The consequences from the file scandal in the Federal Chancellery
Legal consequences, the briefcase in the Federal Chancellery first does not seem to have for the involved data killers, but for the planning of the press. Tomorrow Friday, three editors of the "Time" before the district court of Hamburg Mitte. You are charged with the mystery bouncy. You have "Official types of criminal proceedings in essential parts in the wording" before a "public negotiation" released. It threatens money bubes, yes even imprisonment.
The trio had the "Operation Loose button" In the Bonn Chancellery, which went, reported, reports, and literally quoted from the secret final report of the special investigator Burkhard Hirsch (see also Interview) in the Bonn chancellor’s office. Display was reimbursed. However, not against the data killers who have three gigabytes of data on conscience, but against the journalists Bruno Schirra, Thomas Small-Brockhoff and Martin Klingst.
"Shredding of unimaginable quality"
In the current time, the Prasident of the Bundesarchiv, Hartmut Weber, dicks: "The case of the co-destruction in the Chancellery of Helmut Kohl reaches a for archives so far unimaginable quality." The gentlemen in the Federal Chancellery did not change the change of government as a democratic normal case, but "apparently considered a ‘enemy overnight’."
At that time became apparent from the Hirsch report, data consciously and coordinated deleted, passes out of files. Even the registry tools, which could prove the advances. Transparency and control have been deliberately prevented. So it may not be surprising that this is mainly due to files to trust privatizations, for the sale of the Leuna refinery, to the weapon export of Fuchs track tankers as well as for the construction of a tank factory in Canada. After segregation of Weber, the extermination action has violated applicable law and administrative regulations, according to this "the state of a thing is always apparent at any time from the files" got to.
Printing certificate for critical reporting
Already last week was against the "Time"-Journalists negotiate. At that time, however, the judge read only the incriminated time articles and parts of the files. He tried to convince the defendants of accepting a money pow – so no confidence is associated.
However, the editors do not want to adjust the procedure. Bruno Schirra opposite Telepolis: "It is a fundamental matter that should also be treated as well." An judgment, but also a money pit was "Prevent a certain type of reporting." The news magazine "The mirror", the after the "Time"-Report also quoted and then complained, the money pit had paid wesired.
Chancellor’s gate remains follow?
When US Prasident Richard Nixon rolled over the Watergate scandal, the last thing he wanted to rescue were hundreds of clay. Each conversation in the woman’s house had had Nixon recorded. Partially compromising material about motifs and strategies in the Vietnam war, to the ratio to China. Nixon could keep most of the bander and only had to – judicially forced – ie a small part.
The American politics moved their teachings from the scandal: In 1974, the Freedom of Information Act obliged all the bodies of the Confederation, with the exception of the immediate staff of the Prasident, to make any burger on written application. The answer must be made within 10 days, another 10 wearing are possible. The case shows Schirra that "A dinner arrogance against the American democracy negative is not appropriate."
In fact, German policy has no lessons from the briefcandal in the Federal Chancellery to this day. To date, there is no similarly coarsent Information Freedom Act. As an EU Commission Sprasident Romano Prodi, Schroder Schroder does not even have a list from which to look like, who sends him by mail and what post he answers.
The fact that politicians consider files as private property is not unusual, women Hartmut Weber: "Without an injustice awareness take you "their" Documents after the end of their term of office. Often fonts of politicians also land as so-called estate in the shelves of the party foundations, which is not unproblematic for the work of the Federal Archives."
After all, the Federal Government has adopted a new directive for the file transfer. This is: "Documents can not be removed from the file, not to be lolled when using electronic transaction processing." Also, a personal approval of all "in the exploitation of tasks of the federal government or received documents" forbidden.
The German press UBLIGEN has not learned nothing from the scandal: a sustainable debate about more transparency and control has not launched them until today. ()