Dataset statistics
Number of variables | 187 |
---|---|
Number of observations | 38 |
Missing cells | 3875 |
Missing cells (%) | 54.5% |
Total size in memory | 51.2 KiB |
Average record size in memory | 1.3 KiB |
Variable types
Categorical | 157 |
---|---|
Numeric | 4 |
Boolean | 17 |
Unsupported | 9 |
CSfoi5[too_expensive] has constant value "False" | Constant |
CSfoi5[afraid_of_data_destruction] has constant value "False" | Constant |
CSfoi5[afraid_of_discrimination] has constant value "False" | Constant |
CScampact1[6] has constant value "NOPNR - Fluggastdatenspeicherung" | Constant |
CSadvocact1[6] has constant value "Organising public events with agencies and tech businesses" | Constant |
CSadvocact1[7] has constant value "Organising closed discussions between agencies and civil society groups" | Constant |
CSadvocact2other has constant value "Obwohl es hier um Lobbyarbeit geht: Kamagnenelemente helfen, durch öfftl. Druck Lobbyarbeit zu verstärken und z.B. zu Gesprächen eingeladen zu werden. Leider ist Mobilisierung zu ND-Themen schwierig." | Constant |
CSlitigateact1[5] has constant value "Initiierung einer erfolgreich abgeschlossenen US-Zivilklage gegen syrischen Geheimdienst bzw. dessen Überwachung und gezielte Tötung ausländischer Journalist*innen" | Constant |
CSlitigateact1[6] has constant value "Strafanzeige in Deutschland gegen Vertreter des saudi-arabischen Geheimdiensts wegen gezielter Ãœberwachung von Journalist*innen" | Constant |
CSlitigateact2other has constant value "Finanzierung sicherstellen und Netzwerk aktivieren, um passende Beschwerdeführer:innen zu finden." | Constant |
CSconstraintinter2 has constant value "No" | Constant |
CSconstraintinter6[ethnicity] has constant value "No" | Constant |
CSconstraintinter6[sexual] has constant value "No" | Constant |
CSconstraintinter6[religious] has constant value "No" | Constant |
CSconstraintinter6[other] has constant value "No" | Constant |
surveytype has constant value "Civil Society Scrutiny" | Constant |
CShr2 has 2 (5.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSexpertise1 has 4 (10.5%) missing values | Missing |
CSexpertise2 has 2 (5.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSexpertise3 has 2 (5.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSexpertise4 has 2 (5.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSfinance1 has 5 (13.2%) missing values | Missing |
CSfinance2[private_foundations] has 6 (15.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSfinance2[donations] has 7 (18.4%) missing values | Missing |
CSfinance2[national_public_funds] has 7 (18.4%) missing values | Missing |
CSfinance2[corporate_sponsorship] has 8 (21.1%) missing values | Missing |
CSfinance2[international_public_funds] has 7 (18.4%) missing values | Missing |
CSfinance2[other] has 11 (28.9%) missing values | Missing |
CSfinance2other has 34 (89.5%) missing values | Missing |
CSfinance3 has 15 (39.5%) missing values | Missing |
CSfinance4 has 8 (21.1%) missing values | Missing |
CSfoi1 has 7 (18.4%) missing values | Missing |
CSfoi2 has 32 (84.2%) missing values | Missing |
CSfoi3 has 32 (84.2%) missing values | Missing |
CSfoi4 has 32 (84.2%) missing values | Missing |
CSpreselection has 6 (15.8%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact1[1] has 34 (89.5%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact1[2] has 34 (89.5%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact1[3] has 34 (89.5%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact1[4] has 36 (94.7%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact1[5] has 36 (94.7%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact1[6] has 37 (97.4%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact1[7] has 38 (100.0%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact1[8] has 38 (100.0%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact2[media_contributions] has 30 (78.9%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact2[own_publications] has 30 (78.9%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact2[petitions_open_letters] has 30 (78.9%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact2[public_events] has 30 (78.9%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact2[collaborations] has 30 (78.9%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact2[demonstrations] has 30 (78.9%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact2[social_media] has 30 (78.9%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact2[advertising] has 30 (78.9%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact2[volunteer_activities] has 31 (81.6%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact2[providing_technical_tools] has 30 (78.9%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact2[support_for_eu_campaigns] has 31 (81.6%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact2[other] has 35 (92.1%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact2other has 38 (100.0%) missing values | Missing |
CScamptrans1 has 30 (78.9%) missing values | Missing |
CScamptrans2 has 31 (81.6%) missing values | Missing |
CScampimpact1[increased_awareness] has 31 (81.6%) missing values | Missing |
CScampimpact1[policies_reflect_demands] has 31 (81.6%) missing values | Missing |
CScampimpact1[created_media_attention] has 31 (81.6%) missing values | Missing |
CScampimpact1[achieved_goals] has 31 (81.6%) missing values | Missing |
CScampimpact2 has 36 (94.7%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocact1[1] has 26 (68.4%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocact1[2] has 28 (73.7%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocact1[3] has 31 (81.6%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocact1[4] has 32 (84.2%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocact1[5] has 36 (94.7%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocact1[6] has 37 (97.4%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocact1[7] has 37 (97.4%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocact1[8] has 38 (100.0%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocact2[research] has 25 (65.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocact2[consultations] has 25 (65.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocact2[briefings] has 25 (65.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocact2[expert_events] has 25 (65.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocact2[participation_in_fora] has 25 (65.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocact2[legal_opinions] has 25 (65.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocact2[informal_encounters] has 25 (65.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocact2[other] has 33 (86.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocact2other has 37 (97.4%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvoctrans1 has 25 (65.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvoctrans2 has 25 (65.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocimpact1[increased_awareness] has 25 (65.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocimpact1[policies_reflect_recommendations] has 25 (65.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocimpact1[more_informed_debates] has 25 (65.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocimpact1[achieved_goals] has 25 (65.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSadvocimpact2 has 33 (86.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigateact1[1] has 30 (78.9%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigateact1[2] has 31 (81.6%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigateact1[3] has 33 (86.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigateact1[4] has 34 (89.5%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigateact1[5] has 37 (97.4%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigateact1[6] has 37 (97.4%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigateact1[7] has 38 (100.0%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigateact1[8] has 38 (100.0%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigateact2[initiating_lawsuit] has 29 (76.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigateact2[initiating_complaint] has 29 (76.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigateact2[supporting_existing_legislation] has 29 (76.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigateact2[other] has 35 (92.1%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigateact2other has 37 (97.4%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigatecost1 has 29 (76.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigatecost2 has 30 (78.9%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigatecost3 has 29 (76.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigatetrans1 has 29 (76.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigatetrans2 has 30 (78.9%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigateimpact1[increased_awareness] has 29 (76.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigateimpact1[changed_the_law] has 29 (76.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigateimpact1[amendments_of_the_law] has 29 (76.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigateimpact1[revealed_new_information] has 29 (76.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigateimpact1[achieved_goals] has 29 (76.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSlitigateimpact2 has 33 (86.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSprotectops1[sectraining] has 11 (28.9%) missing values | Missing |
CSprotectops1[e2e] has 11 (28.9%) missing values | Missing |
CSprotectops2 has 13 (34.2%) missing values | Missing |
CSprotectops3[encrypted_email] has 10 (26.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSprotectops3[vpn] has 10 (26.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSprotectops3[tor] has 10 (26.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSprotectops3[e2e_chat] has 11 (28.9%) missing values | Missing |
CSprotectops3[encrypted_hardware] has 10 (26.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSprotectops3[2fa] has 11 (28.9%) missing values | Missing |
CSprotectops3[other] has 30 (78.9%) missing values | Missing |
CSprotectops3other has 35 (92.1%) missing values | Missing |
CSprotectops4 has 10 (26.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSprotectleg1 has 11 (28.9%) missing values | Missing |
CSprotectleg2 has 12 (31.6%) missing values | Missing |
CSprotectleg2no has 26 (68.4%) missing values | Missing |
CSprotectleg3[free_counsel] has 14 (36.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSprotectleg3[cost_insurance] has 14 (36.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSprotectleg3[other] has 26 (68.4%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter1 has 14 (36.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter2 has 13 (34.2%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter3 has 38 (100.0%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter4[police_search] has 13 (34.2%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter4[seizure] has 13 (34.2%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter4[extortion] has 15 (39.5%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter4[violent_threat] has 14 (36.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter4[inspection_during_travel] has 13 (34.2%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter4[detention] has 13 (34.2%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter4[surveillance_signalling] has 13 (34.2%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter4[online_harassment] has 13 (34.2%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter4[entry_on_deny_lists] has 13 (34.2%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter4[exclusion_from_events] has 13 (34.2%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter4[public_defamation] has 13 (34.2%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter5[unsolicited_information] has 13 (34.2%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter5[invitations] has 13 (34.2%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter5[other] has 24 (63.2%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter5other has 38 (100.0%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter6[gender] has 14 (36.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter6[ethnicity] has 14 (36.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter6[political] has 14 (36.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter6[sexual] has 14 (36.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter6[religious] has 14 (36.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter6[other] has 22 (57.9%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintinter6other has 38 (100.0%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintself1[avoid] has 14 (36.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintself1[cancelled_campaign] has 14 (36.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintself1[withdrew_litigation] has 14 (36.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintself1[leave_profession] has 14 (36.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintself1[other] has 29 (76.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSconstraintself1other has 36 (94.7%) missing values | Missing |
CSattitude1 has 14 (36.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSattitude2 has 14 (36.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSattitude4[1] has 17 (44.7%) missing values | Missing |
CSattitude4[2] has 17 (44.7%) missing values | Missing |
CSattitude4[3] has 19 (50.0%) missing values | Missing |
CSattitude4[4] has 22 (57.9%) missing values | Missing |
CSattitude4[5] has 25 (65.8%) missing values | Missing |
CSattitude4[6] has 27 (71.1%) missing values | Missing |
CSattitude5[1] has 17 (44.7%) missing values | Missing |
CSattitude5[2] has 21 (55.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSattitude5[3] has 22 (57.9%) missing values | Missing |
CSattitude5[4] has 26 (68.4%) missing values | Missing |
CSattitude5[5] has 27 (71.1%) missing values | Missing |
CSattitude5[6] has 27 (71.1%) missing values | Missing |
CSattitude6[1] has 18 (47.4%) missing values | Missing |
CSattitude6[2] has 21 (55.3%) missing values | Missing |
CSattitude6[3] has 23 (60.5%) missing values | Missing |
CSattitude6[4] has 27 (71.1%) missing values | Missing |
CSattitude6[5] has 27 (71.1%) missing values | Missing |
CSattitude6[6] has 27 (71.1%) missing values | Missing |
CSgender has 15 (39.5%) missing values | Missing |
CScampact1[7] is an unsupported type, check if it needs cleaning or further analysis | Unsupported |
CScampact1[8] is an unsupported type, check if it needs cleaning or further analysis | Unsupported |
CScampact2other is an unsupported type, check if it needs cleaning or further analysis | Unsupported |
CSadvocact1[8] is an unsupported type, check if it needs cleaning or further analysis | Unsupported |
CSlitigateact1[7] is an unsupported type, check if it needs cleaning or further analysis | Unsupported |
CSlitigateact1[8] is an unsupported type, check if it needs cleaning or further analysis | Unsupported |
CSconstraintinter3 is an unsupported type, check if it needs cleaning or further analysis | Unsupported |
CSconstraintinter5other is an unsupported type, check if it needs cleaning or further analysis | Unsupported |
CSconstraintinter6other is an unsupported type, check if it needs cleaning or further analysis | Unsupported |
CShr2 has 1 (2.6%) zeros | Zeros |
Reproduction
Analysis started | 2021-07-28 08:40:46.664070 |
---|---|
Analysis finished | 2021-07-28 08:40:47.351056 |
Duration | 0.69 seconds |
Software version | pandas-profiling v3.0.0 |
Download configuration | config.json |
country
Categorical
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 7.9% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Germany | |
---|---|
United Kingdom | |
France |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | United Kingdom |
---|---|
2nd row | United Kingdom |
3rd row | United Kingdom |
4th row | United Kingdom |
5th row | United Kingdom |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Germany | 18 | |
United Kingdom | 13 | |
France | 7 | 18.4% |
Pie chart
lastpage
Real number (ℝ≥0)
Distinct | 10 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 26.3% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Infinite | 0 |
Infinite (%) | 0.0% |
Mean | 18.34210526 |
Minimum | 3 |
---|---|
Maximum | 23 |
Zeros | 0 |
Zeros (%) | 0.0% |
Negative | 0 |
Negative (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Quantile statistics
Minimum | 3 |
---|---|
5-th percentile | 3 |
Q1 | 17 |
median | 23 |
Q3 | 23 |
95-th percentile | 23 |
Maximum | 23 |
Range | 20 |
Interquartile range (IQR) | 6 |
Descriptive statistics
Standard deviation | 7.360509368 |
---|---|
Coefficient of variation (CV) | 0.4012903242 |
Kurtosis | 0.09077667249 |
Mean | 18.34210526 |
Median Absolute Deviation (MAD) | 0 |
Skewness | -1.316487289 |
Sum | 697 |
Variance | 54.17709815 |
Monotonicity | Not monotonic |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
23 | 24 | |
3 | 3 | 7.9% |
5 | 2 | 5.3% |
17 | 2 | 5.3% |
18 | 2 | 5.3% |
19 | 1 | 2.6% |
11 | 1 | 2.6% |
16 | 1 | 2.6% |
6 | 1 | 2.6% |
4 | 1 | 2.6% |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
3 | 3 | |
4 | 1 | 2.6% |
5 | 2 | |
6 | 1 | 2.6% |
11 | 1 | 2.6% |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
23 | 24 | |
19 | 1 | 2.6% |
18 | 2 | 5.3% |
17 | 2 | 5.3% |
16 | 1 | 2.6% |
CShr1
Categorical
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 13.2% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Full-time | |
---|---|
Part-time (>50%) | |
Freelance | |
Part-time (<50%) | 1 |
Other | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 5.3% |
Sample
1st row | Part-time (<50%) |
---|---|
2nd row | Full-time |
3rd row | Full-time |
4th row | Freelance |
5th row | Full-time |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Full-time | 24 | |
Part-time (>50%) | 8 | 21.1% |
Freelance | 4 | 10.5% |
Part-time (<50%) | 1 | 2.6% |
Other | 1 | 2.6% |
Pie chart
Distinct | 8 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 22.2% |
Missing | 2 |
Missing (%) | 5.3% |
Infinite | 0 |
Infinite (%) | 0.0% |
Mean | 3.5 |
Minimum | 0 |
---|---|
Maximum | 15 |
Zeros | 1 |
Zeros (%) | 2.6% |
Negative | 0 |
Negative (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Quantile statistics
Minimum | 0 |
---|---|
5-th percentile | 0.5 |
Q1 | 1.75 |
median | 2.5 |
Q3 | 4 |
95-th percentile | 15 |
Maximum | 15 |
Range | 15 |
Interquartile range (IQR) | 2.25 |
Descriptive statistics
Standard deviation | 3.751190287 |
---|---|
Coefficient of variation (CV) | 1.071768654 |
Kurtosis | 5.816225783 |
Mean | 3.5 |
Median Absolute Deviation (MAD) | 1.5 |
Skewness | 2.492227754 |
Sum | 126 |
Variance | 14.07142857 |
Monotonicity | Not monotonic |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
2 | 9 | |
4 | 7 | |
1 | 6 | |
3 | 6 | |
15 | 3 | 7.9% |
5 | 2 | 5.3% |
0.5 | 2 | 5.3% |
0 | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 2 | 5.3% |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
0 | 1 | 2.6% |
0.5 | 2 | 5.3% |
1 | 6 | |
2 | 9 | |
3 | 6 |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
15 | 3 | 7.9% |
5 | 2 | 5.3% |
4 | 7 | |
3 | 6 | |
2 | 9 |
Distinct | 16 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 47.1% |
Missing | 4 |
Missing (%) | 10.5% |
Infinite | 0 |
Infinite (%) | 0.0% |
Mean | 11.98529412 |
Minimum | 0.5 |
---|---|
Maximum | 40 |
Zeros | 0 |
Zeros (%) | 0.0% |
Negative | 0 |
Negative (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Quantile statistics
Minimum | 0.5 |
---|---|
5-th percentile | 2.65 |
Q1 | 5 |
median | 9.5 |
Q3 | 18.75 |
95-th percentile | 26 |
Maximum | 40 |
Range | 39.5 |
Interquartile range (IQR) | 13.75 |
Descriptive statistics
Standard deviation | 9.434370829 |
---|---|
Coefficient of variation (CV) | 0.7871622287 |
Kurtosis | 0.7886472462 |
Mean | 11.98529412 |
Median Absolute Deviation (MAD) | 4.5 |
Skewness | 1.171417437 |
Sum | 407.5 |
Variance | 89.00735294 |
Monotonicity | Not monotonic |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
10 | 5 | |
5 | 4 | |
25 | 3 | |
6 | 3 | |
26 | 3 | |
3 | 2 | 5.3% |
20 | 2 | 5.3% |
4 | 2 | 5.3% |
12 | 2 | 5.3% |
7 | 2 | 5.3% |
Other values (6) | 6 | |
(Missing) | 4 |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
0.5 | 1 | 2.6% |
2 | 1 | 2.6% |
3 | 2 | |
4 | 2 | |
5 | 4 |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
40 | 1 | 2.6% |
26 | 3 | |
25 | 3 | |
20 | 2 | |
15 | 1 | 2.6% |
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 11.1% |
Missing | 2 |
Missing (%) | 5.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Advanced knowledge | |
---|---|
Some knowledge | |
Basic knowledge | |
Expert knowledge |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Some knowledge |
---|---|
2nd row | Advanced knowledge |
3rd row | Advanced knowledge |
4th row | Advanced knowledge |
5th row | Advanced knowledge |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Advanced knowledge | 15 | |
Some knowledge | 8 | |
Basic knowledge | 7 | |
Expert knowledge | 6 | 15.8% |
(Missing) | 2 | 5.3% |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 11.1% |
Missing | 2 |
Missing (%) | 5.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Advanced knowledge | |
---|---|
Some knowledge | |
Expert knowledge | |
Basic knowledge | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 2.8% |
Sample
1st row | Some knowledge |
---|---|
2nd row | Some knowledge |
3rd row | Advanced knowledge |
4th row | Advanced knowledge |
5th row | Advanced knowledge |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Advanced knowledge | 17 | |
Some knowledge | 11 | |
Expert knowledge | 7 | |
Basic knowledge | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 2 | 5.3% |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 13.9% |
Missing | 2 |
Missing (%) | 5.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Some knowledge | |
---|---|
Advanced knowledge | |
Basic knowledge | |
Expert knowledge | |
No knowledge | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 2.8% |
Sample
1st row | Some knowledge |
---|---|
2nd row | Some knowledge |
3rd row | Some knowledge |
4th row | Advanced knowledge |
5th row | Advanced knowledge |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Some knowledge | 18 | |
Advanced knowledge | 7 | 18.4% |
Basic knowledge | 7 | 18.4% |
Expert knowledge | 3 | 7.9% |
No knowledge | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 2 | 5.3% |
Pie chart
Distinct | 6 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 18.2% |
Missing | 5 |
Missing (%) | 13.2% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Little funding | |
---|---|
Sufficient funding | |
Some funding | |
No funding | |
I prefer not to say |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 3.0% |
Sample
1st row | Little funding |
---|---|
2nd row | Sufficient funding |
3rd row | Little funding |
4th row | Little funding |
5th row | Little funding |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Little funding | 9 | |
Sufficient funding | 9 | |
Some funding | 7 | |
No funding | 4 | |
I prefer not to say | 3 | 7.9% |
I don't know | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 5 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 6 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 18.8% |
Missing | 6 |
Missing (%) | 15.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No important at all | |
---|---|
Very important | |
Important | |
Slightly important | |
Somewhat important |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 3.1% |
Sample
1st row | Important |
---|---|
2nd row | Important |
3rd row | Important |
4th row | Very important |
5th row | Very important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No important at all | 11 | |
Very important | 9 | |
Important | 5 | |
Slightly important | 3 | 7.9% |
Somewhat important | 3 | 7.9% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 6 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 16.1% |
Missing | 7 |
Missing (%) | 18.4% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Very important | |
---|---|
No important at all | |
Important | |
Slightly important | |
I prefer not to say | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 3.2% |
Sample
1st row | Important |
---|---|
2nd row | No important at all |
3rd row | Very important |
4th row | No important at all |
5th row | No important at all |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Very important | 11 | |
No important at all | 8 | |
Important | 6 | |
Slightly important | 5 | |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 7 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 6 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 19.4% |
Missing | 7 |
Missing (%) | 18.4% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No important at all | |
---|---|
Somewhat important | |
Important | |
Slightly important | |
Very important | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 6.5% |
Sample
1st row | No important at all |
---|---|
2nd row | Slightly important |
3rd row | No important at all |
4th row | Very important |
5th row | No important at all |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No important at all | 19 | |
Somewhat important | 4 | 10.5% |
Important | 4 | 10.5% |
Slightly important | 2 | 5.3% |
Very important | 1 | 2.6% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 7 | 18.4% |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 16.7% |
Missing | 8 |
Missing (%) | 21.1% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No important at all | |
---|---|
Slightly important | |
Somewhat important | 2 |
Important | 2 |
I prefer not to say | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 3.3% |
Sample
1st row | No important at all |
---|---|
2nd row | No important at all |
3rd row | Somewhat important |
4th row | Important |
5th row | No important at all |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No important at all | 20 | |
Slightly important | 5 | 13.2% |
Somewhat important | 2 | 5.3% |
Important | 2 | 5.3% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 8 | 21.1% |
Pie chart
Distinct | 6 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 19.4% |
Missing | 7 |
Missing (%) | 18.4% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No important at all | |
---|---|
Slightly important | |
Important | |
Somewhat important | |
Very important | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 6.5% |
Sample
1st row | Slightly important |
---|---|
2nd row | Important |
3rd row | No important at all |
4th row | Very important |
5th row | No important at all |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No important at all | 18 | |
Slightly important | 5 | 13.2% |
Important | 4 | 10.5% |
Somewhat important | 2 | 5.3% |
Very important | 1 | 2.6% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 7 | 18.4% |
Pie chart
Distinct | 6 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 22.2% |
Missing | 11 |
Missing (%) | 28.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No important at all | |
---|---|
I don't know | |
Important | |
Very important | |
Somewhat important | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 7.4% |
Sample
1st row | No important at all |
---|---|
2nd row | I don't know |
3rd row | No important at all |
4th row | I don't know |
5th row | I don't know |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No important at all | 16 | |
I don't know | 5 | 13.2% |
Important | 2 | 5.3% |
Very important | 2 | 5.3% |
Somewhat important | 1 | 2.6% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 11 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 34 |
Missing (%) | 89.5% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Co-Finanzierung von Klagen durch Partnerorganisationen | |
---|---|
Eigene ehrenamtliche Arbeit | |
Mitgliedsbeiträge von Vereinsmitgliedern (--> Damit kann man konstanter planen als mit Spenden, gerade was langfristige Litigation-Projekte angeht ist das wichtig) | |
Mitgliedsbeiträge |
Unique
Unique | 4 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | Co-Finanzierung von Klagen durch Partnerorganisationen |
---|---|
2nd row | Eigene ehrenamtliche Arbeit |
3rd row | Mitgliedsbeiträge von Vereinsmitgliedern (--> Damit kann man konstanter planen als mit Spenden, gerade was langfristige Litigation-Projekte angeht ist das wichtig) |
4th row | Mitgliedsbeiträge |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Co-Finanzierung von Klagen durch Partnerorganisationen | 1 | 2.6% |
Eigene ehrenamtliche Arbeit | 1 | 2.6% |
Mitgliedsbeiträge von Vereinsmitgliedern (--> Damit kann man konstanter planen als mit Spenden, gerade was langfristige Litigation-Projekte angeht ist das wichtig) | 1 | 2.6% |
Mitgliedsbeiträge | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 34 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 20 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 87.0% |
Missing | 15 |
Missing (%) | 39.5% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Spenden | |
---|---|
Private Stiftungen | |
foundations. | 1 |
Wir sind eine ausschließlich spendenfinanziert Organisation. Wir nehmen keine öffentlichen Gelder oder Unternehmenssponsoring. | 1 |
- Projets de recherche européens - Fondations privées | 1 |
Other values (15) |
Unique
Unique | 18 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 78.3% |
Sample
1st row | foundations. |
---|---|
2nd row | trusts and foundations |
3rd row | I managed to do intelligence-related work in the context of broader studies commissioned by the EU (European Parliament), but did most of my work without being paid, as part of my work with civil society. |
4th row | Have only obtained funding to work on cybersecurity policy but not intelligence. |
5th row | Private foundations |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Spenden | 3 | 7.9% |
Private Stiftungen | 2 | 5.3% |
foundations. | 1 | 2.6% |
Wir sind eine ausschließlich spendenfinanziert Organisation. Wir nehmen keine öffentlichen Gelder oder Unternehmenssponsoring. | 1 | 2.6% |
- Projets de recherche européens - Fondations privées | 1 | 2.6% |
Mitgliedsbeiträge | 1 | 2.6% |
Spenden- und Mitgliedsbeiträge allgemein für die Organisation (nicht speziell für ND-Arbeit, dafür wird wenig bis gar nicht zweckgebunden gespendet) | 1 | 2.6% |
Eigene ehrenamtliche Arbeit | 1 | 2.6% |
Spenden - Garantieren Unabhängigkeit | 1 | 2.6% |
Wir nehmen (mit seltenen, hier nicht relevanten Ausnahmen) ausschließlich Spenden privater Personen. | 1 | 2.6% |
Other values (10) | 10 | |
(Missing) | 15 |
Distinct | 6 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 20.0% |
Missing | 8 |
Missing (%) | 21.1% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No effect on fundraising | |
---|---|
Rather beneficial for fundraising | |
I don't know | |
Clearly beneficial for fundraising | |
Rather constraining for fundraising |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Rather beneficial for fundraising |
---|---|
2nd row | No effect on fundraising |
3rd row | I don't know |
4th row | Clearly beneficial for fundraising |
5th row | I don't know |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No effect on fundraising | 7 | |
Rather beneficial for fundraising | 6 | |
I don't know | 6 | |
Clearly beneficial for fundraising | 6 | |
Rather constraining for fundraising | 3 | 7.9% |
I prefer not to say | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 8 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 6.5% |
Missing | 7 |
Missing (%) | 18.4% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
Yes |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 25 | |
Yes | 6 | 15.8% |
(Missing) | 7 | 18.4% |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 66.7% |
Missing | 32 |
Missing (%) | 84.2% |
Infinite | 0 |
Infinite (%) | 0.0% |
Mean | 8.5 |
Minimum | 1 |
---|---|
Maximum | 20 |
Zeros | 0 |
Zeros (%) | 0.0% |
Negative | 0 |
Negative (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Quantile statistics
Minimum | 1 |
---|---|
5-th percentile | 2 |
Q1 | 5 |
median | 5 |
Q3 | 12.5 |
95-th percentile | 18.75 |
Maximum | 20 |
Range | 19 |
Interquartile range (IQR) | 7.5 |
Descriptive statistics
Standard deviation | 7.314369419 |
---|---|
Coefficient of variation (CV) | 0.8605140493 |
Kurtosis | -0.6521093545 |
Mean | 8.5 |
Median Absolute Deviation (MAD) | 2 |
Skewness | 0.9544648364 |
Sum | 51 |
Variance | 53.5 |
Monotonicity | Not monotonic |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
5 | 3 | 7.9% |
15 | 1 | 2.6% |
20 | 1 | 2.6% |
1 | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 32 |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
1 | 1 | 2.6% |
5 | 3 | |
15 | 1 | 2.6% |
20 | 1 | 2.6% |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
20 | 1 | 2.6% |
15 | 1 | 2.6% |
5 | 3 | |
1 | 1 | 2.6% |
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 50.0% |
Missing | 32 |
Missing (%) | 84.2% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No, usually longer than 30 days | |
---|---|
Yes, within 30 days | |
I don't know |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 16.7% |
Sample
1st row | I don't know |
---|---|
2nd row | No, usually longer than 30 days |
3rd row | Yes, within 30 days |
4th row | No, usually longer than 30 days |
5th row | No, usually longer than 30 days |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No, usually longer than 30 days | 3 | 7.9% |
Yes, within 30 days | 2 | 5.3% |
I don't know | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 32 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 33.3% |
Missing | 32 |
Missing (%) | 84.2% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Helpful in parts | |
---|---|
Not helpful at all |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Not helpful at all |
---|---|
2nd row | Helpful in parts |
3rd row | Helpful in parts |
4th row | Not helpful at all |
5th row | Helpful in parts |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Helpful in parts | 4 | 10.5% |
Not helpful at all | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 32 |
Pie chart
CSfoi5[not_aware]
Boolean
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 5.3% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 166.0 B |
False | |
---|---|
True | 1 |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
False | 37 | |
True | 1 | 2.6% |
CSfoi5[not_covered]
Boolean
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 5.3% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 166.0 B |
False | |
---|---|
True |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
False | 33 | |
True | 5 | 13.2% |
Distinct | 1 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 2.6% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 166.0 B |
False |
---|
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
False | 38 |
CSfoi5[too_time_consuming]
Boolean
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 5.3% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 166.0 B |
False | |
---|---|
True |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
False | 33 | |
True | 5 | 13.2% |
Distinct | 1 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 2.6% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 166.0 B |
False |
---|
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
False | 38 |
Distinct | 1 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 2.6% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 166.0 B |
False |
---|
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
False | 38 |
CSfoi5[other]
Boolean
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 5.3% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 166.0 B |
False | |
---|---|
True |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
False | 26 | |
True | 12 |
CSfoi5[dont_know]
Boolean
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 5.3% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 166.0 B |
False | |
---|---|
True | 1 |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
False | 37 | |
True | 1 | 2.6% |
CSfoi5[prefer_not_to_say]
Boolean
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 5.3% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 166.0 B |
False | |
---|---|
True | 3 |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
False | 35 | |
True | 3 | 7.9% |
CSfoi5other
Boolean
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 5.3% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 166.0 B |
False | |
---|---|
True |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
False | 27 | |
True | 11 |
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 9.4% |
Missing | 6 |
Missing (%) | 15.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Policy Advocacy | |
---|---|
Public Campaigning | |
Strategic Litigation |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Public Campaigning |
---|---|
2nd row | Policy Advocacy |
3rd row | Policy Advocacy |
4th row | Policy Advocacy |
5th row | Policy Advocacy |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Policy Advocacy | 14 | |
Public Campaigning | 9 | |
Strategic Litigation | 9 | |
(Missing) | 6 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 75.0% |
Missing | 34 |
Missing (%) | 89.5% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Allo place BEauvau | |
---|---|
Terrorfilter (TERREG) | |
Loi renseignement 2015 |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 50.0% |
Sample
1st row | Terrorfilter (TERREG) |
---|---|
2nd row | Loi renseignement 2015 |
3rd row | Allo place BEauvau |
4th row | Allo place BEauvau |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Allo place BEauvau | 2 | 5.3% |
Terrorfilter (TERREG) | 1 | 2.6% |
Loi renseignement 2015 | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 34 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 75.0% |
Missing | 34 |
Missing (%) | 89.5% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Allo IGPN | |
---|---|
NetzDG | |
modif intermédiaore 2017-2020 |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 50.0% |
Sample
1st row | NetzDG |
---|---|
2nd row | modif intermédiaore 2017-2020 |
3rd row | Allo IGPN |
4th row | Allo IGPN |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Allo IGPN | 2 | 5.3% |
NetzDG | 1 | 2.6% |
modif intermédiaore 2017-2020 | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 34 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 75.0% |
Missing | 34 |
Missing (%) | 89.5% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Un pays qui se tient sage | |
---|---|
E-Evidence Verordnung | |
Loi pater 2021 |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 50.0% |
Sample
1st row | E-Evidence Verordnung |
---|---|
2nd row | Loi pater 2021 |
3rd row | Un pays qui se tient sage |
4th row | Un pays qui se tient sage |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Un pays qui se tient sage | 2 | 5.3% |
E-Evidence Verordnung | 1 | 2.6% |
Loi pater 2021 | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 34 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 36 |
Missing (%) | 94.7% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Reclaim your face | |
---|---|
Sensibilisation générale |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | Reclaim your face |
---|---|
2nd row | Sensibilisation générale |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Reclaim your face | 1 | 2.6% |
Sensibilisation générale | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 36 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 36 |
Missing (%) | 94.7% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Vorratsdatenspeicherung | |
---|---|
etc |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | Vorratsdatenspeicherung |
---|---|
2nd row | etc |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Vorratsdatenspeicherung | 1 | 2.6% |
etc | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 36 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 1 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 37 |
Missing (%) | 97.4% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
NOPNR - Fluggastdatenspeicherung |
---|
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | NOPNR - Fluggastdatenspeicherung |
---|
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
NOPNR - Fluggastdatenspeicherung | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 37 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 37.5% |
Missing | 30 |
Missing (%) | 78.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Very important | |
---|---|
Somewhat important | |
Important |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 12.5% |
Sample
1st row | Important |
---|---|
2nd row | Very important |
3rd row | Somewhat important |
4th row | Very important |
5th row | Somewhat important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Very important | 4 | 10.5% |
Somewhat important | 3 | 7.9% |
Important | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 30 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 25.0% |
Missing | 30 |
Missing (%) | 78.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Very important | |
---|---|
Important |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Important |
---|---|
2nd row | Very important |
3rd row | Important |
4th row | Very important |
5th row | Very important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Very important | 5 | 13.2% |
Important | 3 | 7.9% |
(Missing) | 30 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 62.5% |
Missing | 30 |
Missing (%) | 78.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Somewhat important | |
---|---|
Slightly important | |
Very important | |
Important | |
I prefer not to say |
Unique
Unique | 3 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 37.5% |
Sample
1st row | Slightly important |
---|---|
2nd row | Very important |
3rd row | Somewhat important |
4th row | Important |
5th row | Somewhat important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Somewhat important | 3 | 7.9% |
Slightly important | 2 | 5.3% |
Very important | 1 | 2.6% |
Important | 1 | 2.6% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 30 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 37.5% |
Missing | 30 |
Missing (%) | 78.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Somewhat important | |
---|---|
Very important | |
Important |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Important |
---|---|
2nd row | Somewhat important |
3rd row | Somewhat important |
4th row | Important |
5th row | Somewhat important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Somewhat important | 3 | 7.9% |
Very important | 3 | 7.9% |
Important | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 30 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 62.5% |
Missing | 30 |
Missing (%) | 78.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Slightly important | |
---|---|
Not important at all | |
Somewhat important | |
Important | |
I prefer not to say |
Unique
Unique | 3 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 37.5% |
Sample
1st row | Not important at all |
---|---|
2nd row | Not important at all |
3rd row | Slightly important |
4th row | Somewhat important |
5th row | Slightly important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Slightly important | 3 | 7.9% |
Not important at all | 2 | 5.3% |
Somewhat important | 1 | 2.6% |
Important | 1 | 2.6% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 30 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 62.5% |
Missing | 30 |
Missing (%) | 78.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Important | |
---|---|
Somewhat important | |
Not important at all | |
Slightly important | |
Very important |
Unique
Unique | 3 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 37.5% |
Sample
1st row | Not important at all |
---|---|
2nd row | Important |
3rd row | Somewhat important |
4th row | Important |
5th row | Slightly important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Important | 3 | 7.9% |
Somewhat important | 2 | 5.3% |
Not important at all | 1 | 2.6% |
Slightly important | 1 | 2.6% |
Very important | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 30 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 50.0% |
Missing | 30 |
Missing (%) | 78.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Important | |
---|---|
Very important | |
Not important at all | |
Somewhat important |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 25.0% |
Sample
1st row | Not important at all |
---|---|
2nd row | Important |
3rd row | Somewhat important |
4th row | Very important |
5th row | Important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Important | 3 | 7.9% |
Very important | 3 | 7.9% |
Not important at all | 1 | 2.6% |
Somewhat important | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 30 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 50.0% |
Missing | 30 |
Missing (%) | 78.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
I prefer not to say | |
---|---|
Not important at all | |
Somewhat important | |
Important |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 25.0% |
Sample
1st row | Not important at all |
---|---|
2nd row | Not important at all |
3rd row | I prefer not to say |
4th row | Somewhat important |
5th row | I prefer not to say |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
I prefer not to say | 4 | 10.5% |
Not important at all | 2 | 5.3% |
Somewhat important | 1 | 2.6% |
Important | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 30 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 71.4% |
Missing | 31 |
Missing (%) | 81.6% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Somewhat important | |
---|---|
Slightly important | |
Not important at all | |
Important | |
I prefer not to say |
Unique
Unique | 3 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 42.9% |
Sample
1st row | Not important at all |
---|---|
2nd row | Somewhat important |
3rd row | Slightly important |
4th row | Somewhat important |
5th row | Important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Somewhat important | 2 | 5.3% |
Slightly important | 2 | 5.3% |
Not important at all | 1 | 2.6% |
Important | 1 | 2.6% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 31 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 50.0% |
Missing | 30 |
Missing (%) | 78.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
I prefer not to say | |
---|---|
Not important at all | |
Slightly important | |
Important |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 12.5% |
Sample
1st row | Not important at all |
---|---|
2nd row | Not important at all |
3rd row | I prefer not to say |
4th row | Slightly important |
5th row | Slightly important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
I prefer not to say | 3 | 7.9% |
Not important at all | 2 | 5.3% |
Slightly important | 2 | 5.3% |
Important | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 30 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 57.1% |
Missing | 31 |
Missing (%) | 81.6% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Important | |
---|---|
Somewhat important | |
I prefer not to say | |
Slightly important |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 14.3% |
Sample
1st row | Important |
---|---|
2nd row | Somewhat important |
3rd row | Somewhat important |
4th row | Important |
5th row | Slightly important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Important | 2 | 5.3% |
Somewhat important | 2 | 5.3% |
I prefer not to say | 2 | 5.3% |
Slightly important | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 31 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 66.7% |
Missing | 35 |
Missing (%) | 92.1% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
I prefer not to say | |
---|---|
Not important at all |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 33.3% |
Sample
1st row | Not important at all |
---|---|
2nd row | I prefer not to say |
3rd row | I prefer not to say |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
I prefer not to say | 2 | 5.3% |
Not important at all | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 35 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 37.5% |
Missing | 30 |
Missing (%) | 78.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Rarely (25% of the time) | |
---|---|
Sometimes (50% of the time) | |
Often (75% of the time) |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Sometimes (50% of the time) |
---|---|
2nd row | Rarely (25% of the time) |
3rd row | Rarely (25% of the time) |
4th row | Often (75% of the time) |
5th row | Rarely (25% of the time) |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Rarely (25% of the time) | 4 | 10.5% |
Sometimes (50% of the time) | 2 | 5.3% |
Often (75% of the time) | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 30 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 42.9% |
Missing | 31 |
Missing (%) | 81.6% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Often (75% of the time) | |
---|---|
Rarely (25% of the time) | |
Sometimes (50% of the time) |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 14.3% |
Sample
1st row | Often (75% of the time) |
---|---|
2nd row | Sometimes (50% of the time) |
3rd row | Rarely (25% of the time) |
4th row | Often (75% of the time) |
5th row | Rarely (25% of the time) |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Often (75% of the time) | 3 | 7.9% |
Rarely (25% of the time) | 3 | 7.9% |
Sometimes (50% of the time) | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 31 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 42.9% |
Missing | 31 |
Missing (%) | 81.6% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Agree to a great extent | |
---|---|
Agree somewhat | |
Agree completely |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Agree to a great extent |
---|---|
2nd row | Agree to a great extent |
3rd row | Agree somewhat |
4th row | Agree to a great extent |
5th row | Agree somewhat |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Agree to a great extent | 3 | 7.9% |
Agree somewhat | 2 | 5.3% |
Agree completely | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 31 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 57.1% |
Missing | 31 |
Missing (%) | 81.6% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Agree sligthly | |
---|---|
Agree somewhat | |
Agree to a great extent | |
Not agree at all |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 28.6% |
Sample
1st row | Agree sligthly |
---|---|
2nd row | Agree to a great extent |
3rd row | Agree sligthly |
4th row | Agree sligthly |
5th row | Not agree at all |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Agree sligthly | 3 | 7.9% |
Agree somewhat | 2 | 5.3% |
Agree to a great extent | 1 | 2.6% |
Not agree at all | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 31 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 42.9% |
Missing | 31 |
Missing (%) | 81.6% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Agree somewhat | |
---|---|
Agree to a great extent | |
Agree completely |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 14.3% |
Sample
1st row | Agree somewhat |
---|---|
2nd row | Agree somewhat |
3rd row | Agree to a great extent |
4th row | Agree to a great extent |
5th row | Agree somewhat |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Agree somewhat | 3 | 7.9% |
Agree to a great extent | 3 | 7.9% |
Agree completely | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 31 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 71.4% |
Missing | 31 |
Missing (%) | 81.6% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Not agree at all | |
---|---|
Agree sligthly | |
Agree to a great extent | |
I don't know | |
Agree somewhat |
Unique
Unique | 3 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 42.9% |
Sample
1st row | Not agree at all |
---|---|
2nd row | Agree to a great extent |
3rd row | Agree sligthly |
4th row | Not agree at all |
5th row | I don't know |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Not agree at all | 2 | 5.3% |
Agree sligthly | 2 | 5.3% |
Agree to a great extent | 1 | 2.6% |
I don't know | 1 | 2.6% |
Agree somewhat | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 31 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 36 |
Missing (%) | 94.7% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Greater interest in interoperability of EU JHA databases, in the ways in which travel surveillance and migration policy are promoting systems of generalised surveillance, concern about the possible use of underhand tactics to undermine migrant solidarity and NGOs at sea, concerns about AI and facial recognition are currently hot topics, like in the Reclaim your Face campaign. | |
---|---|
https://www.davduf.net/alloplacebeauvau-bilan https://www.mediapart.fr/studio/panoramique/allo-place-beauvau-cest-pour-un-bilan |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | Greater interest in interoperability of EU JHA databases, in the ways in which travel surveillance and migration policy are promoting systems of generalised surveillance, concern about the possible use of underhand tactics to undermine migrant solidarity and NGOs at sea, concerns about AI and facial recognition are currently hot topics, like in the Reclaim your Face campaign. |
---|---|
2nd row | https://www.davduf.net/alloplacebeauvau-bilan https://www.mediapart.fr/studio/panoramique/allo-place-beauvau-cest-pour-un-bilan |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Greater interest in interoperability of EU JHA databases, in the ways in which travel surveillance and migration policy are promoting systems of generalised surveillance, concern about the possible use of underhand tactics to undermine migrant solidarity and NGOs at sea, concerns about AI and facial recognition are currently hot topics, like in the Reclaim your Face campaign. | 1 | 2.6% |
https://www.davduf.net/alloplacebeauvau-bilan https://www.mediapart.fr/studio/panoramique/allo-place-beauvau-cest-pour-un-bilan | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 36 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 12 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 26 |
Missing (%) | 68.4% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Primarily our work has been concerned with biometrics and facial recognition - developing understanding on public attitudes and legal regulation. | |
---|---|
Submissions to EU (and to a lesser extent national/EU MSs) bodies, esp. the EP (LIBE Ctee) | |
Lobbying parliament for and during legal reforms, including drafting amendments | |
Oversight engagement with civil society report | |
Writing policy reports | |
Other values (7) |
Unique
Unique | 12 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | Primarily our work has been concerned with biometrics and facial recognition - developing understanding on public attitudes and legal regulation. |
---|---|
2nd row | Submissions to EU (and to a lesser extent national/EU MSs) bodies, esp. the EP (LIBE Ctee) |
3rd row | Lobbying parliament for and during legal reforms, including drafting amendments |
4th row | Oversight engagement with civil society report |
5th row | Writing policy reports |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Primarily our work has been concerned with biometrics and facial recognition - developing understanding on public attitudes and legal regulation. | 1 | 2.6% |
Submissions to EU (and to a lesser extent national/EU MSs) bodies, esp. the EP (LIBE Ctee) | 1 | 2.6% |
Lobbying parliament for and during legal reforms, including drafting amendments | 1 | 2.6% |
Oversight engagement with civil society report | 1 | 2.6% |
Writing policy reports | 1 | 2.6% |
Research | 1 | 2.6% |
Research reports on regulation of algorithmic tools by police/intelligence agencies | 1 | 2.6% |
Lobbygespräche | 1 | 2.6% |
Angewandte Forschung | 1 | 2.6% |
Lobby-Gespräche | 1 | 2.6% |
Other values (2) | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 26 |
Distinct | 10 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 28 |
Missing (%) | 73.7% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
We have also done some engagement with intelligence agencies on ethical codes and frameworks. | |
---|---|
Academic and semi-academic studies, reports, papers and blogs | |
Engagement with oversight bodies throug workshops | |
about:intel editorial team | |
Research on biometrics regulation | |
Other values (5) |
Unique
Unique | 10 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | We have also done some engagement with intelligence agencies on ethical codes and frameworks. |
---|---|
2nd row | Academic and semi-academic studies, reports, papers and blogs |
3rd row | Engagement with oversight bodies throug workshops |
4th row | about:intel editorial team |
5th row | Research on biometrics regulation |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
We have also done some engagement with intelligence agencies on ethical codes and frameworks. | 1 | 2.6% |
Academic and semi-academic studies, reports, papers and blogs | 1 | 2.6% |
Engagement with oversight bodies throug workshops | 1 | 2.6% |
about:intel editorial team | 1 | 2.6% |
Research on biometrics regulation | 1 | 2.6% |
contributing to research on algorithmic bias | 1 | 2.6% |
Briefings für pol. Entscheidungsträger_innen | 1 | 2.6% |
Gespräche mit Entscheider:innen | 1 | 2.6% |
Briefings und Stellungnahmen | 1 | 2.6% |
Pressearbeit (PM, Statements) | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 28 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 7 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 31 |
Missing (%) | 81.6% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Engagement with intelligence agencies in meetings and seminars | |
---|---|
artificial intelligence and national security research | |
internal governance and oversight of development and deployment of algorithmic surveillance tools | |
Öffentliche Stellungnahmen | |
Medienarbeit | |
Other values (2) |
Unique
Unique | 7 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | Engagement with intelligence agencies in meetings and seminars |
---|---|
2nd row | artificial intelligence and national security research |
3rd row | internal governance and oversight of development and deployment of algorithmic surveillance tools |
4th row | Öffentliche Stellungnahmen |
5th row | Medienarbeit |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Engagement with intelligence agencies in meetings and seminars | 1 | 2.6% |
artificial intelligence and national security research | 1 | 2.6% |
internal governance and oversight of development and deployment of algorithmic surveillance tools | 1 | 2.6% |
Öffentliche Stellungnahmen | 1 | 2.6% |
Medienarbeit | 1 | 2.6% |
Ãœbergabe von Petitionen | 1 | 2.6% |
Sachverständigenanhörungen | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 31 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 6 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 32 |
Missing (%) | 84.2% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Responding to consultations, including codes of practice | |
---|---|
discrimination and surveillance report | |
building a data ethics framework for law enforcement | |
Übergabe von Petitionen verbunden mit Gesprächen | |
Sachverständigenarbeit |
Unique
Unique | 6 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | Responding to consultations, including codes of practice |
---|---|
2nd row | discrimination and surveillance report |
3rd row | building a data ethics framework for law enforcement |
4th row | Übergabe von Petitionen verbunden mit Gesprächen |
5th row | Sachverständigenarbeit |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Responding to consultations, including codes of practice | 1 | 2.6% |
discrimination and surveillance report | 1 | 2.6% |
building a data ethics framework for law enforcement | 1 | 2.6% |
Übergabe von Petitionen verbunden mit Gesprächen | 1 | 2.6% |
Sachverständigenarbeit | 1 | 2.6% |
Organisation von lobbyrelevanten Veranstaltungen | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 32 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 36 |
Missing (%) | 94.7% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Writing blogs | |
---|---|
encouraging greater transparency and independent oversight as a way of demonstrating legitimacy |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | Writing blogs |
---|---|
2nd row | encouraging greater transparency and independent oversight as a way of demonstrating legitimacy |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Writing blogs | 1 | 2.6% |
encouraging greater transparency and independent oversight as a way of demonstrating legitimacy | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 36 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 1 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 37 |
Missing (%) | 97.4% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Organising public events with agencies and tech businesses |
---|
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | Organising public events with agencies and tech businesses |
---|
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Organising public events with agencies and tech businesses | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 37 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 1 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 37 |
Missing (%) | 97.4% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Organising closed discussions between agencies and civil society groups |
---|
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | Organising closed discussions between agencies and civil society groups |
---|
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Organising closed discussions between agencies and civil society groups | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 37 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 23.1% |
Missing | 25 |
Missing (%) | 65.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Very important | |
---|---|
Important | |
Somewhat important |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 7.7% |
Sample
1st row | Very important |
---|---|
2nd row | Very important |
3rd row | Important |
4th row | Very important |
5th row | Very important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Very important | 8 | 21.1% |
Important | 4 | 10.5% |
Somewhat important | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 25 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 23.1% |
Missing | 25 |
Missing (%) | 65.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Very important | |
---|---|
Somewhat important | |
Important |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Somewhat important |
---|---|
2nd row | Important |
3rd row | Very important |
4th row | Very important |
5th row | Somewhat important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Very important | 5 | 13.2% |
Somewhat important | 4 | 10.5% |
Important | 4 | 10.5% |
(Missing) | 25 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 30.8% |
Missing | 25 |
Missing (%) | 65.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Very important | |
---|---|
Important | |
Slightly important | |
Somewhat important |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 7.7% |
Sample
1st row | Important |
---|---|
2nd row | Important |
3rd row | Very important |
4th row | Important |
5th row | Very important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Very important | 6 | 15.8% |
Important | 4 | 10.5% |
Slightly important | 2 | 5.3% |
Somewhat important | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 25 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 23.1% |
Missing | 25 |
Missing (%) | 65.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Very important | |
---|---|
Somewhat important | |
Important |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Very important |
---|---|
2nd row | Somewhat important |
3rd row | Important |
4th row | Somewhat important |
5th row | Very important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Very important | 5 | 13.2% |
Somewhat important | 4 | 10.5% |
Important | 4 | 10.5% |
(Missing) | 25 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 38.5% |
Missing | 25 |
Missing (%) | 65.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Not important at all | |
---|---|
Important | |
Somewhat important | |
Slightly important | |
Very important |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 15.4% |
Sample
1st row | Not important at all |
---|---|
2nd row | Somewhat important |
3rd row | Slightly important |
4th row | Somewhat important |
5th row | Important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Not important at all | 4 | 10.5% |
Important | 4 | 10.5% |
Somewhat important | 3 | 7.9% |
Slightly important | 1 | 2.6% |
Very important | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 25 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 7 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 53.8% |
Missing | 25 |
Missing (%) | 65.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Not important at all | |
---|---|
Slightly important | |
Important | |
Somewhat important | |
I don't know | |
Other values (2) |
Unique
Unique | 3 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 23.1% |
Sample
1st row | Not important at all |
---|---|
2nd row | Important |
3rd row | Not important at all |
4th row | Important |
5th row | Not important at all |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Not important at all | 3 | 7.9% |
Slightly important | 3 | 7.9% |
Important | 2 | 5.3% |
Somewhat important | 2 | 5.3% |
I don't know | 1 | 2.6% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
Very important | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 25 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 30.8% |
Missing | 25 |
Missing (%) | 65.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Important | |
---|---|
Slightly important | |
Somewhat important | |
Not important at all |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 7.7% |
Sample
1st row | Not important at all |
---|---|
2nd row | Important |
3rd row | Slightly important |
4th row | Important |
5th row | Important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Important | 6 | 15.8% |
Slightly important | 3 | 7.9% |
Somewhat important | 3 | 7.9% |
Not important at all | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 25 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 80.0% |
Missing | 33 |
Missing (%) | 86.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
I don't know | |
---|---|
Not important at all | |
Somewhat important | |
I prefer not to say |
Unique
Unique | 3 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 60.0% |
Sample
1st row | I don't know |
---|---|
2nd row | Not important at all |
3rd row | I don't know |
4th row | Somewhat important |
5th row | I prefer not to say |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
I don't know | 2 | 5.3% |
Not important at all | 1 | 2.6% |
Somewhat important | 1 | 2.6% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 33 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 1 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 37 |
Missing (%) | 97.4% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Obwohl es hier um Lobbyarbeit geht: Kamagnenelemente helfen, durch öfftl. Druck Lobbyarbeit zu verstärken und z.B. zu Gesprächen eingeladen zu werden. Leider ist Mobilisierung zu ND-Themen schwierig. |
---|
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | Obwohl es hier um Lobbyarbeit geht: Kamagnenelemente helfen, durch öfftl. Druck Lobbyarbeit zu verstärken und z.B. zu Gesprächen eingeladen zu werden. Leider ist Mobilisierung zu ND-Themen schwierig. |
---|
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Obwohl es hier um Lobbyarbeit geht: Kamagnenelemente helfen, durch öfftl. Druck Lobbyarbeit zu verstärken und z.B. zu Gesprächen eingeladen zu werden. Leider ist Mobilisierung zu ND-Themen schwierig. | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 37 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 30.8% |
Missing | 25 |
Missing (%) | 65.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Rarely (25% of the time) | |
---|---|
Sometimes (50% of the time) | |
Often (75% of the time) | |
Always |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 7.7% |
Sample
1st row | Rarely (25% of the time) |
---|---|
2nd row | Always |
3rd row | Sometimes (50% of the time) |
4th row | Often (75% of the time) |
5th row | Rarely (25% of the time) |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Rarely (25% of the time) | 5 | 13.2% |
Sometimes (50% of the time) | 4 | 10.5% |
Often (75% of the time) | 3 | 7.9% |
Always | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 25 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 30.8% |
Missing | 25 |
Missing (%) | 65.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Often (75% of the time) | |
---|---|
Rarely (25% of the time) | |
Sometimes (50% of the time) | |
Always |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 7.7% |
Sample
1st row | Often (75% of the time) |
---|---|
2nd row | Always |
3rd row | Rarely (25% of the time) |
4th row | Often (75% of the time) |
5th row | Often (75% of the time) |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Often (75% of the time) | 6 | 15.8% |
Rarely (25% of the time) | 4 | 10.5% |
Sometimes (50% of the time) | 2 | 5.3% |
Always | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 25 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 30.8% |
Missing | 25 |
Missing (%) | 65.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Agree somewhat | |
---|---|
Agree to a great extent | |
Agree completely | |
Agree sligthly |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Agree somewhat |
---|---|
2nd row | Agree to a great extent |
3rd row | Agree somewhat |
4th row | Agree somewhat |
5th row | Agree sligthly |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Agree somewhat | 5 | 13.2% |
Agree to a great extent | 3 | 7.9% |
Agree completely | 3 | 7.9% |
Agree sligthly | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 25 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 38.5% |
Missing | 25 |
Missing (%) | 65.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Agree sligthly | |
---|---|
Agree somewhat | |
Not agree at all | |
Agree to a great extent | |
Agree completely |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 15.4% |
Sample
1st row | Agree somewhat |
---|---|
2nd row | Agree to a great extent |
3rd row | Agree sligthly |
4th row | Agree sligthly |
5th row | Agree sligthly |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Agree sligthly | 7 | 18.4% |
Agree somewhat | 2 | 5.3% |
Not agree at all | 2 | 5.3% |
Agree to a great extent | 1 | 2.6% |
Agree completely | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 25 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 30.8% |
Missing | 25 |
Missing (%) | 65.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Agree somewhat | |
---|---|
Agree to a great extent | |
Agree sligthly | |
Agree completely |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Agree somewhat |
---|---|
2nd row | Agree to a great extent |
3rd row | Agree to a great extent |
4th row | Agree somewhat |
5th row | Agree sligthly |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Agree somewhat | 5 | 13.2% |
Agree to a great extent | 3 | 7.9% |
Agree sligthly | 3 | 7.9% |
Agree completely | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 25 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 30.8% |
Missing | 25 |
Missing (%) | 65.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Agree sligthly | |
---|---|
Not agree at all | |
Agree somewhat | |
Agree completely |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 15.4% |
Sample
1st row | Agree somewhat |
---|---|
2nd row | Agree sligthly |
3rd row | Agree sligthly |
4th row | Not agree at all |
5th row | Agree sligthly |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Agree sligthly | 9 | 23.7% |
Not agree at all | 2 | 5.3% |
Agree somewhat | 1 | 2.6% |
Agree completely | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 25 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 33 |
Missing (%) | 86.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
We were approached by someone high up in government national security to discuss ethical issues around certain surveillance techniques. | |
---|---|
One very recent example: In the autumn of last year (2020), Prof. Ian Brown and I (Douwe Korff) submitted two extensive papers on the inadequacy of UK data protection law, in particular in relation to access to data by the UK intelligence services, to EU bodies involved in assessing the adequacy of UK data protection law after Brexit. Our very critical comments were very clearly reflected (at times verbatim) in the EP LIBE Ctee draft resolution on the issue (to go to the EP plenary in May) and in the EDPB's opinion on UK adequacy (issued earlier this month [April] 2021). | |
Many references to our work and personal feedback. | |
Successful court victories. Encouragement from current and former national security officials. | |
independent reports are now frequently cited in official reports and policy papers. |
Unique
Unique | 5 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | We were approached by someone high up in government national security to discuss ethical issues around certain surveillance techniques. |
---|---|
2nd row | One very recent example: In the autumn of last year (2020), Prof. Ian Brown and I (Douwe Korff) submitted two extensive papers on the inadequacy of UK data protection law, in particular in relation to access to data by the UK intelligence services, to EU bodies involved in assessing the adequacy of UK data protection law after Brexit. Our very critical comments were very clearly reflected (at times verbatim) in the EP LIBE Ctee draft resolution on the issue (to go to the EP plenary in May) and in the EDPB's opinion on UK adequacy (issued earlier this month [April] 2021). |
3rd row | Many references to our work and personal feedback. |
4th row | Successful court victories. Encouragement from current and former national security officials. |
5th row | independent reports are now frequently cited in official reports and policy papers. |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
We were approached by someone high up in government national security to discuss ethical issues around certain surveillance techniques. | 1 | 2.6% |
One very recent example: In the autumn of last year (2020), Prof. Ian Brown and I (Douwe Korff) submitted two extensive papers on the inadequacy of UK data protection law, in particular in relation to access to data by the UK intelligence services, to EU bodies involved in assessing the adequacy of UK data protection law after Brexit. Our very critical comments were very clearly reflected (at times verbatim) in the EP LIBE Ctee draft resolution on the issue (to go to the EP plenary in May) and in the EDPB's opinion on UK adequacy (issued earlier this month [April] 2021). | 1 | 2.6% |
Many references to our work and personal feedback. | 1 | 2.6% |
Successful court victories. Encouragement from current and former national security officials. | 1 | 2.6% |
independent reports are now frequently cited in official reports and policy papers. | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 33 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 8 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 30 |
Missing (%) | 78.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
10 Human Rights Organisations v. U.K. (ECHR) | |
---|---|
Reporter ohne Grenzen ./. BND | |
Beschwerdeführende Organisation im erfolgreich abgeschlossenen BVErfG-Verfahren gegen das BND-Gesetz | |
Verfassungsbeschwerde gegen BND-Gesetz | |
https://fragdenstaat.de/blog/tag/bnd/ | |
Other values (3) |
Unique
Unique | 8 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | 10 Human Rights Organisations v. U.K. (ECHR) |
---|---|
2nd row | Reporter ohne Grenzen ./. BND |
3rd row | Beschwerdeführende Organisation im erfolgreich abgeschlossenen BVErfG-Verfahren gegen das BND-Gesetz |
4th row | Verfassungsbeschwerde gegen BND-Gesetz |
5th row | https://fragdenstaat.de/blog/tag/bnd/ |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
10 Human Rights Organisations v. U.K. (ECHR) | 1 | 2.6% |
Reporter ohne Grenzen ./. BND | 1 | 2.6% |
Beschwerdeführende Organisation im erfolgreich abgeschlossenen BVErfG-Verfahren gegen das BND-Gesetz | 1 | 2.6% |
Verfassungsbeschwerde gegen BND-Gesetz | 1 | 2.6% |
https://fragdenstaat.de/blog/tag/bnd/ | 1 | 2.6% |
VerAS-Urteil Bundesverwaltungsgericht Leipzig | 1 | 2.6% |
Verfassungsbeschwerde BND-G | 1 | 2.6% |
Contentieu constitutionnel sur l'article L. 811-5 du code de la sécurité intérieur | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 30 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 7 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 31 |
Missing (%) | 81.6% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Bulk Personal Datasets & Bulk Communications Data (UK) | |
---|---|
Beschwerdeführende Organisation im erfolgreich abgeschlossenen Bundesverwaltungsgerichtsverfahren gegen die Veras-Datenbank | |
Verfassungsbeschwerde gegen das bayerische Verfassungsschutzgesetz | |
https://fragdenstaat.de/blog/tag/verfassungsschutz/ | |
Verfassungsbeschwerde gegen Teil-Niederlage bei VerAS-Urteil | |
Other values (2) |
Unique
Unique | 7 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | Bulk Personal Datasets & Bulk Communications Data (UK) |
---|---|
2nd row | Beschwerdeführende Organisation im erfolgreich abgeschlossenen Bundesverwaltungsgerichtsverfahren gegen die Veras-Datenbank |
3rd row | Verfassungsbeschwerde gegen das bayerische Verfassungsschutzgesetz |
4th row | https://fragdenstaat.de/blog/tag/verfassungsschutz/ |
5th row | Verfassungsbeschwerde gegen Teil-Niederlage bei VerAS-Urteil |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Bulk Personal Datasets & Bulk Communications Data (UK) | 1 | 2.6% |
Beschwerdeführende Organisation im erfolgreich abgeschlossenen Bundesverwaltungsgerichtsverfahren gegen die Veras-Datenbank | 1 | 2.6% |
Verfassungsbeschwerde gegen das bayerische Verfassungsschutzgesetz | 1 | 2.6% |
https://fragdenstaat.de/blog/tag/verfassungsschutz/ | 1 | 2.6% |
Verfassungsbeschwerde gegen Teil-Niederlage bei VerAS-Urteil | 1 | 2.6% |
Verfassungsbeschwerde Trojaner-Einsatz durch Verfassungsschutz und Predicitive-Policing-Befugnisse der Polizei in Hamburg | 1 | 2.6% |
Contentieu administratif et européen sur la conservation généralisée des données | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 31 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 33 |
Missing (%) | 86.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
PRIVACY INTERNATIONAL and Others against the United Kingdom (ECHR, Application no. 46259/16) | |
---|---|
Beschwerdeführende Organisation im laufenden EGMR-Verfahren gegen die BND-Überwachung der Inland-Inland-Kommunikatin | |
Verfassungsbeschwerde gegen das Hamburgische Verfassungsschutzgesetz | |
EGMR-Beschwerde gegen Niederlage bei VB zu Teil-Niederlage bei VerAS-Urteil | |
Contentieu administratif sur les décrets d'application de la loi renseignement |
Unique
Unique | 5 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | PRIVACY INTERNATIONAL and Others against the United Kingdom (ECHR, Application no. 46259/16) |
---|---|
2nd row | Beschwerdeführende Organisation im laufenden EGMR-Verfahren gegen die BND-Überwachung der Inland-Inland-Kommunikatin |
3rd row | Verfassungsbeschwerde gegen das Hamburgische Verfassungsschutzgesetz |
4th row | EGMR-Beschwerde gegen Niederlage bei VB zu Teil-Niederlage bei VerAS-Urteil |
5th row | Contentieu administratif sur les décrets d'application de la loi renseignement |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
PRIVACY INTERNATIONAL and Others against the United Kingdom (ECHR, Application no. 46259/16) | 1 | 2.6% |
Beschwerdeführende Organisation im laufenden EGMR-Verfahren gegen die BND-Überwachung der Inland-Inland-Kommunikatin | 1 | 2.6% |
Verfassungsbeschwerde gegen das Hamburgische Verfassungsschutzgesetz | 1 | 2.6% |
EGMR-Beschwerde gegen Niederlage bei VB zu Teil-Niederlage bei VerAS-Urteil | 1 | 2.6% |
Contentieu administratif sur les décrets d'application de la loi renseignement | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 33 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 34 |
Missing (%) | 89.5% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Privacy International v. U.K. (CJEU, C-623/17) | |
---|---|
Amicus Curiae in laufendem türkischem Strafverfahren gegen Inlandsgeheimdienatüberwachung | |
Auskunftsklage gegen Hamburgischen Verfassungsschutz | |
VB gegen BND-Gesetz in Karlsruhe |
Unique
Unique | 4 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | Privacy International v. U.K. (CJEU, C-623/17) |
---|---|
2nd row | Amicus Curiae in laufendem türkischem Strafverfahren gegen Inlandsgeheimdienatüberwachung |
3rd row | Auskunftsklage gegen Hamburgischen Verfassungsschutz |
4th row | VB gegen BND-Gesetz in Karlsruhe |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Privacy International v. U.K. (CJEU, C-623/17) | 1 | 2.6% |
Amicus Curiae in laufendem türkischem Strafverfahren gegen Inlandsgeheimdienatüberwachung | 1 | 2.6% |
Auskunftsklage gegen Hamburgischen Verfassungsschutz | 1 | 2.6% |
VB gegen BND-Gesetz in Karlsruhe | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 34 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 1 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 37 |
Missing (%) | 97.4% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Initiierung einer erfolgreich abgeschlossenen US-Zivilklage gegen syrischen Geheimdienst bzw. dessen Überwachung und gezielte Tötung ausländischer Journalist*innen |
---|
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | Initiierung einer erfolgreich abgeschlossenen US-Zivilklage gegen syrischen Geheimdienst bzw. dessen Überwachung und gezielte Tötung ausländischer Journalist*innen |
---|
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Initiierung einer erfolgreich abgeschlossenen US-Zivilklage gegen syrischen Geheimdienst bzw. dessen Überwachung und gezielte Tötung ausländischer Journalist*innen | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 37 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 1 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 37 |
Missing (%) | 97.4% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Strafanzeige in Deutschland gegen Vertreter des saudi-arabischen Geheimdiensts wegen gezielter Ãœberwachung von Journalist*innen |
---|
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | Strafanzeige in Deutschland gegen Vertreter des saudi-arabischen Geheimdiensts wegen gezielter Ãœberwachung von Journalist*innen |
---|
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Strafanzeige in Deutschland gegen Vertreter des saudi-arabischen Geheimdiensts wegen gezielter Ãœberwachung von Journalist*innen | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 37 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 33.3% |
Missing | 29 |
Missing (%) | 76.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Very important | |
---|---|
Important | |
Somewhat important |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 11.1% |
Sample
1st row | Very important |
---|---|
2nd row | Important |
3rd row | Very important |
4th row | Very important |
5th row | Very important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Very important | 6 | 15.8% |
Important | 2 | 5.3% |
Somewhat important | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 29 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 55.6% |
Missing | 29 |
Missing (%) | 76.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Important | |
---|---|
Very important | |
Slightly important | |
I prefer not to say | |
Somewhat important |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 22.2% |
Sample
1st row | Very important |
---|---|
2nd row | Important |
3rd row | Important |
4th row | Very important |
5th row | I prefer not to say |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Important | 3 | 7.9% |
Very important | 2 | 5.3% |
Slightly important | 2 | 5.3% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
Somewhat important | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 29 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 55.6% |
Missing | 29 |
Missing (%) | 76.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Very important | |
---|---|
Important | |
Somewhat important | |
Slightly important | |
I prefer not to say |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 11.1% |
Sample
1st row | Very important |
---|---|
2nd row | Important |
3rd row | Important |
4th row | Somewhat important |
5th row | Slightly important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Very important | 2 | 5.3% |
Important | 2 | 5.3% |
Somewhat important | 2 | 5.3% |
Slightly important | 2 | 5.3% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 29 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 35 |
Missing (%) | 92.1% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
I don't know | |
---|---|
I prefer not to say | |
Very important |
Unique
Unique | 3 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | I don't know |
---|---|
2nd row | I prefer not to say |
3rd row | Very important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
I don't know | 1 | 2.6% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
Very important | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 35 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 1 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 37 |
Missing (%) | 97.4% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Finanzierung sicherstellen und Netzwerk aktivieren, um passende Beschwerdeführer:innen zu finden. |
---|
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | Finanzierung sicherstellen und Netzwerk aktivieren, um passende Beschwerdeführer:innen zu finden. |
---|
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Finanzierung sicherstellen und Netzwerk aktivieren, um passende Beschwerdeführer:innen zu finden. | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 37 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 44.4% |
Missing | 29 |
Missing (%) | 76.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Never or rarely | |
---|---|
I don't know | |
Sometimes (50% of the time) | |
Rarely (25% of the time) |
Unique
Unique | 3 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 33.3% |
Sample
1st row | I don't know |
---|---|
2nd row | Never or rarely |
3rd row | Never or rarely |
4th row | Never or rarely |
5th row | Never or rarely |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Never or rarely | 6 | 15.8% |
I don't know | 1 | 2.6% |
Sometimes (50% of the time) | 1 | 2.6% |
Rarely (25% of the time) | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 29 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 50.0% |
Missing | 30 |
Missing (%) | 78.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Often (75% of the time) | |
---|---|
Always or very often | |
Never or rarely | |
Sometimes (50% of the time) |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Often (75% of the time) |
---|---|
2nd row | Always or very often |
3rd row | Often (75% of the time) |
4th row | Never or rarely |
5th row | Sometimes (50% of the time) |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Often (75% of the time) | 2 | 5.3% |
Always or very often | 2 | 5.3% |
Never or rarely | 2 | 5.3% |
Sometimes (50% of the time) | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 30 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 33.3% |
Missing | 29 |
Missing (%) | 76.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Not risky at all | |
---|---|
I don't know | |
Somewaht risky |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | I don't know |
---|---|
2nd row | Not risky at all |
3rd row | Not risky at all |
4th row | Not risky at all |
5th row | Not risky at all |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Not risky at all | 5 | 13.2% |
I don't know | 2 | 5.3% |
Somewaht risky | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 29 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 44.4% |
Missing | 29 |
Missing (%) | 76.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Often (75% of the time) | |
---|---|
Rarely (25% of the time) | |
Sometimes (50% of the time) | |
Always |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 11.1% |
Sample
1st row | Often (75% of the time) |
---|---|
2nd row | Rarely (25% of the time) |
3rd row | Always |
4th row | Often (75% of the time) |
5th row | Sometimes (50% of the time) |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Often (75% of the time) | 3 | 7.9% |
Rarely (25% of the time) | 3 | 7.9% |
Sometimes (50% of the time) | 2 | 5.3% |
Always | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 29 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 50.0% |
Missing | 30 |
Missing (%) | 78.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Often (75% of the time) | |
---|---|
Sometimes (50% of the time) | |
Rarely (25% of the time) | |
Never |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 25.0% |
Sample
1st row | Often (75% of the time) |
---|---|
2nd row | Often (75% of the time) |
3rd row | Often (75% of the time) |
4th row | Sometimes (50% of the time) |
5th row | Sometimes (50% of the time) |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Often (75% of the time) | 3 | 7.9% |
Sometimes (50% of the time) | 3 | 7.9% |
Rarely (25% of the time) | 1 | 2.6% |
Never | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 30 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 33.3% |
Missing | 29 |
Missing (%) | 76.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Agree completely | |
---|---|
Agree somewhat | |
Agree to a great extent |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 11.1% |
Sample
1st row | Agree completely |
---|---|
2nd row | Agree somewhat |
3rd row | Agree completely |
4th row | Agree somewhat |
5th row | Agree somewhat |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Agree completely | 4 | 10.5% |
Agree somewhat | 4 | 10.5% |
Agree to a great extent | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 29 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 33.3% |
Missing | 29 |
Missing (%) | 76.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Agree to a great extent | |
---|---|
Agree somewhat | |
Agree completely |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Agree completely |
---|---|
2nd row | Agree somewhat |
3rd row | Agree to a great extent |
4th row | Agree somewhat |
5th row | Agree to a great extent |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Agree to a great extent | 4 | 10.5% |
Agree somewhat | 3 | 7.9% |
Agree completely | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 29 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 33.3% |
Missing | 29 |
Missing (%) | 76.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Agree completely | |
---|---|
Agree sligthly | |
Agree to a great extent |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Agree completely |
---|---|
2nd row | Agree sligthly |
3rd row | Agree to a great extent |
4th row | Agree to a great extent |
5th row | Agree completely |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Agree completely | 4 | 10.5% |
Agree sligthly | 3 | 7.9% |
Agree to a great extent | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 29 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 55.6% |
Missing | 29 |
Missing (%) | 76.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Agree completely | |
---|---|
Agree sligthly | |
Agree to a great extent | |
Agree somewhat | |
Not agree at all |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 22.2% |
Sample
1st row | Agree completely |
---|---|
2nd row | Agree sligthly |
3rd row | Agree completely |
4th row | Agree completely |
5th row | Agree to a great extent |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Agree completely | 3 | 7.9% |
Agree sligthly | 2 | 5.3% |
Agree to a great extent | 2 | 5.3% |
Agree somewhat | 1 | 2.6% |
Not agree at all | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 29 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 44.4% |
Missing | 29 |
Missing (%) | 76.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Agree sligthly | |
---|---|
Agree somewhat | |
Agree to a great extent | |
Agree completely |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 11.1% |
Sample
1st row | Agree to a great extent |
---|---|
2nd row | Agree sligthly |
3rd row | Agree completely |
4th row | Agree somewhat |
5th row | Agree to a great extent |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Agree sligthly | 3 | 7.9% |
Agree somewhat | 3 | 7.9% |
Agree to a great extent | 2 | 5.3% |
Agree completely | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 29 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 33 |
Missing (%) | 86.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
In Folge der BVerfG-Klage gegen BND-Gesetz wurde neues BND-Gesetz verabschiedet. In Folge der Bundesverwaltungagerichtklage gegen die Veras-Datenbank wurde diese Datenbank abgestellt. Im Rahmen der Zivilklage in den USA gegen syrischen Geheimdienst wurde der Geheimdienst zu einer Entschädigungszahlung verurteilt, die allerdings (so lange das Assad-Regime herrscht) wohl nicht gezahlt werden wird. | |
---|---|
Neues Gesetz wurde erlassen | |
https://fragdenstaat.de/blog/2019/05/02/klage-erfolgreich-berliner-verfassungsschutz-muss-auskunft-geben/ | |
Neues BND-Gesetz nach VB-Erfolg in Karlsruhe 2020 (Schaffung Kontrollgremium usw.) Abschaltung VerAS-Datenbank durch re:publica-Aktion "Bitte Nicht Durchleuchten" nach Leipzig-Urteil: https://netzpolitik.org/2018/bitte-nicht-durchleuchten-bnd-stoppt-illegale-speicherung-von-metadaten-in-datei-veras/ | |
Nos recours jouent un rôle dans la meilleure connaissance des juges français du droit européen et international applicable aux activités de surveillance. Ils sont fréquemment cités dans les rapports parlementaires ou les rapports des autorités de contrôle s'intéressant au renseignement, et permettent de faire évoluer le droit applicable dans le sens d'un meilleur encadrement de l'activité des services de renseignement. |
Unique
Unique | 5 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | In Folge der BVerfG-Klage gegen BND-Gesetz wurde neues BND-Gesetz verabschiedet. In Folge der Bundesverwaltungagerichtklage gegen die Veras-Datenbank wurde diese Datenbank abgestellt. Im Rahmen der Zivilklage in den USA gegen syrischen Geheimdienst wurde der Geheimdienst zu einer Entschädigungszahlung verurteilt, die allerdings (so lange das Assad-Regime herrscht) wohl nicht gezahlt werden wird. |
---|---|
2nd row | Neues Gesetz wurde erlassen |
3rd row | https://fragdenstaat.de/blog/2019/05/02/klage-erfolgreich-berliner-verfassungsschutz-muss-auskunft-geben/ |
4th row | Neues BND-Gesetz nach VB-Erfolg in Karlsruhe 2020 (Schaffung Kontrollgremium usw.) Abschaltung VerAS-Datenbank durch re:publica-Aktion "Bitte Nicht Durchleuchten" nach Leipzig-Urteil: https://netzpolitik.org/2018/bitte-nicht-durchleuchten-bnd-stoppt-illegale-speicherung-von-metadaten-in-datei-veras/ |
5th row | Nos recours jouent un rôle dans la meilleure connaissance des juges français du droit européen et international applicable aux activités de surveillance. Ils sont fréquemment cités dans les rapports parlementaires ou les rapports des autorités de contrôle s'intéressant au renseignement, et permettent de faire évoluer le droit applicable dans le sens d'un meilleur encadrement de l'activité des services de renseignement. |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
In Folge der BVerfG-Klage gegen BND-Gesetz wurde neues BND-Gesetz verabschiedet. In Folge der Bundesverwaltungagerichtklage gegen die Veras-Datenbank wurde diese Datenbank abgestellt. Im Rahmen der Zivilklage in den USA gegen syrischen Geheimdienst wurde der Geheimdienst zu einer Entschädigungszahlung verurteilt, die allerdings (so lange das Assad-Regime herrscht) wohl nicht gezahlt werden wird. | 1 | 2.6% |
Neues Gesetz wurde erlassen | 1 | 2.6% |
https://fragdenstaat.de/blog/2019/05/02/klage-erfolgreich-berliner-verfassungsschutz-muss-auskunft-geben/ | 1 | 2.6% |
Neues BND-Gesetz nach VB-Erfolg in Karlsruhe 2020 (Schaffung Kontrollgremium usw.) Abschaltung VerAS-Datenbank durch re:publica-Aktion "Bitte Nicht Durchleuchten" nach Leipzig-Urteil: https://netzpolitik.org/2018/bitte-nicht-durchleuchten-bnd-stoppt-illegale-speicherung-von-metadaten-in-datei-veras/ | 1 | 2.6% |
Nos recours jouent un rôle dans la meilleure connaissance des juges français du droit européen et international applicable aux activités de surveillance. Ils sont fréquemment cités dans les rapports parlementaires ou les rapports des autorités de contrôle s'intéressant au renseignement, et permettent de faire évoluer le droit applicable dans le sens d'un meilleur encadrement de l'activité des services de renseignement. | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 33 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 14.8% |
Missing | 11 |
Missing (%) | 28.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Very important | |
---|---|
Important | |
Somewhat important | 1 |
Slightly important | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 7.4% |
Sample
1st row | Important |
---|---|
2nd row | Very important |
3rd row | Very important |
4th row | Important |
5th row | Very important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Very important | 14 | |
Important | 11 | |
Somewhat important | 1 | 2.6% |
Slightly important | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 11 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 11.1% |
Missing | 11 |
Missing (%) | 28.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Very important | |
---|---|
Important | 1 |
Slightly important | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 7.4% |
Sample
1st row | Important |
---|---|
2nd row | Very important |
3rd row | Very important |
4th row | Very important |
5th row | Very important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Very important | 25 | |
Important | 1 | 2.6% |
Slightly important | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 11 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 12.0% |
Missing | 13 |
Missing (%) | 34.2% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Yes | |
---|---|
No | |
I don't know | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 4.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | Yes |
3rd row | No |
4th row | Yes |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Yes | 13 | |
No | 11 | |
I don't know | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 13 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 6 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 21.4% |
Missing | 10 |
Missing (%) | 26.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Very important | |
---|---|
Important | |
Somewhat important | |
Not important at all | |
Slightly important |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 3.6% |
Sample
1st row | Very important |
---|---|
2nd row | Somewhat important |
3rd row | Important |
4th row | Somewhat important |
5th row | Not important at all |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Very important | 10 | |
Important | 5 | |
Somewhat important | 4 | 10.5% |
Not important at all | 4 | 10.5% |
Slightly important | 4 | 10.5% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 10 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 17.9% |
Missing | 10 |
Missing (%) | 26.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Slightly important | |
---|---|
Very important | |
Somewhat important | |
Important | |
I prefer not to say |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Very important |
---|---|
2nd row | Somewhat important |
3rd row | Somewhat important |
4th row | Somewhat important |
5th row | Important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Slightly important | 9 | |
Very important | 8 | |
Somewhat important | 5 | |
Important | 4 | 10.5% |
I prefer not to say | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 10 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 6 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 21.4% |
Missing | 10 |
Missing (%) | 26.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Somewhat important | |
---|---|
Not important at all | |
Very important | |
Slightly important | |
I prefer not to say |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 3.6% |
Sample
1st row | Very important |
---|---|
2nd row | Not important at all |
3rd row | Slightly important |
4th row | Not important at all |
5th row | Not important at all |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Somewhat important | 7 | |
Not important at all | 6 | |
Very important | 5 | |
Slightly important | 5 | |
I prefer not to say | 4 | 10.5% |
I don't know | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 10 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 18.5% |
Missing | 11 |
Missing (%) | 28.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Very important | |
---|---|
Important | |
Somewhat important | |
Slightly important | |
I prefer not to say | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 3.7% |
Sample
1st row | Very important |
---|---|
2nd row | Important |
3rd row | Important |
4th row | Very important |
5th row | Very important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Very important | 15 | |
Important | 5 | 13.2% |
Somewhat important | 4 | 10.5% |
Slightly important | 2 | 5.3% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 11 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 17.9% |
Missing | 10 |
Missing (%) | 26.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Very important | |
---|---|
Important | |
Slightly important | |
Somewhat important | |
I prefer not to say |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Very important |
---|---|
2nd row | Important |
3rd row | Important |
4th row | Very important |
5th row | Very important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Very important | 12 | |
Important | 7 | |
Slightly important | 4 | 10.5% |
Somewhat important | 3 | 7.9% |
I prefer not to say | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 10 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 18.5% |
Missing | 11 |
Missing (%) | 28.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Very important | |
---|---|
Important | |
Somewhat important | |
I prefer not to say | 1 |
I don't know | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 7.4% |
Sample
1st row | Very important |
---|---|
2nd row | Very important |
3rd row | Important |
4th row | Very important |
5th row | Very important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Very important | 12 | |
Important | 9 | |
Somewhat important | 4 | 10.5% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
I don't know | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 11 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 62.5% |
Missing | 30 |
Missing (%) | 78.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
I prefer not to say | |
---|---|
Very important | |
Not important at all | |
I don't know | |
Important |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 25.0% |
Sample
1st row | I don't know |
---|---|
2nd row | I prefer not to say |
3rd row | Important |
4th row | I prefer not to say |
5th row | Very important |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
I prefer not to say | 2 | 5.3% |
Very important | 2 | 5.3% |
Not important at all | 2 | 5.3% |
I don't know | 1 | 2.6% |
Important | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 30 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 35 |
Missing (%) | 92.1% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Updates | |
---|---|
Passwortmanager | |
Eigene Server-Infrastruktur |
Unique
Unique | 3 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | Updates |
---|---|
2nd row | Passwortmanager |
3rd row | Eigene Server-Infrastruktur |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Updates | 1 | 2.6% |
Passwortmanager | 1 | 2.6% |
Eigene Server-Infrastruktur | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 35 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 6 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 21.4% |
Missing | 10 |
Missing (%) | 26.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | |
---|---|
I don't know | 2 |
Under the current conditions of communications <br>surveillance, technological solutions cannot offer <br>sufficient protection for the data I handle | 2 |
I prefer not to say | 1 |
I have full confidence that the right tools <br>will protect my communication from surveillance | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 3 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 10.7% |
Sample
1st row | I don't know |
---|---|
2nd row | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards |
3rd row | Under the current conditions of communications <br>surveillance, technological solutions cannot offer <br>sufficient protection for the data I handle |
4th row | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards |
5th row | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | 21 | |
I don't know | 2 | 5.3% |
Under the current conditions of communications <br>surveillance, technological solutions cannot offer <br>sufficient protection for the data I handle | 2 | 5.3% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
I have full confidence that the right tools <br>will protect my communication from surveillance | 1 | 2.6% |
I have no confidence in the protection offered by <br>technological tools | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 10 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 7 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 25.9% |
Missing | 11 |
Missing (%) | 28.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Sometimes (50% of the time) | |
---|---|
Rarely (25% of the time) | |
Often (75% of the time) | |
Always | |
I don't know | |
Other values (2) |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 3.7% |
Sample
1st row | Always |
---|---|
2nd row | Rarely (25% of the time) |
3rd row | I don't know |
4th row | Sometimes (50% of the time) |
5th row | Always |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Sometimes (50% of the time) | 8 | |
Rarely (25% of the time) | 5 | |
Often (75% of the time) | 5 | |
Always | 4 | 10.5% |
I don't know | 2 | 5.3% |
I prefer not to say | 2 | 5.3% |
Never | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 11 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 15.4% |
Missing | 12 |
Missing (%) | 31.6% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
Yes | |
I don't know | |
I prefer not to say | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 3.8% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | Yes |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 18 | |
Yes | 4 | 10.5% |
I don't know | 3 | 7.9% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 12 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 12 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 26 |
Missing (%) | 68.4% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
I assume I am always liable to be intercepted when working on sensitive matters; I do not have great technical know-how or the ability or time to train up on these issues, but I do follow the line when I am told something amounts to a minimum standard I should use. I feel that extreme openness in everything I do amounts to a form of defence, because it is all done as a form of public service, including when criticising malfunctions and/or irregularities and foul play. | |
---|---|
I know that British law enables widespread surveillance including of CSOs. | |
If the intelligence agencies want to, I am sure they can access my data and communications - both legally and illegally. I just shrug that off. | |
CSOs are not generally covered by protected communicaitons, like journalists or lawyers, or even trade unionists. Most of the work of local CSOs is harmless enough not to require surveillance. International work is different. For example, advocacy work on international trade issues is a legitimate target for US security services tasked by the US Trade Representative (Knowledge Ecology International case). But in most cases the main surveillance risk to my activities comes from governments of less democratic countries where project partners are based. | |
Due to the secrecy of intelligence work and the catch-all exemptions for 'national security', there will never be meaningful legal protection from surveillance in the UK | |
Other values (7) |
Unique
Unique | 12 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | I assume I am always liable to be intercepted when working on sensitive matters; I do not have great technical know-how or the ability or time to train up on these issues, but I do follow the line when I am told something amounts to a minimum standard I should use. I feel that extreme openness in everything I do amounts to a form of defence, because it is all done as a form of public service, including when criticising malfunctions and/or irregularities and foul play. |
---|---|
2nd row | I know that British law enables widespread surveillance including of CSOs. |
3rd row | If the intelligence agencies want to, I am sure they can access my data and communications - both legally and illegally. I just shrug that off. |
4th row | CSOs are not generally covered by protected communicaitons, like journalists or lawyers, or even trade unionists. Most of the work of local CSOs is harmless enough not to require surveillance. International work is different. For example, advocacy work on international trade issues is a legitimate target for US security services tasked by the US Trade Representative (Knowledge Ecology International case). But in most cases the main surveillance risk to my activities comes from governments of less democratic countries where project partners are based. |
5th row | Due to the secrecy of intelligence work and the catch-all exemptions for 'national security', there will never be meaningful legal protection from surveillance in the UK |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
I assume I am always liable to be intercepted when working on sensitive matters; I do not have great technical know-how or the ability or time to train up on these issues, but I do follow the line when I am told something amounts to a minimum standard I should use. I feel that extreme openness in everything I do amounts to a form of defence, because it is all done as a form of public service, including when criticising malfunctions and/or irregularities and foul play. | 1 | 2.6% |
I know that British law enables widespread surveillance including of CSOs. | 1 | 2.6% |
If the intelligence agencies want to, I am sure they can access my data and communications - both legally and illegally. I just shrug that off. | 1 | 2.6% |
CSOs are not generally covered by protected communicaitons, like journalists or lawyers, or even trade unionists. Most of the work of local CSOs is harmless enough not to require surveillance. International work is different. For example, advocacy work on international trade issues is a legitimate target for US security services tasked by the US Trade Representative (Knowledge Ecology International case). But in most cases the main surveillance risk to my activities comes from governments of less democratic countries where project partners are based. | 1 | 2.6% |
Due to the secrecy of intelligence work and the catch-all exemptions for 'national security', there will never be meaningful legal protection from surveillance in the UK | 1 | 2.6% |
Insb. meine internationale Kommunikation mit ausländischen Kolleg_innen kann nach derzeitiger Rechtslage überwacht werden. Gleichzeitig ist meine Orgsanisation technisch nicht auf dem Stand, dass wir diese Kommunikation schützen könnten. | 1 | 2.6% |
Keine ausreichende Kontrolle der Dienste | 1 | 2.6% |
Auskunftsrechte nicht weit genug (z. B. bei BfV) | 1 | 2.6% |
Besonders Schrankenregelungen wie z.B. beim publizistischen Zeugnisverweigerungsrecht (§160a StPO usw.) gibt es für NGOs in Deutschland nicht. Außerdem: Schutzrechte greifen für Journalist:innen und Anwält:innen, aber nicht für Whistleblower (Steigbügelhalter-Theorie), die im ND-Bereich sehr wichtig, weil über offizielle Wege kaum bis keine Infos nach außen dringen. Außerdem großes Problem: Auskunftsrechte existieren (wenn überhaupt) nur auf dem Papier, d.h. es kann i.d.R. kein Rechtsweg beschritten werden, weil die Betroffenen nie erfahren, über Überwachung stattgefunden hat. Zuletzt: Trend bei Kontrolle hin zu außerparlamentarischen Stellvertreter-Kontrollorganen, statt echte Transparenz über ND-Tätigkeit. Ebenfalls schwierig für Rechtsschutz. | 1 | 2.6% |
Je n'ai aucune information permettant de penser que je bénéficierais d'une protection particulière. Mes activités militantes font que je communique ou rencontre fréquemment des personnes dont je sais qu'elles ont, ou font encore, l'objet de mesures de surveillance de la part des services de renseignement. | 1 | 2.6% |
Other values (2) | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 26 |
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 16.7% |
Missing | 14 |
Missing (%) | 36.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
I don't know | |
Yes | |
I prefer not to say | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 4.2% |
Sample
1st row | I don't know |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | Yes |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 10 | |
I don't know | 7 | |
Yes | 6 | |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 14 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 16.7% |
Missing | 14 |
Missing (%) | 36.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
I don't know | |
Yes | |
I prefer not to say | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 4.2% |
Sample
1st row | I don't know |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 13 | |
I don't know | 7 | |
Yes | 3 | 7.9% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 14 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 33.3% |
Missing | 26 |
Missing (%) | 68.4% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
I don't know | |
---|---|
No | |
I prefer not to say | |
Yes |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 8.3% |
Sample
1st row | I don't know |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | I don't know |
5th row | I prefer not to say |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
I don't know | 5 | 13.2% |
No | 4 | 10.5% |
I prefer not to say | 2 | 5.3% |
Yes | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 26 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 20.8% |
Missing | 14 |
Missing (%) | 36.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
I prefer not to say | |
---|---|
Yes, I suspect | |
No | |
Yes, I have evidence | |
I don't know |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 4.2% |
Sample
1st row | I prefer not to say |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | I prefer not to say |
4th row | No |
5th row | Yes, I have evidence |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
I prefer not to say | 8 | |
Yes, I suspect | 8 | |
No | 4 | 10.5% |
Yes, I have evidence | 3 | 7.9% |
I don't know | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 14 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 1 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 4.0% |
Missing | 13 |
Missing (%) | 34.2% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No |
---|
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 25 | |
(Missing) | 13 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 8.0% |
Missing | 13 |
Missing (%) | 34.2% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
I prefer not to say | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 4.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 24 | |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 13 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 8.0% |
Missing | 13 |
Missing (%) | 34.2% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
I prefer not to say | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 4.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 24 | |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 13 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 8.7% |
Missing | 15 |
Missing (%) | 39.5% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
I prefer not to say | 2 |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 21 | |
I prefer not to say | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 15 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 8.3% |
Missing | 14 |
Missing (%) | 36.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
I prefer not to say | 2 |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 22 | |
I prefer not to say | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 14 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 16.0% |
Missing | 13 |
Missing (%) | 34.2% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
Yes | |
I don't know | |
I prefer not to say | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 4.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 19 | |
Yes | 3 | 7.9% |
I don't know | 2 | 5.3% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 13 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 8.0% |
Missing | 13 |
Missing (%) | 34.2% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
I prefer not to say | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 4.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 24 | |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 13 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 16.0% |
Missing | 13 |
Missing (%) | 34.2% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
I don't know | |
I prefer not to say | |
Yes |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 16 | |
I don't know | 5 | 13.2% |
I prefer not to say | 2 | 5.3% |
Yes | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 13 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 16.0% |
Missing | 13 |
Missing (%) | 34.2% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
I don't know | 2 |
Yes | 2 |
I prefer not to say | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 4.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 20 | |
I don't know | 2 | 5.3% |
Yes | 2 | 5.3% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 13 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 12.0% |
Missing | 13 |
Missing (%) | 34.2% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
I don't know | |
I prefer not to say |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 19 | |
I don't know | 4 | 10.5% |
I prefer not to say | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 13 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 16.0% |
Missing | 13 |
Missing (%) | 34.2% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
I don't know | |
Yes | |
I prefer not to say | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 4.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | Yes |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 17 | |
I don't know | 5 | 13.2% |
Yes | 2 | 5.3% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 13 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 16.0% |
Missing | 13 |
Missing (%) | 34.2% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
I don't know | |
Yes | |
I prefer not to say | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 4.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | I don't know |
4th row | No |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 19 | |
I don't know | 3 | 7.9% |
Yes | 2 | 5.3% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 13 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 16.0% |
Missing | 13 |
Missing (%) | 34.2% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
Yes | |
I prefer not to say | |
I don't know | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 4.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | Yes |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 19 | |
Yes | 3 | 7.9% |
I prefer not to say | 2 | 5.3% |
I don't know | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 13 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 16.0% |
Missing | 13 |
Missing (%) | 34.2% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
Yes | |
I prefer not to say | |
I don't know |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | Yes |
3rd row | Yes |
4th row | No |
5th row | Yes |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 14 | |
Yes | 7 | |
I prefer not to say | 2 | 5.3% |
I don't know | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 13 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 21.4% |
Missing | 24 |
Missing (%) | 63.2% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
I prefer not to say | |
I don't know |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | I prefer not to say |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 10 | |
I prefer not to say | 2 | 5.3% |
I don't know | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 24 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 8.3% |
Missing | 14 |
Missing (%) | 36.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
Yes | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 4.2% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 23 | |
Yes | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 14 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 1 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 4.2% |
Missing | 14 |
Missing (%) | 36.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No |
---|
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 24 | |
(Missing) | 14 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 12.5% |
Missing | 14 |
Missing (%) | 36.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
Yes | 1 |
I don't know | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 8.3% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 22 | |
Yes | 1 | 2.6% |
I don't know | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 14 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 1 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 4.2% |
Missing | 14 |
Missing (%) | 36.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No |
---|
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 24 | |
(Missing) | 14 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 1 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 4.2% |
Missing | 14 |
Missing (%) | 36.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No |
---|
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 24 | |
(Missing) | 14 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 1 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 6.2% |
Missing | 22 |
Missing (%) | 57.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No |
---|
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 16 | |
(Missing) | 22 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 12.5% |
Missing | 14 |
Missing (%) | 36.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
Yes | |
I don't know |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | Yes |
4th row | Yes |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 17 | |
Yes | 5 | 13.2% |
I don't know | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 14 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 8.3% |
Missing | 14 |
Missing (%) | 36.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
I don't know |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | No |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 21 | |
I don't know | 3 | 7.9% |
(Missing) | 14 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 12.5% |
Missing | 14 |
Missing (%) | 36.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
Yes | 2 |
I don't know | 2 |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | Yes |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 20 | |
Yes | 2 | 5.3% |
I don't know | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 14 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 12.5% |
Missing | 14 |
Missing (%) | 36.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
Yes | |
I don't know |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | No |
4th row | Yes |
5th row | No |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 18 | |
Yes | 3 | 7.9% |
I don't know | 3 | 7.9% |
(Missing) | 14 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 33.3% |
Missing | 29 |
Missing (%) | 76.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
No | |
---|---|
I don't know | |
Yes |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | No |
---|---|
2nd row | No |
3rd row | I don't know |
4th row | No |
5th row | I don't know |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
No | 4 | 10.5% |
I don't know | 3 | 7.9% |
Yes | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 29 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
Missing | 36 |
Missing (%) | 94.7% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Wir haben die Arbeit an Nachrichtendienst-Themen reduziert, da sie bei der Politik im Wesentlichen "auf taube Ohren" zu stoßen scheint und es schwierig ist, am Ball zu bleiben, wenn man scheinbar keinen Unterschied macht (außer durch Klageführung). Auch Mobilisierung und Fundraising zu dem Themenbereich ist schwierig. Themenbereich zudem rechtlich enorm komplex, schwierig für NGOs, die große Fülle an auch anderen Themen bearbeiten müssen. | |
---|---|
Aufgabe von Projekten weniger aus "Angst", als aufgrund von Kosten/Nutzen-Rechnung für Organisationen: Arbeitet kostet viel Geld, dauert lange (wenig passiert), wenig Interesse in der Öffentlichkeit und geringe Erfolgsaussichten. Das macht es für viele Organisationen unattraktiv, da zu investieren. |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
1st row | Wir haben die Arbeit an Nachrichtendienst-Themen reduziert, da sie bei der Politik im Wesentlichen "auf taube Ohren" zu stoßen scheint und es schwierig ist, am Ball zu bleiben, wenn man scheinbar keinen Unterschied macht (außer durch Klageführung). Auch Mobilisierung und Fundraising zu dem Themenbereich ist schwierig. Themenbereich zudem rechtlich enorm komplex, schwierig für NGOs, die große Fülle an auch anderen Themen bearbeiten müssen. |
---|---|
2nd row | Aufgabe von Projekten weniger aus "Angst", als aufgrund von Kosten/Nutzen-Rechnung für Organisationen: Arbeitet kostet viel Geld, dauert lange (wenig passiert), wenig Interesse in der Öffentlichkeit und geringe Erfolgsaussichten. Das macht es für viele Organisationen unattraktiv, da zu investieren. |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Wir haben die Arbeit an Nachrichtendienst-Themen reduziert, da sie bei der Politik im Wesentlichen "auf taube Ohren" zu stoßen scheint und es schwierig ist, am Ball zu bleiben, wenn man scheinbar keinen Unterschied macht (außer durch Klageführung). Auch Mobilisierung und Fundraising zu dem Themenbereich ist schwierig. Themenbereich zudem rechtlich enorm komplex, schwierig für NGOs, die große Fülle an auch anderen Themen bearbeiten müssen. | 1 | 2.6% |
Aufgabe von Projekten weniger aus "Angst", als aufgrund von Kosten/Nutzen-Rechnung für Organisationen: Arbeitet kostet viel Geld, dauert lange (wenig passiert), wenig Interesse in der Öffentlichkeit und geringe Erfolgsaussichten. Das macht es für viele Organisationen unattraktiv, da zu investieren. | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 36 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 16.7% |
Missing | 14 |
Missing (%) | 36.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Intelligence agencies contradict democratic principles,<br>and their powers should be kept at a bare minimum | |
---|---|
Intelligence agencies are necessary and legitimate institutions <br>of democratic states, even though they may sometimes overstep <br>their legal mandates | |
I prefer not to say | |
Intelligence agencies are incompatible with democratic <br>values and should be abolished |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Intelligence agencies contradict democratic principles,<br>and their powers should be kept at a bare minimum |
---|---|
2nd row | Intelligence agencies are necessary and legitimate institutions <br>of democratic states, even though they may sometimes overstep <br>their legal mandates |
3rd row | Intelligence agencies contradict democratic principles,<br>and their powers should be kept at a bare minimum |
4th row | Intelligence agencies are necessary and legitimate institutions <br>of democratic states, even though they may sometimes overstep <br>their legal mandates |
5th row | Intelligence agencies are necessary and legitimate institutions <br>of democratic states, even though they may sometimes overstep <br>their legal mandates |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Intelligence agencies contradict democratic principles,<br>and their powers should be kept at a bare minimum | 8 | |
Intelligence agencies are necessary and legitimate institutions <br>of democratic states, even though they may sometimes overstep <br>their legal mandates | 8 | |
I prefer not to say | 4 | 10.5% |
Intelligence agencies are incompatible with democratic <br>values and should be abolished | 4 | 10.5% |
(Missing) | 14 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 16.7% |
Missing | 14 |
Missing (%) | 36.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Intelligence oversight lacks efficacy, hence a fundamental <br>reorganization of oversight capacity is needed for oversight practitioners <br>to reliably uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct | |
---|---|
Effective intelligence oversight is a hopeless endeavour <br>and even a systematic reorganization is unlikely to ensure <br>misconduct is uncovered and prevented. | |
Intelligence oversight is mostly effective, however its <br>institutional design needs reform for oversight practitioners to reliably <br>uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct | |
I prefer not to say | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 4.2% |
Sample
1st row | Effective intelligence oversight is a hopeless endeavour <br>and even a systematic reorganization is unlikely to ensure <br>misconduct is uncovered and prevented. |
---|---|
2nd row | Intelligence oversight lacks efficacy, hence a fundamental <br>reorganization of oversight capacity is needed for oversight practitioners <br>to reliably uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct |
3rd row | Intelligence oversight lacks efficacy, hence a fundamental <br>reorganization of oversight capacity is needed for oversight practitioners <br>to reliably uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct |
4th row | Intelligence oversight lacks efficacy, hence a fundamental <br>reorganization of oversight capacity is needed for oversight practitioners <br>to reliably uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct |
5th row | Intelligence oversight lacks efficacy, hence a fundamental <br>reorganization of oversight capacity is needed for oversight practitioners <br>to reliably uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Intelligence oversight lacks efficacy, hence a fundamental <br>reorganization of oversight capacity is needed for oversight practitioners <br>to reliably uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct | 14 | |
Effective intelligence oversight is a hopeless endeavour <br>and even a systematic reorganization is unlikely to ensure <br>misconduct is uncovered and prevented. | 7 | |
Intelligence oversight is mostly effective, however its <br>institutional design needs reform for oversight practitioners to reliably <br>uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct | 2 | 5.3% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 14 |
Pie chart
CSattitude3[rule_of_law]
Boolean
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 5.3% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 166.0 B |
True | |
---|---|
False |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
True | 20 | |
False | 18 |
CSattitude3[civil_liberties]
Boolean
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 5.3% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 166.0 B |
True | |
---|---|
False |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
True | 20 | |
False | 18 |
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 5.3% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 166.0 B |
False | |
---|---|
True | 2 |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
False | 36 | |
True | 2 | 5.3% |
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 5.3% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 166.0 B |
False | |
---|---|
True |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
False | 32 | |
True | 6 | 15.8% |
CSattitude3[trust_in_intel]
Boolean
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 5.3% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 166.0 B |
False | |
---|---|
True | 2 |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
False | 36 | |
True | 2 | 5.3% |
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 5.3% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 166.0 B |
False | |
---|---|
True |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
False | 23 | |
True | 15 |
Distinct | 2 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 5.3% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 166.0 B |
False | |
---|---|
True | 1 |
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
False | 37 | |
True | 1 | 2.6% |
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 23.8% |
Missing | 17 |
Missing (%) | 44.7% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Civil society organisations | |
---|---|
Independent expert bodies | |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | 1 |
Judicial oversight bodies | 1 |
Audit courts | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 3 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 14.3% |
Sample
1st row | Independent expert bodies |
---|---|
2nd row | Civil society organisations |
3rd row | Parliamentary oversight bodies |
4th row | Civil society organisations |
5th row | Independent expert bodies |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Civil society organisations | 13 | |
Independent expert bodies | 5 | 13.2% |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | 1 | 2.6% |
Judicial oversight bodies | 1 | 2.6% |
Audit courts | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 17 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 23.8% |
Missing | 17 |
Missing (%) | 44.7% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Judicial oversight bodies | |
---|---|
Parliamentary oversight bodies | |
Independent expert bodies | |
Civil society organisations | |
Data protection authorities |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Judicial oversight bodies |
---|---|
2nd row | Judicial oversight bodies |
3rd row | Judicial oversight bodies |
4th row | Parliamentary oversight bodies |
5th row | Judicial oversight bodies |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Judicial oversight bodies | 7 | |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | 6 | 15.8% |
Independent expert bodies | 4 | 10.5% |
Civil society organisations | 2 | 5.3% |
Data protection authorities | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 17 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 26.3% |
Missing | 19 |
Missing (%) | 50.0% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | |
---|---|
Data protection authorities | |
Independent expert bodies | |
Civil society organisations | |
Judicial oversight bodies |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Data protection authorities |
---|---|
2nd row | Parliamentary oversight bodies |
3rd row | Civil society organisations |
4th row | Judicial oversight bodies |
5th row | Civil society organisations |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | 5 | 13.2% |
Data protection authorities | 4 | 10.5% |
Independent expert bodies | 4 | 10.5% |
Civil society organisations | 3 | 7.9% |
Judicial oversight bodies | 3 | 7.9% |
(Missing) | 19 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 6 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 37.5% |
Missing | 22 |
Missing (%) | 57.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Data protection authorities | |
---|---|
Judicial oversight bodies | |
Independent expert bodies | |
Civil society organisations | |
Audit courts |
Unique
Unique | 3 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 18.8% |
Sample
1st row | Civil society organisations |
---|---|
2nd row | Data protection authorities |
3rd row | Data protection authorities |
4th row | Judicial oversight bodies |
5th row | Independent expert bodies |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Data protection authorities | 7 | 18.4% |
Judicial oversight bodies | 4 | 10.5% |
Independent expert bodies | 2 | 5.3% |
Civil society organisations | 1 | 2.6% |
Audit courts | 1 | 2.6% |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 22 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 6 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 46.2% |
Missing | 25 |
Missing (%) | 65.8% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Audit courts | |
---|---|
Independent expert bodies | |
Data protection authorities | |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | |
Judicial oversight bodies |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 7.7% |
Sample
1st row | Audit courts |
---|---|
2nd row | Independent expert bodies |
3rd row | Data protection authorities |
4th row | Audit courts |
5th row | Parliamentary oversight bodies |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Audit courts | 3 | 7.9% |
Independent expert bodies | 3 | 7.9% |
Data protection authorities | 2 | 5.3% |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | 2 | 5.3% |
Judicial oversight bodies | 2 | 5.3% |
Civil society organisations | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 25 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 27.3% |
Missing | 27 |
Missing (%) | 71.1% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Audit courts | |
---|---|
Parliamentary oversight bodies | |
Data protection authorities |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 9.1% |
Sample
1st row | Parliamentary oversight bodies |
---|---|
2nd row | Audit courts |
3rd row | Audit courts |
4th row | Data protection authorities |
5th row | Parliamentary oversight bodies |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Audit courts | 8 | 21.1% |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | 2 | 5.3% |
Data protection authorities | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 27 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 14.3% |
Missing | 17 |
Missing (%) | 44.7% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Judicial oversight bodies | |
---|---|
Civil society organisations | |
Independent expert bodies |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Independent expert bodies |
---|---|
2nd row | Civil society organisations |
3rd row | Civil society organisations |
4th row | Civil society organisations |
5th row | Independent expert bodies |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Judicial oversight bodies | 10 | |
Civil society organisations | 9 | |
Independent expert bodies | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 17 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 6 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 35.3% |
Missing | 21 |
Missing (%) | 55.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Data protection authorities | |
---|---|
Parliamentary oversight bodies | |
Judicial oversight bodies | |
Independent expert bodies | |
Civil society organisations |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 11.8% |
Sample
1st row | Data protection authorities |
---|---|
2nd row | Judicial oversight bodies |
3rd row | Judicial oversight bodies |
4th row | Data protection authorities |
5th row | Independent expert bodies |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Data protection authorities | 5 | 13.2% |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | 4 | 10.5% |
Judicial oversight bodies | 3 | 7.9% |
Independent expert bodies | 3 | 7.9% |
Civil society organisations | 1 | 2.6% |
Audit courts | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 21 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 6 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 37.5% |
Missing | 22 |
Missing (%) | 57.9% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | |
---|---|
Civil society organisations | |
Independent expert bodies | |
Data protection authorities | |
Audit courts |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 6.2% |
Sample
1st row | Civil society organisations |
---|---|
2nd row | Parliamentary oversight bodies |
3rd row | Independent expert bodies |
4th row | Civil society organisations |
5th row | Parliamentary oversight bodies |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | 4 | 10.5% |
Civil society organisations | 3 | 7.9% |
Independent expert bodies | 3 | 7.9% |
Data protection authorities | 3 | 7.9% |
Audit courts | 2 | 5.3% |
Judicial oversight bodies | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 22 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 33.3% |
Missing | 26 |
Missing (%) | 68.4% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Data protection authorities | |
---|---|
Parliamentary oversight bodies | |
Judicial oversight bodies | |
Civil society organisations |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Judicial oversight bodies |
---|---|
2nd row | Parliamentary oversight bodies |
3rd row | Data protection authorities |
4th row | Judicial oversight bodies |
5th row | Data protection authorities |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Data protection authorities | 5 | 13.2% |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | 3 | 7.9% |
Judicial oversight bodies | 2 | 5.3% |
Civil society organisations | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 26 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 45.5% |
Missing | 27 |
Missing (%) | 71.1% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Independent expert bodies | |
---|---|
Data protection authorities | |
Audit courts | |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | |
Civil society organisations |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 18.2% |
Sample
1st row | Parliamentary oversight bodies |
---|---|
2nd row | Data protection authorities |
3rd row | Data protection authorities |
4th row | Audit courts |
5th row | Data protection authorities |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Independent expert bodies | 4 | 10.5% |
Data protection authorities | 3 | 7.9% |
Audit courts | 2 | 5.3% |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | 1 | 2.6% |
Civil society organisations | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 27 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 36.4% |
Missing | 27 |
Missing (%) | 71.1% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Audit courts | |
---|---|
Parliamentary oversight bodies | |
Civil society organisations | |
Independent expert bodies |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 18.2% |
Sample
1st row | Audit courts |
---|---|
2nd row | Audit courts |
3rd row | Audit courts |
4th row | Parliamentary oversight bodies |
5th row | Audit courts |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Audit courts | 7 | 18.4% |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | 2 | 5.3% |
Civil society organisations | 1 | 2.6% |
Independent expert bodies | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 27 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 25.0% |
Missing | 18 |
Missing (%) | 47.4% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Judicial oversight bodies | |
---|---|
Parliamentary oversight bodies | |
Data protection authorities | |
Independent expert bodies | |
Civil society organisations | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 5.0% |
Sample
1st row | Data protection authorities |
---|---|
2nd row | Judicial oversight bodies |
3rd row | Judicial oversight bodies |
4th row | Judicial oversight bodies |
5th row | Independent expert bodies |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Judicial oversight bodies | 11 | |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | 4 | 10.5% |
Data protection authorities | 2 | 5.3% |
Independent expert bodies | 2 | 5.3% |
Civil society organisations | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 18 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 6 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 35.3% |
Missing | 21 |
Missing (%) | 55.3% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Judicial oversight bodies | |
---|---|
Data protection authorities | |
Independent expert bodies | |
Audit courts | |
Parliamentary oversight bodies |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 5.9% |
Sample
1st row | Judicial oversight bodies |
---|---|
2nd row | Parliamentary oversight bodies |
3rd row | Independent expert bodies |
4th row | Judicial oversight bodies |
5th row | Independent expert bodies |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Judicial oversight bodies | 4 | 10.5% |
Data protection authorities | 4 | 10.5% |
Independent expert bodies | 3 | 7.9% |
Audit courts | 3 | 7.9% |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | 2 | 5.3% |
Civil society organisations | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 21 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 33.3% |
Missing | 23 |
Missing (%) | 60.5% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Data protection authorities | |
---|---|
Parliamentary oversight bodies | |
Civil society organisations | |
Audit courts | |
Judicial oversight bodies |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 6.7% |
Sample
1st row | Civil society organisations |
---|---|
2nd row | Parliamentary oversight bodies |
3rd row | Data protection authorities |
4th row | Data protection authorities |
5th row | Audit courts |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Data protection authorities | 6 | 15.8% |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | 4 | 10.5% |
Civil society organisations | 2 | 5.3% |
Audit courts | 2 | 5.3% |
Judicial oversight bodies | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 23 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 5 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 45.5% |
Missing | 27 |
Missing (%) | 71.1% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | |
---|---|
Data protection authorities | |
Independent expert bodies | |
Judicial oversight bodies | |
Audit courts |
Unique
Unique | 2 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 18.2% |
Sample
1st row | Parliamentary oversight bodies |
---|---|
2nd row | Data protection authorities |
3rd row | Data protection authorities |
4th row | Independent expert bodies |
5th row | Data protection authorities |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | 3 | 7.9% |
Data protection authorities | 3 | 7.9% |
Independent expert bodies | 3 | 7.9% |
Judicial oversight bodies | 1 | 2.6% |
Audit courts | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 27 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 4 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 36.4% |
Missing | 27 |
Missing (%) | 71.1% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Independent expert bodies | |
---|---|
Audit courts | |
Civil society organisations | |
Parliamentary oversight bodies |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 9.1% |
Sample
1st row | Independent expert bodies |
---|---|
2nd row | Audit courts |
3rd row | Civil society organisations |
4th row | Parliamentary oversight bodies |
5th row | Audit courts |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Independent expert bodies | 4 | 10.5% |
Audit courts | 3 | 7.9% |
Civil society organisations | 3 | 7.9% |
Parliamentary oversight bodies | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 27 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 27.3% |
Missing | 27 |
Missing (%) | 71.1% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Civil society organisations | |
---|---|
Audit courts | |
Independent expert bodies |
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Audit courts |
---|---|
2nd row | Civil society organisations |
3rd row | Independent expert bodies |
4th row | Civil society organisations |
5th row | Civil society organisations |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Civil society organisations | 6 | 15.8% |
Audit courts | 3 | 7.9% |
Independent expert bodies | 2 | 5.3% |
(Missing) | 27 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 3 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 13.0% |
Missing | 15 |
Missing (%) | 39.5% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Man | |
---|---|
Woman | |
I prefer not to say | 1 |
Unique
Unique | 1 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 4.3% |
Sample
1st row | Man |
---|---|
2nd row | Man |
3rd row | Man |
4th row | Man |
5th row | Woman |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Man | 18 | |
Woman | 4 | 10.5% |
I prefer not to say | 1 | 2.6% |
(Missing) | 15 |
Pie chart
Distinct | 1 |
---|---|
Distinct (%) | 2.6% |
Missing | 0 |
Missing (%) | 0.0% |
Memory size | 432.0 B |
Civil Society Scrutiny |
---|
Unique
Unique | 0 ? |
---|---|
Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
1st row | Civil Society Scrutiny |
---|---|
2nd row | Civil Society Scrutiny |
3rd row | Civil Society Scrutiny |
4th row | Civil Society Scrutiny |
5th row | Civil Society Scrutiny |
Common Values
Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
Civil Society Scrutiny | 38 |
Pie chart
First rows
country | lastpage | CShr1 | CShr2 | CSexpertise1 | CSexpertise2 | CSexpertise3 | CSexpertise4 | CSfinance1 | CSfinance2[private_foundations] | CSfinance2[donations] | CSfinance2[national_public_funds] | CSfinance2[corporate_sponsorship] | CSfinance2[international_public_funds] | CSfinance2[other] | CSfinance2other | CSfinance3 | CSfinance4 | CSfoi1 | CSfoi2 | CSfoi3 | CSfoi4 | CSfoi5[not_aware] | CSfoi5[not_covered] | CSfoi5[too_expensive] | CSfoi5[too_time_consuming] | CSfoi5[afraid_of_data_destruction] | CSfoi5[afraid_of_discrimination] | CSfoi5[other] | CSfoi5[dont_know] | CSfoi5[prefer_not_to_say] | CSfoi5other | CSpreselection | CScampact1[1] | CScampact1[2] | CScampact1[3] | CScampact1[4] | CScampact1[5] | CScampact1[6] | CScampact1[7] | CScampact1[8] | CScampact2[media_contributions] | CScampact2[own_publications] | CScampact2[petitions_open_letters] | CScampact2[public_events] | CScampact2[collaborations] | CScampact2[demonstrations] | CScampact2[social_media] | CScampact2[advertising] | CScampact2[volunteer_activities] | CScampact2[providing_technical_tools] | CScampact2[support_for_eu_campaigns] | CScampact2[other] | CScampact2other | CScamptrans1 | CScamptrans2 | CScampimpact1[increased_awareness] | CScampimpact1[policies_reflect_demands] | CScampimpact1[created_media_attention] | CScampimpact1[achieved_goals] | CScampimpact2 | CSadvocact1[1] | CSadvocact1[2] | CSadvocact1[3] | CSadvocact1[4] | CSadvocact1[5] | CSadvocact1[6] | CSadvocact1[7] | CSadvocact1[8] | CSadvocact2[research] | CSadvocact2[consultations] | CSadvocact2[briefings] | CSadvocact2[expert_events] | CSadvocact2[participation_in_fora] | CSadvocact2[legal_opinions] | CSadvocact2[informal_encounters] | CSadvocact2[other] | CSadvocact2other | CSadvoctrans1 | CSadvoctrans2 | CSadvocimpact1[increased_awareness] | CSadvocimpact1[policies_reflect_recommendations] | CSadvocimpact1[more_informed_debates] | CSadvocimpact1[achieved_goals] | CSadvocimpact2 | CSlitigateact1[1] | CSlitigateact1[2] | CSlitigateact1[3] | CSlitigateact1[4] | CSlitigateact1[5] | CSlitigateact1[6] | CSlitigateact1[7] | CSlitigateact1[8] | CSlitigateact2[initiating_lawsuit] | CSlitigateact2[initiating_complaint] | CSlitigateact2[supporting_existing_legislation] | CSlitigateact2[other] | CSlitigateact2other | CSlitigatecost1 | CSlitigatecost2 | CSlitigatecost3 | CSlitigatetrans1 | CSlitigatetrans2 | CSlitigateimpact1[increased_awareness] | CSlitigateimpact1[changed_the_law] | CSlitigateimpact1[amendments_of_the_law] | CSlitigateimpact1[revealed_new_information] | CSlitigateimpact1[achieved_goals] | CSlitigateimpact2 | CSprotectops1[sectraining] | CSprotectops1[e2e] | CSprotectops2 | CSprotectops3[encrypted_email] | CSprotectops3[vpn] | CSprotectops3[tor] | CSprotectops3[e2e_chat] | CSprotectops3[encrypted_hardware] | CSprotectops3[2fa] | CSprotectops3[other] | CSprotectops3other | CSprotectops4 | CSprotectleg1 | CSprotectleg2 | CSprotectleg2no | CSprotectleg3[free_counsel] | CSprotectleg3[cost_insurance] | CSprotectleg3[other] | CSconstraintinter1 | CSconstraintinter2 | CSconstraintinter3 | CSconstraintinter4[police_search] | CSconstraintinter4[seizure] | CSconstraintinter4[extortion] | CSconstraintinter4[violent_threat] | CSconstraintinter4[inspection_during_travel] | CSconstraintinter4[detention] | CSconstraintinter4[surveillance_signalling] | CSconstraintinter4[online_harassment] | CSconstraintinter4[entry_on_deny_lists] | CSconstraintinter4[exclusion_from_events] | CSconstraintinter4[public_defamation] | CSconstraintinter5[unsolicited_information] | CSconstraintinter5[invitations] | CSconstraintinter5[other] | CSconstraintinter5other | CSconstraintinter6[gender] | CSconstraintinter6[ethnicity] | CSconstraintinter6[political] | CSconstraintinter6[sexual] | CSconstraintinter6[religious] | CSconstraintinter6[other] | CSconstraintinter6other | CSconstraintself1[avoid] | CSconstraintself1[cancelled_campaign] | CSconstraintself1[withdrew_litigation] | CSconstraintself1[leave_profession] | CSconstraintself1[other] | CSconstraintself1other | CSattitude1 | CSattitude2 | CSattitude3[rule_of_law] | CSattitude3[civil_liberties] | CSattitude3[effectiveness_of_intel] | CSattitude3[legitimacy_of_intel] | CSattitude3[trust_in_intel] | CSattitude3[critique_of_intel] | CSattitude3[prefer_not_to_say] | CSattitude4[1] | CSattitude4[2] | CSattitude4[3] | CSattitude4[4] | CSattitude4[5] | CSattitude4[6] | CSattitude5[1] | CSattitude5[2] | CSattitude5[3] | CSattitude5[4] | CSattitude5[5] | CSattitude5[6] | CSattitude6[1] | CSattitude6[2] | CSattitude6[3] | CSattitude6[4] | CSattitude6[5] | CSattitude6[6] | CSgender | surveytype | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | United Kingdom | 23.0 | Part-time (<50%) | 4.0 | 20.0 | Some knowledge | Some knowledge | Some knowledge | Little funding | Important | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | foundations. | Rather beneficial for fundraising | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | True | False | False | True | Public Campaigning | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Important | Important | Slightly important | Important | Not important at all | Not important at all | Not important at all | Not important at all | Not important at all | Not important at all | Important | Not important at all | NaN | Sometimes (50% of the time) | Often (75% of the time) | Agree to a great extent | Agree sligthly | Agree somewhat | Not agree at all | Greater interest in interoperability of EU JHA databases, in the ways in which travel surveillance and migration policy are promoting systems of generalised surveillance, concern about the possible use of underhand tactics to undermine migrant solidarity and NGOs at sea, concerns about AI and facial recognition are currently hot topics, like in the Reclaim your Face campaign. | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Important | Important | NaN | Very important | Very important | Very important | Very important | Very important | Very important | NaN | NaN | I don't know | Always | No | I assume I am always liable to be intercepted when working on sensitive matters; I do not have great technical know-how or the ability or time to train up on these issues, but I do follow the line when I am told something amounts to a minimum standard I should use. I feel that extreme openness in everything I do amounts to a form of defence, because it is all done as a form of public service, including when criticising malfunctions and/or irregularities and foul play. | I don't know | I don't know | I don't know | I prefer not to say | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | Intelligence agencies contradict democratic principles,<br>and their powers should be kept at a bare minimum | Effective intelligence oversight is a hopeless endeavour <br>and even a systematic reorganization is unlikely to ensure <br>misconduct is uncovered and prevented. | False | True | False | True | False | True | False | Independent expert bodies | Judicial oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Civil society organisations | Audit courts | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Independent expert bodies | Data protection authorities | Civil society organisations | Judicial oversight bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Audit courts | Data protection authorities | Judicial oversight bodies | Civil society organisations | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Independent expert bodies | Audit courts | Man | Civil Society Scrutiny |
1 | United Kingdom | 19.0 | Full-time | 1.0 | 9.0 | Advanced knowledge | Some knowledge | Some knowledge | Sufficient funding | Important | Important | No important at all | No important at all | Slightly important | NaN | NaN | trusts and foundations | No effect on fundraising | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | True | False | False | True | Policy Advocacy | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Primarily our work has been concerned with biometrics and facial recognition - developing understanding on public attitudes and legal regulation. | We have also done some engagement with intelligence agencies on ethical codes and frameworks. | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Somewhat important | Important | Very important | Not important at all | Not important at all | Not important at all | NaN | NaN | Rarely (25% of the time) | Often (75% of the time) | Agree somewhat | Agree somewhat | Agree somewhat | Agree somewhat | We were approached by someone high up in government national security to discuss ethical issues around certain surveillance techniques. | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Very important | No | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | Not important at all | Important | Important | Very important | NaN | NaN | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | Rarely (25% of the time) | No | I know that British law enables widespread surveillance including of CSOs. | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | NaN | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Civil Society Scrutiny |
2 | United Kingdom | 23.0 | Full-time | 4.0 | NaN | Advanced knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Some knowledge | Little funding | Important | No important at all | Slightly important | No important at all | Important | NaN | NaN | I managed to do intelligence-related work in the context of broader studies commissioned by the EU (European Parliament), but did most of my work without being paid, as part of my work with civil society. | I don't know | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | True | False | False | False | False | False | False | Policy Advocacy | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Submissions to EU (and to a lesser extent national/EU MSs) bodies, esp. the EP (LIBE Ctee) | Academic and semi-academic studies, reports, papers and blogs | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Important | Important | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | Important | Important | NaN | NaN | Always | Always | Agree to a great extent | Agree to a great extent | Agree to a great extent | Agree sligthly | One very recent example: In the autumn of last year (2020), Prof. Ian Brown and I (Douwe Korff) submitted two extensive papers on the inadequacy of UK data protection law, in particular in relation to access to data by the UK intelligence services, to EU bodies involved in assessing the adequacy of UK data protection law after Brexit. Our very critical comments were very clearly reflected (at times verbatim) in the EP LIBE Ctee draft resolution on the issue (to go to the EP plenary in May) and in the EDPB's opinion on UK adequacy (issued earlier this month [April] 2021). | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Very important | Yes | Important | Somewhat important | Slightly important | Important | Important | Important | NaN | NaN | Under the current conditions of communications <br>surveillance, technological solutions cannot offer <br>sufficient protection for the data I handle | I don't know | No | If the intelligence agencies want to, I am sure they can access my data and communications - both legally and illegally. I just shrug that off. | No | No | No | I prefer not to say | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | I don't know | No | Yes | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | Intelligence agencies are necessary and legitimate institutions <br>of democratic states, even though they may sometimes overstep <br>their legal mandates | Intelligence oversight lacks efficacy, hence a fundamental <br>reorganization of oversight capacity is needed for oversight practitioners <br>to reliably uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct | True | True | False | False | False | False | False | Civil society organisations | Judicial oversight bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | NaN | NaN | NaN | Civil society organisations | Judicial oversight bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | NaN | NaN | NaN | Judicial oversight bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Man | Civil Society Scrutiny |
3 | United Kingdom | 23.0 | Freelance | 0.0 | NaN | Advanced knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Little funding | Very important | Very important | No important at all | Somewhat important | No important at all | No important at all | NaN | Have only obtained funding to work on cybersecurity policy but not intelligence. | Clearly beneficial for fundraising | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | True | False | False | True | Policy Advocacy | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Lobbying parliament for and during legal reforms, including drafting amendments | Engagement with oversight bodies throug workshops | Engagement with intelligence agencies in meetings and seminars | Responding to consultations, including codes of practice | Writing blogs | Organising public events with agencies and tech businesses | Organising closed discussions between agencies and civil society groups | NaN | Important | Very important | Very important | Important | Slightly important | Not important at all | Slightly important | NaN | NaN | Sometimes (50% of the time) | Rarely (25% of the time) | Agree somewhat | Agree sligthly | Agree to a great extent | Agree sligthly | Many references to our work and personal feedback. | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Important | Very important | No | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | Not important at all | Very important | Very important | Very important | NaN | NaN | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | Sometimes (50% of the time) | No | CSOs are not generally covered by protected communicaitons, like journalists or lawyers, or even trade unionists. Most of the work of local CSOs is harmless enough not to require surveillance. International work is different. For example, advocacy work on international trade issues is a legitimate target for US security services tasked by the US Trade Representative (Knowledge Ecology International case). But in most cases the main surveillance risk to my activities comes from governments of less democratic countries where project partners are based. | Yes | No | NaN | No | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | Yes | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | Intelligence agencies contradict democratic principles,<br>and their powers should be kept at a bare minimum | Intelligence oversight lacks efficacy, hence a fundamental <br>reorganization of oversight capacity is needed for oversight practitioners <br>to reliably uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct | False | True | False | True | False | True | False | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Judicial oversight bodies | Civil society organisations | Data protection authorities | NaN | NaN | Civil society organisations | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Judicial oversight bodies | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Man | Civil Society Scrutiny |
4 | United Kingdom | 23.0 | Full-time | 3.0 | 12.0 | Advanced knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Little funding | Very important | No important at all | Very important | Important | Very important | I don't know | NaN | Private foundations | I don't know | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | True | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | Policy Advocacy | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Oversight engagement with civil society report | about:intel editorial team | artificial intelligence and national security research | discrimination and surveillance report | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Very important | Important | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | Important | Important | I don't know | NaN | Often (75% of the time) | Often (75% of the time) | Agree somewhat | Agree sligthly | Agree somewhat | Not agree at all | Successful court victories. Encouragement from current and former national security officials. | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Very important | Yes | Not important at all | Important | Not important at all | Very important | Very important | Very important | NaN | NaN | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | Always | Yes | NaN | No | No | NaN | Yes, I have evidence | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | NaN | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | NaN | NaN | Intelligence agencies are necessary and legitimate institutions <br>of democratic states, even though they may sometimes overstep <br>their legal mandates | Intelligence oversight lacks efficacy, hence a fundamental <br>reorganization of oversight capacity is needed for oversight practitioners <br>to reliably uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct | True | True | False | True | False | False | False | Civil society organisations | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Judicial oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Independent expert bodies | Audit courts | Civil society organisations | Judicial oversight bodies | Independent expert bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Audit courts | Judicial oversight bodies | Independent expert bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Audit courts | Civil society organisations | Man | Civil Society Scrutiny |
5 | United Kingdom | 3.0 | Full-time | 2.0 | 12.0 | Expert knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Some knowledge | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Civil Society Scrutiny |
6 | United Kingdom | 23.0 | Full-time | 1.0 | 10.0 | Advanced knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Some knowledge | Sufficient funding | Very important | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | NaN | Core funding from foundation | No effect on fundraising | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | True | False | False | True | Policy Advocacy | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Writing policy reports | Research on biometrics regulation | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Somewhat important | Very important | Very important | Important | Not important at all | Important | Not important at all | NaN | Rarely (25% of the time) | Often (75% of the time) | Agree sligthly | Agree sligthly | Agree sligthly | Agree sligthly | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Important | Very important | No | Not important at all | Slightly important | Not important at all | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | Important | NaN | NaN | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | Rarely (25% of the time) | Yes | NaN | No | No | NaN | No | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | Intelligence agencies are necessary and legitimate institutions <br>of democratic states, even though they may sometimes overstep <br>their legal mandates | Intelligence oversight lacks efficacy, hence a fundamental <br>reorganization of oversight capacity is needed for oversight practitioners <br>to reliably uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct | True | True | False | False | False | True | False | Independent expert bodies | Judicial oversight bodies | Civil society organisations | NaN | NaN | NaN | Independent expert bodies | Data protection authorities | Civil society organisations | NaN | NaN | NaN | Independent expert bodies | Judicial oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | NaN | NaN | NaN | Woman | Civil Society Scrutiny |
7 | United Kingdom | 23.0 | Full-time | 2.0 | 5.0 | Advanced knowledge | Some knowledge | Some knowledge | Little funding | Very important | Very important | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | I don't know | NaN | Private Foundations | No effect on fundraising | Yes | 5.0 | I don't know | Not helpful at all | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | Strategic Litigation | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | 10 Human Rights Organisations v. U.K. (ECHR) | Bulk Personal Datasets & Bulk Communications Data (UK) | PRIVACY INTERNATIONAL and Others against the United Kingdom (ECHR, Application no. 46259/16) | Privacy International v. U.K. (CJEU, C-623/17) | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Very important | Very important | I don't know | NaN | I don't know | Often (75% of the time) | I don't know | Often (75% of the time) | Often (75% of the time) | Agree completely | Agree completely | Agree completely | Agree completely | Agree to a great extent | NaN | Very important | Very important | Yes | Important | Important | Somewhat important | Important | Important | Somewhat important | I don't know | NaN | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | I prefer not to say | I don't know | NaN | Yes | I don't know | I don't know | I don't know | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | I don't know | I don't know | No | I don't know | I don't know | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | I don't know | NaN | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | True | True | False | False | False | True | False | Civil society organisations | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Independent expert bodies | Judicial oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Audit courts | Judicial oversight bodies | Independent expert bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | NaN | NaN | Judicial oversight bodies | Independent expert bodies | Data protection authorities | NaN | NaN | NaN | Man | Civil Society Scrutiny |
8 | United Kingdom | 23.0 | Full-time | 2.0 | 0.5 | Basic knowledge | Some knowledge | No knowledge | Some funding | Slightly important | Important | Somewhat important | Slightly important | Important | NaN | NaN | Donations by governments | Rather beneficial for fundraising | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | True | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | Policy Advocacy | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Research | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | Slightly important | Slightly important | NaN | NaN | Rarely (25% of the time) | Sometimes (50% of the time) | Agree sligthly | Agree sligthly | Agree sligthly | Agree sligthly | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Somewhat important | Very important | No | Slightly important | Slightly important | Slightly important | Important | Slightly important | Important | NaN | NaN | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | Sometimes (50% of the time) | Yes | NaN | I don't know | I don't know | NaN | I prefer not to say | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | Intelligence agencies are necessary and legitimate institutions <br>of democratic states, even though they may sometimes overstep <br>their legal mandates | Intelligence oversight is mostly effective, however its <br>institutional design needs reform for oversight practitioners to reliably <br>uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct | True | True | False | False | False | True | False | Judicial oversight bodies | Civil society organisations | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Independent expert bodies | Audit courts | Data protection authorities | Civil society organisations | Independent expert bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Judicial oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Audit courts | Judicial oversight bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Audit courts | Data protection authorities | Civil society organisations | Independent expert bodies | Man | Civil Society Scrutiny |
9 | United Kingdom | 5.0 | Part-time (>50%) | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Civil Society Scrutiny |
10 | United Kingdom | 11.0 | Full-time | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | Policy Advocacy | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Civil Society Scrutiny |
11 | United Kingdom | 23.0 | Full-time | 2.0 | 5.0 | Some knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Some knowledge | Some funding | Important | Slightly important | Important | No important at all | Important | NaN | NaN | Trusts and foundations | Rather beneficial for fundraising | Yes | 15.0 | No, usually longer than 30 days | Helpful in parts | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | Public Campaigning | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Very important | Very important | Somewhat important | Not important at all | Important | Important | Not important at all | Somewhat important | Not important at all | Somewhat important | NaN | NaN | Rarely (25% of the time) | Sometimes (50% of the time) | Agree to a great extent | Agree to a great extent | Agree somewhat | Agree to a great extent | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Very important | Yes | Slightly important | Very important | Slightly important | Very important | Slightly important | Very important | NaN | NaN | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | Rarely (25% of the time) | No | Due to the secrecy of intelligence work and the catch-all exemptions for 'national security', there will never be meaningful legal protection from surveillance in the UK | No | No | NaN | Yes, I suspect | No | NaN | No | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | No | No | No | No | NaN | No | No | Yes | No | No | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | Intelligence agencies contradict democratic principles,<br>and their powers should be kept at a bare minimum | Effective intelligence oversight is a hopeless endeavour <br>and even a systematic reorganization is unlikely to ensure <br>misconduct is uncovered and prevented. | True | True | False | False | False | True | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Man | Civil Society Scrutiny |
12 | United Kingdom | 23.0 | Freelance | 5.0 | 20.0 | Some knowledge | Some knowledge | Some knowledge | Some funding | Very important | Slightly important | Important | Slightly important | Slightly important | I don't know | NaN | Private endowment | Rather constraining for fundraising | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | True | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | Policy Advocacy | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Research reports on regulation of algorithmic tools by police/intelligence agencies | contributing to research on algorithmic bias | internal governance and oversight of development and deployment of algorithmic surveillance tools | building a data ethics framework for law enforcement | encouraging greater transparency and independent oversight as a way of demonstrating legitimacy | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Somewhat important | Very important | Very important | Important | I don't know | Important | I don't know | NaN | Rarely (25% of the time) | Rarely (25% of the time) | Agree completely | Agree completely | Agree completely | Agree completely | independent reports are now frequently cited in official reports and policy papers. | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Slightly important | Slightly important | NaN | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | NaN | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | NaN | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | No | NaN | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | I don't know | I don't know | I don't know | I don't know | I don't know | NaN | Intelligence agencies are necessary and legitimate institutions <br>of democratic states, even though they may sometimes overstep <br>their legal mandates | Intelligence oversight is mostly effective, however its <br>institutional design needs reform for oversight practitioners to reliably <br>uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct | True | False | True | True | False | False | False | Independent expert bodies | Judicial oversight bodies | Civil society organisations | Data protection authorities | Parliamentary oversight bodies | NaN | Civil society organisations | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Judicial oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Parliamentary oversight bodies | NaN | NaN | NaN | Man | Civil Society Scrutiny |
13 | Germany | 16.0 | Part-time (>50%) | 4.0 | 5.0 | Advanced knowledge | Expert knowledge | Some knowledge | Sufficient funding | No important at all | Very important | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | NaN | Wir sind eine ausschließlich spendenfinanziert Organisation. Wir nehmen keine öffentlichen Gelder oder Unternehmenssponsoring. | Rather constraining for fundraising | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | True | False | False | True | False | False | True | Policy Advocacy | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Lobbygespräche | Briefings für pol. Entscheidungsträger_innen | Öffentliche Stellungnahmen | Übergabe von Petitionen verbunden mit Gesprächen | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Important | Important | Slightly important | Important | Not important at all | Slightly important | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | Obwohl es hier um Lobbyarbeit geht: Kamagnenelemente helfen, durch öfftl. Druck Lobbyarbeit zu verstärken und z.B. zu Gesprächen eingeladen zu werden. Leider ist Mobilisierung zu ND-Themen schwierig. | Sometimes (50% of the time) | Often (75% of the time) | Agree somewhat | Agree sligthly | Agree somewhat | Not agree at all | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Civil Society Scrutiny |
14 | Germany | 23.0 | Full-time | 1.0 | 4.0 | Basic knowledge | Some knowledge | Expert knowledge | No funding | Very important | No important at all | Important | Slightly important | Slightly important | I don't know | NaN | Private Stiftungen | Clearly beneficial for fundraising | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | True | False | False | Policy Advocacy | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Angewandte Forschung | Gespräche mit Entscheider:innen | Medienarbeit | Sachverständigenarbeit | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Very important | Very important | Somewhat important | Not important at all | I prefer not to say | Somewhat important | I prefer not to say | NaN | Sometimes (50% of the time) | Often (75% of the time) | Agree completely | Agree somewhat | Agree to a great extent | Agree sligthly | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Important | Very important | No | Slightly important | Slightly important | I prefer not to say | Very important | Somewhat important | Very important | Important | Updates | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | Sometimes (50% of the time) | I don't know | NaN | I don't know | I don't know | I don't know | I prefer not to say | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | I don't know | No | No | No | I don't know | I don't know | No | No | I don't know | I don't know | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | I don't know | I don't know | I don't know | I don't know | I don't know | NaN | Intelligence agencies are necessary and legitimate institutions <br>of democratic states, even though they may sometimes overstep <br>their legal mandates | Intelligence oversight lacks efficacy, hence a fundamental <br>reorganization of oversight capacity is needed for oversight practitioners <br>to reliably uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct | True | True | False | False | False | True | False | Civil society organisations | Independent expert bodies | Data protection authorities | Audit courts | NaN | NaN | Judicial oversight bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Man | Civil Society Scrutiny |
15 | Germany | 17.0 | Full-time | 2.0 | 7.0 | Some knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Expert knowledge | No funding | No important at all | Important | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | NaN | NaN | Clearly beneficial for fundraising | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | True | False | Policy Advocacy | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Important | Important | Important | Very important | Important | Very important | Important | NaN | NaN | Sometimes (50% of the time) | Sometimes (50% of the time) | Agree completely | Not agree at all | Agree completely | Agree sligthly | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Very important | Yes | Very important | Very important | Very important | Very important | Very important | Very important | I prefer not to say | NaN | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Civil Society Scrutiny |
16 | Germany | 23.0 | Full-time | 0.5 | 40.0 | Some knowledge | Expert knowledge | Basic knowledge | Little funding | Very important | Important | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | NaN | NaN | Rather beneficial for fundraising | Yes | 5.0 | Yes, within 30 days | Helpful in parts | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | Strategic Litigation | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Important | Important | Important | NaN | NaN | Never or rarely | Always or very often | Not risky at all | Rarely (25% of the time) | Often (75% of the time) | Agree somewhat | Agree somewhat | Agree sligthly | Agree sligthly | Agree sligthly | NaN | Very important | Very important | Yes | Important | Somewhat important | Slightly important | Somewhat important | Slightly important | NaN | NaN | NaN | Under the current conditions of communications <br>surveillance, technological solutions cannot offer <br>sufficient protection for the data I handle | Always | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | Yes | Yes, I suspect | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | Yes | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | Intelligence agencies are incompatible with democratic <br>values and should be abolished | Effective intelligence oversight is a hopeless endeavour <br>and even a systematic reorganization is unlikely to ensure <br>misconduct is uncovered and prevented. | False | False | False | False | False | False | True | Civil society organisations | Judicial oversight bodies | Independent expert bodies | Data protection authorities | Audit courts | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Civil society organisations | Independent expert bodies | Judicial oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Audit courts | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Judicial oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Audit courts | Independent expert bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Civil society organisations | Man | Civil Society Scrutiny |
17 | Germany | 3.0 | Part-time (>50%) | 3.0 | 10.0 | Advanced knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Some knowledge | Some funding | No important at all | No important at all | Important | NaN | Important | No important at all | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Civil Society Scrutiny |
18 | Germany | 23.0 | Full-time | 0.5 | 10.0 | Expert knowledge | Expert knowledge | Some knowledge | Some funding | Very important | Very important | Slightly important | Slightly important | Slightly important | Somewhat important | NaN | NaN | NaN | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | True | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | Strategic Litigation | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Reporter ohne Grenzen ./. BND | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Important | Important | NaN | NaN | Never or rarely | NaN | Not risky at all | Always | NaN | Agree completely | Agree to a great extent | Agree to a great extent | Agree completely | Agree completely | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Never | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | NaN | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | Intelligence agencies contradict democratic principles,<br>and their powers should be kept at a bare minimum | Effective intelligence oversight is a hopeless endeavour <br>and even a systematic reorganization is unlikely to ensure <br>misconduct is uncovered and prevented. | True | True | False | False | True | False | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Man | Civil Society Scrutiny |
19 | Germany | 23.0 | Full-time | 3.0 | 8.0 | Some knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Basic knowledge | Sufficient funding | No important at all | Very important | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | NaN | Spenden | Rather beneficial for fundraising | Yes | 5.0 | No, usually longer than 30 days | Not helpful at all | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | Strategic Litigation | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Beschwerdeführende Organisation im erfolgreich abgeschlossenen BVErfG-Verfahren gegen das BND-Gesetz | Beschwerdeführende Organisation im erfolgreich abgeschlossenen Bundesverwaltungsgerichtsverfahren gegen die Veras-Datenbank | Beschwerdeführende Organisation im laufenden EGMR-Verfahren gegen die BND-Überwachung der Inland-Inland-Kommunikatin | Amicus Curiae in laufendem türkischem Strafverfahren gegen Inlandsgeheimdienatüberwachung | Initiierung einer erfolgreich abgeschlossenen US-Zivilklage gegen syrischen Geheimdienst bzw. dessen Überwachung und gezielte Tötung ausländischer Journalist*innen | Strafanzeige in Deutschland gegen Vertreter des saudi-arabischen Geheimdiensts wegen gezielter Überwachung von Journalist*innen | NaN | NaN | Very important | Very important | Somewhat important | NaN | NaN | Never or rarely | Often (75% of the time) | Not risky at all | Often (75% of the time) | Often (75% of the time) | Agree somewhat | Agree somewhat | Agree to a great extent | Agree completely | Agree somewhat | In Folge der BVerfG-Klage gegen BND-Gesetz wurde neues BND-Gesetz verabschiedet.\nIn Folge der Bundesverwaltungagerichtklage gegen die Veras-Datenbank wurde diese Datenbank abgestellt.\nIm Rahmen der Zivilklage in den USA gegen syrischen Geheimdienst wurde der Geheimdienst zu einer Entschädigungszahlung verurteilt, die allerdings (so lange das Assad-Regime herrscht) wohl nicht gezahlt werden wird. | Very important | Very important | Yes | Very important | Very important | Somewhat important | Very important | Important | Very important | NaN | NaN | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | Often (75% of the time) | I don't know | NaN | Yes | Yes | NaN | Yes, I have evidence | No | NaN | No | No | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | Yes | No | Yes | I don't know | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | NaN | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | No | No | No | I don't know | NaN | NaN | Intelligence agencies are necessary and legitimate institutions <br>of democratic states, even though they may sometimes overstep <br>their legal mandates | Intelligence oversight lacks efficacy, hence a fundamental <br>reorganization of oversight capacity is needed for oversight practitioners <br>to reliably uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct | True | False | False | True | True | False | False | Civil society organisations | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Judicial oversight bodies | Independent expert bodies | Audit courts | Judicial oversight bodies | Civil society organisations | Independent expert bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Audit courts | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Independent expert bodies | Judicial oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Audit courts | Civil society organisations | Man | Civil Society Scrutiny |
20 | Germany | 23.0 | Part-time (>50%) | 3.0 | 5.0 | Advanced knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Some knowledge | Sufficient funding | No important at all | Very important | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | NaN | Wir nehmen (mit seltenen, hier nicht relevanten Ausnahmen) ausschließlich Spenden privater Personen. | Rather constraining for fundraising | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | True | False | False | True | Policy Advocacy | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Lobby-Gespräche | Briefings und Stellungnahmen | Übergabe von Petitionen | Organisation von lobbyrelevanten Veranstaltungen | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Important | Important | Slightly important | Important | Not important at all | Slightly important | Slightly important | NaN | NaN | Often (75% of the time) | Rarely (25% of the time) | Agree to a great extent | Not agree at all | Agree somewhat | Agree sligthly | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Very important | No | Slightly important | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | Important | I prefer not to say | Somewhat important | NaN | NaN | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | Sometimes (50% of the time) | No | Insb. meine internationale Kommunikation mit ausländischen Kolleg_innen kann nach derzeitiger Rechtslage überwacht werden. Gleichzeitig ist meine Orgsanisation technisch nicht auf dem Stand, dass wir diese Kommunikation schützen könnten. | I don't know | I don't know | NaN | Yes, I have evidence | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | Yes | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | Wir haben die Arbeit an Nachrichtendienst-Themen reduziert, da sie bei der Politik im Wesentlichen "auf taube Ohren" zu stoßen scheint und es schwierig ist, am Ball zu bleiben, wenn man scheinbar keinen Unterschied macht (außer durch Klageführung). Auch Mobilisierung und Fundraising zu dem Themenbereich ist schwierig. Themenbereich zudem rechtlich enorm komplex, schwierig für NGOs, die große Fülle an auch anderen Themen bearbeiten müssen. | I prefer not to say | Intelligence oversight lacks efficacy, hence a fundamental <br>reorganization of oversight capacity is needed for oversight practitioners <br>to reliably uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct | True | True | False | False | False | True | False | Civil society organisations | Data protection authorities | Independent expert bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Judicial oversight bodies | NaN | Judicial oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Audit courts | Civil society organisations | Independent expert bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Judicial oversight bodies | Audit courts | Data protection authorities | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Independent expert bodies | Civil society organisations | Woman | Civil Society Scrutiny |
21 | Germany | 3.0 | Part-time (>50%) | 1.0 | 10.0 | Basic knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Basic knowledge | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Civil Society Scrutiny |
22 | Germany | 23.0 | Part-time (>50%) | 3.0 | 6.0 | Expert knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Some knowledge | Little funding | No important at all | Very important | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | NaN | Spenden | I don't know | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | True | False | Public Campaigning | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Somewhat important | Important | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | Slightly important | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | I prefer not to say | Slightly important | I prefer not to say | Somewhat important | NaN | NaN | Rarely (25% of the time) | Rarely (25% of the time) | Agree somewhat | Agree sligthly | Agree to a great extent | Agree sligthly | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Very important | Yes | Important | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | Important | Somewhat important | NaN | NaN | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | Sometimes (50% of the time) | No | NaN | Yes | No | I prefer not to say | Yes, I suspect | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | I prefer not to say | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | No | No | I don't know | No | No | NaN | NaN | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | Intelligence agencies are incompatible with democratic <br>values and should be abolished | Effective intelligence oversight is a hopeless endeavour <br>and even a systematic reorganization is unlikely to ensure <br>misconduct is uncovered and prevented. | True | True | False | False | False | True | False | Civil society organisations | Independent expert bodies | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Judicial oversight bodies | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Civil society organisations | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Man | Civil Society Scrutiny |
23 | Germany | 23.0 | Full-time | 1.0 | 10.0 | Expert knowledge | Expert knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Sufficient funding | Somewhat important | Very important | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | I don't know | NaN | Spenden - Garantieren Unabhängigkeit | No effect on fundraising | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | True | False | False | True | Policy Advocacy | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Lobbyarbeit - Gespräch mit Entscheidungsträgern; Versuch, Gesetzgebung zu beeinflußen | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Somewhat important | Very important | Very important | Important | Important | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | NaN | NaN | Often (75% of the time) | Often (75% of the time) | Agree to a great extent | Agree sligthly | Agree sligthly | Agree sligthly | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Important | Very important | Yes | Very important | Very important | Very important | Very important | Very important | Very important | Very important | Passwortmanager | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | Often (75% of the time) | No | Keine ausreichende Kontrolle der Dienste | I don't know | I don't know | NaN | Yes, I suspect | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | I don't know | No | I don't know | No | No | No | I don't know | I don't know | I don't know | I don't know | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | I prefer not to say | Intelligence oversight lacks efficacy, hence a fundamental <br>reorganization of oversight capacity is needed for oversight practitioners <br>to reliably uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct | True | False | True | True | False | False | False | Independent expert bodies | Data protection authorities | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Judicial oversight bodies | NaN | NaN | Judicial oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Judicial oversight bodies | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | I prefer not to say | Civil Society Scrutiny |
24 | Germany | 23.0 | Part-time (>50%) | 2.0 | 3.0 | Expert knowledge | Some knowledge | Some knowledge | Sufficient funding | Very important | Very important | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | Important | Co-Finanzierung von Klagen durch Partnerorganisationen | Private Stiftungen | Clearly beneficial for fundraising | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | True | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | Strategic Litigation | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Verfassungsbeschwerde gegen BND-Gesetz | Verfassungsbeschwerde gegen das bayerische Verfassungsschutzgesetz | Verfassungsbeschwerde gegen das Hamburgische Verfassungsschutzgesetz | Auskunftsklage gegen Hamburgischen Verfassungsschutz | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | I prefer not to say | Slightly important | I prefer not to say | NaN | Never or rarely | Never or rarely | Not risky at all | Sometimes (50% of the time) | Sometimes (50% of the time) | Agree somewhat | Agree to a great extent | Agree completely | Agree to a great extent | Agree to a great extent | Neues Gesetz wurde erlassen | Important | Very important | Yes | Very important | Very important | Slightly important | Very important | Very important | Important | Very important | Eigene Server-Infrastruktur | I have full confidence that the right tools <br>will protect my communication from surveillance | Rarely (25% of the time) | Yes | NaN | No | Yes | No | No | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | I prefer not to say | Intelligence oversight lacks efficacy, hence a fundamental <br>reorganization of oversight capacity is needed for oversight practitioners <br>to reliably uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct | True | True | False | False | False | True | False | Civil society organisations | Independent expert bodies | Judicial oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Audit courts | Judicial oversight bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Civil society organisations | Independent expert bodies | Audit courts | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Civil society organisations | Judicial oversight bodies | Independent expert bodies | Audit courts | Man | Civil Society Scrutiny |
25 | Germany | 5.0 | Full-time | 3.0 | 15.0 | Advanced knowledge | Expert knowledge | Advanced knowledge | I prefer not to say | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | NaN | NaN | I prefer not to say | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | True | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Civil Society Scrutiny |
26 | Germany | 17.0 | Part-time (>50%) | 4.0 | 4.0 | Advanced knowledge | Some knowledge | Basic knowledge | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | NaN | NaN | I prefer not to say | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | True | False | False | False | Policy Advocacy | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Verfassen von Stellungnahmen | Pressearbeit (PM, Statements) | Sachverständigenanhörungen | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Very important | Very important | Very important | Very important | Somewhat important | Important | NaN | NaN | Rarely (25% of the time) | Rarely (25% of the time) | Agree somewhat | Agree sligthly | Agree somewhat | Agree sligthly | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Important | Very important | I don't know | NaN | Very important | I don't know | NaN | NaN | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Civil Society Scrutiny |
27 | Germany | 23.0 | Full-time | 4.0 | 26.0 | Some knowledge | Some knowledge | Basic knowledge | I prefer not to say | Somewhat important | Very important | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | NaN | Spenden | No effect on fundraising | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | True | False | False | True | Public Campaigning | Terrorfilter (TERREG) | NetzDG | E-Evidence Verordnung | Reclaim your face | Vorratsdatenspeicherung | NOPNR - Fluggastdatenspeicherung | NaN | NaN | Very important | Very important | Important | Important | Somewhat important | Important | Very important | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | Slightly important | Important | NaN | NaN | Often (75% of the time) | Often (75% of the time) | Agree to a great extent | Agree sligthly | Agree to a great extent | Not agree at all | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Important | Very important | Yes | Very important | Important | Somewhat important | Very important | Very important | Very important | NaN | NaN | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | Often (75% of the time) | No | NaN | No | No | I don't know | I prefer not to say | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | Intelligence agencies are incompatible with democratic <br>values and should be abolished | Effective intelligence oversight is a hopeless endeavour <br>and even a systematic reorganization is unlikely to ensure <br>misconduct is uncovered and prevented. | True | True | False | False | False | True | False | Independent expert bodies | Judicial oversight bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Civil society organisations | Audit courts | Judicial oversight bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Independent expert bodies | Data protection authorities | Civil society organisations | Audit courts | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Judicial oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Independent expert bodies | Civil society organisations | Audit courts | Woman | Civil Society Scrutiny |
28 | Germany | 23.0 | Full-time | 1.0 | 3.0 | Basic knowledge | Basic knowledge | Basic knowledge | No funding | Important | Important | Somewhat important | Slightly important | Slightly important | Very important | Eigene ehrenamtliche Arbeit | Eigene ehrenamtliche Arbeit | No effect on fundraising | Yes | 20.0 | No, usually longer than 30 days | Helpful in parts | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | Strategic Litigation | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | https://fragdenstaat.de/blog/tag/bnd/ | https://fragdenstaat.de/blog/tag/verfassungsschutz/ | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Important | Important | I prefer not to say | NaN | NaN | Sometimes (50% of the time) | Sometimes (50% of the time) | Somewaht risky | Rarely (25% of the time) | Sometimes (50% of the time) | Agree completely | Agree to a great extent | Agree sligthly | Agree sligthly | Agree sligthly | https://fragdenstaat.de/blog/2019/05/02/klage-erfolgreich-berliner-verfassungsschutz-muss-auskunft-geben/ | Important | Very important | I don't know | Very important | Very important | Somewhat important | Very important | Very important | Very important | NaN | NaN | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | Always | No | Auskunftsrechte nicht weit genug (z. B. bei BfV) | I don't know | I don't know | I don't know | Yes, I suspect | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | Yes | No | No | Yes | NaN | NaN | Intelligence agencies are incompatible with democratic <br>values and should be abolished | Effective intelligence oversight is a hopeless endeavour <br>and even a systematic reorganization is unlikely to ensure <br>misconduct is uncovered and prevented. | True | True | False | False | False | True | False | Civil society organisations | Independent expert bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Judicial oversight bodies | Audit courts | Judicial oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Audit courts | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Independent expert bodies | Civil society organisations | Data protection authorities | Judicial oversight bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Independent expert bodies | Audit courts | Civil society organisations | Man | Civil Society Scrutiny |
29 | Germany | 23.0 | Freelance | 5.0 | 6.0 | Advanced knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Some knowledge | Sufficient funding | No important at all | Very important | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | Important | Mitgliedsbeiträge von Vereinsmitgliedern (--> Damit kann man konstanter planen als mit Spenden, gerade was langfristige Litigation-Projekte angeht ist das wichtig) | Spenden- und Mitgliedsbeiträge allgemein für die Organisation (nicht speziell für ND-Arbeit, dafür wird wenig bis gar nicht zweckgebunden gespendet) | No effect on fundraising | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | True | False | False | False | False | True | False | False | True | Strategic Litigation | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | VerAS-Urteil Bundesverwaltungsgericht Leipzig | Verfassungsbeschwerde gegen Teil-Niederlage bei VerAS-Urteil | EGMR-Beschwerde gegen Niederlage bei VB zu Teil-Niederlage bei VerAS-Urteil | VB gegen BND-Gesetz in Karlsruhe | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Slightly important | Slightly important | Very important | Finanzierung sicherstellen und Netzwerk aktivieren, um passende Beschwerdeführer:innen zu finden. | Never or rarely | Sometimes (50% of the time) | Somewaht risky | Often (75% of the time) | Rarely (25% of the time) | Agree completely | Agree completely | Agree completely | Agree somewhat | Agree somewhat | Neues BND-Gesetz nach VB-Erfolg in Karlsruhe 2020 (Schaffung Kontrollgremium usw.)\n\nAbschaltung VerAS-Datenbank durch re:publica-Aktion "Bitte Nicht Durchleuchten" nach Leipzig-Urteil: https://netzpolitik.org/2018/bitte-nicht-durchleuchten-bnd-stoppt-illegale-speicherung-von-metadaten-in-datei-veras/ \n\n | Very important | Very important | Yes | Very important | Slightly important | Very important | Very important | Very important | Very important | NaN | NaN | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | Sometimes (50% of the time) | No | Besonders Schrankenregelungen wie z.B. beim publizistischen Zeugnisverweigerungsrecht (§160a StPO usw.) gibt es für NGOs in Deutschland nicht. Außerdem: Schutzrechte greifen für Journalist:innen und Anwält:innen, aber nicht für Whistleblower (Steigbügelhalter-Theorie), die im ND-Bereich sehr wichtig, weil über offizielle Wege kaum bis keine Infos nach außen dringen.\nAußerdem großes Problem: Auskunftsrechte existieren (wenn überhaupt) nur auf dem Papier, d.h. es kann i.d.R. kein Rechtsweg beschritten werden, weil die Betroffenen nie erfahren, über Überwachung stattgefunden hat.\nZuletzt: Trend bei Kontrolle hin zu außerparlamentarischen Stellvertreter-Kontrollorganen, statt echte Transparenz über ND-Tätigkeit. Ebenfalls schwierig für Rechtsschutz. | No | No | No | Yes, I suspect | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | I prefer not to say | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | Yes | Aufgabe von Projekten weniger aus "Angst", als aufgrund von Kosten/Nutzen-Rechnung für Organisationen: Arbeitet kostet viel Geld, dauert lange (wenig passiert), wenig Interesse in der Öffentlichkeit und geringe Erfolgsaussichten. Das macht es für viele Organisationen unattraktiv, da zu investieren. | Intelligence agencies contradict democratic principles,<br>and their powers should be kept at a bare minimum | Intelligence oversight lacks efficacy, hence a fundamental <br>reorganization of oversight capacity is needed for oversight practitioners <br>to reliably uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct | True | True | False | False | False | False | False | Civil society organisations | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Judicial oversight bodies | Independent expert bodies | Audit courts | Judicial oversight bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Civil society organisations | Data protection authorities | Audit courts | Independent expert bodies | Judicial oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Audit courts | Civil society organisations | Independent expert bodies | Man | Civil Society Scrutiny |
30 | Germany | 23.0 | Full-time | 2.0 | 2.0 | Basic knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Basic knowledge | Some funding | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | Very important | Mitgliedsbeiträge | Mitgliedsbeiträge | I don't know | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | True | False | False | True | Strategic Litigation | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Verfassungsbeschwerde BND-G | Verfassungsbeschwerde Trojaner-Einsatz durch Verfassungsschutz und Predicitive-Policing-Befugnisse der Polizei in Hamburg | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | Very important | NaN | NaN | Rarely (25% of the time) | Never or rarely | I don't know | Sometimes (50% of the time) | Never | Agree to a great extent | Agree somewhat | Agree sligthly | Not agree at all | Agree somewhat | NaN | Very important | Very important | Yes | Very important | Slightly important | I prefer not to say | Very important | Very important | Important | NaN | NaN | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | Rarely (25% of the time) | No | NaN | Yes | Yes | NaN | I prefer not to say | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | I don't know | No | I don't know | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | Intelligence agencies are necessary and legitimate institutions <br>of democratic states, even though they may sometimes overstep <br>their legal mandates | Intelligence oversight lacks efficacy, hence a fundamental <br>reorganization of oversight capacity is needed for oversight practitioners <br>to reliably uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct | True | True | False | False | False | False | False | Civil society organisations | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Judicial oversight bodies | Independent expert bodies | Data protection authorities | Audit courts | Civil society organisations | Judicial oversight bodies | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Data protection authorities | Independent expert bodies | Audit courts | Judicial oversight bodies | Audit courts | Data protection authorities | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Independent expert bodies | Civil society organisations | Woman | Civil Society Scrutiny |
31 | France | 23.0 | Full-time | 4.0 | 6.0 | Advanced knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Sufficient funding | Somewhat important | Important | Somewhat important | No important at all | Somewhat important | No important at all | NaN | - Projets de recherche européens\n- Fondations privées | Rather beneficial for fundraising | Yes | 1.0 | Yes, within 30 days | Helpful in parts | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | Strategic Litigation | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Contentieu constitutionnel sur l'article L. 811-5 du code de la sécurité intérieur | Contentieu administratif et européen sur la conservation généralisée des données | Contentieu administratif sur les décrets d'application de la loi renseignement | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Slightly important | Somewhat important | NaN | NaN | Never or rarely | Always or very often | Not risky at all | Rarely (25% of the time) | Sometimes (50% of the time) | Agree somewhat | Agree to a great extent | Agree completely | Agree to a great extent | Agree sligthly | Nos recours jouent un rôle dans la meilleure connaissance des juges français du droit européen et international applicable aux activités de surveillance. Ils sont fréquemment cités dans les rapports parlementaires ou les rapports des autorités de contrôle s'intéressant au renseignement, et permettent de faire évoluer le droit applicable dans le sens d'un meilleur encadrement de l'activité des services de renseignement. | Important | Very important | No | Somewhat important | Slightly important | Somewhat important | Very important | Important | Important | NaN | NaN | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | Sometimes (50% of the time) | No | Je n'ai aucune information permettant de penser que je bénéficierais d'une protection particulière. Mes activités militantes font que je communique ou rencontre fréquemment des personnes dont je sais qu'elles ont, ou font encore, l'objet de mesures de surveillance de la part des services de renseignement. | No | No | NaN | Yes, I suspect | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | Yes | No | I don't know | No | I don't know | I don't know | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | Intelligence agencies contradict democratic principles,<br>and their powers should be kept at a bare minimum | Intelligence oversight lacks efficacy, hence a fundamental <br>reorganization of oversight capacity is needed for oversight practitioners <br>to reliably uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct | True | True | False | False | False | True | False | Civil society organisations | Parliamentary oversight bodies | Independent expert bodies | NaN | NaN | NaN | Civil society organisations | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Independent expert bodies | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Man | Civil Society Scrutiny |
32 | France | 23.0 | Other | 4.0 | 7.0 | Advanced knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Some knowledge | Little funding | Slightly important | Slightly important | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | NaN | énergie bénévole | I don't know | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | Public Campaigning | Loi renseignement 2015 | modif intermédiaore 2017-2020 | Loi pater 2021 | Sensibilisation générale | etc | NaN | NaN | NaN | Somewhat important | Very important | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | Slightly important | Slightly important | Important | I prefer not to say | Important | Slightly important | Slightly important | NaN | NaN | Rarely (25% of the time) | Rarely (25% of the time) | Agree somewhat | Not agree at all | Agree somewhat | I don't know | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Very important | No | Somewhat important | Slightly important | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | Somewhat important | NaN | NaN | I don't know | I don't know | No | NaN | I don't know | No | NaN | I prefer not to say | No | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | No | I don't know | No | No | I don't know | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | No | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | Yes | I don't know | Yes | Yes | NaN | NaN | Intelligence agencies contradict democratic principles,<br>and their powers should be kept at a bare minimum | Intelligence oversight lacks efficacy, hence a fundamental <br>reorganization of oversight capacity is needed for oversight practitioners <br>to reliably uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct | False | True | False | False | False | True | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Civil Society Scrutiny |
33 | France | 18.0 | Full-time | 15.0 | 25.0 | Some knowledge | Expert knowledge | Some knowledge | Little funding | No important at all | Slightly important | No important at all | Important | No important at all | No important at all | NaN | NaN | Clearly beneficial for fundraising | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | True | False | False | False | False | False | False | Public Campaigning | Allo place BEauvau | Allo IGPN | Un pays qui se tient sage | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Important | Somewhat important | Very important | Important | Important | Very important | I prefer not to say | Slightly important | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | NaN | Rarely (25% of the time) | Often (75% of the time) | Agree completely | Agree somewhat | Agree completely | Agree somewhat | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Important | Very important | No | Not important at all | Slightly important | Not important at all | Slightly important | Important | Important | Not important at all | NaN | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | Often (75% of the time) | No | Pressions judiciaires et policières sur les lanceurs alerte et journaliste | Yes | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Civil Society Scrutiny |
34 | France | 6.0 | Freelance | 15.0 | 25.0 | Expert knowledge | Expert knowledge | Expert knowledge | No funding | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | NaN | NaN | I don't know | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | True | False | False | True | Public Campaigning | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Civil Society Scrutiny |
35 | France | 23.0 | Full-time | 15.0 | 25.0 | Advanced knowledge | Advanced knowledge | Some knowledge | Some funding | Slightly important | Slightly important | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | No important at all | NaN | NaN | Clearly beneficial for fundraising | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | True | False | False | False | False | False | False | Public Campaigning | Allo place BEauvau | Allo IGPN | Un pays qui se tient sage | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Very important | I prefer not to say | Very important | Slightly important | Somewhat important | Very important | Important | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | I prefer not to say | NaN | Often (75% of the time) | Rarely (25% of the time) | Agree completely | Agree somewhat | Agree to a great extent | Agree sligthly | https://www.davduf.net/alloplacebeauvau-bilan \nhttps://www.mediapart.fr/studio/panoramique/allo-place-beauvau-cest-pour-un-bilan | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Important | Very important | No | Not important at all | Slightly important | Not important at all | Slightly important | Slightly important | Important | Not important at all | NaN | I have no confidence in the protection offered by <br>technological tools | Often (75% of the time) | No | Trop de pressions policières et judiciaires | No | No | NaN | Yes, I suspect | No | NaN | No | No | NaN | NaN | No | No | Yes | Yes | I don't know | I don't know | Yes | No | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | No | No | No | No | NaN | NaN | Intelligence agencies contradict democratic principles,<br>and their powers should be kept at a bare minimum | Intelligence oversight lacks efficacy, hence a fundamental <br>reorganization of oversight capacity is needed for oversight practitioners <br>to reliably uncover past misconduct and prevent future misconduct | True | True | False | False | False | True | False | Audit courts | Civil society organisations | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Civil society organisations | Audit courts | Data protection authorities | NaN | NaN | NaN | Civil society organisations | Audit courts | Data protection authorities | NaN | NaN | NaN | Man | Civil Society Scrutiny |
36 | France | 4.0 | Full-time | 2.0 | 26.0 | Basic knowledge | Some knowledge | Advanced knowledge | I don't know | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Civil Society Scrutiny |
37 | France | 18.0 | Full-time | 2.0 | 26.0 | Basic knowledge | Some knowledge | Advanced knowledge | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | True | False | False | False | False | False | False | Public Campaigning | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Somewhat important | Very important | Slightly important | Very important | I prefer not to say | Very important | Important | I prefer not to say | NaN | Important | NaN | NaN | NaN | Sometimes (50% of the time) | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Very important | No | Very important | Important | Very important | Very important | Very important | Important | NaN | NaN | Technological tools help to protect my identity <br>to some extent, but an attacker with sufficient power <br>may eventually be able to bypass my technological <br>safeguards | Sometimes (50% of the time) | No | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | False | False | False | False | False | False | False | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Civil Society Scrutiny |