Germany is facing a heated debate over the potential nationwide deployment of the controversial surveillance software Palantir, with significant opposition from various political factions. The Green party, led by security politician Konstantin von Notz, has voiced strong criticism of the proposed use of the software, which has been under scrutiny for its ties to US intelligence and military operations.
Initially, the ruling coalition, known as the Ampel government, had planned to develop its own IT system to analyze data more efficiently, effectively sidelining Palantir. However, recent pressure from the Bundesrat, Germany's federal council, has prompted discussions about using Palantir as an interim solution. The coalition agreement between the parties has left room for the use of AI-driven analysis, alongside other stringent law-and-order measures.
Von Notz has been vocal about his concerns, stating, "Palantir has never fulfilled the security policy expectations placed in it." He pointed out that even Europol, the European policing agency, has distanced itself from using Palantir due to its failure to meet necessary security standards. The Green politician further warned that deploying Palantir at the federal level could pose significant legal and constitutional risks, particularly in light of the company's controversial connections to figures like Peter Thiel, who has been a prominent supporter of former President Donald Trump.
On March 21, 2025, the Bundesrat passed a resolution that aims to include data from various authorities—including health, weapons, and foreign agencies—into the surveillance software's database. This could also encompass toll data and biometric information, raising alarms among privacy advocates. Critics, including police scientists and data specialists, have repeatedly expressed concerns regarding the implications of using Palantir's software, particularly given its historical associations with the US military and intelligence sectors.
Despite the Green party's opposition, five state governments with Green participation—Baden-Württemberg, North Rhine-Westphalia, Bremen, Rhineland-Palatinate, and Schleswig-Holstein—approved the resolution in the Bundesrat. This has led to some confusion within the party, as the decision appears to contradict their established stance against Palantir. The resolution, however, does not guarantee that Palantir will be implemented in these states, as the final decision will depend on future discussions within the coalition government and state administrations.
In Schleswig-Holstein, Green party member Jan Kürschner has openly rejected the use of Palantir, citing the company's connections to Trump and Musk as significant reasons against its adoption. He stated, "The acquisition of surveillance software from a provider linked to Donald Trump's agenda poses serious concerns." The coalition agreement between the CDU and SPD, which emphasizes the need for digital sovereignty, also complicates the situation, as the CSU is expected to take control of the Interior Ministry, potentially paving the way for Palantir's integration.
Palantir, often referred to as a "data octopus" by its critics, has been a focal point of controversy for years. Its co-founder and major shareholder, Peter Thiel, has been a long-time supporter of Trump, raising further questions about the ethical implications of using the software in Germany. Currently, states like Bavaria, Hesse, and North Rhine-Westphalia are already utilizing Palantir's software, while Berlin and Baden-Württemberg are considering collaborations with the US firm.
In light of these developments, the Federal Ministry of the Interior, led by Nancy Faeser of the SPD, has expressed skepticism about Palantir's deployment. A planned introduction of the software in 2023 was halted due to concerns over its implications for privacy and civil liberties. With the upcoming change in leadership at the ministry, it remains to be seen how this will affect the future of Palantir in Germany.
The ongoing debate highlights the tension between the need for effective data analysis in law enforcement and the imperative to protect citizens' rights and privacy. As discussions continue, von Notz has vowed to closely monitor the coalition's actions regarding Palantir, stating, "We will accompany the legislative process very intensively, and if necessary, we will take legal action before the Federal Constitutional Court." This commitment underscores the urgency of ensuring that any deployment of surveillance technology aligns with constitutional and European legal standards.
As the situation evolves, it is clear that the conversation surrounding Palantir is not just about technology; it encompasses broader issues of governance, ethics, and the future of civil liberties in Germany. The implications of this decision could resonate far beyond national borders, influencing how surveillance technologies are perceived and regulated in Europe and beyond.
