Extremism clause

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article or section needs to be revised. Details should be given on the talk page. Please help to improve it , and then remove this flag.

The declaration of democracy , also known as the extremism clause, was a written declaration of consent that applicants had to sign since 2011 for the three federal funding programs “Promote tolerance - strengthen competence”, “Initiative strengthen democracy” and “Cohesion through participation”. At the beginning of 2014, Federal Family Minister Manuela Schwesig (SPD) and Federal Interior Minister Thomas de Maizière (CDU) agreed to abolish the clause.

background

The clause contained a commitment to the free democratic basic order and the obligation to "ensure that the organizations, speakers, etc. selected as partners also commit to the goals of the Basic Law." It pursued the goal of "supporting extremist structures" to prevent. It was introduced at the initiative of Family Minister Kristina Schröder ( CDU ). Her successor, Manuela Schwesig , announced that she wanted to abolish the extremism clause.

The Left , Greens and SPD rejected the extremism clause. Numerous associations and people protested against the clause, many of them under the umbrella of the “Day of Action against Compulsory Confession” initiative. The critics accuse the extremism clause of obstructing projects against right-wing extremism . She criminalizes many of these projects as left-wing extremists .

Following a lawsuit, the Dresden Administrative Court declared the administrative regulation that requires the declaration to be made unlawful in 2012 . The second (concept of partner, scope of duties) and third sentence (concept of extremism) of the declaration of democracy are too vague according to the judgment. Due to the fundamental importance of the judgment, the Dresden court allowed an appeal to the higher administrative court of Saxony. The clause is now applied in a modified form. Now the sponsored no longer have to sign the declaration of democracy by hand. Instead, the grant notification stipulates that no tax money may go to extremist organizations or people.

The declaration of democracy

The signing of the extremism clause was defined by the Federal Ministry of Family Affairs as a condition for the allocation of funds to organizations interested in funding in the guideline on the program area "Promotion and support of quality-oriented advisory services in the state-wide advisory networks" . The extremism clause thus had no legal character of its own, but was merely part of an administrative regulation . In the wording it says:

"We hereby confirm that we are committed to the free democratic basic order of the Federal Republic of Germany and guarantee work that is conducive to the goals of the Basic Law.
As the sponsor of the funded measure, we also have to ensure within the scope of our possibilities (literature, contacts to other sponsors, references, the annual reports on the protection of the constitution of the federal and state governments, etc.) and on our own responsibility that the organizations selected as partners, speakers etc. also commit to the goals of the Basic Law. We are aware that under no circumstances should the impression be given that support for extremist structures is being promoted by granting material or immaterial services. "

According to the federal government, the extremism clause applies to funding applications from the federal programs “Promote Tolerance - Strengthen Competence” and “Initiative Strengthening Democracy” of the Federal Ministry of Family Affairs and for the program “Cohesion through participation” of the Federal Ministry of the Interior . In the case of the latter, it bears the name "Declaration on safeguarding democratic practice in project implementation" with the same content. As of June 30, 2011, 223 project applications with a total funding volume of around 18.7 million euros were approved in the federal program “Promote tolerance - strengthen competence” alone.

On September 14, 2012, the clause was amended by the Federal Ministry of Family Affairs. It now reads:

"We hereby confirm that we are committed to the free democratic basic order of the Federal Republic of Germany and guarantee work that is conducive to the goals of the Basic Law.
We will not entrust any persons or organizations with the content-related involvement in the implementation of the project, of which we are aware or which we expect to act against the free democratic basic order. "

Emergence

Federal Family Minister Kristina Schröder in March 2010

On October 6, 2010, the Federal Minister for Families, Seniors, Women and Youth, Kristina Schröder, announced via the microblogging platform Twitter that in future she would “demand a commitment to our constitution from initiatives against right-wing extremism, left-wing extremism or Islamism”.

The announcement immediately met with opposition, especially from initiatives and associations that are committed to combating neo-Nazi worldviews, structures and actions. Schröder responded to a criticism of a written commitment to confess: “Anyone who already has a problem with this unmask themselves.” Defamation or even criminalization of civic engagement against neo-Nazis is not to be feared, because, as Schröder asked, “who would everyone Are you serious about handing a confessed pyromaniac a lighter just because he is also involved in the voluntary fire brigade? Nor will we support extremist groups just because they turn against other extremists. "

In order to justify the clause, the CDU referred to the fact that in 2005 the commitment to the free democratic basic order under the then Federal Minister of the Interior Otto Schily had become part of the funding guidelines, which applicants had to take note of as a prerequisite for receiving funding.

Legal dispute

Legal disputes

On November 15, 2011, the Pirna Association Akubiz finally filed a lawsuit against the extremism clause with the Dresden Administrative Court . According to the association, the background is an approved funding application for 600 euros from the federal program “Promote Tolerance - Strengthen Competence”, which the association wanted to use to print information material to provide information about the former satellite camp in Königstein . The extremism clause was sent for signature with the approval notification and the request for funds. The association contradicted this approval notification. The objection was rejected by the Saxon Switzerland-Eastern Ore Mountains District Office. On April 25, 2012, the Dresden Administrative Court finally approved the association and declared the project sponsors' guarantee of the constitutional loyalty of their cooperation partners required in the second part of the declaration of democracy to be unlawful due to its vagueness. A written commitment to the free democratic basic order as in the first part of the declaration could, however, be made a prerequisite for receiving federal funding.

The judges thus joined one of the arguments of the Dresden lawyer Robert Uhlemann, who had represented AKuBiZ against the extremism clause. He had argued: “The clause uses the term ' extremist '. But what does that mean? This is a political term, a matter of definition and therefore indefinite. Administrative acts must be determined, says the law. "

An appeal was filed against the decision. The proceedings before the Higher Administrative Court have been concluded. The Pirna Association Akubiz declared the legal dispute to be over. The association is now suing the Dresden Administrative Court against the "new" clause.

Legal opinion

The law teacher Fritz Ossenbühl (University of Bonn), on the other hand, came to the conclusion in a legal opinion of February 2011 commissioned by the Federal Ministry for Family, Seniors, Women and Youth that the clause does not violate the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany . Although the clause was phrased unhappily in some places, it was absolutely absurd that the declaration constituted a violation of the principle of equality ( Article 3, Paragraph 1 of the Basic Law) or freedom of expression , since the declaration was required equally from all subsidy recipients. A violation of the principle of equal treatment would exist if there were deviations from this in individual cases or in a group of cases and individuals were privileged or disadvantaged. However, this is obviously not the case. The fundamental right of freedom of expression is not affected either, since every organization is free to forego state funding: “An organization that does not guarantee that the values ​​and goals of the Basic Law will be realized with the means granted will of course be the ultimate recipient out. It would be absurd if such an organization could participate in the state subsidy program on the basis of freedom of expression [...] in order to then thwart the state subsidy program with state subsidies ”(p. 23).

In a legal opinion on November 29, 2010 , the legal and administrative scientist Ulrich Battis came to the conclusion that from a legal point of view it is quite possible to demand a commitment to a free democratic basic order from the organization interested in funding. However, it is legally problematic that the declaration of accession does not clearly indicate “which behavior the final recipient specifically has to show”, who is to be understood by “partner”, “from what level of suspicion” a partner is not active in the sense of the Basic Law and how the legal consequences in The case of a violation. As a result, the extremism clause would violate the principle of equal treatment in conjunction with the principle of proportionality and the certainty requirement of the Basic Law.

In an expert opinion of the Scientific Service of the German Bundestag commissioned by Wolfgang Thierse on January 13, 2011, doubts are expressed about the constitutional permissibility to demand a commitment from grant recipients. Not having a certain opinion or not wanting to express it falls within the scope of protection of freedom of expression ( Art. 5 GG). Since one's own opinion is the most direct expression of the human personality, the obligation to a certain opinion is only permissible if this restriction of fundamental rights is indispensable due to a special relationship or legal position, for example for civil servants or for naturalization. This is probably not the case in a grant relationship.

Debate to extend the clause

In the course of the discussion about contacts of the Olympic participant Nadja Drygalla in the right-wing extremist scene in August 2012, considerations of the Federal Ministry of the Interior became known. According to this, since the end of 2011 it has been checked whether the signing of a “democracy declaration” can also be made a requirement for German sports funding. The amount of this sport funding by the Federal Ministry in 2012 was around 132 million euros. Representatives of the Greens immediately spoke out against the idea. The Minister of the Interior of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Lorenz Caffier (CDU), described the idea as a "system of opinion sniffing".

Cooperation with the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution

In May 2018 it became known that the Federal Ministry for Family Affairs would have a total of 51 democracy projects from 2015 to 2018 as part of the project "Live Democracy!" checked by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution. Apparently, the Ministry stepped up cooperation with the secret service in response to the absence of the extremism clause. The ministry did not inform the initiatives concerned about the reviews. A legal expert opinion on behalf of the Federal Association of Mobile Consulting came to the conclusion that the encroachments on fundamental rights associated with the review were not constitutionally justifiable and disproportionate.

criticism

Underlying term of extremism

Criticism of the declaration of democracy ignites the concept of extremism , which is problematic. The extremism model with its description of the political landscape in the social sciences has not yet been able to establish itself . In addition, the extremism model refers to the free democratic basic order , which has its roots not in democratic theory, but in addition to constitutional law also in political criminal law.

With a politically controversial term of extremism and an understanding of what is “democratic” and what is “anti-democratic”, which is constantly challenged in the public debate, no legal reliability could be established for the organizations interested in funding. The report on the results of the scientific support of the federal program “Initiative Demokratie Praise” criticizes the term “left-wing extremism”. Due to the diversity of the phenomena involved, it is not a suitable generic term.

Finally, an interim report by the German Youth Institute , which is entrusted by the Federal Ministry for Family, Seniors, Women and Youth with the scientific support of the program “Strengthening Democracy”, comes to the conclusion in an evaluating interim report related to the term “left-wing extremism”: “ As already described […], the subject area 'left-wing extremism' shows the clear challenge of defining the content of the subject and working out its youth-relevant elements. Given the limited research situation, this does not seem surprising. However, there are indications that the term 'left-wing extremism' denotes phenomena that are so diverse that it seems doubtful to what extent 'left-wing extremism' is a suitable generic term in the social science and pedagogical field (especially with a focus on the youth phase). "

It was further criticized that the extremism clause represents a suspicion and distrust of the state towards initiatives promoting democracy and that civil society organizations are entrusted with monitoring tasks.

Resistances

The opposition parties represented in the German Bundestag (SPD, Left and Greens) were among the critics of the clause .

Numerous initiatives had refused to sign the clause (e.g. AkuBiZ, Reach Out Berlin, mbr Berlin).

In March 2012, the DGB youth group merged education and advice initiatives in Hesse and Thuringia to form the “Platform Extremely Democratic”. The platform calls for the extremism clause to be abolished and for democratic participation no longer to be prevented. The platform promotes more democratic engagement. In their opinion, the general suspicion of the extremism clause unsettles organizations and initiatives and thus prevents democratic participation. If you want to win people over to the fight against neo-Nazis , they would need support and no new obstacles should be put in their way by being checked beforehand by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution. The “Platform Extremely Democratic” itself offers educational and discussion events, lectures and project days that provide information about the extremism clause and question the extremism that underlies it. In addition, an “Initiative against any concept of extremism” has been founded.

Other organizations and individuals who explicitly reject the extremism clause are: The Amadeu Antonio Foundation , the Federal Working Group Church and Right-Wing Extremism - Active for Democracy and Human Rights , the Alliance for Democracy and Tolerance , the Working Group of German Educational Institutions , Stephan Kramer (General Secretary of the Central Council of Jews ), Aiman ​​Mazyek (Chairman of the Central Council of Muslims in Germany ), the Network for Democracy and Courage , the Socialist Youth Germany - Die Falken , the VVN-BdA , the Antifascist Press Archive and Education Center Berlin , the Akubiz , the Fürth Alliance against Racism and Xenophobia and Wolfgang Thierse . The following humanities and social scientists, among others, speak out against the clause: Wolfgang Benz , Roland Roth , Albert Scherr , Franz Hamburger and Franz Josef Krafeld .

There are also gradual differences among the parties that reject the extremism clause. For example, the state chairman of the Left in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania , Steffen Bockhahn , admitted that it was “not asking too much” “that the sponsors of projects that are financed from tax revenues should adhere to the Basic Law”. On the other hand, it is too much for them to vouch for their partners.

Response to the criticism

Schröder opposes the arguments that demand the end of the application of the declaration of democracy, among other things with the words: "You cannot fight extremism with extremists". Schröder also referred to similarities with a less controversial decree that was initiated by Manuela Schwesig (SPD) and thus from the camp of critics in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania . This decree provides for a review of the constitutionality of employees in day-care centers.

Situation at the country level

Berlin

The red-red Senate of Berlin rejected the federal extremism clause. Reach Out Berlin and Mobile Advice Against Right-Wing Extremism Berlin (MBR) were two of the first major initiatives to refuse to sign the relevant declaration. The state of Berlin stepped in to make up for the financial losses . The Berlin state government had spoken out against the extremism clause and announced that it would examine legal means against it. The Berlin Senate sought a Federal Council initiative to repeal the clause. After the elections to the Berlin Senate in 2011, the political majority in Berlin changed, and the CDU, which is part of the government, supports the declaration.

Saxony

In 2011, Saxony was the first federal state to issue a declaration based on the federal extremism clause for the state programs against right-wing extremism (also known as the " Saxony clause"). It was abolished again in 2015.

Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania

In Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania there has been a decree by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health since July 2010 in connection with the operation of day-care centers and the approval of child minders. According to this, only those who sign a self-declaration that they do not in any way support efforts whose goals are directed against the free-democratic basic order or against one of its fundamental principles receive an operating license.

Thuringia

Since January 1, 2012, the state's own development bank has required a so-called negative declaration for all funding programs. Applicants must assure that they, board members and shareholders were not, are or will not be members of an extremist group. In May 2012, however, the state government answered a parliamentary question untruthfully in the state parliament that there was no extremism clause for state funds and that none was planned.

literature

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Der Tagesspiegel, January 31, 2014
  2. ↑ gera.de (PDF file; 13 kB)
  3. ↑ Kristina Schröder: "The extremism clause will remain" , welt.de, article from November 26, 2011, accessed on April 25, 2012
  4. ^ Family Ministry : Schwesig wants to abolish extremism clause , Spiegel online, article from December 21, 2013, accessed on December 23, 2013
  5. ↑ http://www.sz-online.de/nachrichten/artikel.asp?id=3045424
  6. ↑ Archive link ( Memento of the original from January 4, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.  @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.bundestag.de
  7. ↑ http://aktionstag gegenbebekanntniszwang.blogsport.de/protestschreiben/
  8. ↑ http://www.extrem-demokratisch.de/extremismusklausel
  9. ↑ Peter Seiffert: "Arrogance as we have not experienced it before". In: Focus Online . December 1, 2011, accessed October 14, 2018 .
  10. ↑ http://www.neues-deutschland.de/artikel/223497.schroeders-extremismusfalle.html
  11. ↑ a b Press release of the Dresden Administrative Court ( Memento of the original from April 28, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , April 25, 2012, accessed April 25, 2012 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.justiz.sachsen.de
  12. ↑ http://www.tagesschau.de/inland/extremismusklausel104.html ( Memento from April 29, 2012 in the Internet Archive )
  13. ↑ Archive link ( Memento of the original from October 27, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.  @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.akubiz.de
  14. ↑ Guideline on the program area "Promotion and support of quality-oriented consulting services in the state-wide consulting networks" of the federal program "Promote tolerance - strengthen competence", p. 14 ( Memento of the original from July 25, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and still Not checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF file; 117 kB)  @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.toleranz-foerdern-kompetenz-staerken.de
  15. ↑ gera.de (PDF file; 13 kB)
  16. ↑ Answer of the Federal Government to the minor question from MPs Daniela Kolbe (Leipzig), Sönke Rix, Petra Crone, other MPs and the SPD parliamentary group (PDF file; 246 kB), July 26, 2011, accessed on November 18, 2011, P. 2.
  17. ↑ "Declaration on safeguarding democratic practice in project implementation"  ( page no longer available , search in web archives )  Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (pdf), Federal Ministry of the Interior@1@ 2Template: Toter Link / www.z togetherhalt-durch-teilhabe.de  
  18. ↑ Archive link ( Memento of the original dated November 16, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.  @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.toleranz-foerdern-kompetenz-staerken.de
  19. ↑ twitter.com: In the future, I will ask initiatives against right-wing extremism, left-wing extremism or Islamism to adhere to our constitution.
  20. ↑ a b "Schröder spoils it with initiatives against the right", WELT online, October 6, 2010, accessed on November 18, 2011
  21. ↑ bundestag.de
  22. ↑ "Lawsuit against extremism clause filed"  ( page no longer available , search in web archives )  Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , mdr.de, November 17, 2011, accessed on November 18, 2011@1@ 2Template: Dead Link / www.mdr.de  
  23. ^ "Correction" , declaration by AKuBiZ eV on akubiz.de from November 5, 2011, update on November 17, 2011, accessed on November 18, 2011
  24. ↑ "Extremism clause is illegal" ( Memento of the original from June 8, 2016 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , MDR Saxony, April 25, 2012, accessed on June 8, 2016  @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.mdr.de
  25. ↑ "Extremism clause in court: 'Spying' passages illegally" , netz-gegen-nazis.de, April 25, 2012, accessed on April 25, 2012
  26. ↑ http://www.taz.de/1/archiv/digitaz/artikel/?ressort=in&dig=2012%2F07%2F26%2Fa0095&cHash=8592ee1353
  27. ↑ Archive link ( Memento of the original from April 21, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.  @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.akubiz.de
  28. ↑ ndk-wurzen.de (PDF file; 142 kB)
  29. ↑ On the admissibility of the extremism clause in the federal program "Promote Tolerance - Strengthen Competence" (PDF file; 123 kB), legal opinion by Prof. Dr. Dr. hc Ulrich Battis, November 29, 2010, accessed November 18, 2011
  30. ↑ thierse.de (PDF; 190 kB)
  31. ↑ http://www.tagesspiegel.de/zeitung/der-fall-drygalla-innenministerium-will-demokratiebelösungen-im-sport/6973578.html
  32. ↑ Martin Kaul: Democracy projects examined. In: taz. May 16, 2018, accessed April 6, 2019 .
  33. ↑ Arne Semsrott: Family Ministry: If it becomes known how we work, we can no longer be trusted. In: fragdenstaat.de. Retrieved April 6, 2019 .
  34. ↑ Federal Association of Mobile Advice: Legal opinion proves: Review of democracy projects is constitutionally questionable and not proportionate. Retrieved April 6, 2019 .
  35. ↑ Sarah Schulz: On becoming the fdGO - The prohibition of the Socialist Reich Party 1952. (PDF; 383 kB). In: Standpunkte 7/2011 (February 2011), Rosa Luxemburg Foundation, Berlin.
  36. ↑ "We're sticking with it, the democracy declaration is correct" , sueddeutsche.de, November 18, 2011, accessed on November 18, 2011
  37. ↑ a b www.taz.de (PDF file; 3.8 MB), report on the results of the scientific support of the federal program "INITIATIVE DEMOKRATIE STÄRKEN", reporting period January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011, Maximilian Fuhrmann, Susanne Johansson, Katja Schau ; Retrieved March 10, 2012, p. 109
  38. ↑ Press release of March 7, 2012 Kin / ske www.hessen-thueringen.dgb.de
  39. ↑ http://www.amadeu-antonio-stiftung.de/w/files/pdfs/die-extremismusklausel.pdf
  40. ↑ http://www.petitiononline.de/petition/wer-sich-gegen-rechtsextremismus-engagiert-macht-sich-verdaechtig-aufruf-gegen-generalverdacht-und-bebekniszwang/160
  41. ↑ "Confession Controversy" in: Das Parlament 29–31 / 2012, p. 10
  42. ↑ http://www.bmfsfj.de/BMFSFJ/Presse/pressemitteilungen,did=175584.html
  43. ↑ "In Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, NPD sympathizers tried to infiltrate a day care center. In response to this, the SPD social minister Manuela Schwesig, like the federal government, introduced a declaration of democracy for day care center operators. [...] Nobody speaks there of a general suspicion against daycare operators. " on: http://www.bmfsfj.de/BMFSFJ/aktuelles,did=175568.html , accessed on February 13, 2013
  44. ↑ http://www.berlin.de/landespressestelle/archiv/20110510.1310.343720.html
  45. ↑ Saxony's democracy watchdogs know no pardon zeit.de, February 8, 2013
  46. ↑ Saxony creates controversial declaration of democracy from zeit.de, March 17, 2015
  47. ↑ Guarantee of work that is conducive to the objectives of the Basic Law in the granting of permits for the operation of day-care facilities - day-care funding , accessed on February 12, 2012
  48. ↑ http://www.thueringen.de/imperia/md/content/tmwta/aktuelles/fluthilfe/negativerkl__rung.pdf
  49. ↑ Archive link ( Memento of the original from December 17, 2014 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.  @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.mdr.de