Following the Hakenkreuz controversy: No probing initiated against SPD politicians
In Germany, a politician has faced no immediate legal consequences for defacing a ballot with a swastika, despite parliamentary immunity not providing blanket protection against criminal acts. Daniel Born, a politician from the SPD, admitted to writing a swastika next to the name of an AfD member during a secret vote, an act considered an electoral offense under German election law.
Parliamentary immunity in Germany protects members from prosecution for statements or votes made in the course of their official roles, but it does not provide protection against all criminal acts, especially those unrelated to legislative activities. Defacing ballots is a serious offense under the German electoral law, which undermines the integrity of elections and can result in criminal charges.
The public prosecutor's office decided not to investigate Born for not spreading or publicly using the swastika on the ballot, citing his parliamentary immunity. However, the prosecution is ruled out for a possible insult of AfD member Bernhard Eisenhut due to the same immunity.
Despite the lack of criminal investigation, Born faced significant political repercussions. He resigned as deputy president of the state parliament, withdrew from the SPD faction, resigned from his SPD party positions, and withdrew his candidacy for the state parliament.
The public prosecutor's office in Stuttgart decided against initiating an investigation into Born's ballot defacement due to insufficient grounds for a prosecutable offense. However, the act remains unlawful and subject to potential prosecution.
The swastika scandal involved Born marking Eisenhut's ballot with a swastika during a secret vote, an act that has raised concerns about the integrity of the voting process. Born described his actions as a "momentary lapse of reason" and a "serious mistake" in a personal statement.
Despite these actions, Born keeps his state parliament mandate, as the public prosecutor sees no crime in the ballot defacement. The state administration initially filed a criminal complaint against an unknown person in connection with the swastika incident, but the investigation has since been dropped.
This case highlights the complexities in enforcing parliamentary immunity and the laws surrounding electoral offenses in Germany. It serves as a reminder that criminal acts such as defacing ballots can have severe political consequences, even if they do not result in criminal prosecution.
Policy-and-legislation: The swastika scandal, involving a politician defacing a ballot with a swastika despite parliamentary immunity, serves as a reminder of the complexities in enforcing such immunity and the laws surrounding electoral offenses in Germany.
General-news: Despite avoiding criminal charges, the politician faced significant political repercussions, including resigning from various party positions and withdrawing his candidacy for the state parliament, following the defacement of a ballot with a swastika.
