I think we’ve seen ministries mishandle investigations at the pressure of politically appointed ministers like Stark Watzinger with her Fördergeld Affäre trying to cut funding to researchers that don’t fit in her political agenda, or the case with Berlin’s Culture Minister/Senator that ended up cutting funding to a cultural center that then sued his office and won (rbb24.de/…/berlin-joe-chialo-foerderstopp-oyoun-v…). I don’t think such cases should be admissible under a democracy, even a flawed one as ours. I don’t care if 4 out of 5 such orders are well intended, if 1 out of 5 exist because of political pressure. These institutions then have to fight their way through courts (while also being financially able to do so), while the state doesn’t have to use the courts at all. That can take ages. If the government wants to ban an organization, it should use the court system, and everything should be on the table. Closing down entire cultural institutions isn’t something as simple as “closing down some restaurant”. If Hamburg had this cultural center in view for so long, even years, why hasn’t it used the courts to close it down? It takes the same amount of time to take them to court after all.
This is what to me is concerning about Germany and especially German democracy.
they’ve had a very keen eye on all kinds of Islamists ever since 9/11 (remember where Muhammed Atta studied?)
And no, I won’t trade democracy for this supposed sense of “security” where governmental offices get to skip a ton of steps and political influence can poison the decision making.
I might be mistaken but I don’t think they’re even confidential, they’re just not automatically published.
Why is that? Why not publish your findings? And are you so sure about the fact that you can request them through a freedom of information act? I wouldn’t be