Anonymised documents when viewing one’s own file
All documents found regarding the applicant are prepared for review or release. However, the right to view files generally applies only to information concerning the applicant.
Information regarding other individuals or third parties must be rendered anonymous to protect their personal rights. For this reason, certain text passages and in some cases entire pages will be redacted. When original documents are viewed, the pages in question are either covered or copies of the originals are provided with redacted passages.
The names or aliases of full-time and unofficial employees of the State Security Service remain unredacted. After viewing the files or receiving copies, you may request to have the aliases decrypted.
Examples of anonymised personal information
In the examples, the passages in bold must be anonymised. They are taken from the guidelines regarding § 32 of the Stasi Records Act.
Information on data subjects and third parties
(According to the files, Anton Alt is the data subject and Eva Alt is a third party. No declaration of consent has been provided)
‘Anton Alt resides at 62 Müllerstraße, Berlin. He is married to Eva Alt, who is the medical director of the University Hospital. Anton Alt served as factory submanager of the VEB “Gummiwerke Treptow” from 1975 to 1980.’
Information on personages of contemporary history and holders of political office
(Walter Demos is party chairman)
‘Demos comes from a lower-middle-class background, passed his school-leaving exams and began studying engineering in 1939. During the war, he was a sergeant in the Luftwaffe ground crew. After returning from captivity, he contracted tuberculosis. His political views lean towards radicalism and he attacks political opponents with impertinent, personal attacks. In diary entries obtained through an operational measure, he writes that 95% of his party members are a dull, mindless mass. His personal life is in disarray; he is currently going through a divorce and has a fondness for alcohol.’
Information on public officials
(Peter Scharf is a public prosecutor)
‘Peter Scharf works as a public prosecutor at the Neubrandenburg District Court, Department 2. In court proceedings, he consistently upholds the socialist laws. Because he followed the guidance we provided regarding the charges in the Meier case, it was possible to conclude the proceedings at a high standard.
Scharf is married, has two children and enjoys sailing in his spare time. Since he is transferring to the Public Prosecutor’s Office in Berlin, there is no operational need to recruit him for our unit.’
(Although the information regarding his family circumstances and hobby is not primarily sensitive, it does not constitute information relating to a public official in the performance of his duties. Hence, this information falls within the category of information concerning a data subject.)
Information on employees
‘The IMS was recruited on 23 July 1971 for unofficial cooperation with the Stasi on the basis of his personal conviction. He was deployed to secure the apprentice hostel at the Halle chemical fibre plant. The IM’s reports are marked by objectivity. The IM’s character, however, has developed to his detriment; he comes across as overbearing and arrogant, which has resulted in contact with superiors and colleagues being restricted to work-related encounters. Consequently, the IM’s ability to operate effectively within the scope of his assignment is limited. Furthermore, when under the influence of alcohol, the IM tends to act recklessly, which manifests itself in indecent advances towards women and the disruption of socialist relations. Due to the IM’s aforementioned development, contact with him is to be severed and the material transferred to Department XII for archiving.’
Information on legal persons
(Bartelt is considered here a data subject)
‘Bartelt has been working as a development engineer at Franz-Meyer GmbH since 1 August 1982. The IM learned from a conversation with Bartelt that the management team, consisting of Günther Obotrit, is unable to respond to the changed market situation. The company’s situation has therefore deteriorated to such an extent that repayment of the loans granted by the Beckenhusen Bank has had to be deferred.’
