Petition Violations of Human Rights in Germany

Draft

Walter Keim, Email: wkeim@online.no
Torshaugv. 2 C
N-7020 Trondheim, den 21. December 2003

Committee of Petitions
Deutschen Bundestages
Platz der Republik 1
D-11011 Berlin

Petition Violations of Human Rights in Germany

Sir,

today is the second anniversary of my unanswered Petition 4-14-05-104-042507 about Freedom of Information in Germany. Therefore I write a petition on additional violations of human rights.

The governments of Switzerland: http://www.ofj.admin.ch/themen/oeffprinzip/intro-d.htm, Serbia http://www.yumediacenter.com/english/mom/2003/7/m280703e.html#vest1 and Montenegro have sent draft FOI laws to parliament. Germany (in 12 of 16 lander) and Luxembourg are now competing to be the last in Europe regarding Freedom of Information.

Germany is the only OECD country, the only industrialized country and the only civilized country without freedom of Information, including access to public documents.

Here are additional violations of human rights:

The United Nations (UN) have 1948 given the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Afterwards many international conventions were signed to secure human rights. Germany has among other signed the following conventions:

The European Union guarantees Human Rights according to Article 53 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU.

Violations of the ECHRFF can be reported to the European Court of Human Rights. The Human Rights Committee of the UN is responsible for complaints about the ICCPR.

Human rights in question are:

Freedom of opinion is found in Article 10 of the ECHRFF,
freedom of association in Article 11 of the ECHRFF,
right to fair trial in Article 6 of the ECHRFF and
freedom of information in Article 19 (2) of the ICCPR.

The following cases about violation of human rights are known to me:

In complaint No. 40901/02 to the European Court of Human Rights ¹of 13. November 2002 violations of freedom of opinion have been filed. This case is because a integration helper violated ² the law on legal advice ¹⁶ , because he supported Jewish immigrants for free.
In case BARTHOLD v. GERMANY and STAMBUK v. GERMANY freedom of opinion was violated.
In case Vogt vs. Germany ( - 7/1994/454/535 - EuGRZ 1995, 590 - ) ³, Germany was condemned because of violations of freedom of opinion and freedom of association by the European Court of Human Rights. But the German courts seem not to respect this judgment ⁴ and try to continue as before.
Violation of Article 6 of the ECHRFF ¹⁴ : Deumeland v. Germany, BOCK v. GERMANY , PAMMEL v. GERMANY , PROBSTMEIER v. GERMANY , KÖNIG v. GERMANY , ELSHOLZ v. GERMANY , SOMMERFELD v. GERMANY , KLEIN v. GERMANY , MIANOWICZ v. GERMANY , METZGER v. GERMANY , H.T. v. GERMANY , HOFFMANN v. GERMANY , P.S. v. GERMANY , JANSSEN v. GERMANY , KIND v. Germany, BECKER v. GERMANY , BÖHMER v. GERMANY, THIEME v. GERMANY , HASSE-ANGER v. GERMANY , NIEDERBOSTER v. GERMANY, VAN KUCK v. GERMANY, HERBOLZHEIMER v. GERMANY.
Violation of the human right of freedom of information (including access to public documents) has been filed to the Human Rights Committee of the UN ⁶. In its report on ICCPR: CCPR/C/DEU/2002/5 of 4 December 2002 Germany claims in point 240 to comply with ICCPR Article 19 (2). But this is wrong because access to public documents is missing. Will the UN find out?
Answers to petition complaints never discussed human rights questions. Therefore access to documents was asked for, to study the communication between parliament and ministries. Access was refused:
- Petition Freedom of Information 21. Dec. 2001 to Bundestag: http://home.online.no/~wkeim/petition_ifg.htm#einsicht,
- Petition Freedom of Information 20. Dec. 2001 to Landtag Baden-Württemberg: http://home.online.no/~wkeim/petition_bw.htm#einsicht
- Petition Patients Rights 25. Oct. 2001 to Bundestag: http://home.online.no/~wkeim/petition4.htm#einsicht and
- Petition Patients Rights 25. Oct. 2001 to Landtag Baden-Württemberg: The committee of petitions rejects access. The Ministry of Social Affairs rejects as well.
The German Constitutional Court often does not give reasons e. g. in case 1 BvR 1057/02 ⁷ about Freedom of Information ⁸and violates Article 6 of the ECHRFF ⁹ . The same problem exists for Petitions ¹⁰, there is no right to a fair answer (1 BvR 1553/90) ¹¹. Here is an investigation who is responsible for the lack of freedom of information ¹⁵ in Germany.
Access to information is limited for patient files. A violation of Article 19 of the ICCPR. Who is responsible that patient rights are insufficient in Germany? ¹²
Watchdog documents violations of Human Rights.
The highest Court in the German land Rhineland-Palatine LG Mainz (1 QS 25/98 ) ¹³ stated that the court can not give access to documents (as human rights would demand), because it is the parliament, which would have to give this right.

The executive and judicative power does not give confidence always to be committed to human rights and does not respect the UN declaration of human rights, the European Convention of Human Rights International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU are not followed..

Will the German Bundestag promote and make human rights a reality?

Sincerely,

Walter Keim
Human Right violations in Germany: http://home.online.no/~wkeim/files/de_human_rights.htm
Support Freedom of Information: http://home.online.no/~wkeim/foil.htm#e-mail
Support Patients' Rights: http://home.online.no/~wkeim/patients.htm#e-mail

Enclosure:

Visitor No. since 18. November 2003

[Petitions] [Freedom of Information] [Violations of Human Rights] [Patients Rights in Europe] [Law on Legal Advice] [Homepage]

You are welcome to link this page.

Colours on picture: dark green: FOIA enacted. Yellow: pending law. FOIA= Freedom of Information Act