Germany: Anti-Radical Decree applied against teacher
01 March 2006
A left-wing activist, who took legal action against the refusal by the regional authorities of Baden-Württemberg to employ him, has received a negative first instance decision from the regional administrative court in Karslruhe. The regional ministry of culture, and by its decision also the court, are of the opinion that Michael Csaszkóczy, who has recently completed his teaching degree in History and German language, belongs to an anti-fascist group (Antifaschistische Initiative Heidelberg - AIHD) which "attacked and defamed the Federal Republic of Germany" and "transgressed the border of legitimate critique of our state and its constitution". The AIHD is under observation by the regional internal security services in Baden-Württemberg for its allegedly 'radical' left-wing activities. In reply to these allegations, Csaszkóczy says:
I was shocked that this was formulated and said in such a frank and audacious manner. In my opinion, by now even within mainstream society, it is no longer questioned that there have been continuities between national-socialism and the Federal Republic of Germany or that racist attacks have become an everyday occurrence. To try and codify such facts as an illegitimate critique of the state, is a questionable attempt to prescribe political history from above
The authorities are basing their decision on the so-called "Anti-Radical Decree" from 1972, according to which "an applicant [to a civil service position] may only be appointed into public service [if he] guarantees that he is committed at any time to the liberal democratic constitutional structure [as laid down in] the German constitution [Grundgesetz]". Article 2(2) of the degree lays down that
If a civil servant belongs to an organization, which pursues anti-constitutional goals, then this membership justifies doubts about whether he will be committed at any time to the liberal democratic constitutional order. As a rule, these doubts justify a refusal of the application for employment.
The decree was brought in by Chancellor Willy Brandt and the regional premiers in January 1972, as a response to the militant group Rote Armee Fraktion and in an attempt by Brandt to counter an internal political crisis he was facing at the time. Between 1972 and the late 1970s, around 3 million people were checked for their "commitment to the constitution", thousands were refused entry into the civil service and hundreds were dismissed from their jobs. There has since been a broad campaign to stop the so-called employment bans, and over 10,000 persons, including many members of parliament, have signed a petition (www.gegen-berufsverbote.de). The campaign against the Anti-Radical Decree, which supports Csaszkóczy, writes that:
All in all there were 11,000 official "ban" proceedings, which resulted in the rejection of 1,250 applicants (for civil service positions), some of which [...] took over 20 years. After 1979, this instrument of repression has been only partially or sporadically applied. In spite of that, it is still embedded in the laws of many German States, for example in the "Civil Service Law of Baden-Württemberg". This form of political intimidation is unique in Europe and has been condemned by many international civil liberties organizations as a clear violation of human rights. In 1995, the European Court of Human Rights decided accordingly in the case of a high school [...] teacher affected by the "ban".
The ECHR case cited above refers to Vogt v. Germany (26.9.95), which decided that Germany was in breach of Article 10 (right to freedom of expression) and Article 11 (right to freedom of assembly and association) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The teacher Dorothea Vogt had been dismissed from the civil service in 1987 on account of her political actions on behalf of the German Communist Party (DKP). The government subsequently settled with her, providing compensation for her time without full ea