6 ms·

It is clearly Merkel who made the decision. The law requires approval at that level, she is the one who announced the decision, the buck stops with her. This i

It is clearly Merkel who made the decision. The law requires approval at that level, she is the one who announced the decision, the buck stops with her. This is really terrible news for Germany and the EU as a whole. Merkel has said "this is a bad law and we have the option to ignore it, but we will prosecute anyway". Who rules Germany now, exactly? Is it Merkel or is it Erdogan? And if it's the latter, which is what it looks like, then how much influence does Turkey have over the EU as a whole?

bayesian_horse 11y ago
You obsess over singular persons having power to do something. But in reality, Merkel is not at all free to decide this issue. For that matter, the government as a whole is not free to decide this issue, regardless where "the buck" stops. Nor is Erdogan calling any shots, because he is only using an option that German law provides to any organ of a foreign state. To any Human Being actually, considering that there are cases of personal defamation pending. Nothing special about Erdogan, except that he is exerting that option rather spectacularly to his own detriment. The sad thing about this issue is that obviously a lot of people don't bother to appreciate the complexity of the issue and want to frame it as a question of who is in power and who is calling the shots. If you don't want to be ruled by dictators, start recognizing law and institutions at work, rather than attributing everything that happens to the power and will of singular persons.
- projectramo 11y ago
  ^^^^^ This. This should be restated at the root level so everyone could see it.
- hussong 11y ago
  Most people seem to focus on the political side of this whole affair, but at the same time it is clearly a legal case as well (and a rather interesting one) with hundreds of pending legal complaints
- matthewmacleod 11y ago
  I would point out that the German government explicitly is free to decide whether or not prosecution continues. I don't think it's a good idea that this is the case, but it is.

bayesian_horse 11y ago

You obsess over singular persons having power to do something. But in reality, Merkel is not at all free to decide this issue. For that matter, the government as a whole is not free to decide this issue, regardless where "the buck" stops. Nor is Erdogan calling any shots, because he is only using an option that German law provides to any organ of a foreign state. To any Human Being actually, considering that there are cases of personal defamation pending. Nothing special about Erdogan, except that he is exerting that option rather spectacularly to his own detriment. The sad thing about this issue is that obviously a lot of people don't bother to appreciate the complexity of the issue and want to frame it as a question of who is in power and who is calling the shots. If you don't want to be ruled by dictators, start recognizing law and institutions at work, rather than attributing everything that happens to the power and will of singular persons.

projectramo 11y ago
^^^^^ This. This should be restated at the root level so everyone could see it.
hussong 11y ago
Most people seem to focus on the political side of this whole affair, but at the same time it is clearly a legal case as well (and a rather interesting one) with hundreds of pending legal complaints
matthewmacleod 11y ago
I would point out that the German government explicitly is free to decide whether or not prosecution continues. I don't think it's a good idea that this is the case, but it is.