Interview on personal identification numbers: "Preventing the transparent citizen not only legally but also technically"

Germany's ambition to implement a lifelong personal identification number for unified administrative data exchange faces significant data privacy concerns, drawing parallels to past constitutional court rulings against extensive citizen data collection. This initiative, intended to streamline inter-agency data sharing, has been met with criticism from legal experts and data protection advocates who argue it risks creating a "transparent citizen." Despite historical warnings, successive German governments have maintained the plan to leverage the tax identification number as a central citizen identifier. In contrast, Austria has adopted a different approach with its sector-specific personal identification number (bPK). This system utilizes a one-way identifier that is adapted for different administrative authorities, thereby enhancing data protection. The bPK aims to establish controllable barriers against cross-agency profiling while still facilitating effective digital administration without compromising individual privacy. The contrasting strategies highlight a growing European debate on balancing digital transformation with robust data sovereignty and privacy rights. While Germany pushes for a singular, all-encompassing identifier, Austria's model suggests that sector-specific, adaptable identifiers can achieve administrative efficiency without jeopardizing fundamental privacy principles, potentially influencing future digital policy across the continent.