(1) However, according to the established case-law of the Federal Constitutional
Court, an interference with fundamental rights is generally not found where personal
data of third persons is incidentally recorded within the scope of electronic data processing measures and deleted immediately thereafter, anonymously, without any
traces nor interest on the part of authorities in obtaining knowledge thereof. As stated, the standard is that there can only be an interference with fundamental rights
where the authorities have a specific interest in the data records concerned (cf. para.
43 above).
48
(2) Given the possibilities offered by modern information technology for crosschecking key indicators or personal characteristics with large amounts of data in a
very short time period, such specific interest exists where measures such as the number plate recognition at hand are conducted. Where the cross-checking of data is
used specifically to verify whether persons in public spaces or the objects with them
are sought by the police, a specific interest on the part of the authorities exists even
if such data is immediately deleted following the verification.
49
In this regard, it is essential that the collection and cross-checking of data be carried
out in a single measure, which specifically covers and is intended to cover all persons
subject to the number plate recognition. The inclusion of data from persons that does
not yield a match is not unintentional nor solely for technical reasons; rather, it is a
necessary and intended part of these measures, as they would otherwise not achieve
their purpose. In the ex ante view of the authorities, which is decisive for the carrying
out of number plate recognition, there is a specific interest in recording the number
plates of all vehicles that pass the number plate recognition device or are otherwise
included in the measure, because the measure specifically aims at checking these
vehicles. For this purpose, the data is intentionally collected and it is also essential
that it be attributable to a specific person. The fact that the data is analysed automatically does not change anything; rather, this method considerably expands the possibilities of these police measures.
50
The fact that the persons concerned face no inconvenience or consequences in
case of a no match also does not change anything. For the fact remains that automatic number plate recognition subjects these persons to a state measure, and a
specific search interest by the authority is thus applied to them. With this measure,
the persons concerned are checked against whether they or the objects with them
are sought by the authorities. At the same time, they may only continue their journey
unhindered on the condition that the police records do not contain relevant information on them. In view of this, it is not just the consequences of the measure, but the
measure as such that results in an impairment to the freedom of the persons concerned. It is integral to a free society that anyone may in principle move freely, without having their movements arbitrarily registered by the state, without having to prove
their integrity as law-abiding citizens, and without the feeling of constantly being under surveillance (cf. BVerfGE 107, 299 <328>; 115, 320 <354 and 355>; 120, 378
<402>; 122, 342 <370 and 371>; 125, 260 <335>). The possibility that a person could
51
13/34