Driving too fast once and then you get caught speeding. This is not only annoying, but in many cases results in high fines or, in the worst case, a driving ban. The corresponding fine notice, including a photo, often arrives in the mailbox quicker than expected. To identify the driver, the relevant authorities then use data stored with other authorities. Photo It is often overlooked that such a procedure is not always compatible with the GDPR. In some cases, there is no corresponding legal basis for it. The State Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information North Rhine-Westphalia (LDI NRW) addressed precisely this issue in its 28th report on data protection comparisons and data protection.
Excursus: Insight into investigative practice comparisons and data protection
To understand the problem, it is necessary to take a closer look at common investigative practices:
If the responsible authority is informed that a person has been caught speeding, they first check the owner’s identity using the photographed license plate. This process alone is often unsuccessful. Often the owner does not want to comment or states that they were not driving. However, austria business fax list the driver must be clearly identified because a fine can only be imposed on the person who was actually driving. For this reason, in the cases mentioned above, the “speed camera photos” are then compared with an official photograph . To do this, the responsible authority uses the photographs stored with the identity card authority. The driver can then be clearly identified using the photograph.
Data protection compliance of the procedure
However, given the authorities’ described practice, the question arises as to whether such a procedure is even compliant with data protection regulations. After all, if you want to be successful a photograph is personal data, the transmission of which requires a corresponding legal basis under the GDPR or a specific law.
Taking the speed camera photo
The taking and processing of the speed camera photo is permissible because, according to Art. 2 (2) (d) GDPR, it does not fall within the material scope of the GDPR. This is because the scope of application does not apply to the collection and processing of personal data if investigation, detection, marketing list or prosecution of criminal offenses or criminal prosecution, including the protection against and averting threats to public security. Although administrative offenses are not explicitly listed in the exception, they are nevertheless included.
Requirements for the legality of access to photographs
According to Section 24 of the Personal Identity Card Act (PAuswG), the request is possible under the following conditions:
(2) The identity card authorities may transmit data from the identity card register to other authorities at their request if
- the requesting authority is entitled to receive such data on the basis of laws or legal regulations,
- the requesting authority would not be able to fulfil its duties without knowledge of the data, and
When comparing photo ID for driver identification purposes, the data transfer is based on Section 24 (2) No. 3 of the Photo ID Act (PAAuswG) . Consequently, the principle of proportionality must always be observed in this context. In particular, requesting a photo always requires that the person accused of an administrative offense has previously been interviewed unsuccessfully in accordance with Section 55 of the OWiG and informed of the possibility of a photo comparison.
Legal assessment of the procedure
In particular, the person concerned (= the person caught speeding) must at least be given the opportunity to be heard.
Application to a company car
They must first take further investigative measures to locate the driver of the vehicle caught speeding. Only if less stringent investigative measures fail can they rely on a photo.
