Honor protection
As patronage the legal protection of personal honor is called the outflow of personal rights. It forms a barrier to freedom of expression , freedom of the press and freedom of broadcasting ( Art. 5 (2) GG). As a result, these basic rights from Art. 5 GG often prevail over honor protection. The protection of honor has to take a back seat to these basic rights, especially when the concrete statement is not a case of abusive criticism. Because even an exaggerated and abusive criticism does not in itself turn an utterance into an abusive criticism . A disparaging remark takes only the character of an insult to, if not more in their discussion on the matter, but the defamation of the person in the foreground stands. The term is to be interpreted narrowly. The limit to vicious criticism is not exceeded if it is not evident from the statement that the criticism of the person completely takes the factual issue into the background . When determining the limit to criticism of abuse, the factual and procedural nature of the utterance must be taken into account. Damage to honor usually has to withdraw from the freedom of expression if the allegation is part of a more comprehensive expression of opinion that serves to enforce legitimate personal rights in court proceedings and, in any case, from the viewpoint of the person making the statement , is not completely out of thin air. In addition, a judge is able and required to endure over-pointed criticism of his work in the "fight for justice".
Web links
- Bernd von Heintschel-Heinegg , Protection of Honor against Freedom of Expression - Three current decisions of the BVerfG (3rd part) , published on August 6, 2016 on Beck blog
Individual evidence
- ↑ Protection of honor
- ↑ Zeit Online, abuse criticism limited to rare exceptional cases
- ↑ Thomas Fischer, Commentary on the Criminal Code, 65th edition 2018, Rn. 28a to Section 193 of the Criminal Code
- ↑ Decision of the OLG Munich of July 11, 2016, Az. 5 OLG 13 Ss 244/16 in the case " Freisler-comparison " = Anwaltsblatt 2016, 767 = StV 2017, 183 = NJW 2016, 2759, confirmed by decision of the OLG Munich dated May 31, 2017, Az. 5 OLG 13 Ss 81/17 = Anwaltsblatt 2017, 783 = BRAK-Mitteilungen 2017, 239 = DVBl 2017, 979 = StV 2018, 163
- ↑ Constantin Baron van Lijnden , acquittal before the Higher Regional Court Munich: lawyer was allowed to call the Senate worse than Roland Freisler