If you're asking why we downweighted the submission, moderators routinely do that on HN when a story doesn't fit the site guidelines, isn't substantive enough, is overly sensational, and so on. If we didn't, HN's front page would consist of the same few hot topics and flamewars repeated over and over. Maintaining a site for intellectual curiosity requires active pruning.

Sure, we've routinely downweighted tons of election campaign stories, which is what most policy proposals from candidates are. That includes Elizabeth's among many others. I could see making an exception for proposals that come with detailed arguments and make a genuinely new contribution to debate on something that's on topic here. But most aren't anything like that, they're just attempts to gain attention for a candidate.

I just spent almost an hour reading the drafts in question and converting documents back and forth to provide an English translation and a summary of what exactly the proposed changes are in a comment below, and this makes me a bit sad since it means the effort was mostly wasted.

This is not an election story or a random politician drafting a bill, but a draft by the relevant ministry of the elected government in Germany. It raises important questions about the relationship between large multinational companies and law enforcement in a country other than the US, with quite a bit of nuance and potential for in-depth discussion.

If you feel strongly about this issue and you think it's worth being debated then the best thing you can do is to write an in-depth analysis in your personal blog and then submit the link

I hear you and am sorry about the wasted effort. vsadu's advice sounds good.