§ 175

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The left-wing publicist Kurt Hiller published a collection of articles against § 175 in 1922.

The § 175 of the German Penal Code (§ 175 Penal Code) existed from 1 January 1872 (entry into force of the German Penal Code ) to June 11, 1994. He made sexual acts between persons of the male sex offense. Until 1969 he also punished the "unnatural fornication with animals " (from 1935 outsourced according to § 175b). A total of around 140,000 men were convicted of the various versions of Section 175. On September 1, 1935, the National Socialists tightened § 175, among other things by increasing the maximum sentence from six months to five years in prison . In addition, the offense was extended from sexual intercourse to all "lewd" acts. The newly inserted § 175a determined for "difficult cases" between one and ten years imprisonment .

The GDR returned to the old version of § 175 in 1950; Section 175a continued to be applied. From the late 1950s, homosexual acts among adults were no longer punished. In 1968 the GDR enacted a completely new penal code , which, in Section 151, made same-sex sexual acts with young people a criminal offense for both women and men. With effect from July 1, 1989, this paragraph was deleted without replacement. The Federal Republic of Germany adhered to the versions of §§ 175 and 175a from the time of National Socialism for two decades. A first reform was carried out in 1969 and a second in 1973. Since then, only sexual acts with male adolescents under the age of 18 have been punishable, whereas the age of consent for lesbian and heterosexual acts was 14 years. Only after reunification in 1994 was Section 175 repealed without replacement for the territory of the old Federal Republic.

In the vernacular , homosexuals were sometimes referred to as "175s". At the same time, May 17th (May 17th) was called the "gay holiday" in terms of numbers. Today, on the occasion of the removal of homosexuality from the WHO diagnosis code for diseases on May 17, 1990, actions are taking place on the same day for the International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia .

prehistory

Burning of the Knight of Hohenberg with his servant outside the walls of Zurich (1482)

In the second half of the 13th century, anal intercourse between men changed from a sinful , but mostly completely legal act to a crime that was punished with the death penalty almost everywhere in Europe ( see: Sodomite persecution ). In 1532, Charles V created a legal basis for this legal practice with the Constitutio Criminalis Carolina , which was valid in the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation until the end of the 18th century. So it said there in § 116:

“Tight the vnkeusch, so coated against nature. cxvj. ITem so eyn man with eynem vihe, man with man, woman with woman, driving vnkeusch, they have also ruined life, and they should be judged according to the common wonheyt with the fewer from life to death. "
(" Punishment for fornication , if it happens against nature. 116. Furthermore, if a person commits fornication with a cattle, man with man, woman with woman, they have also forfeited life, and according to the general habit one should take them from life to death with fire judge.")

After the Code pénal of 1791 in France had already completely eliminated the criminality of homosexuality (see Homosexuality in France ), Prussia reduced the death penalty to imprisonment and exile with the introduction of the general land law in 1794 to Pennsylvania (1786) and Austria (1787) . Sections 1069 and 1070 of the twentieth title determined:

"Sodomiterey and other such unnatural sins, which cannot be mentioned here because of their abomination, require a complete eradication of the memory."
“Therefore, after having endured a year or several year prison sentence with welcome and farewell, such a criminal should be banished forever from the place of his stay, where his vice has become known, and the possibly abused animal should be killed or secretly from the Area to be removed. "

“Welcome and farewell” means corporal punishment at the beginning and the end of the prison sentence. At that time, sodomy was understood to mean anything that did not represent coitus between man and woman. At that time, Prussia was still a pioneer and was considered to be enlightening - but was soon overtaken by other countries in terms of development. The French Code Pénal of 1810 only criminalized acts that interfered with the rights of a third party, which led to the complete legalization of consensual sexual acts between men. As part of his conquests, Napoleon exported the Code Pénal and Code Civil to the annexed areas on the left bank of the Rhine , where the Code Pénal was retained until the introduction of the Imperial Criminal Code on January 1, 1872, as well as to a number of other states, for example the Netherlands . Even Bayern was based on the French model, leaving in its Code of 1813 all victimless crimes falling replacement. In Prussia, with effect from July 1, 1851, the criminal part of the general land law was replaced by the penal code for the Prussian states . There the offense was again defined more precisely and instead of banishment, the temporary denial of civil rights was provided. Section 143 said:

"The unnatural fornication that is committed between persons of the male sex or by people with animals is to be punished with imprisonment from six months to four years, as well as with early prohibition of the exercise of civil rights."

On July 1, 1853, the Prussian Higher Tribunal confirmed the previous legal opinion that "mutual masturbation" between man and man is unpunished. As early as 1865, Karl Heinrich Ulrichs submitted a petition to the German Lawyers' Association to abolish the penal provisions, but this was suppressed. At the meeting of the Juristentag on August 29, 1867 in Munich, Ulrichs publicly demanded the abolition of all paragraphs directed against “ Urninge ” in front of 500 listeners , but was prevented from finishing his speech by the loud protest of the jurists. From 1868 the deliberations on a criminal law for the North German Confederation began , and from autumn 1868 Ulrichs addressed numerous petitions to the responsible politicians, which ultimately went unnoticed.

In view of the developments in France, the occupied territories, Bavaria and the voices of individual doctors and lawyers, the Prussian Ministry of Justice commissioned the Royal Scientific Deputation for the medical sector to provide an expert opinion, which included the famous doctors Rudolf Virchow and Heinrich Adolf von Bardeleben . On March 24, 1869, the members of the deputation submitted their report: As medical professionals, they did not see it as their competence to judge whether individual acts of fornication represent a particular immorality or degradation of people in contrast to others. They found themselves unable to "provide any reasons why, while other types of fornication are disregarded by the penal law, fornication with animals or between persons of the male sex should be threatened with punishment" . Section 143 of the Prussian Criminal Code appears in the draft of the Criminal Code for the North German Confederation as Section 152. In addition to Ulrichs, Karl Maria Kertbeny also opposes criminal liability in the draft and coined the terms “homosexual” and “heterosexual”. In 1870 Bismarck submitted the draft of a penal code approved by the Federal Council to the Reichstag of the North German Confederation. The criminal liability of same-sex acts among men is justified with consideration for public opinion :

“Even if one could justify the omission of these penal provisions from the standpoint of medicine, as by some of the reasons taken from certain theories of criminal law; the legal consciousness of the people judges these acts not just as vice, but as a crime, and the legislature will have to reasonably have reservations about declaring acts contrary to these legal views as punishable, which are in public opinion as punishable. "

An exemption from punishment would therefore be criticized as a legal mistake. The wording from 1851 is thus adopted in the Criminal Code for the North German Confederation .

Empire

Table 1: Offenses under Section 175 of the German Penal Code (1902–1918)
year Judged Convicts
1902 364  / 393 613
1903 332  / 389 600
1904 348  / 376 570
1905 379  / 381 605
1906 351  / 382 623
1907 404  / 367 612
1908 282  / 399 658
1909 510  / 331 677
1910 560  / 331 732
1911 526  / 342 708
1912 603  / 322 761
1913 512  / 341 698
1914 490  / 263 631
1915 233  / 120 294
1916 278  / 120 318
1917 131  / 70 166
1918 157  / 3 118
Middle column: homosexuality / sodomy

On January 1, 1872, the Criminal Code of the North German Confederation, which had come into force exactly one year earlier, became the Criminal Code of the German Reich . This meant that sexual intercourse between men was again punishable in Bavaria. Almost word for word with its Prussian model from 1851, the new § 175 of the Reich Criminal Code (RStGB) determined:

“The unnatural fornication which is committed between persons of the male sex or by persons with animals is to be punished with imprisonment; loss of civil rights can also be recognized. "

The minimum penalty was reduced from six months to one day compared to Section 143 of the Criminal Code for the Prussian states . The loss of civil rights could u. a. consist in the revocation of the doctoral degree or the withdrawal of the active and passive right to vote .

Petition of the Scientific-Humanitarian Committee (1926)

As early as the 1860s, individuals like Karl Heinrich Ulrichs and Karl Maria Kertbeny had unsuccessfully raised their voices against the Prussian § 143. In the German Empire, with the Scientific-Humanitarian Committee (WhK) founded in 1897, a dignitaries movement was formed, which tried to take action against § 175 with the thesis of the innate nature of homosexuals.

A petition based on this argumentation by the doctor and Scientific and Humanitarian Committee chairman Magnus Hirschfeld to delete § 175 managed to collect 6,000 signatures in 1897. A year later, the SPD chairman August Bebel introduced them to the Reichstag . However, the desired success did not materialize. The sensational trials in connection with the Harden-Eulenburg affair took place between 1907 and 1909 . From 1909 until the First World War, this caused a marked increase in the number of convictions for homosexuality. A good ten years after Hirschfeld's petition, the government planned to extend Section 175 to include women. In their "Preliminary Draft for a German Criminal Code" (E 1909) it said:

“The danger to family life and youth is the same. There is credible evidence that such cases are increasing in modern times. It is therefore in the interests of morality as well as general welfare that the penal provisions should also be extended to women. "

According to experts' calculations, the draft should not reach a vote in the Reichstag until 1917 at the earliest. The First World War and the fall of the German Empire made it a waste of time.

Weimar Republic

Table 2: Offenses under Section 175 of the German Penal Code (1919–1933)
year Judged Convicts
1919 110  / 10 89
1920 237  / 39 197
1921 485  / 86 425
1922 588  / 7th 499
1923 503  / 31 445
1924 850  / 12 696
1925 1225  / 111 1107
1926 1126  / 135 1040
1927 911  / 118 848
1928 731  / 202 804
1929 786  / 223 837
1930 723  / 221 804
1931 618  / 139 665
1932 721  / 204 801
Middle column: homosexuality / sodomy

In the Weimar Republic, as in the empire, the abolition of Section 175, which the left-wing parties were striving for, failed due to the lack of a majority. As a result of the sensational trial of serial killer Fritz Haarmann in 1924, the number of cases and convictions skyrocketed and then remained at a higher level than before 1914. On the other hand, various judicial reforms made it possible to convert small prison sentences into fines or to suspend them many courts made use of the convictions under Section 175.

In 1927, Friedrich Radszuweit distributed a call to reform Section 175 to members of the Reichstag . Scenic mountain were against the plans of a center-right government in 1925 to tighten the § 175. For this new state of affairs should not only beischlaf similar acts be relevant, but also other forms of homosexual activity such as mutual masturbation .

In order to justify the two new paragraphs, the authors cited the protection of public health:

“It can be assumed that the German view of the sexual relationship from man to man appears to be an aberration that is likely to shatter character and destroy moral feeling. If this aberration spreads further, it leads to the degeneration of the people and the decline of their strength. "

When this draft was discussed by the Criminal Law Committee of the German Reichstag in 1929, the KPD , SPD and DDP initially succeeded in mobilizing a majority of 15:13 votes against Section 296. This would be tantamount to legalizing “simple homosexuality” among adult men. At the same time, however, the introduction of the new § 297 (so-called qualified cases) was decided by an overwhelming majority - against only three votes from the KPD. But even this partial success, which the Sexual Reform Scientific-Humanitarian Committee characterized as "one step forward and two steps back", was undone in March 1930 when the Interparliamentary Committee for the Legal Alignment of Criminal Law between Germany and Austria passed § 23:21. 296 was included again in the reform package. It did not come to pass, however, as the presidential cabinets in the early 1930s largely brought the parliamentary legislative process to a standstill.

National Socialism

Table 3: Convictions according to §§ 175, 175a and b (1933–1943)
year    Adults    Teenagers
1933  853 104
1934  948 121
1935 2106 257
1936 5320 481
1937 8271 973
1938 8562 974
1939 8274 689
1940 3773 427
1941 3739 687
1942 3963 nv
1943 * 2218 nv
Young people: up to the age of 18
* 1943: 1st half year doubled
Sources: "Statistisches Reichsamt"
and Baumann 1968, p. 61

In 1935, the National Socialists tightened § 175 (law of June 28, 1935, came into force on September 1, 1935): By deleting the adjective "unnatural", the traditional restriction on sexual intercourse was lifted. The criminal offense was now considered fulfilled if "objectively the general feeling of shame was violated and subjectively there was a voluptuous intention to arouse the lust of one of the two men or a third party". This meant that from now on every indecent act between men could be prosecuted, insofar as it was linked to a “voluptuous intention”. This not only included mutual masturbation, which was previously unpunished. In theory, “just looking at the beloved object” or “just touching it” should be enough to be punished. Even the previously unpunished “caressing, hugging, kissing, etc. like. "was now threatened with prison.

In addition - similar to what was planned in 1925 - a new § 175a was created, which punished so-called qualified cases as "serious fornication " with penal servitude between one and ten years. These included:

  1. homosexual acts enforced by violence or threat of violence ( rape ),
  2. the exploitation of a dependency relationship,
  3. homosexual acts with men under the age of 21 and
  4. male prostitution .

The "unnatural fornication with animals " was outsourced according to § 175b.

In the official justification, the amendment to § 175 was justified with the interest in “maintaining the moral health of the people”, because “experience has shown that homosexuality has a“ tendency to epidemic spread ”and has“ a pernicious influence ”on the“ affected groups ” . Shortly after the “Röhm Putsch”, Prof. Wenzeslaus von Gleispach justified the planned tightening with a threatening “falsification of public life” and thus adopted Himmler's threat scenario that homosexuals could infiltrate and destroy the National Socialist “men's state”: “Through tolerance male homosexuality would result in a distortion of the conception and the basis on which our whole social life rests. A homosexual man can e.g. B. be dominated in his activity in office by motives that cannot be foreseen. He is, so to speak, a woman in a male garb. The result is what I would like to call a falsification of public life. "

In fact, the amendment was a late consequence of the so-called Röhm Putsch , which was also used by the National Socialists to wash their reputation in the conservative and above all Catholic population. Because after Röhm's murder, the way was clear for the pursuit of the policy of persecution Himmler was aiming for. In December 1934, the Gestapo began raiding homosexuals in Berlin. In the following months hundreds, possibly even several thousand homosexual men were arrested and deported to the early Columbiahaus and Lichtenburg concentration camps. However, most of the arrested homosexuals could not be proven to have committed any criminal acts in the sense of the paragraph, because it only criminalized "intercourse-like acts", reciprocal masturbation was free from punishment. Many of those arrested admitted the latter at their interrogation, but denied any further actions. You could not prosecute them legally. Due to the persecution of the Gestapo, the Reich Ministry of Justice felt compelled to act. Since March 1935 there have been several meetings, the aim of which was to tighten § 175. This is how the secret government councilor Dr. Leopold Schäfer later, “bad experiences of the last time” would have “made it appear advisable to put into force the tightening of the regulations against same-sex fornication between men envisaged for the general renewal of criminal law”. The greatest "deficiency" of the old paragraph was that "only intercourse-like acts were taken, so that the public prosecutor and police could not intervene against obvious same-sex intercourse between men if they could not prove such acts".

On the other hand, when the criminal law was tightened in 1935, the criminalization of lesbian sexuality was deliberately avoided. Only male homosexuality and fornication with animals were still punishable. The fact that women were actually convicted according to § 175 in individual cases, as Claudia Schoppmann notes, had, contrary to her insinuation, nothing to do with female homosexuality. Because “a woman” could “take part in the act of the man as an instigator or assistant”. A conviction for "fornication with animals" was also possible, until 1935 according to § 175, then according to the newly created § 175b. Even before 1933, women were regularly sentenced under Section 175, with fornication with animals being the main cause. Between 1920 and 1930 ten of a total of twelve convictions of women were due to them. Corresponding statistics are also available for the years 1933 to 1943: According to this, 23 women were convicted according to §§ 175 during this time. These included at least eight cases of fornication with animals, which the statistics only showed separately for the years 1933 to 1936.

The tightening resulted in a tenfold increase in the number of convictions from 801 (1932) to over 8,000 (1937 and 1938). Between 1937 and 1939 alone, almost 100,000 men were recorded in the secret " Reich Central Office for Combating Homosexuality and Abortion ". In total, almost 50,000 men were tried for homosexuality in the German Reich between 1933 and 1945. About 5,000–6,000 were sent to a concentration camp, where they were marked with a pink triangle . The thesis advocated in earlier research that homosexuals were denounced particularly often is put into perspective by a new research by Alexander Zinn. The denunciation rates of up to 40 percent determined for the metropolises of Berlin and Hamburg cannot be transferred to the entire territory of the Reich. According to Zinn's results, a denunciation rate of ten to twenty percent appears more realistic. At the same time, especially in large cities, there were repeated reports from bystanders. For example, in 1938 the Gestapo received the following anonymous letter:

Telex from the Gestapo ordering protective custody against an "incorrigible homosexual"
“We - a large part of the artists' block on Barnayweg - urgently ask you to observe Mr B., who lives with Ms. F… as a subtenant, who has young boys with him in a striking way every day. It doesn't go on like this ... We sincerely ask you to pass the matter on for observation. "

In contrast to the criminal police , the Gestapo could order protective custody against gay men at any time . This arbitrary measure was z. B. Applied after an acquittal or if the prison sentence already served was assessed as too mild. Instead, the criminal police had the means of preventive detention . This affected so-called dangerous moral and professional criminals. A circular issued by the Reich Main Security Office on July 12, 1940 stipulated that “all homosexuals who have seduced more than one partner should be taken into preventive police custody after their release from prison”. Only about 40 percent of the men who were sent to a concentration camp on the basis of a preventive or protective detention order and who were marked with the green or pink triangle , managed to survive the camp system. After their liberation by the Allies , some of them were transferred back to a prison because they had not yet fully served their sentence under Section 175, which is still in force.

post war period

Development in the Soviet zone of occupation and the German Democratic Republic

OdF ID that has been declared invalid; the magistrate of East Berlin refused to recognize Rosa Winkel prisoners as "victims of fascism"

In the Soviet Zone of Occupation (SBZ) the development to the right was inconsistent. While the government of Thuringia resolved to moderate Sections 175 and 175a in 1945, which roughly corresponded to the draft criminal law of 1925, the version from 1935 continued to apply unchanged in the other countries. In 1946 the Legal Examination Committee of the Magistrate of Greater Berlin advised "not to incorporate Section 175 StGB into a new criminal law", but this recommendation had no consequences. For Saxony-Anhalt , the Higher Regional Court (OLG) Halle ruled in 1948 that Sections 175 to 175b were typically National Socialist injustice because they had broken off a progressive legal development and turned it into its opposite. Homosexual acts are therefore to be condemned exclusively according to the criminal law of the Weimar Republic.

One year after the founding of the republic in 1949, the Berlin Court of Appeal decided for the entire German Democratic Republic that Section 175 in the old version valid until 1935 should be applied. However, in contrast to the OLG Halle, it adhered unchanged to the new § 175a, because it serves to protect society against "socially harmful homosexual acts of a qualified nature". In 1954, the same court ruled that, in contrast to Section 175, Section 175a does not presuppose acts similar to sexual intercourse. Fornication is any act undertaken to arouse sexual desire "which offends the morality of our working people".

The Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1957 made it possible to refrain from prosecution if an illegal act does not pose a threat to socialist society in the absence of damaging consequences . This put § 175 de facto inoperative, as the Berlin Chamber of Appeal ruled at the same time that "all criminal offenses falling under § 175 old version should be widely used because of the insignificance" . Homosexual acts among adults therefore remained unpunished from the late 1950s.

In 1968 the German Democratic Republic adopted its own penal code. In it, the new Section 151 of the German Criminal Code (GDR) stipulated a prison sentence of up to three years or a suspended sentence for an adult who “engages in sexual acts” with an adolescent of the same sex. Due to the no longer gender-related formulation, the criminal law now also covers sex between women and girls under the age of 18.

On August 11, 1987, the Supreme Court of the German Democratic Republic overturned a judgment on Section 151 on the grounds that “homosexuality, like heterosexuality, is a variant of sexual behavior. Homosexual people are therefore not outside socialist society, and civil rights are guaranteed to them like all other citizens. ” One year later, the People's Chamber of the German Democratic Republic deleted Section 151 in its 5th Criminal Law Amendment Act of December 14, 1988 without replacement. The law came into force on July 1, 1989.

From this point on, Section 149 of the German Criminal Code ( GDR) (simple abuse) , which provided for a uniform age of consent for homosexual and heterosexual acts of 16 years, applied.

Development in the old Federal Republic

Statistics of persecution according to § 175 in the FRG; Post-war period until 1994;
Rainer Hoffschildt , December 2016
Tab. 4: Convictions according to §§ 175, 175a (1946–1994)
year  number      year  number
1946 : ≈ 1152 1970 : 340
1947 : ≈ 1344 1971 : 372
1948 : ≈ 1536 1972 : 362
1949 : ≈ 1728 1973 : 373
1950 : 2158 1974 : 235
1951 : 2359 1975 : 160
1952 : 2656 1976 : 200
1953 : 2592 1977 : 191
1954 : 2801 1978 : 177
1955 : 2904 1979 : 148
1956 : 2993 1980 : 164
1957 : 3403 1981 : 147
1958 : ≈ 3486 1982 : 163
1959 : ≈ 3804 1983 : 178
1960 : ≈ 3406 1984 : 153
1961 : 3196 1985 : 123
1962 : 3098 1986 : 118
1963 : 2803 1987 : 117
1964 : 2907 1988 : 95
1965 : 2538 1989 : 95
1966 : 2261 1990 : 96
1967 : 1783 1991 : 86
1968 : 1727 1992 : 77
1969 : 894 1993 : 76
1994 : 44
Source: Hoffschildt 2002
* 1946–1949 Complete estimate,
based on the course of the First World War
*
West Berlin and Saarland were included before 1962 and 1961 respectively .
(Never taken into account in earlier sources!)
* 1958–1960 Partial estimate Saarland (≈59)

Even before the founding of the Federal Republic of Germany , there was hardly any doubt in the western occupation zones that §§ 175 and 175a in their 1935 version would continue to apply. In 1949, all of the law that had been in force up to that point was officially adopted, “as long as it does not contradict the Basic Law” ( Art. 123 (1) GG ). In a number of decisions, the Federal Court of Justice agreed with the interpretation of Section 175 of the case law of the time of National Socialism , according to which the offense of fornication does not require mutual contact. Simultaneous masturbation or the spectator during triplet intercourse can also be punished . However, it was deduced from the characteristic “drive” that action “must always have a certain strength and duration”. On this basis, there were more than 100,000 preliminary investigations and around 50,000 final convictions between 1950 and 1969 .

While some judges had great reservations about applying Section 175, which contradicts their legal opinion - for example, the Hamburg Regional Court sentenced two homosexual men to a replacement fine of DM 3 in 1951 - others showed particular ambition in prosecuting them. A wave of arrests and lawsuits in Frankfurt am Main in 1950/51 had shocking consequences:

“A nineteen-year-old jumps from the Goethe Tower after receiving a court summons, another flees to South America, another to Switzerland, a dental technician and his friend poison themselves with luminous gas . A total of six suicides are known. Many of the accused lose their position. "

In September 1951, Richard Gatzweiler, a local judge in Bonn, published his first pamphlet on the subject of homosexuality in the Roman Catholic Volkswartbund , in which he called for a tightening of the procedure and the criminalization of female homosexuality. With the biblical metaphor "But what should one do with a tree that is not fertile?" And other statements, he approached the National Socialist use of language and argumentation. In the end, he also considered the suicides in the course of the Frankfurt investigations to be entirely justified and desirable. Many church magazines spread his ideas. In the same month, at the 39th German Jurists Conference in Stuttgart, a narrow majority (14:11 eligible voters out of 300 participants) spoke out in favor of impunity under Section 175 and in favor of a new version of Section 175a.

In 1952 and 1954, respectively, two men filed constitutional complaints on the grounds that Sections 175 and 175a were null and void because they were enacted on the basis of the Enabling Act. In addition, they violated the principle of equal treatment of the sexes ( Article 3 (2) and (3) GG) and the fundamental right to free development of personality ( Article 2 (1) GG). On May 10, 1957, the Federal Constitutional Court rejected the complaint. The two penal provisions were “formally duly issued” and “not to the extent that“ National Socialist law ”” would “have to be denied validity in a free, democratic state”. The different treatment of male and female homosexuality was attributed to biological conditions and the “unrestrained sexual need” of the homosexual man. "The moral beliefs of the people" were named as legal interests to be protected , which were largely based on the teachings of the "two great Christian denominations ".

A government draft of a criminal law for the Federal Republic of Germany submitted in 1962 (at that time the Adenauer IV cabinet ruled under Konrad Adenauer ) justified - contrary to the proposal of the Great Criminal Law Commission of 1959 (where representatives of the CDU / CSU were rarely present) - the retention of § 175 as follows :

"Above all, nothing stands in the way of homosexuals from bothering their immediate surroundings by living together in marriage-like circumstances. [...] More pronounced than in other areas, the legal system has the task of building a dam against male homosexuality through the moral-forming power of the criminal law against the spread of vicious behavior that, if it spreads, poses a grave danger to a healthy and healthy person would mean natural order of life among the people. "

and continued to say:

“The assertion repeatedly made by interested circles in recent decades that same-sex intercourse is a natural and therefore not offensive drive can only be rejected as an assertion of purpose. [...] Where same-sex fornication has spread and assumed great proportions, the result has been the degeneration of the people and the decline of their moral strength. "

From 1965 onwards, the general change in values in society became increasingly apparent in the statistics of convictions through falling numbers. The arrest (1966) of and the trial (1967) against Jürgen Bartsch left no visible traces in the statistics, in contrast to Haarmann, whose victims were also older. The 1st StrRG of June 25, 1969, shortly before the end of the grand coalition of Chancellor Kiesinger, reformed Section 175 by lifting the total ban and only the qualified cases (sex with an under 21-year-old, homosexual prostitution and the exploitation of a Service, employment or subordination) were retained, which had previously been regulated by Section 175a. Like this, § 175b ( sodomy ) was no longer applicable . The changes came into force on September 1, 1969, which is why the time until the emergence of today's gay movement from 1970 (founding of the "Homosexual Action Group Bochum" (HAG)) is also called "Post-September". However, the change led to strange case groups: If both were over 21 (then age of majority ) or under 18 years of age, it was exempt from punishment. If one was over 21 and the other under 21, only the older one was punished. However, if both were between 18 and 21 years old, they were both liable to prosecution. The court was able to waive a penalty for under 21-year-olds, which defused the situation.

“Imagine the consequences: Two friends of the same age are allowed to have same-sex relationships with each other until they turn eighteen, then they have to take a three-year break, and after they turn 21 they are allowed to resume relationships. […] One can assume that the legislature wanted to smuggle in the hotly contested special law for the Bundeswehr in a cold way. But it doesn't work like that. "

- Helmut Ostermeyer : Bielefelder Richter, 1969

On November 23, 1973, the Brandt II cabinet (a social-liberal coalition ) carried out a comprehensive reform of sexual criminal law . The corresponding section in the StGB was renamed from “Crimes and offenses against morality” to “Offenses against sexual self-determination”. Likewise, the concept of fornication has been replaced by that of “sexual acts”. In § 175 only sex with minors remained as a qualifying feature, whereby the so-called age of consent was lowered from 21 to 18 years. On October 2, 1973, the Federal Constitutional Court confirmed this version as constitutional in a resolution. From 1975 onwards there were only a maximum of 200 convictions a year.

Sexual contacts between women were not mentioned in the criminal law. For girls, the age of consent was 14 years. With the then § 182, the seduction of a girl between the ages of 14 and 16 by a man to cohabit could be punished at the request of a legal guardian . If the man was not yet 21 years old, the court could waive the penalty.

In the commentary on Section 175, from 1973 until the 1980s, the undisturbed sexual development of male adolescents was specified as a legal asset to be protected . This also corresponded to the justification of the federal government in the draft of the fourth law on the reform of criminal law (4th StrRG). On the part of the legislature it was therefore assumed that the male adolescent could suffer permanent damage if he had sexual contact with a man, even if this was done by mutual, full consent. This approach corresponded to the so-called imprinting or seduction theory, according to which homosexuality also spreads spontaneously when young people are seduced by adults.

The election manifesto of the FDP for the federal election in 1980 demanded "to make homosexuals legally and socially equal", § 175 deleted. The other criminal provisions are sufficient to protect children and dependents. The FDP was unable to enforce this demand in the negotiations on the formation of a government ( Schmidt III cabinet ).

On March 9, 1989, 40 MPs and the Greens parliamentary group introduced a bill to delete §§ 175 StGB in the German Bundestag without replacement, but this was rejected by both the governing coalition of CDU and FDP and the SPD.

Developments after 1990

Deletion of § 175

The German reunification initially did not alter the different treatment of homosexuality in East and West. The Unification Treaty put the Federal Criminal Code into effect in the accession area, but with the proviso that u. a. Sections 175, 182 and 236 (kidnapping with the will of the abductee) are not applicable (Annex I, Chapter III, Subject C, Section III, No. 1) and u. a. Sections 149, 153–155 StGB-DDR remained in force (Appendix II, Chapter III, Subject C, Section I, No. 1). In 1994 the Bundestag passed the 29th Criminal Law Amendment Act to repeal Section 175 of the Criminal Code without replacement. The absolute age of consent for sexual acts was uniformly set at 14 years ( sexual abuse of children , § 176 StGB); In addition, the sexual abuse of young people ( Section 182 StGB) with a relative age of consent of 16 years was expanded and formulated gender-neutral for special cases . A violation of § 182 para. 3 of the Criminal Code, according to § 182 para. 5 of the Criminal Code as opposed to a violation of § 176 of the Criminal Code in principle only at the request Following (relative antragsdelikt ), unless the prosecutor , a special public interest in prosecution takes for granted.

According to Section 182 (4) of the Criminal Code, the court can waive the penalty if the wrongdoing is assessed as minor. The abundance of indefinite legal terms in Section 182 of the Criminal Code, which could be detrimental to legal certainty, is problematic . Similar to Section 207b of the Austrian Criminal Code , many see the danger that this could criminalize undesirable relationships in the social environment. In Austria, an analogous development was carried out with the deletion of Section 209 of the Austrian Criminal Code and the introduction of Section 207b of the Austrian Criminal Code.

Partial rehabilitation of the condemned

Symbolically placed on May 17 (numbers game: May 17 ), the Bundestag decided in 2002, against votes from the CDU / CSU and FDP , to amend the law to repeal unjust judgments in criminal justice ( BGBl. 2002 I p. 2714 ). Thus convictions were for homosexual acts and for desertion in time of National Socialism annulled. The lesbian and gay movement criticized the fact that the Bundestag left the judgments untouched after 1945, although the legal basis was the same until 1969.

Proposals that the Bundestag should ask the Federal Government to submit a draft law for their repeal and the compensation of the convicts, which the Bundestag faction Bündnis 90 / Die Grünen and the left-wing faction 2008/09 brought to the Bundestag on May 6th, 2009 rejected with the votes of the governing parties and the FDP. On October 12, 2012, however, at the request of the states of Berlin, Brandenburg, Hamburg and North Rhine-Westphalia, the Federal Council decided to call on the federal government to “propose rehabilitation measures and support for those convicted of consensual homosexual acts in both German states after 1945. “However, the federal government initially did not take up the issue, and the Bundestag rejected the motions submitted by the Bundestag parliamentary group Bündnis 90 / Die Grünen and the left-wing parliamentary group during the same period.

Rehabilitation of other convicts: Law of 2017

On March 22, 2017, the Federal Cabinet passed a draft law to overturn the judgments made on the basis of Section 175 of the Criminal Code and to compensate those convicted who were still alive. The bill was passed on June 22, 2017 in the second and third deliberations in the Bundestag. At the insistence of the CDU, only those delinquents whose sexual partners were at least 16 years old were rehabilitated. The restriction was criticized in the SPD because the originally intended age limit had corresponded to the applicable general age of consent of 14 years, but the parliamentary group approved the bill.

The law on the criminal rehabilitation of persons convicted of consensual homosexual acts after May 8, 1945 (StrRehaHomG) came into force on July 22, 2017.

In mid-2017, the Federal Ministry of Justice estimated the number of surviving victims of the criminal norm to be around 5,000. They are to be compensated with 3,000 euros per judgment and 1,500 euros per year of imprisonment. For comparison: According to the Law on Compensation for Prosecution Measures, wrongfully detained persons (since 2009) receive compensation of 25 € per day, i.e. around 9100 € per full year.

Graphical representation of the statistics

1st: 1902-1918, 2nd: 1919-1933, 3rd: 1933-1941, 4th: 1950-1987
Convictions according to § 175, 1902–1987
Period Homosexuality
sodomy		 epoch Special event
1902-1918 H & S 1907–1909 Harden-Eulenburg affair
1914–1918 First World War
1919-1933 H & S Weimar Republic 1924 Fritz Haarmann
1933-1941 H & S "Third Reich" 1935 tightening
1950-1969 H Federal Republic only 1957 Rejection of a constitutional complaint
1965 Social change in values ​​(e.g. Second Vatican Council , Pillenknick , 1968 movement )
1970-1987 H Federal Republic only Only male adults with male adolescents
Judgments and convictions according to § 175, 1902–1932
  • Convicted of homosexuality and sodomy
  • People convicted (conviction, suspension, acquittal, etc.) for homosexuality
  • Persons judged (convicted, setting acquittal etc.) for sodomy
  • Total number of people judged for homosexuality and sodomy

    • Wording of the versions of § 175 and the preliminary provisions

    Constitutio Criminalis Carolina from 1532

    Tight the vnkeusch, so against the coating of nature
    116.
    Item so eyn man with eynem vihe, man with man, woman with woman, drifting vnkeusch, they have ruined life too, and they should be judged according to common sense with the less from life to death.
    Wikisource: Keyser Charles the Fifth: vnnd des Heyligen Roman Empire embarrassing court order  - sources and full texts

    General land law for the Prussian states of February 5, 1794

    Second part
    Twentieth title. About the crimes and their punishments. (§§ 1–1577)
    Twelfth section: Of carnal crimes (§§ 992 ff.). Unnatural sins.
    § 1069 . Sodomiterey and other such unnatural sins, which because of their abomination cannot be mentioned here, require a complete obliteration of the memory.
    § 1070 . Such a criminal should therefore, after he has endured a year or several year prison sentence with welcome and farewell, forever banished from the place of his stay where his vice has become known, and the possibly abused animal should be killed, or secretly from the area removed.
    § 1071 . Anyone who seduces and abuses someone into such unnatural vices is guilty of double punishment.
    § 1072 . If parents, guardians, teachers or educators are guilty of this crime: the same four to eight year penal prison sentence with welcome and farewell should take place.

    Criminal Code for the Prussian States of April 14, 1851

    Second part.
    About the individual crimes and offenses and their punishment
    Twelfth title. Crimes and offenses against morality (Sections 139 to 151)
    § 143
    The unnatural fornication 59) which is committed between persons of the male sex or by persons with animals is to be punished with imprisonment from six months to four years, as well as with early prohibition of the exercise of civil rights.

    Entry into force: July 1, 1851; As of April 30, 1856

    Explanations to this (1864)

    59) By this sodomy is meant. This is every pleasure satisfaction, except for the natural cohabitation between man and woman. The term is formed by lawyers; the name is taken from Sodom and Gomorrah, which were destroyed because of these vices. Among the Romans there is a lex Catinia , of which only this is known that it was directed against unnatural crimes of the flesh; everything closer is unknown, even the name is uncertain. The lex Jul. De adult. understood this crime only in a very limited way, namely only of what was committed against a boy from a good family. If violence was used against a man with this intention, the act was unlawful violence (vis). L. 5 D. de vi publ. So we do not find a real punitive sanction against this crime in the RR, rather we find the same unrepentant. Only since Constantine has the sword been prescribed against unnatural pleasure satisfaction. L. 31 C. ad I. Jul. De adult. Justitian's novella 77 also threatens ultima supplicia. - The can. R. determines church punishments. The PGO Art. 116 emphasizes only three types of unnatural pleasure satisfaction: with an animal; with a man; Woman with woman; and threatens fire. German practice, however, extends this provision to other cases and thus distinguishes sodomia propria and impropria ; but punished the cases of the latter only arbitrarily. Of the §. 143 did not include the third case of the PGO and practice assumes that the s. impropia does not fall under the criminal provision. “Under unnatural fornication within the meaning of §. 143 the actual sodomy (sodomia propria) is to be understood in its two forms, not other such acts, namely not mutual masturbation between persons of the male sex. ”Br. Des Obertr., P. F. Str.G., No. 48, of July 1, 1853. (Decision Volume XXVI, p. 403.)

    Version dated May 15, 1871 (proclamation)

    § 175
    The unnatural fornication which is committed between persons of the male sex or between persons with animals is to be punished with imprisonment; Loss of civil rights can also be recognized.
    Wikisource: Criminal Code for the North German Confederation 1870 (version of May 31, 1870; announced: June 8, 1870)  - sources and full texts

    ( Digitized and full text in the German text archive )

    Wikisource: Criminal Code 1871 (May 15, 1871; published June 14, 1871)  - Sources and full texts
    Wikisource: Criminal Code 1876 (February 26, 1876 version; published March 6, 1876)  - Sources and full texts

    Legal explanations on this (1913)

    1. suction Pederasty , bestiality , sodomy ; not the tribadie (fornication between women)
    2. The unnatural fornication requires a process similar to the natural intercourse; the exposed limb of one perpetrator must always have touched the body of the other; this need not have been exposed.
    3. Section 175 also applies to those who put the genitals of another in their mouths, not reciprocal masturbation.
    4. It is sufficient if one of the two strives for the satisfaction of the sexual instinct; but the other is also punishable as a perpetrator, not just as an assistant. The satisfaction need not have arisen, that both acted deliberately is not required.
    5. Even with sodomia tarione generis , an act similar to intercourse is required, so it is not enough for a woman to have a dog lick her genitals.
    6. Ideal competition with §§ 173, 174, 176, 178 possible
    7. Responsible: criminal chamber

    Version dated September 1, 1935

    § 175
    (1) A man who commits fornication with another man or lets himself be abused by him for fornication shall be punished with imprisonment.
    (2) In the case of a party who was not yet twenty-one years old at the time of the act, the court may waive the penalty in particularly light cases.
    § 175a
    With prison for up to ten years, in extenuating circumstances with imprisonment not under three months, the following is punished:
    1. a man who coerces another man with violence or threats with present danger to life or limb to commit fornication with him or to allow himself to be abused by him for fornication;
    2. a man who, by abusing a dependency based on a service, employment or subordination relationship, determines another man to commit fornication with him or to allow himself to be abused by him for fornication;
    3. a man over the age of twenty-one who seduces a male person under the age of twenty-one to commit fornication or allow himself to be abused by him for fornication;
    4. a man who commercially forniates men or allows himself to be abused by men for fornication or offers himself to do so.
    § 175b
    The unnatural fornication committed by humans with animals is to be punished with imprisonment; Loss of civil rights can also be recognized.

    Version from 1949 (GDR)

    § 175 - Unnatural fornication
    The unnatural fornication which is committed between persons of the male sex or by persons with animals is to be punished with imprisonment; Loss of civil rights can also be recognized.
    Section 175 a - Serious fornication between men
    With prison up to 10 years, in extenuating circumstances with prison not less than 3 months is punished,
    1. a man who coerces another man with violence or threats with present danger to life and limb to commit fornication with him or to allow himself to be abused for fornication with him;
    2. a man who determines another man, abusing a dependency based on a service, employment or subordination relationship, to commit fornication with him or to allow himself to be abused by him for fornication;
    3. a man over the age of twenty-one who seduces a man under the age of twenty-one to fornicate him or allow him to abuse him to fornicate him;
    4. a man who commercially forniates men or allows himself to be abused by men for fornication or offers himself to do so.

    Version from 1968 (GDR, § 151)

    § 151
    An adult who engages in sexual acts with an adolescent of the same sex is punished with imprisonment for up to three years or with a suspended sentence.

    Version of June 25, 1969 (Federal Republic)

    Section 175 fornication between men
    (1) The following is punished with a prison sentence of up to five years:
    1. a man over eighteen years of age who is fornication with another man under the age of twenty-one or who allows himself to be abused by him for fornication,
    2. a man who, by abusing a dependency based on a service, employment or subordination relationship, determines another man to commit fornication with him or to allow himself to be abused by him for fornication,
    3. a man who commercially forniates men or lets men abuse him for fornication or who offers himself to do so.
    (2) In the cases of paragraph 1 No. 2, the attempt is punishable.
    (3) In the case of a party who was not yet 21 years old at the time of the act, the court may waive the penalty.
    § 175b
    (canceled)

    Version of November 28, 1973 (Federal Republic)

    Section 175 Homosexual Acts
    (1) A man over the age of eighteen who engages in sexual acts on a man under the age of 18 or allows a man under the age of 18 to do so is punishable by imprisonment of up to five years or a fine.
    (2) The court may dispense with punishment under this provision if
    1. the perpetrator was not yet twenty-one at the time of the act or
    2. taking into account the conduct of the person against whom the act is directed, the injustice of the act is minor.

    Version dated March 10, 1994

    § 175
    (canceled)

    New publication of the Criminal Code of November 13, 1998

    § 175
    (dropped out)

    Chronological overview

    date event
      1532 Constitutio Criminalis Carolina (§ 116; beginning of civil criminal liability)
    0Feb 5, 1794 Proclamation of the general land law for the Prussian states (§§ 1069-1072)
    0June 1, 1794 Entry into force of the general land law for the Prussian states (§§ 1069-1072, subsidiary)
    ? Homosexuality is exempt from punishment by the Code Pénal in France and thereafter in some influenced areas
      1813 Homosexuality is exempt from punishment in Bavaria
    Apr 14, 1851 Proclamation of the Prussian Criminal Code (PStGB, § 143)
    0July 1, 1851 Entry into force of the Prussian Criminal Code (PStGB, § 143)
    May 31, 1870 Proclamation of the Criminal Code for the North German Confederation (Section 152)
    0Jan. 1, 1871 Entry into force of the Criminal Code for the North German Confederation (Section 152)
    May 15, 1871 Proclamation of the Reich Criminal Code (RStGB, § 175)
    0Jan. 1, 1872 Entry into force of the Reich Criminal Code (RStGB, § 175) in all parts of the Reich
    June 28, 1935 Resolution of the tightening of § 175 as well as the new § 175a and § 175b by the National Socialists
    0Sep 1 1935 Entry into force of the tightening by the National Socialists
    GDR
      1945 until 1949 inconsistent development in the Soviet zone of occupation (SBZ)
      1945 SBZ Thuringia: Mitigation to the design from 1925
      1948 SBZ Saxony-Anhalt: Mitigation to the version of the Weimar Republic
      1949 Version for the entire GDR, § 175 contains sodomy again, § 175b is repealed
      1950 Berlin Court of Appeal for the entire GDR: Version from 1872 is valid, but with Section 175a from 1935
      1954 Berlin Court of Appeal for the whole of the GDR: No acts similar to intercourse are necessary for Section 175a
      1957 Criminal Law Amendment Act allows forbearance if it does not pose a threat to socialist society
      1957 Berlin Court of Appeal for the whole of the GDR: In the case of ordinary § 175 setting due to insignificance
    Jan. 12, 1968 Resolution of the Criminal Code of the GDR (StGB-GDR, § 151): Only adults with young people (now up to 18) are punishable, both for gays and lesbians
      1968 Entry into force of the Criminal Code of the GDR (StGB-DDR, § 151)
    Aug 11, 1987 The Supreme Court of the GDR repeals Section 151
      1988 Resolution of the Criminal Law Amendment Act: § 151 is deleted without replacement, uniform age of consent at 16 years
    May 30, 1989 Entry into force of the Criminal Law Amendment Act
    Federal Republic of Germany until reunification
      1949 § 175 and § 175a in the version from 1935 officially adopted
      1955 Filing a constitutional complaint against § 175 and § 175a
    May 10, 1957 The Federal Constitutional Court rejects the complaint; the 1935 version is not a national socialist law
    June 25, 1969 Proclamation of the 1st StrRG: Only punishable for adults with under 21-year-olds, prostitution and different relationships of authority
    0Sep 1 1969 Entry into force of the 1st StrRG
    Nov 23, 1973 Reform of sexual criminal law: fornication → sexual acts, only adults with young people (now up to 18) punishable
    Germany since reunification in 1990
    10 Mar 1994 Adoption of the 29th Criminal Law Amendment Act (29th StrÄndG) in the German Bundestag: repeal of § 175, legal alignment between the Federal Republic of Germany and the GDR
    May 31, 1994 Execution of the 29th StrÄndG
    June 10, 1994 Proclamation of the 29th StrÄndG; Comes into force the following day
    May 17, 2002 Adoption of the law amending the law to repeal wrongful National Socialist judgments in criminal justice (NS-AufhGÄndG) in the German Bundestag:

    Symbolic rehabilitation of the convicts between 1935 and 1945

    July 23, 2002 Execution of the NS-AufhGÄndG
    July 26, 2002 Proclamation of the NS-AufhGÄndG; Comes into force the following day
    23 Mar 2017 Assurance of compensation for convicts who are still alive in accordance with Section 175 by the Federal Cabinet
    23rd June 2017 Rehabilitation of all convicts whose sexual partners were at least 16 years old at the time of the crime

    literature

    Web links

    Commons : § 175 StGB  - collection of pictures, videos and audio files

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ a b § 175a Criminal Code for the German Empire of May 15, 1871 , Artt. 6 No. 2, 14 of the law of June 28, 1935.
    2. ^ The embarrassing court order of Emperor Charles V (Carolina) , ed. and come by Friedrich-Christian Schroeder (Stuttgart: Reclam, 2000).
    3. ↑ GStA Koblenz - We about us / History ( Memento from May 1, 2015 in the Internet Archive )
    4. ↑ Br. Des Obertr., P. F. Str.G., No. 48, of July 1, 1853. (Dec. Volume XXVI, p. 403.); See also the 1864 comment above.
    5. ↑ Stümke 1989: 50 f.
    6. ↑ Alexander Zinn: "Removed from the people's body"? P. 61 f.
    7. ↑ Friedrich Radszuweit: False teachings about homosexuality. § 175 must be abolished! Memorandum to the German Reichstag to eliminate a cultural disgrace. published by Bund für Menschenrechte, Berlin 1927, 14 pages
    8. ↑ Stümke 1989, 65 f.
    9. ^ "Statistisches Reichsamt"
      Jürgen Baumann: Paragraph 175 , Luchterhand, Darmstadt 1968
      Compiled in: Hans-Georg Stümke, Rudi Finkler: Rosa Winkel, pink lists , Rowohlt TB-V., July 1985, ISBN 3-499-14827-7 , P. 262.
    10. ↑ Günter Grau , Rüdiger Lautmann : Lexicon on the persecution of homosexuals 1933–1945 : Institutions – competencies – fields of activity. Lit, Berlin / Münster 2011, ISBN 978-3-8258-9785-7 , p. 152.
    11. ↑ Alexander Zinn: "Removed from the people's body"? Homosexual men under National Socialism. Pp. 279-289.
    12. ↑ The tightening of paragraph 175 on rosawinkel.de , accessed on April 7, 2017.
    13. ↑ Alexander Zinn: "Removed from the people's body"? Homosexual men under National Socialism. Pp. 279-289.
    14. ↑ Alexander Zinn: "Removed from the people's body"? Homosexual men under National Socialism. Pp. 279-289.
    15. ↑ Alexander Zinn: Was there persecution of lesbians by the Nazi regime? , accessed August 26, 2018.
    16. ↑ Alexander Zinn: "Removed from the people's body"? Homosexual men under National Socialism. Pp. 283-285.
    17. ↑ Michael Grüttner : The Third Reich. 1933–1939 (=  Gebhardt. Handbook of German History . Volume 19). Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart 2014, p. 420 f.
    18. ↑ Alexander Zinn: "Removed from the people's body"? Homosexual men under National Socialism. Pp. 305-309.
    19. ↑ Pretzel 2000, 23.
    20. ↑ Angelika von Wahl: How Sexuality Changes Agency: Gay Men, Jews, and Transitional Justice. In: Susanne Buckley-Zistel, Ruth Stanley (ed.): Gender in Transitional Justice (Governance and Limited Statehood). Palgrave Macmillan, 2011, p. 205. The corresponding chapter with an identical paragraph can also be found on p. 16 of this article ( Memento of September 4, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) by the author. It is available for download as a PDF on the website of the European Consortium for Political Research.
    21. ↑ Christian Schäfer: "Widernaturliche Unzucht" (2006), p. 253 ( limited preview in the Google book search)
    22. ^ Rainer Hoffschildt: 140,000 convictions according to "§ 175". In: Fachverband Homosexualität und Geschichte e. V. (Ed.): Invertito - 4th year - Denounced, persecuted, murdered: Homosexual men and women in the Nazi era. MännerschwarmSkript Verlag, Hamburg 2002, ISBN 3-935596-14-6 , pp. 140-149.
    23. ↑ Kraushaar 1997, 62.
    24. ↑ Gottfried Lorenz: Richard Gatzweiler . On the occasion of the guided tour through the exhibition "Persecution of Homosexuals in Hamburg" (Hamburg State Library) on February 25, 2007.
    25. ^ A b Andreas Pretzel: Nazi Victims with Reservation: Homosexual Men in Berlin after 1945. Lit Verlag, Berlin / Hamburg / Münster 2002, ISBN 3-8258-6390-5 , p. 306 f.
    26. ↑ BVerfG, judgment of May 10, 1957, Az. 1 BvR 550/52, BVerfGE 6, 389 - Homosexuals.
    27. ↑ E 1962 , BT-Drs. IV / 650.
    28. ↑ [ http://dipbt.bundestag.de/doc/btd/04/006/0400650.pdf BT-Drucksache IV / 650, page 375ff
    29. ↑ Uwe Scheffler: The Age of Reform 1953–1975 ( Memento from January 9, 2016 in the Internet Archive ) (PDF; 535 kB), European University Viadrina - Law, 2008, p. 186.
    30. ↑ Bernhard Nolz: “Schwule Säue!” ( Memento from June 12, 2007 in the Internet Archive ), Information Service Science and Peace, 3/1995.
    31. ↑ Stümke 1989: 138 f.
    32. ↑ Quoted from Ron Steinke: "A man who with another man ..." - A short history of § 175 in the FRG , Forum Recht, issue 2/2005, pp. 60–63.
    33. ↑ Confess that you are different . In: Der Spiegel . No. 11 , 1973, p. 46 ( Online - Mar. 12, 1973 ).
    34. ↑ Michael Glas: 100 Years of the Gay Movement - Part 3 - The Formation Phase from 1969 ( Memento from December 11, 2011 in the Internet Archive ), September 28, 1997, Version: February 20, 1998, nuernberg.gay-web.de.
    35. ↑ Helmut Ostermeyer : Is the new § 175 StGB unconstitutional? Journal of Legal Policy, 1969, p. 154.
    36. ↑ BVerfG, decision of October 2, 1973 , Az. 1 BvL 7/72, guiding principle.
    37. ↑ Christian Schäfer: "Unnatural fornication" (§§ 175, 175 a, 175 b, 182 a. F. StGB) , Berliner Wissenschaftsverlag 2006, ISBN 3-8305-1241-4 , p. 216.
    38. ↑ Bundestag printed paper VI / 1552, p. 9 ff.
    39. ↑ Thomas Stephan: Sexual abuse of young people. Tectum Verlag, Marburg 2002, ISBN 3-8288-8433-4 , p. 23.
    40. ↑ [http ://www. Freiheit.org/files/288/1980_Bundestagswahlprogramm.pdf '' FDP Bundestag election program 1980 ''] (link not available)
    41. ↑ Gay at twelve . In: Der Spiegel . No. 25 , 1981, pp. 52-53 ( Online - June 15, 1981 ).
    42. ^ Letters to the editor: Helmut Schmidt clarifies. In: Welt Online . April 11, 2010, accessed May 11, 2011 .
    43. ↑ Rainer Haubrich : Interview with Helmut Schmidt: “Homosexual Chancellors? No problem". In: Welt Online. May 9, 2010, accessed May 11, 2011 .
    44. ↑ http://dip21.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/11/041/1104153.pdf
    45. ^ Treaty between the GDR and the Federal Republic of Germany on the establishment of the unity of Germany -unification treaty- (1990). In: verfassungen.de. Retrieved February 17, 2015 .
    46. ↑ Appendix II, Chap. III Subject C Section I No. 1 of the Unification Treaty.
    47. ↑ BT-Drs. 14/8276 (draft law; PDF; 265 kB), 14/9092 (resolution recommendation of the Legal Affairs Committee; PDF; 275 kB)
    48. ↑ a b plenary minutes 14/237 (PDF; 1.2 MB) p. 23733 ff., 23741.
    49. ^ Rehabilitation and compensation for those convicted of homosexual acts in Germany after 1945. In: dipbt.bundestag.de. December 17, 2008, accessed February 17, 2015 .
    50. ↑ Recommended resolution and report. In: dipbt.bundestag.de. March 20, 2009, accessed February 17, 2015 .
    51. ↑ Resolution of the Federal Council on measures to rehabilitate and support those convicted of consensual homosexual acts in both German states after 1945. In: dipbt.bundestag.de. April 27, 2012, accessed February 17, 2015 .
    52. ↑ See: Answer of the Federal Ministry of Justice on behalf of the Federal Government to the written question from Angelika Graf (Rosenheim) (SPD) on the implementation status of the Federal Council initiative , Bundestag printed paper 17/14744 , No. 30.
    53. ^ Rehabilitation and compensation for those convicted of homosexual acts in Germany after 1945. In: dipbt.bundestag.de. December 1, 2010, accessed February 17, 2015 .
    54. ↑ Measures to rehabilitate and support those convicted of consensual homosexual acts in both German states after 1945. In: dipbt.bundestag.de. November 7, 2012, accessed February 17, 2015 .
    55. ^ Rehabilitation and compensation for persecuted lesbians and gays in both German states. In: dipbt.bundestag.de. September 26, 2012, accessed February 17, 2015 .
    56. ↑ Federal government rehabilitates convicted homosexuals . In: Süddeutsche.de . March 22, 2017. Retrieved June 26, 2017.
    57. ↑ Law on the criminal rehabilitation of persons convicted after May 8, 1945 for consensual homosexual acts (StrRehaHomG) at juris
    58. ↑ a b Tilmann Warnecke: Bundestag resolves rehabilitation of gays. In: Tagesspiegel online . June 23, 2017. Retrieved June 26, 2017.
    59. ↑ Embarrassing neck court order of Emperor Charles V (Constitutio Criminalis Carolina) from 1532 ( Memento from July 19, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) (PDF; 695 kB), at smixx.de
    60. ↑ opinioiuris.de
    61. ^ A b Christian Friedrich Koch: General land law for the Prussian states. 3rd probably ed. Volume 2.2.2 = 4.2, Nachtr. Ud Reg., Berlin 1864, p. 141. (at dlib-pr.mpier.mpg.de).
    62. ↑ RGBl. 1871, p. 127. See also the Criminal Code for the North German Confederation. Decker, Berlin 1870, p 46 . In: German Text Archive , accessed on August 8, 2013.
    63. ^ The Criminal Code for the German Reich together with the Introductory Act in short explanations, edited by Dr. Hermann Göbel, Director at the District Court I in Berlin, Verlag CL Hirschfeld, Leipzig 1913.
    64. ↑ Art. 6 of the law amending the Criminal Code of June 28, 1935, RGBl. I p. 839.
    65. ↑ Criminal Code and Other Criminal Laws , ed. from the Ministry of Justice of the German Democratic Republic, Deutscher Zentralverlag, Berlin 1951.
    66. ^ Criminal Code of the German Democratic Republic , published by the Ministry of Justice, 8th edition. State Publishing House of the German Democratic Republic, Berlin 1984.
    67. ↑ Plenary minutes 12/216 (PDF; 6.1 MB), pp. 18.698–18.706.
    68. ↑ BGBl. 1994 I p. 1168
    69. ↑ BGBl. 2002 I p. 2714 (PDF; 16 kB)
    70. ^ Zeit.de: Cabinet decides to rehabilitate convicted homosexuals. Retrieved June 20, 2017 .
    This article was added to the list of excellent articles on September 24, 2004 in this version .