case-by-case risk assessment. The IFK considers these measures to amount to a de facto suppression of the right of access to information at the federal level, believing that the security argument is a pretext and that existing legal exceptions are sufficient.
The IFK emphasizes that the requirement of a legitimate interest would reverse the burden of proof, obliging the applicant to justify their request rather than the administration to justify a refusal. This change, along with other restrictions, would generate additional administrative burden for authorities, who would have to verify the eligibility and interest of each request. Moreover, the primacy given to other information rights could prevent journalists from invoking this law. The IFK therefore urges the government to implement a reform that increases the transparency of state action, drawing inspiration from the modern laws of certain federal states.
According to decisions published on July 1, 2026, the plan proposes to condition the right of access to information on the justification of a legitimate interest and to limit it to natural persons of German nationality or Union citizens residing in Germany. It also involves increasing fees and generally excluding entire sectors, such as critical infrastructures or scientific research, from the scope of the law, instead of a case-by-case risk assessment. The IFK considers these measures to amount to a de facto suppression of the right of access to information at the federal level, believing that the security argument is a pretext and that existing legal exceptions are sufficient.
The IFK emphasizes that the requirement of a legitimate interest would reverse the burden of proof, obliging the applicant to justify their request rather than the administration to justify a refusal. This change, along with other restrictions, would generate additional administrative burden for authorities, who would have to verify the eligibility and interest of each request. Moreover, the primacy given to other information rights could prevent journalists from invoking this law. The IFK therefore urges the government to implement a reform that increases the transparency of state action, drawing inspiration from the modern laws of certain federal states.
Informations complémentaires
L’analyse complète est réservée aux membres
Montant de la sanction, thèmes, secteurs, entités et données concernées : l’essai gratuit de 14 jours ouvre la fiche entière et la veille personnalisée.
Essayer gratuitement 14 jours · accès complet · sans carte bancaire