Image: Fionn Große / pexels.com

Artificial intelligence is intended to help investigators find criminals more quickly and identify connections that people tend to overlook. Yet it is precisely this technology that is now sparking a heated debate.

The Federal Constitutional Court has ruled that the use of the “VeRA” analysis platform, which is based on software from the U.S. company Palantir, is in some respects incompatible with the Basic Law. The justices made it clear: Modern technology may facilitate investigations—but it must not come at the expense of fundamental rights.

Although the decision primarily affects Bavaria, it could have consequences far beyond the state's borders.

What exactly is VeRA?

VeRA is not software that monitors people or makes decisions on its own. Instead, it helps the police link existing information from various databases. This enables investigators to more quickly determine whether individuals, vehicles, phone numbers, or other pieces of information are connected.

Such an analysis can offer enormous advantages, especially in complex investigations. Connections that used to take many hours or even days to identify can now be revealed in just a few minutes. That is precisely why more and more law enforcement agencies are turning to such systems.

Why the court intervened

The Federal Constitutional Court did not question, as a matter of principle, the police's right to use modern technology.

The issue is rather when and under what conditions such extensive data analyses may be used.

In the judges’ view, some of the existing regulations in Bavaria went too far. They noted that the legal requirements were not defined narrowly enough in some instances. This creates the risk that personal data will be processed even though there are no sufficiently compelling reasons to do so.

In other words: The technology itself is not the problem. What matters are the rules of the game. Especially when large amounts of data are linked together, clear boundaries must be in place.

Security and data protection must go hand in hand

Many people want a police force that uses modern technology to prevent crimes as early as possible. At the same time, however, citizens also expect that their personal data will not be analyzed without sufficient cause. The current decision strikes a balance between these two interests.

The court makes it clear that security and data protection do not have to be mutually exclusive. Both objectives can be reconciled—but only if the legislature establishes clear and transparent rules.

Powerful software should therefore not automatically be allowed to do everything simply because it is technically capable of doing so.

What are the consequences of the ruling?

Bavaria must now amend its legal regulations. Until then, VeRA may no longer be used in all cases where it was previously applied. The legislature must now establish more precise requirements to ensure that its use is consistent with the Basic Law.

Other federal states are also likely to follow the decision closely. This is because many police agencies are now using similar systems or planning to implement them. The ruling could therefore have far-reaching implications for the future use of AI in criminal investigations.

One thing is certain: Artificial intelligence is here to stay in police work. The question is rather, under what conditions it may be used.

The real dispute is only just beginning

The discussion has long since moved beyond just software.

It concerns the fundamental question of how much surveillance a modern society is willing to tolerate.

New technologies are becoming increasingly powerful. At the same time, the need for security is growing. Balancing these two factors will be one of the greatest challenges of the coming years.

Lawmakers therefore face a difficult task: They must establish rules that facilitate investigations without unnecessarily restricting citizens' civil liberties.

When Technology Outpaces the Law

This case clearly demonstrates that technological progress alone is not enough. The more powerful digital tools become, the more important it is to establish clear boundaries.

Modern investigative software is not the enemy of freedom—as long as it is used responsibly. The real problem arises when the government seeks to collect and analyze more and more data before clear rules are in place. Technology evolves rapidly, while laws often evolve much more slowly. That is precisely where the danger lies. Those who seek to ensure security must not, at the same time, squander the trust of citizens. For a state governed by the rule of law does not thrive on being able to do everything—but rather on consciously refraining from doing everything that is technically possible.