Legislative deceleration at the hold

If it’s about the subject of corruption of politicians, the copyright may also be able to keep in the cabinet closed in the closet

They liked to be the fly on the wall, if head of the local banks and savings banks meet with local politicians and advised to chat, perhaps the basic chocolates, private and public, building sites, building permits, mortgages, investors, loans and what else is so busy and suggests, and both know exactly who knows who whom he has in the hindhand.

If only the half of the true is, which is then privately paid, then democratic prediction of the independence of politicians of these actual political power and business ratios is approximately as far away as municipalities of debt-free households. (The attempt to privatization, with the help of "strategic partners", The hole shut off, which is due to lack of tax revenue, has been crowned by little success, sold out and dead savings).

Relationship work, lobbyism and foxes only separates a narrow ridge of corruption. The exact border is sometimes the closer you look, the harder to recognize. The smell, the "Gutter" does it easier; Only is not enough. That’s not justified. The prosecutor in the case Wulff is difficult.

The sharp perspective on questionable weighted conditions is also adjusted by habits that put the veil of the normatality of such relationships. Alone the professional handling of the politician with a confronted milieu, with persons living in a very similar world, with similar values, similar goals and similar arguments, leads to retracted attitudes of a thing, which can not be described by more than open. The word "without alternative" From the mouth of politicians is no coincidence.

Lobbying can count on coarse probabilities to meet suitable partners in the political class. Sometimes the cooperation up to the intercept of laws by private law firms (seemance appropriation).

That there is this gray area of inflections and fallows, is known (good read in the interviews of Reinhard Jellen or at the Thinking Pages), but is annoyed. Due to the discussion on side invokes of the parliamentarian, draw by well-paid lectures of the SPD chancellor candidate Steinbruck at events of the financial industry, just comes "Movement in the game" – After the socket of the Pandora was opened.

"Practically meaningless symbolic legislation"

How it is necessary that, in view of years of practiced intransparence, displacement and carryover, is already shown in the legislation in the matter "Corruption of Members". So you became the blog network policy.Org should notify that the deputies in Germany are regulated by law in such a way – one "practically meaningless symbolic legislation" -, that they are urgently encouraged after segregation of the Federal Court of Justice.

That there is a need for reform, it also refers to an opinion of the scientific service of the Bundestag. The document points out that requirements of international and European anti-corruption income are not implemented. For example, Germany has not ratified the UN Convention against corruption, since 2005, as well as Myanmar, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, North Korea and Syria.

The Council of Europe also recognized German law in 2009 in the case of corruption. It is not wanted by politics, Burkhard Schroder reports. Laws that wanted to implement international volunteers were rejected by the majority of CDU / CSU, SPD and FDP in the interior committee of the Bundestag.

Deputies include the German Penal Code only by § 108e StGB. Is dealt with in the voice purchase, nothing else. There is too little, acknowledges the scientific service that looks like the BGH legislation needs. Thus, the opinion, which also approaches the comparison with the right in other countries, can be seen that the independence and the integration of the official expansion of a Member is not properly protected by the § 108e StGB. And the criminal legislation is considered not sufficient. She should be reformed.

The report comes from September 2008 and was broken down on network policy.org. Yesterday, about two weeks later, blog operator Markus BeckElahl reported from a registered letter of the German Bundestag to his address with the request to depict the hitherto secret opinion on Member Corruption. The continuing unlawful publication is invalidary – due to copyright law.

BeckDahl refuses to acknowledge this reason. He is, as well as from other publications, no friend of "Bunkermentality in domestic policy", certainly not with this important topic. The report should remain publicly accessible to its conviction. His grounds:

"The German people" is on the front of the Bundestag building, the people pay the creation of expertise of scientific services, there is no confidence reason for the opinion – otherwise it was not allowed to be published according to IFG – and the reference to copyright is on behalf of officials or employees of the Bundestag in its working time created appraisal.

Among the comments on his entry are meanwhile many links on back-ups of the document. So for transparency is ensured in this case. How clear will the Bundestag react?

As far as copyright questions are concerned, the strean attitude that positions itself against press freedom has legal opportunities, and on "Depictional" to insist and may have to react sharply. Be in legal literature "the concept of openness has not been explored so far", said the legal scientist focusing on information and media law, Thomas Hoeren, in June of this year opposite Telepolis on the topic of initial publications (copyright versus press freedom).

And in political reality: what goods to keep from an openness that has fallen from a scientific service that he "his results under closure and thus keep away from the burger away"? And what a legislator, the resourceing regulations against the corruption of deputies shy?

Like this post? Please share to your friends:
Leave a Reply

;-) :| :x :twisted: :smile: :shock: :sad: :roll: :razz: :oops: :o :mrgreen: :lol: :idea: :grin: :evil: :cry: :cool: :arrow: :???: :?: :!: