The rule of law is a valuable asset. Restrictions on fundamental rights, which were commonplace during the pandemic, should be warning enough. Especially since, as we now know, many of the restrictions were unnecessary. Public servants in particular should strive to be careful when dealing with restrictions on fundamental rights.
As a fan advocate, I am particularly attentive when it comes to this topic. After all, during interrogations or in the courtroom, I often have to deal with police officers who are known not to take the rights of the accused very seriously. Here is an example from the court in Moabit. After an arraignment, I sat with the client in the hearing room and listened to the evidence being taken. A police officer, who was contacted by witnesses to the incident at the time, was interviewed. He made his statement calmly and matter-of-factly. There was nothing to complain about – until he said the defendant had been very uncooperative. Typical sentences that are often added at the end of a statement to make the accused look bad. Of course the defender listens up. When I asked to what extent the accused had behaved uncooperatively, things became interesting. The client initially did not want to comment on the accusation, then he even denied it and he also did not want to be searched. Interesting – aren’t these the rights of every accused in criminal proceedings? I wanted to know whether there had been any more uncooperative behavior. The officer said no. I pointed out to him that what was mentioned was a matter of the accused’s rights being exercised, and certainly not of uncooperative behavior. The judge and prosecutor didn’t interrupt me, they probably saw it the same way. The police officer looked at me with wide eyes; he obviously didn’t understand.
Unfortunately, as long as officials think they can describe defendants who exercise their rights as uncooperative, we have a lot to do in the constitutional state.
“Sport free!” from the fan advocate.
