tion requires that justification for such measures must be based on reasons serving
to protect legal interests of at least considerable weight, or comparably weighty public
interests, in order to justify them. These include particularly protected legal interests
like life, limb and liberty of the person and the existence and security of the Federation and the Länder (cf. BVerfGE 120, 274 <328>; 125, 260 <330>; 141, 220
<270 para. 108>). In addition, they may also include legal interests situated below the
threshold determined for surveillance measures constituting significant interferences,
such as the protection of considerable material assets. The legislature can specify
further details regarding this threshold [...]. A review as to constitutionality examines
the entire legislative framework of the authorisation. In this respect, both the purposes set out by the legislature in the provisions on automatic number plate recognition,
as well as the scope and content of the data records the legislature authorises in the
context of data cross-checking would have to be examined.
cc) Finally, while considering all its characteristic circumstances, the legislative
framework regarding automatic number plate recognition must also be proportionate
in an overall assessment. In this respect, the legislature must preserve the balance
between the type and intensity of the impairments of fundamental rights on the one
hand and the causes justifying the interference on the other hand, for instance by establishing requirements regarding the threshold for the exercise of powers, the necessary factual basis, or the weight of the protected legal interests (cf. BVerfGE 120,
378 <429>). It also follows from this that the measures may not be conducted to cover an unlimited area. However, the requirements to specify the spatial limits within
which number plate recognition measures are to take place become less strict, the
more serious and urgent the danger to be averted is in a specific case. In any case,
the proportionality of the application of number plate recognition measures pursuant
to general principles must be ensured.
100
dd) Furthermore, to protect the right to informational self-determination, requirements with regard to transparency, individual legal recourse and supervisory measures follow from the principle of proportionality (cf. BVerfGE 65, 1 <44 et seq.>; 125,
260 <334 et seq.>; 141, 220 <282 para. 134>; established case-law). The scope of
these requirements is determined by the intensity of the interference of the number
plate recognition measure and is therefore not as far-reaching as when it applies to
cases of covert surveillance measures whose intensity of interference is particularly
high. Also constitutionally required are tenable provisions on data use and deletion
(cf. BVerfGE 65, 1 <46>; 133, 277 <366 para. 206>; 141, 220 <285 para. 144>; established case-law).
101
b) With regard to the specification of their individual constituent elements, the challenged provisions do not satisfy the aforementioned requirements in every respect.
Nor are the overarching requirements fully complied with.
102
aa) As a first option, the Act provides that automatic number plate recognition measures may be implemented to avert a danger (Art. 33(2) second to fifth sentences,
103
19/34