5 ms·

Art 21 (2) bans 'political organisations that work towards a disruption or removal of the liberal democratic order'. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/gg/art_

Art 21 (2) bans 'political organisations that work towards a disruption or removal of the liberal democratic order'. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/gg/art_21.html https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/gg/art_21.html

adwn 5y ago
True, but that article only refers to political parties. It says nothing about personal opinions published on some website (unless you're a representative of a political organisation, then it's a different matter).
- hnbad 5y ago
  It's also almost never applied in practice. There are several openly far-right political parties and there have been two unsuccessful attempts to ban the party with the most well-known ties to neo-nazi movements, the NPD: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/NPD-Verbotsverfahren https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/NPD-Verbotsverfahren Note that this is a disambiguation page because there were two years long processes, neither of which resulted in a ban even though the more recent one did at least rule the party anti-constitutional, which resulted in laws being passed to exempt anti-constitutional parties from public party financing and the forced neutrality of public institutions in their statements regarding political parties. Still not a ban. I think the more relevant examples are: * Germany's strict laws surrounding "insults", which mean that you can incur a €600 fine for intentionally addressing a police officer using the colloquial form ("du" instead of the more formal "Sie") * the ban on "anti-constitutional" symbols, especially the swastika, various insignia, flags, songs and salutes associated with nazi movements (but also symbols associated with designated terrorist groups like ISIS), when used in a context that can be understood to express approval of the associated ideologies * the denial of the Holocaust But note that in practice these are punishable by law, not strictly prohibited/enforced by the constitution.
  - realityking 5y ago
    > Germany's strict laws surrounding "insults", which mean that you can incur a €600 fine for intentionally addressing a police officer using the colloquial form ("du" instead of the more formal "Sie") Do you have a reference on the "du" as insult ever being successfully prosecuted? I can't find anything.
    - hnbad 5y ago
      There are several Google results explicitly calling it an insult: https://www.prigge-recht.de/duzen-sie-niemals-einen-polizisten/ https://www.prigge-recht.de/duzen-sie-niemals-einen-polizist... https://www.helpster.de/polizei-duzen-das-sollten-sie-beachten_119529 https://www.helpster.de/polizei-duzen-das-sollten-sie-beacht... (the first one seems to be written by a legal expert) But it is indeed a bit more complicated as there may be circumstances where "du" could not be considered disrespectful (e.g. if the police officer does it first). There are a lot of Google results about German celebrity Dieter Bohlen winning a legal case by establishing that he uses the colloquial form with everyone and therefore using it on a police officer could not have been an expression of disrespect. But when dealing with police officers, the burden of proof tends to be on the "offender" in practice, so for most people it's probably cheaper to pay a fine than go to court. That said, unless you have the spare change to pay the fee or a legal insurance willing to cover you for this, I simply wouldn't risk it and since most Germans believe there's a crime called "Beamtenbeleidigung" (insulting a public official, which is not a separate crime from the more generic "insult" -- the misconception arises because it's not worth the effort for most people to sue over an ordinary insult) I don't think many people risk it unless they're already being considerably more offensive than merely being a bit disrespectful.

adwn 5y ago

True, but that article only refers to political parties. It says nothing about personal opinions published on some website (unless you're a representative of a political organisation, then it's a different matter).

hnbad 5y ago
It's also almost never applied in practice. There are several openly far-right political parties and there have been two unsuccessful attempts to ban the party with the most well-known ties to neo-nazi movements, the NPD: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/NPD-Verbotsverfahren https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/NPD-Verbotsverfahren Note that this is a disambiguation page because there were two years long processes, neither of which resulted in a ban even though the more recent one did at least rule the party anti-constitutional, which resulted in laws being passed to exempt anti-constitutional parties from public party financing and the forced neutrality of public institutions in their statements regarding political parties. Still not a ban. I think the more relevant examples are: * Germany's strict laws surrounding "insults", which mean that you can incur a €600 fine for intentionally addressing a police officer using the colloquial form ("du" instead of the more formal "Sie") * the ban on "anti-constitutional" symbols, especially the swastika, various insignia, flags, songs and salutes associated with nazi movements (but also symbols associated with designated terrorist groups like ISIS), when used in a context that can be understood to express approval of the associated ideologies * the denial of the Holocaust But note that in practice these are punishable by law, not strictly prohibited/enforced by the constitution.
- realityking 5y ago
  > Germany's strict laws surrounding "insults", which mean that you can incur a €600 fine for intentionally addressing a police officer using the colloquial form ("du" instead of the more formal "Sie") Do you have a reference on the "du" as insult ever being successfully prosecuted? I can't find anything.
  - hnbad 5y ago
    There are several Google results explicitly calling it an insult: https://www.prigge-recht.de/duzen-sie-niemals-einen-polizisten/ https://www.prigge-recht.de/duzen-sie-niemals-einen-polizist... https://www.helpster.de/polizei-duzen-das-sollten-sie-beachten_119529 https://www.helpster.de/polizei-duzen-das-sollten-sie-beacht... (the first one seems to be written by a legal expert) But it is indeed a bit more complicated as there may be circumstances where "du" could not be considered disrespectful (e.g. if the police officer does it first). There are a lot of Google results about German celebrity Dieter Bohlen winning a legal case by establishing that he uses the colloquial form with everyone and therefore using it on a police officer could not have been an expression of disrespect. But when dealing with police officers, the burden of proof tends to be on the "offender" in practice, so for most people it's probably cheaper to pay a fine than go to court. That said, unless you have the spare change to pay the fee or a legal insurance willing to cover you for this, I simply wouldn't risk it and since most Germans believe there's a crime called "Beamtenbeleidigung" (insulting a public official, which is not a separate crime from the more generic "insult" -- the misconception arises because it's not worth the effort for most people to sue over an ordinary insult) I don't think many people risk it unless they're already being considerably more offensive than merely being a bit disrespectful.