A German judge has ruled that the lockdown measure against Germans is wrong and bad, and many watchers are wondering what the consequences of the case will have upon other world governments.
It was a pandemic regulation that a local German man violated by hosting a party attended by his seven friends. Yet, the judge said that the regional government itself violated the “inviolably guaranteed human dignity” secured by Article 1 of the German basic law in the first place by imposing such restrictions.
According to the court, the government lacked sufficient legal grounds to impose the restrictions since there was no “epidemic situation of national importance” at that time and the health system was at no risk of collapsing as the Robert Koch Institute reported that the Covid-19 reproduction number had fallen below 1. The judge also ruled that the regional government had no right to introduce such far-reaching measures at all since it was up to lawmakers to do so.
Germans news has publically circulated stories for some months as a lead up to a court case where the judge was expected to rule that the pandemic lockdown measures there were too brutal for Germans to deal with.
Just now German news talked about the psychological effect lockdown has especially on children. And how the educational gap will only grow.
Their example family lived in higher middle class standards and both employed parents had the option of home office. I'm- ….
— blurredink (@blurredinkAO3) January 19, 2021
A German district court has declared a strict lockdown imposed by the government of the central state of Thuringia last spring unconstitutional, as it acquitted a person accused of violating it.
“A trivial case about a man violating strict German lockdown rules by celebrating a birthday with his friends has ended up in a decision the German media described as “politically explosive.” A district court in the city of Weimar did not just acquit the defendant but also stated that the authorities themselves breached Germany’s basic law,”Hedge accordingly reported, in their article on the topic.
The story was widely reported around Germany and watched by some around the world as the first case against lockdowns:
Breaking: Weimar court issues devastating ruling against German lockdown, finding a ban on contact for healthy persons exceeds what was advised by German public health authorities even in nightmare scenarios, and time for unprecedented measures has passed.https://t.co/Y1sGCA5dWW
— Michael P Senger (@MichaelPSenger) January 21, 2021
In an English translation of German court documents, Howard Steen, reports:
“A district judge in Weimar has acquitted a man who was to be fined for violating the Corona contact ban by celebrating his birthday with at least seven other parties from a total of eight households, six guests too many under Thuringia’s Corona ordinance. The judge’s verdict is scathing: The Corona Ordinance is unconstitutional and materially objectionable.
For the first time, a judge has dealt intensively with the medical facts, the economic consequences and the effects of the specific policy.
“Part of the rule of law is the requirement that laws be definite. Laws may not simply make blanket decrees and thus encourage interpretation by the authorities according to gusto and thus arbitrariness. According to the Infection Protection Act, the “competent authority shall take the necessary protective measures”. In the normal course of events, this means that excretors or persons suspected of excretion can be isolated or contaminated premises closed.
The Infection Protection Act does not provide for a general ban on contact that also covers healthy persons. However, as has been argued by many administrative courts to date, an overstepping of the regulatory circle of the Infection Protection Act beyond the normal course of events can be justified if it is an “unprecedented event” that is so new that the legislature could not possibly have made the necessary regulations beforehand.
The judge does not accept this excuse: As early as 2013, the Bundestag prepared a risk analysis of a pandemic caused by a “virus Modi-SARS” with the cooperation of the Robert Koch Institute, in which a scenario with 7.5 million (!) deaths in Germany in a period of three years was described and anti-epidemic measures in such a pandemic were discussed (Bundestagsdrucksache 17/12051). In view of such an event, which was considered at least “conditionally probable” (probability of occurrence class C), the legislator could therefore have examined the regulations of the Infection Protection Act and adapted them if necessary. This policy failure, as a result of which Germany had run into the epidemic virtually unprepared – without legal precautions to combat it, without stocks of masks, protective clothing, and medical equipment, could not now lead to politicians being allowed to close any regulatory gap as they saw fit.”
Please visit his site for the full article.
This story will be developing for some time, and I will be following the details to see if there is a chain reaction from it, as it hoped for by many around the world.
Kari is an ex-Community Organizer who writes about Voter Engagement, Cultural Marxism and Campaigns. She has been a grassroots volunteer with the GOP, on and off for 18 years. She is a Homeschool Mom in North Carolina and loves Photojournalism and Citizen Journalism. @Saorsa1776