Friedrich P. Kötter is appealing to the future Federal Government / Centralised security legislation is needed
Essen/Düsseldorf. The importance of the private security sector for Germany’s security structure has been made clear yet again in the now published Lünendonk study, “Leading Security Service Providers in Germany”. According to the study, the top 25 providers generated revenue of almost 3.3 billion euros last year and employ approx. 87,000 staff. KÖTTER Security acknowledged its position as the largest family-owned company in Germany’s security sector.
With an increase in turnover of 9.3% to 457 million euros and an increase in employees of 6.3% to 11,900 staff in 2016, KÖTTER Security was able to further extend its top placing. The decisive factors for growth are the “Smart Security Solutions” that range from security services and technology to money and value services and risk and health management. This broad spectrum is unique in Germany and underlines the family-owned business’ claim to offer its customers complete security which, for example, is of vital importance for protecting the economy. In addition to countless new orders and order extensions, the appearance at Oktoberfest in Munich also had a positive effect on the development.
“The security sector only appears to have marginal importance in politics”
The published results of the Lünendonk study underline the relevance of the security industry yet it appears to only have marginal importance in politics. It would otherwise be difficult to explain why the organisation of internal security remains almost exclusively confined to state bodies. However, this provides opportunities such as relieving the police for example. Above all, this has a major impact on the legal conditions under which the industry operates. The basis for its activity is still primarily section 34a of the German Industrial Code (GewO) which has long since ceased to be sufficient despite last year’s reforms. Among other things, access requirements are still far too low. Specific regulations for the organisation of activity continue to be few and far between and are scattered across multiple laws e.g. for airport security (Aviation Security Act), the protection of nuclear facilities (Atomic Energy Act) and the safeguarding of military property (Application of Military Force Act). Various federal ministries are responsible for compliance with the above laws.
“Even though the legislature had presented the prospect of comprehensive reforms for the previous legislative period, we are still operating on a legal patchwork”, explains Friedrich P. Kötter, Member of the Board of Directors of KÖTTER SE & Co. KG Security, Düsseldorf and Vice President of the Federal Association of the German Security Industry (BDSW) among others. “I am therefore appealing to the future Federal Government and the new Bundestag to put the topic at the top of the political agenda. The ideal solution would be to create a central security act as in other European countries. However, other special legal regulations for critical infrastructures (e.g. for public transport and utility installations) would also be considerable progress. In either case, performance requirements, organisation and additional training for service providers would need to be clearly defined.