Twelve people died on the 19. December 2016, the most serious Islamist terrorist plot in Germany. Educational work, especially parliamentary inquiry make committees. Easy, you don’t have it.
Anis Amri Scheid, long before the attack on the wide square in the sights of security agencies
“Is known as a colorful dog”: one speaks in Germany about people that stand out by their appearance or behavior in General. The assassin Anis Amri was one of those. In the German safety authorities, many knew him long before he stole a truck, the driver murdered, and then in the unprotected Christmas market on Berlin’s Breitscheidplatz raced. Eleven other people of the Tunisian-born Terrorist crack on 19. December 2016 in the death of, more than 60 were injured, some of them difficult.
The later on the run man who was shot Amri was not a blank slate that is two years after the worst Islamist attack in Germany, long a certainty. The 2017 from the Berlin Senate appointed a special Prosecutor Bruno Jost wondered why the ex-offenders and legally rejected asylum seekers had remained in spite of the intense drug trafficking, to walk free. A plausible answer has so far found no one – neither the committees of inquiry in the city-state of Berlin and in North Rhine-Westphalia, in March, established a parliamentary Committee of the Bundestag.
Martina Renner surprised about the functioning of the constitutional protection
There is a witness of the Federal Constitution, was charged in mid-November protection (BfV), which was concerned at the time of the terrorist attack with the evaluation of Islamist websites. But although the question was always a topic of conversation in the Joint terrorism defence centre (GTAZ) of the Federation and the länder in Berlin, took care of, allegedly, no one in the Social Media activities of the later bomber. Facebook Profiles Amris remained therefore, also, no matter how relevant Chat groups, and are surprised the investigation Committee member Martina Renner.
Martina Renner (Left party): “not one Has done the Right thing or not telling us the truth?”
“What are you doing, anyway?” the woman on the Left asks in an interview with Deutsche Welle.Maybe the BfV have no criteria, which should be taken into consideration. Another explanation would be that the Constitution of wool to distract protection and other security agencies from its own failings and misjudgments. Ultimately, there are from Renner’s point of view, only two options: “not done the Right thing or not telling us the truth?”
The FDP, greens and the Left is to sue the Federal government
Their mistrust of authorities, fed also from the restrictive dealing with investigation findings from the current court. The Committee do not receive any files from the in Celle (lower Saxony) process that is taking place against the alleged leader of the terrorist militia “Islamic state” (IS) in Germany, Abu Walaa. That Amri knew the Iraqis, is considered to be safe.
Also on the so-called V-man leader, which supply mole in the Islamist Milieu, with specific orders, you must waive the examination Committee. That is why the Left has been filed now together with the Green and Free Democrats (FDP), the German Federal constitutional court in Karlsruhe a lawsuit against the Federal government.
Parallels and differences to the NSU
The Refusal of the Federal government, according to Martina Renner’s experiences far beyond what she has experienced in connection with the terrorist group “national socialist underground” (NSU). Even so, several investigation committees of Federal and state employees. The difference is From the higher regional court of Munich, where the launched in 2013 NSU-process in July, after five years, have received parliamentary scout files. And as witnesses-charged V-man leader answered questions of the members.
Audio 08:11 to listen live Now 08:11 Min. 
Armin Schuster, the error in the case of Amri
The Chairman of the Committee of inquiry into the Amri assassination, Armin Schuster (CDU), a comparison with the NSU inadmissible. His justification in the DW-interview: V-people and their leaders, the would have says in connection with the right-wing extremist terrorist group, not at the time have been active. He had a Problem with that, V-man leader, “in the active operational use is to be heard”, in a Committee of inquiry.
The Federal government justified the statement of refusal with the protection of trust towards their Informants in the Islamist Milieu. Apparently, they feared to jeopardize their human sources. This principle he could understand, says Schuster. Weak points in dealing with the question of the Christian sees a Democrat, but very comfortable. Because of the protection of the Constitution was according to the findings of the investigation Committee in the first half of 2016, pretty close to the later bombers.
Committee-chief Armin Schuster speaks of a “mistake”
The Tunisians are held often in the now-closed Fussilet-mosque in Berlin. She was regarded as a Hotspot of the radical Salafist scene. But it should not be able to place people directly in Amri. As the “error” referred to the enlightener Schuster the decision of the safety authorities, to deal in the second half of 2016, less Amri, “because they were in the first half of the year, with all the measures fail,”.
Two months after the anise Amris terrorist attack on the Breitscheidplatz, the Fussilet has been made a mosque dense
Due to this incorrect position of the Islamist slowly disappeared from view, although he was classified by the Federal criminal police office (BKA) as a “threat”. To such persons the authorities are to be trusted at any time a stop. Therefore, Amri was also always a topic of conversation in the Joint terrorism defence centre (GTAZ). Around 40 authorities shall exchange Federal and state your information. Through data-matching and monitoring-measures, you know, that under several Alias names registered refugee violence was ready. Still, he could at 19. December 2016 to run unhindered his deadly deed.
The need for reform In the Joint terrorism defence centre (GTAZ)
Armin Schuster, therefore already now: “I want someone in the terrorist-leads the centre of defence in such a case.” Why that remained after the experience with the right-wing extremist terrorist group NSU, is just one of many questions. At the time of inquiry appointed Committee recommended that the Federal office for the protection of the Constitution a leading function. The law was then reformed accordingly. In the GTAZ many other authorities sit still. What is obviously missing is a clear hierarchy and authority.