"No authority"

Fuss about cameras in Wörgl

According to Mayor Michael Riedhart, extensive video surveillance in the urban area of Wörgl is intended to improve security. However, the authorities responsible for security have stated that he appears to have no authority to take this unilateral action.

George Orwell wrote his well-known novel "1984" in 1948. His vision of a total surveillance state at that time is already very close to everyday life in 2024. The dangers of Orwell's "Big Brother" are no longer just literary fiction; in some cases, today's technologically advanced surveillance apparatus can also lead to political abuse. Consequently, State Police Director Helmut Tomac and Kufstein District Administrator Christoph Platzgummer are not at all pleased with the legally unjustified, arbitrary actions of Wörgl Mayor Michael Riedhart.

Focus on the city center
Since the beginning of the year, he has had public areas such as schools and the center of the Unterland municipality monitored by a good dozen video cameras and is selling this approach to the media as "lawful" – the "Krone" reported in detail.

"He never contacted us"
District Administrator Platzgummer explains: "Mayor Riedhart never contacted us in advance. We already informed him last fall that security police arguments cannot be used to justify video surveillance, as the municipality has no jurisdiction in this matter."

There are currently no criminal hotspots in Wörgl that would justify surveillance with cameras.

Christoph Platzgummer, Bezirkshauptmann von Kufstein

A municipality that believes there are so-called crime hotspots in its area must notify the security authorities, in this case the district administration, and request permission to install video surveillance there. The authorities then conduct a lengthy review process in cooperation with the state police department.

Mayor not responsible
According to Platzgummer, however, there are currently no areas in Wörgl with a high crime rate that would justify surveillance with cameras. "Video surveillance may well be used to protect municipal property, but it must comply with data protection regulations," says Platzgummer, who goes on to explain: "Despite this information, Mayor Riedhart never contacted us and repeatedly presented security police arguments in public in his media outpourings. However, he has no jurisdiction in this matter."

Data protection authority notified
In the meantime, State Police Director Tomac instructed his agency's legal department to inform the data protection authority in Vienna about the inadmissible and questionable actions taken unilaterally by the mayor in Wörgl.

"People's interests in data protection are important"
"At the same time, we also informed Mayor Riedhart in writing that, firstly, video surveillance in public areas is the sole responsibility of the security authorities and, secondly, there is a legal procedure in place that aims to take into account both the interests of security and the interests of the population in data protection," State Police Director Tomac said in an interview with the "Krone" newspaper.

Mayor Riedhart is assuming powers that are the sole responsibility of the security authorities in orderly procedures.

Helmut Tomac, Landespolizeidirektor

Section 54, paragraph 6 of the Security Police Act clearly defines: "If dangerous attacks against the life, health, or property of people are to occur in public places and there is reason to fear that further crimes will be committed there in the future, then security authorities may collect personal data of those present using image and sound recording devices in order to prevent such attacks. Defining these places is the sole responsibility of the security authority and not that of a mayor."