Judicial Resistance to Exemption of Conscription Opponents: Criticism of Basic Liberties
The Peace Movement Erupts: A Questionable Ruling by Germany's Highest Court
The peace movement is blowing up, and it's all because of a ruling by Germany's highest court, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH). The BGH has made a controversial decision: a Ukrainian conscientious objector can be extradited to his home country, even though he faces the threat of military service there. This decision has sparked outrage among many, including the German Peace Society - United War Resisters (DFG-VK).
The BGH's Decision Sparks Controversy
"The ruling is scandalous and shows a worrying 'turn of the times' within the judiciary, which seems to want to align itself with the 'state of war' declared by the government," says Michael Schulze von Glaßer, political director of the DFG-VK. Martin Singe, editor of the magazine "Peace Forum," shares similar concerns, fearing that the legislature could use the BGH's ruling to declare the right to conscientious objection invalid for emergency cases.
Upon inquiring the opinions of various legal experts, it seems that the BGH has indeed made a questionable decision. Kathrin Groh, a professor of public law at the University of the German Armed Forces Munich, bluntly states, "The BGH is completely wrong." According to Groh, the right to conscientious objection is "immune to balancing" and cannot be restricted in favor of the state's defense.
Expert Opinions: "Vulnerable", "Inaccurate", "Completely Wrong"
Stefan Oeter, a law professor at the University of Hamburg, describes the BGH ruling as "vulnerable." Oeter, like Groh and others interviewed, believes the BGH does not accurately assess the situation concerning conscientious objection in Germany. Robert Esser, professor of criminal law at the University of Passau, agrees, stating, "I think the BGH does not accurately assess the situation in the German defense case."
All the experts interviewed agree that the BGH cannot shake the right to conscientious objection. While a constitutional complaint against the decision cannot be filed, many remain worried about the future of this fundamental right.
Quickly Refuse Military Service? Not So Fast.
Despite the BGH's questionable decision, it may not immediately impact the right to conscientious objection in Germany. However, fears persist that the federal government could change the way decisions are made on applications for conscientious objection through a simple law. Yet, according to legal scholars, there is currently no intention to change the process.
Until then, the DFG-VK recommends civilians prepare an objection but not submit it yet. The organization will hold a nationwide congress "against a new military service - and for the refusal of all military services" to further discuss the matter.
Enrichment Data:- The federal government can change the way decisions are made on applications for conscientious objection through a simple law, which sparks fear among those who value this right.- The European Court of Human Rights may permit limitations on rights related to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, including conscientious objection, in exceptional cases, such as when countervailing interests like national security or public order are implicated.- Previous court decisions confirm that the right to conscientious objection applies even in times of war, providing further protection.- The BGH's approach aligns with a qualified rather than absolute protection of conscientious objection rights, especially in extraordinary or emergency contexts, reflecting a nuanced and case-specific approach.- The German Peace Society - United War Resisters (DFG-VK) is advocating against a potential new military service and for the refusal of all military services at a nationwide congress.
The controversy surrounding the BGH's decision on the extradition of a conscientious objector has sparked concerns within the realm of politics, particularly among groups like the German Peace Society - United War Resisters (DFG-VK). Experts in the field of law, such as Kathrin Groh and Stefan Oeter, have criticized the BGH's ruling, characterizing it as "vulnerable" and "inaccurate". These concerns extend to the possibility of the federal government limiting the right to conscientious objection through a simple law, a move that could potentially redefine war-and-conflicts dynamics in Germany.
