STAY UP TO DATE: The Effects of the US Foreign Aid Freeze on Freedom House
Expanding Freedom and Democracy
Freedom on the Net 2025

Germany

Free
74
100
A Obstacles to Access 23 25
B Limits on Content 27 35
C Violations of User Rights 24 40
Last Year's Score & Status
77 100 Free
Scores are based on a scale of 0 (least free) to 100 (most free). See the methodology and report acknowledgements.
Germany_hero

header1 Key Developments, June 1, 2024 – May 31, 2025

Germany was host to high internet access and a robust online media ecosystem, and the country’s courts have made decisions that protect rights online. However, internet freedom in Germany declined during the coverage period due to reports of rising self-censorship, the criminal prosecution of people who criticized politicians online, and cyberattacks linked to Russian intelligence agencies targeting a political party and research institution. Certain surveillance laws gave law enforcement and intelligence agencies expansive powers, and the country has been targeted by online influence operations, which often originated from Russian actors.

  • In March 2025, the Federal Network Agency (BNetzA), the telecommunications regulator, extended the rights of the country’s three largest telecommunications companies—Telekom Deutschland, Telefónica Deutschland, and Vodafone Germany—to certain telecommunications spectrums for five years, but compelled the providers to share some of the spectrums with rivals during that period (A4).1
  • A January 2025 investigation from the online outlet CORRECTIV revealed that an influence operation with links to the GRU, Russia’s military intelligence service, and to Russia’s Internet Research Agency, which was known for its use of automated “bot” accounts, had established more than 100 websites that spread false and misleading information ahead of Germany’s February 2025 federal elections. The content included material generated by artificial intelligence (AI).2 In February 2025, the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, a global research group, also identified a network of accounts on X that used AI-generated videos to spread false claims about German politicians. The group linked the network to the pro-Russia Operation Overload campaign, which it described as being designed to overwhelm fact-checking groups (B5).3
  • In February 2025, ahead of the federal elections, TikTok reported that it had removed four inauthentic networks of Germany-based accounts, two of which supported the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD), one which supported the far-left Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW), and another that spread claims that the German Federal Republic was illegitimate. In September 2024, TikTok removed a network of inauthentic accounts that spread pro-AfD content ahead of that month’s state elections (B5).4
  • In April 2025, David Bendels, the editor in chief of a news outlet affiliated with the AfD, received a seven-month suspended sentence and a €1,500 ($1,600) fine for posting a meme that depicted Interior Minister Nancy Fraser holding a sign reading “I hate freedom of speech” on his news outlet’s X account. The Bamburg court ruled that unbiased viewers might not have been able to tell that the original photo of Fraser had been manipulated (C3). 5
  • In June 2024, in the lead-up to the month’s European Parliament elections, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) experienced what Germany’s interior minister called a “serious” cyberattack. German officials later attributed the attack, which affected the CDU’s internal network infrastructure, to the Kremlin-linked hacking group APT28, also known as Fancy Bear. In March 2025, the German Association for Eastern European Studies (DGO) suffered a cyberattack, which German authorities believed was carried out by actors backed by the Russian government (C8).6

header2 Political Overview

Germany is a representative democracy with a vibrant political culture and civil society. Political rights and civil liberties are largely upheld by law and in practice. The political system is influenced by the country’s history, with constitutional safeguards designed to prevent the return of authoritarian rule. Factors including a sharp increase in the number of asylum seekers and the growing reach of right-wing populist movements have posed challenges to political stability over the past decade.

This report has been abridged for Freedom on the Net 2025 due to ongoing budget constraints. Please consider making a donation to support future editions of this vital resource.

For additional background information, see last year’s full report.

A Obstacles to Access

A1 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Do infrastructural limitations restrict access to the internet or the speed and quality of internet connections? 6.006 6.006
A2 1.00-3.00 pts0-3 pts
Is access to the internet prohibitively expensive or beyond the reach of certain segments of the population for geographical, social, or other reasons? 3.003 3.003
A3 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Does the government exercise technical or legal control over internet infrastructure for the purposes of restricting connectivity? 6.006 6.006
A4 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Are there legal, regulatory, or economic obstacles that restrict the diversity of service providers? 5.005 6.006
A5 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Do national regulatory bodies that oversee service providers and digital technology fail to operate in a free, fair, and independent manner? 3.003 4.004

B Limits on Content

B1 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Does the state block or filter, or compel service providers to block or filter, internet content, particularly material that is protected by international human rights standards? 4.004 6.006
B2 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Do state or nonstate actors employ legal, administrative, or other means to force publishers, content hosts, or digital platforms to delete content, particularly material that is protected by international human rights standards? 2.002 4.004
B3 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Do restrictions on the internet and digital content lack transparency, proportionality to the stated aims, or an independent appeals process? 3.003 4.004
B4 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Do online journalists, commentators, and ordinary users practice self-censorship? 3.003 4.004

Score Change: The score declined from 4 to 3 due to professional and legal reprisals against people who criticized the Israeli government online,1 reported intimidation by far-right actors against journalists,2 and concerns about rising antisemitic and anti-Muslim hate speech amid a reported increase in offline violence and threats against both Jews and Muslims.3

B5 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Are online sources of information controlled or manipulated by the government or other powerful actors to advance a particular political interest? 3.003 4.004
B6 1.00-3.00 pts0-3 pts
Are there economic or regulatory constraints that negatively affect users’ ability to publish content online? 2.002 3.003
B7 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Does the online information landscape lack diversity and reliability? 4.004 4.004
B8 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Do conditions impede users’ ability to mobilize, form communities, and campaign, particularly on political and social issues? 6.006 6.006

C Violations of User Rights

C1 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Do the constitution or other laws fail to protect rights such as freedom of expression, access to information, and press freedom, including on the internet, and are they enforced by a judiciary that lacks independence? 5.005 6.006
C2 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Are there laws that assign criminal penalties or civil liability for online activities, particularly those that are protected under international human rights standards? 2.002 4.004
C3 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Are individuals penalized for online activities, particularly those that are protected under international human rights standards? 4.004 6.006

Score Change: The score declined from 5 to 4 because of raids1 and criminal prosecutions against people who criticized politicians online.2

C4 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Does the government place restrictions on anonymous communication or encryption? 3.003 4.004
C5 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Does state surveillance of internet activities infringe on users’ right to privacy? 2.002 6.006
C6 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Does monitoring and collection of user data by service providers and other technology companies infringe on users’ right to privacy? 3.003 6.006
C7 1.00-5.00 pts0-5 pts
Are individuals subject to extralegal intimidation or physical violence by state authorities or any other actor in relation to their online activities? 4.004 5.005
C8 1.00-3.00 pts0-3 pts
Are websites, governmental and private entities, service providers, or individual users subject to widespread hacking and other forms of cyberattack? 1.001 3.003

Score Change: The score declined from 2 to 1 because of cyberattacks targeting political parties ahead of the June 2024 European Parliament elections,1 and a Germany-based research institute focusing on issues related to Russia.2

On Germany

See all data, scores & information on this country or territory.

See More

Country Facts

  • Population

    83,800,000

  • Global Freedom Score

    95 100 free

  • Internet Freedom Score

    74 100 free

  • Freedom in the World Status

    Free

  • Networks Restricted

    No

  • Websites Blocked

    Yes

  • Pro-government Commentators

    No

  • Users Arrested

    No