Deutsch auf Deutsch

----- Original Message -----

From: Walter Keim, Torshaugv. 2C, N-7020 Trondheim
To: Parliamentary Parties: FDP Fraktion Bundestag ; ; ; ;
Cc: Bundestagspräsident (President of German Parliament), Landtagspräsident von Baden-Württemberg, Ministerpräsident von Baden-Württemberg
Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2004 10:44 AM

Subject: In my opinion Germany must be sentenced

... as proposed at the Administrative Court in Berlin: and EU because it is the only major country in Europe without Freedom of Information: und A law has been promised since 1998, but has not yet been proposed to the German parliament Bundestag. Experts as the Freedom of Information Commissioner of Schleswig-Holstein consider the newest draft law a means of rejecting access. Germany will "advance" from last to second last place internationally:

I would like to emphasize that the right to information is part of the right to freedom of expression, which is confirmed by international human rights laws, specifically by the International Pact of Civil and Political Rights (article 19), and the Universal Declaration of Human rights (article 19), all of them ratified by Germany and incorporated into German law.

European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) President Luzius Wildhaber criticized the German government and the German constitutional court. The fact that judgments of the European Court of Human Rights are not followed by German courts shows lack of commitment to Europe:,1518,327801,00.html. Germany violates Article 46 of the European Convention of Human Rights to obey judgments.

Serbian parliament has 2. November 2004 adopted a law on access to information:, leaving Germany the last major country without Freedom of information. There where no votes against this law in Serbia, the same as before e. g. in Nordrhein-Westfahlen, Switzerland and Turkey:
When it comes to the right to give or receive altruistic free legal advice : the reform of the law from 1935 seems to fail:

Unfortunately the German Constitutional Court failed  to declare the Law of Legal Advice of 1935 unconstitutional : The result is very simplified that judges now can give free altruistic advice. Therefore the "Robin Hood" of German legal system has to use a case before the European Court of Human Rights: to overcome this Nazi law from 1935, which is unnecessary restricting Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union: "Everyone shall have the possibility of being advised, defended and represented. "

As shown by the Schavan case, Berufsverbote from the cold war time are back in Germany:
 The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU gives Freedom of Information in Article 42, access to documents in Article 41 (2), the right to complain in Article 43 (Ombudsman) and the right to fair answers within reasonable time in Article 41 (1). The "European Codex of god Administration" defines latest two months to get an answer (Article 17).

As European my opinion is that Germany should respect the fundamental rights of the Charter of the European Union.

In addition Germany and its states (Bundesländer) must learn to respect human rights.  



Walter Keim
In my opinion Germany must be sentenced:
Prevent this berufsverbot for a lawyer:
Who invites the Human Right Commissioner to Germany:
Why are Patients Rights insufficient? :
Fight the Nazi law:

Copy: EU Council, EU Commission, EU Parliament, EU Ombudsman, Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe, OHCHR-UNOG G/SO 215/51 GERM ES, Chancellor, President of Bundestag, Constitutional Court, German Human Rights Commissioner, Klaus Stoltenberg (German Ministry of Justice), Committee for Human Rights.

[Freedom of Information]    [Violations of Human Rights]     [Patients Rights in Europe]     [Critique of Patients Rights in Germany]     [Back to Homepage]