|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
| Home About Contact Deutsch English Français Español | ||
|
The Disturber and the Disturbance in the Force – or: City Council Fails for the 4th TimeIt was once again City Council time in Weißenfels. But the Weißenfels City Council is always a very special experience.  I had duly registered the video recording by email 17 minutes before the meeting started on May 8, 2025, to avoid anyone having a crisis over it. I entered the hall and had hardly set up the first tripod when I was greeted by the adjutant of the council chairperson, who, it seems, was currently on vacation. Her wish – as in the previous three City Council meetings – was that I move away from this spot and go to the spectator gallery. Because only up there could video recordings be made. Why? That was neither explained nor justified. Down here, where the "cat's table" for the exclusively writing profession is, no such recordings were allowed. The escape route had to remain clear. However, the escape route was unquestionably free. I refused. I explained that up there in the spectator gallery, not only is it hard to understand anything, but filming is also significantly more difficult. This was confirmed by others – even by BLK TV – during the last City Council session. The adjutant said that was a subjective impression. But if several people have this impression, then it should be objective, not subjective. I asked if they wanted the people, the public, to be able to understand something. This question was not answered by the adjutant. She insisted that I must go up there. I explained that I would not. If so, it must be formalized as an administrative act – preferably in writing and properly justified. The adjutant replied that an administrative act could also be issued verbally. This is, of course, correct, but as an affected party, I have the right to request that such an act be issued in writing afterward. Since this did not happen during the previous three City Council meetings, I assumed that it would not happen this time either. The adjutant said that the administration did not have to do this. She claimed to be familiar with the law. However, it seems she wasn't quite as familiar as she thought because the Administrative Procedure Act (VwVfG) states in § 37: "A verbal administrative act must be confirmed in writing or electronically if there is a legitimate interest and the affected party requests it immediately." And yes, I have both a legitimate interest and have requested this several times before. Naturally, this legal requirement didn't interest anyone. The adjutant referred to the council’s standing orders. I pointed out that the standing orders, which a City Council creates for itself, rank very low in the hierarchy of legal regulations. At the very top stands the Basic Law with press freedom, then comes the Administrative Procedure Act, and somewhere much lower, the standing orders, which cannot violate higher laws. An administrative act must also be justified. As per § 39 of this Administrative Procedure Act. But justify? No, the adjutant did not want to justify anything. Her demand must be followed. This is the area of immediate execution – and such a decision must be even more strongly justified. But justify? No, the adjutant did not want to justify anything. Mr. Mämecke, the current head of the legal department and deputy mayor of Weißenfels, briefly joined the discussion. He agreed with the adjutant but then left our small circle. Why? Maybe he knew a bit more about the laws but didn’t want to go against the adjutant? Who knows. I orally filed an objection to the verbal administrative act by the adjutant. An objection, as § 80 of the Administrative Court Procedure Act (VwGO) says, has a suspensive effect. This means that you don't have to comply with the demand. However, the adjutant stated that she didn’t have to accept my oral objection to her oral administrative act. § 80 VwGO also regulates when the suspensive effect can be lifted: "The suspensive effect is removed only in cases where immediate execution is ordered in the public interest or in the predominant interest of a participant by the authority that issued the administrative act or has to decide on the objection." The question now is: What public interest exists that the audio and video quality of the recording will be so poor due to the miserable acoustics in the hall and the insufficient view for the cameras that in some parts it will be incomprehensible and less visible? The adjutant didn’t care about this. She repeatedly claimed it was subjective. I did not comply with her demand. I had filed an objection. She declared that house rules could be applied. Yes, the chairperson or their deputy can apply house rules. But that doesn’t mean that house rules can be applied arbitrarily. Because this is a public building and a public meeting – and that means the application of house rules is also an administrative act that must be justified accordingly. The deputy chairperson opened the meeting and called the group leaders for a consultation. This resulted in him reading out the standing orders again and asking me to move to the gallery. Fine, he can do that – but it didn’t change the facts, the legal situation, or my refusal. Because I wanted to record the session properly – with somewhat understandable sound. A motion was made to interrupt the session. Another consultation followed. Other council members and administrative staff made their comments. They considered it somewhat childish and said I was wasting their time. Yes, childish – I agree – but I am not the cause. The council members stole their own time. They could have carried out their meeting without interruptions. I didn’t stop them. I wouldn’t have interfered with the proceedings or said a word. They hindered themselves. My repeated reference to the legal situation caused some others to become upset. According to some, there was no need to justify this decision. I find this a very strange understanding of democracy and the rule of law. Administrative staff have taken an oath to serve the law. It seems that some haven't really internalized this. After some convincing from a city councilor, I decided to end the process. I was later told that the deputy council chairperson would have continued as planned. So, had I not ended the process, the meeting would not have taken place. The blame would, of course, have been placed on me. But I did nothing but position my cameras to record this press freedom... Uh... What’s that again? And wasn’t there something about the press being the 4th estate and independent? The next escalation would likely have been involving the police to remove me from the hall. And all of this based merely on their flimsy reasoning. Moreover, house rules can only be applied by the chairperson or – in this case – their deputy. The adjutant could not have issued or enforced this administrative act. She wasn’t responsible for it, yet she was sent to deal with it. But hey, laws don’t seem to matter much anyway. It was interesting that the City Council session immediately started as soon as I began packing up my equipment. It only took a few minutes, but that didn't bother anyone. I, "the disturber", who only wanted to record the meeting properly, who had no desire for such discussions, who wouldn't have said a word, felt a disturbance in the Force. The City Council – or rather, the now deputy chairperson – and some council members have, in my view, failed the democracy test for the fourth time. They still don’t want any public oversight, no transparency, no accountability to those who elected them. I refer to the recording of the city council meeting in Teuchern on the topic of IKIG. The complete opposite of what is being pulled off in Weißenfels. In Braunsbedra, recording was no problem. The district council doesn't really care anymore. In Naumburg, everything went completely smoothly. Only in Weißenfels is such a circus being staged. Why is that? Author: AI Translation - Michael Thurm | 10.05.2025 |
|
| Other articles: |
 | Hundreds of Books Await Young Bookworms at the 12th Zeitz “Reading Summer XXL”The Reading Summer in Zeitz begins on June 21 at 2:00 PM in the “Martin Luther” City Library... zum Artikel |
 | Monday Demo Zeitz: United in Protest for a Secure Future and Against Threats to Livelihoods!Together Against Threats to Livelihoods: The Monday Demo in Zeitz unites farmers, truckers, and citizens in protest against the irresponsible policies of the "Traffic Light People.... zum Artikel |
 | The Intermunicipal Industrial Area Is Coming – Even Without Teuchern’s Approval? – Ignored Protests and Lack of TransparencyDuring his monthly report to the Burgenlandkreis district council on December 9, 2024, District Administrator Götz Ulrich spoke about the next steps for the intermunicipal industr... zum Artikel |
|
Support the operation of this website with voluntary contributions: via PayPal: https://www.paypal.me/evovi/12 or via bank transfer IBAN: IE55SUMU99036510275719 BIC: SUMUIE22XXX Account holder: Michael Thurm Shorts / Reels / Kurz-Clips Imprint / Disclaimer |