Debate about order call: Siegmund defends his freedom of speech
Debate about order call: Siegmund defends his freedom of speech
On Monday, August 12, 2024, there was an important trial at the State Constitutional Court in Dessau-Roßlau. This revolved around the political freedom of speech and the call for orders, which the President of the Landtag Gunnar Schellenberger (CDU) pronounced in June 2023 to the co-parliamentary group leader of the AfD, Ulrich Siegmund.
The importance of the debate
This case has far-reaching implications for the political landscape in Saxony-Anhalt. The discussion not only affects the rights of individual MPs, but is also seen as part of a broader trend in which the limits of freedom of expression are repeatedly redefined. Ulrich Siegmund sees himself restricted in his freedom of speech and argues that such ordinance calls are politically motivated and endanger freedom of expression.
The background of the argument
The controversies go back to 2018, as Siegmund, as a debate in the state parliament of the left-wing MP Christina Buchheim, "no longer accused of mentally accused of his fraction colleagues. These statements led to a turbulent moment in the state parliament in which Schellenberger finally had to intervene to calm the session.
The negotiation at the State Constitutional Court
At the negotiation on Monday it became clear that the positions would diverge. Siegmund and his lawyer Lauren's Nothdurft emphasized that the statements were inextricably linked to the political debate and were therefore covered by freedom of speech. Nothdurft emphasized that there was not a sufficient justification for the order call at this point, which has legal questions.
on the other hand, Alexander Thiele represented the state parliament president and denied the argument of the AfD. He pointed out that the order call was not justified in terms of content, but in terms of procedural law in order to protect the order in the state parliament.
Inexpicted decisions are on
The decision of the state constitutional court is expected in September 17, 2024 and could be an important course for political culture in the country. Already now there is a growing nervousness about the future manners among MPs, since the debates about freedom of expression and the rights of the MPs make an emotional nerve.
For the AfD, this lawyer is not only a conflict for a single order call, but a symbol of the struggle for the preservation of freedom of expression in political discourse. Siegmund clearly expressed this in an interview: "We have the feeling that freedom of expression in this country is abolished in slices." These statements could have far-reaching implications for future political communication in Saxony-Anhalt and beyond.
MDR (Engin Haupt)