UNTIL NOW POLICE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO INTERVENE ONLY IN CASES OF PUBLIC DANGER AGAINST A VERY SMALL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS CREATING DISTURBANCES. IN THE PROPOSED DRAFT THE CONCEPTS OF DANGER TO THE PUBLIC AND SUSPICION ARE SOMEWHAT RELAXED, AND AUTHORIZATION FOR POLICE MEASURES DURING AN EMERGENCY WHERE INDIVIDUALS ARE CREATING A DISTURBANCE IS EXTENDED TO INCLUDE PERSONS FOUND IN DANGEROUS SITUATIONS. PERSONS NOT CREATING A DISTURBANCE CAN BE SUBJECT TO IDENTITY CHECKS IN SEARCHES FOR UNREGISTERED PERSONS, OR IN INVESTIGATIONS OF CRIMES ASSOCIATED WITH PROSTITUTION AND OF COLLUSION TO COMMIT CRIMES. LINES MUST BE DRAWN, HOWEVER, ON POLICE AUTHORITY, AND PURELY PREVENTIVE IDENTITY CHECKS AND UNDUE SUSPICION OF FOREIGNERS WITHOUT LEGAL PAPERS ARE CONSIDERED UNACCEPTABLE. GENERALLY, SEARCHES ARE ONLY PERMITTED TO ESTABLISH IDENTITY EXCEPT UNDER CLOSELY DEFINED CIRCUMSTANCES. WHILE THE STANDARDIZATION OF MEASURES WHICH CAN BE TAKEN BY THE POLICE IDENTIFICATION SECTION IS WELCOMED, THE QUESTION OF WHEN IDENTIFICATION DOCUMENTATION (E.G., FINGERPRINTS) CAN BE COLLECTED REMAINS UNCLEAR. SUCH DOCUMENTATION, ESPECIALLY WHEN STORED BY COMPUTER, CAN INTERFERE WITH THE INDIVIDUAL'S RIGHTS TO CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION. ACCORDING TO THE DRAFT, SUCH DOCUMENTATION IS TO BE DESTROYED IF THE REASONS FOR GATHERING THE INFORMATION ARE NO LONGER VALID, BUT DESTRUCTION IS PROBLEMATIC BECAUSE OF THE DIFFICULTY OF DETERMINING WHETHER A PARTICULAR PLACE IS DANGEROUS TO A PARTICULAR PERSON OR WHEN THERE IS RISK OF AN INDIVIDUAL'S REPEATING A CRIME. IT IS STRESSED THAT THE LAW IS NOT AS PRECISE AS IT SEEMS, AND THAT IT MAY ENDANGER BASIC RIGHTS WITHOUT EVEN PROVIDING GREATER SECURITY. --IN GERMAN. (KMD)