2 ms·
>- the "CrewCrew" are not just some activists, but some sort of authorized force Legally, they would be "Ordner"[1], and are thereby "authorized". It is perfec
by rndgermandude 5y ago
>- the "CrewCrew" are not just some activists, but some sort of authorized force
Legally, they would be "Ordner"[1], and are thereby "authorized". It is perfectly legal for organizers of "assemblies" to recruit and use volunteers to keep order and peace, as long as these volunteers are unarmed (by law). The Gewerbeordnung does not come into play here. I am not quite sure they were up to snuff when it comes to identification, tho, as legally they have to wear a white armband saying "Ordner", and I do not think they did when I saw them (they did however have those t-shirts and other swag if memory serves right). But I might be wrong.
I am sure some people, maybe even the CCC president, were offended by Vincent's websites - to be offensive is a goal Vincent stated himself - and the CCC leadership then decided to ban him. We may debate if this was justified or free speech or whatever, but at the end of the day, the organizer of the Congress told him to fuck off. There might have been misunderstandings along the way, and/or the CCC may have changed their initial decision and/or fucked up their communication (they are human, after all). But the end result was a ban from the venue.
As I said in another comment, I find the assault of Vincent that then occurred extremely problematic, probably outright illegal assault (I see no evidence of justified self-defense by the security in the video). At the same time, I respect the CCC's decision to ban an "undesirable". The club members have to figure out for themselves who they want at their events and in their spaces.
And as I also said earlier, I find the lack of accountability of the security "crew" very disconcerting. You cannot have people running around playing police (their Congress-internal
DECT phone number even is "110", same as the police has in the public telephone network) who beat up people and cover their faces to hide their identities, all the while the CCC which these security people represent runs campaigns to get laws changed to make police more accountable by having officers to clearly be identifiable (by a number on their uniforms), wearing bodycams and raising the limits on when police is allowed to use force.
[1] https://dejure.org/gesetze/VersG/9.html https://dejure.org/gesetze/VersG/9.html
- detaro 5y agoI don't think Versammlungsgesetz is likely to be relevant to Congress. It's a regular event with paid tickets (primarily restricted to a somewhat limited audience), access control etc, not a public event open to all. Versammlungsgesetz is more relevant for public protests and such, which everyone can just go to (which in turn have stronger legal protections).