display

They were everywhere. Wrapped in snow-white paper overalls. The faces are often masked. By the hundreds. In dozen of places at the same time. The police were overwhelmed. Their job was to keep the masked people away from the edges of the huge crater in which lignite was mined - from the "Garzweiler II" open-cast mine. But there were too many. The activists in white stormed past the police officers, ran over some and climbed into the pit, some 40 meters deep. Such scenes occurred again and again in 2018, 2019 and 2020 when climate protectionists protested against the opencast mine in the Rheinische Revier. That apparently triggered a kind of trauma in the government, says the Green parliamentary group leader Verena Schäffer in an interview with WELT AM SONNTAG. The state government still seems “almost traumatized by the demonstrations in the lignite mining area”.

Interior Minister Herbert Reul (CDU) apparently wants to cope with this trauma. In any case, he has now presented the draft of an assembly law that draws lessons from the tumult of recent years. And that it should make it more difficult in future for militant climate activists to play cat and mouse with the police at the Garzweiler crater. What in the expert hearing of the state parliament this week triggered approval from many constitutional lawyers and police representatives, partial criticism from the SPD and the Greens and sheer horror from the “Stop the NRW Assembly Act!” Alliance.

The critics complain that Reul is dragging a central basic right of democracy - freedom of assembly.

According to the Federal Constitutional Court, it is the fundamental right of those “who have no other way of getting involved in public opinion-forming with the prospect of being heard”.

Of course, the Minister of the Interior asserts that his draft protects this right, which numerous constitutional lawyers agree with.

Alone: ​​Reul would like to restrict the freedom of the demonstrators.

No more marches in white overalls

display

For example, the freedom of large groups to march in white paper overalls. So far, there is a nationwide ban on wearing uniforms for gatherings in the open air. People should not be intimidated by the appearance of demonstrators reminiscent of military groups. Reul's draft extends this ban by banning “uniform-like clothing” and “paramilitary behavior” if this appears intimidating or violent. "When hundreds of people in white overalls run towards a police chain, it conveys a willingness to use violence and has an intimidating effect," says CDU interior politician Christos Katzidis WELT AM SONNTAG. If, on the other hand, “five people stand in a pedestrian zone and demonstrate peacefully in white overalls,the intimidating character is removed and a ban would be inadmissible ”.

Reul is also declaring war on other textiles: for example a black chasm if it is worn by threatening groups of demonstrators. This outfit has been attracting attention to autonomous and left-wing extremists anti-fascists for years, who have come together to form the so-called black block. The alliance against Reul's law is now grumbling that "the climate movement with its white painters' suits and the so-called black block" should be "criminalized". Another almost traumatizing experience during the protests in the mine is associated with the “finger tactics” for the police. This means the following: The militant climate activists divided themselves into several groups (“fingers”) and reported dozens of spontaneous meetings near the crater, important railway tracks or excavators. "These spontaneous or urgent meetings often serve the purpose ofa better starting position to achieve the desired goal of gaining access to stimulating objects, ”explains Police Director Thomas Dammers, who has been in charge of operations in the Rheinische Revier for many years. In addition, those who gathered spontaneously mostly refused to name a meeting leader. Because then there would have been someone whom the police could have held liable. Such new spontaneous meetings without a contact held the police up and drove them far apart - until the police chain was extremely holey, the assault on the target was easy and the illegal occupation was reached.In addition, those who gathered spontaneously mostly refused to name a meeting leader. Because then there would have been someone whom the police could have held liable. Such new spontaneous meetings without a contact held the police up and drove them far apart - until the police chain was extremely holey, the assault on the target was easy and the illegal occupation was reached.In addition, those who gathered spontaneously mostly refused to name a meeting leader. Because then there would have been someone whom the police could have held liable. Such new spontaneous meetings without a contact held the police up and drove them far apart - until the police chain was extremely holey, the assault on the target was easy and the illegal occupation was reached.

No more cat and mouse at the crater

None of this should happen to the law enforcement officers again - this intention can be seen in the draft. So with the question of where the police will be allowed to ban gatherings in the future. The draft expressly mentions “Grubenrandstraßen as in the case of the Garzweiler II opencast mine” as such places. The risk potential there is too great. In addition, the draft puts pressure on meeting leaders, organizers and stewards to behave in accordance with the law. As soon as there are indications that the demonstration could be violent, the police may inquire about the personal details of the stewards in advance and, for example in the case of relevant previous convictions, reject them as stewards. Registrants and leaders of the demonstration should also have to provide their personal details. Then you can, if the meeting takes a different path than announced, for example,easier to settle. Which is even more true when a leader calls for criminal offenses. Then the congregation would no longer have a leadership. And if that is missing, the meeting can be more easily banned in the future.

display

This is precisely what triggers displeasure.

The alliance against the law of the interior minister complains that it should "completely deprive a spectrum of the climate justice movement of the freedom of demonstration".

And the “Parents for Future” (the older supporters of the Fridays for Future movement) complain that a list of all “folders with personal data” is “not logistically feasible for large demonstrations and would be tantamount to a demonstration ban”.

The SPD and the Ver.di union complained that these passages were too vague and left “an unnecessarily large amount of room for interpretation”.

No more public blockade training

According to the CDU interior expert Katzidis, however, the choir of critics fails to recognize "how much the draft strengthens freedom of assembly". This shows the planned protection of gatherings from troublemakers. If there are indications that counter-demonstrators are not planning a peaceful counter-rally but want to disrupt another event, they can be more easily withdrawn from circulation, according to the draft. Reul wants to expand the right of the police to impose reporting requirements on such foreseeable troublemakers far away from the demonstration site. For example, anyone who trains blockades to hinder a demonstration would have to expect the police to report. The police would then also intervene in such blockade exercises, for which climate activists in the lignite mining area had met publicly several times - before they blocked the railroad tracks and roads.At that time, the police had to watch them do nothing during their training.