Media and journalist groups are protesting proposed changes to Germany's information law. They say the reforms would limit public oversight and make reporting harder. Over 100 organizations have signed an open letter.
Proposed changes to Germany's Informationsfreiheitsgesetz (IFG) have triggered strong opposition from leading publisher and journalist associations. Industry groups say the reforms, backed by the federal government, would significantly restrict access to public documents and make investigative reporting more difficult. They warn that the public could lose a key tool for holding authorities accountable.
The IFG, in place since 2006, currently requires government agencies to release documents upon request. Under the new plan, access would be limited to individuals with a 'legitimate interest' who cannot obtain the information through other means. The government is also considering restricting requests to German residents and EU citizens, raising fees for inquiries, and redacting the names of officials in responses.
The BDZV and MVFP, two major publisher associations, have called on the Bundestag to scrutinize the proposed changes. They argue that limiting access to state information would undermine independent journalism and reduce transparency. The groups say that efforts to cut bureaucracy should not come at the expense of press oversight.
A coalition of 116 organizations and media outlets-including Netzwerk Recherche, Deutscher Journalisten-Verband, and “taz”-has sent an open letter to the government, the Interior Ministry, and lawmakers. The letter urges officials to protect the IFG, stating that the law has enabled the exposure of corruption and abuse of power for two decades. The coalition warns that the proposed reforms would sharply reduce the number of IFG requests and deal a serious blow to press freedom in Germany.
Concerns about government limits on journalistic access have surfaced elsewhere in Europe as well. For example, recent Supreme Court actions in the US have also shaped the legal landscape for press freedom, as seen in a recent case involving protections for reporters.
