|
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
| Home About Contact | ||
|
MDR to Enforce Broadcasting Fee Itself – Withdrawal of the State or Dangerous Precedent?Magdeburg – On May 13, 2025, the state parliament of Saxony-Anhalt passed an amendment to the Administrative Enforcement Act (VwVG LSA), creating a legal first: the enforcement of outstanding broadcasting fees will no longer be handled by municipalities but directly by Mitteldeutscher Rundfunk (MDR). What is being sold as a relief for cities and towns raises deep legal and constitutional concerns.  Enforcement by the Broadcaster Itself – A Paradigm ShiftWith this decision, MDR is legally authorized to enforce outstanding broadcasting fees on its own. It may use its own personnel or, as before, hire bailiffs. But this is more than just a technical change – it marks an institutional transformation. A public broadcaster, whose mission under the constitution is independent and state-free reporting, is now being granted a traditional sovereign power: the ability to enforce claims using state coercion.Legal Issues: When the Broadcaster Plays the StateThis decision raises significant constitutional questions. The freedom of broadcasting under Article 5 of the Basic Law protects not only the content-related independence of reporting but also the structural separation from the state. The Federal Constitutional Court has repeatedly emphasized that this distance from the state is a prerequisite for the legitimacy of public broadcasting.But with this new law, MDR steps out of its role as a state-independent media actor. It takes on the role of an authority with coercive powers – precisely the kind of power that is meant to remain with the state. This blurs the lines between state administration and independent media institutions – a constitutionally troubling development. Moreover: even bailiffs today are no longer civil servants, but so-called “justice professionals in public service,” often working on a fee basis. Their sovereign legitimacy has long been a subject of legal debate. If a broadcasting institution with a similar structure is now allowed to initiate enforcement measures against citizens, the question of democratic legitimacy and legal oversight becomes even more pressing. The Compulsion to Fund a Program Many Don’t WantAt the same time, the gap between the mission and acceptance of public broadcasting is growing. At a time when more and more people are critical of public programming or consciously avoid it, it is now the broadcaster itself that will ensure that fees are enforced – if necessary, through garnishment.Many citizens view public broadcasters as too close to the government, one-sided, or elitist. Instead of addressing this criticism, the political response is direct intervention: those who don’t pay will be dealt with directly by MDR – with force if necessary. This is not just symbolic of the growing loss of trust in public institutions, but also a dangerous development: the institution whose legitimacy is already eroding is now being armed with state power – against its own viewers. The Price of Relief is the Erosion of PrinciplesOf course, the desire to relieve municipalities of excessive administrative burdens is understandable. But the chosen solution – MDR as the enforcement authority – is legally and politically questionable.It creates an institutional closeness between broadcasting and the state that contradicts the spirit of the constitution. It delegates sovereign powers to an institution that was never meant to wield them. And it forces people, using administrative coercion, to pay for a program they deliberately do not use – or actively reject. This may seem efficient. But it is the wrong path. Coercion is no substitute for legitimacy – and certainly not a way to regain trust. Hope for Fee Resisters? – New Legal Avenues Open UpParadoxically, for citizens who have resisted paying the broadcasting fee, the new legal situation could open up new legal opportunities – especially if courts critically examine the measure. As soon as MDR acts as an enforcement authority itself, the question arises whether a broadcasting institution may act with sovereign powers at all without violating the principle of state distance or the state's monopoly on force. If an administrative court or even the Federal Constitutional Court concludes that the delegation of such coercive powers is unconstitutional, MDR’s enforcement actions could be rendered invalid. This would not just affect individual cases but could retroactively call thousands of proceedings into question and permanently block this method of collecting fees. The ironic result: the attempt to centralize and simplify fee collection could have the opposite effect – a legal weakening of the entire enforcement regime.Administrative Court or District Court?If MDR acts like a creditor and enforces directly, this could be interpreted legally as private debt collection – or at least no longer clearly fall under the classic administrative process. In that case, district courts would have jurisdiction – particularly for enforcement defense lawsuits or third-party objections.District courts follow a different procedural culture than administrative courts: less formal, more direct, and often more accessible to citizens. Disputes before district courts are usually more affordable and straightforward. MDR would have to provide detailed evidence that all conditions for lawful enforcement are met – something that in administrative procedures often happens via “automated notices” without hearings. This opens up new angles for defending against unlawful enforcement – especially if courts critically examine MDR’s institutional role. Press Release from the Ministry of the Interior and Sports of Saxony-Anhalt, May 13, 2025Magdeburg, May 13, 2025 No. 062/2025 Ministry of the Interior and Sports of the State of Saxony-Anhalt Responsible: Patricia Blei, Press Officer Halberstädter Str. 2 / at “Platz des 17. Juni” 39112 Magdeburg Broadcasting Contributions and Fees State Parliament Relieves Municipalities of Responsibility for EnforcementToday, the state parliament of Saxony-Anhalt passed the Act to Amend the Administrative Enforcement Act of Saxony-Anhalt (VwVG LSA). With the amendment, the enforcement of outstanding broadcasting contributions and fees has been transferred to Mitteldeutscher Rundfunk (MDR). This centralizes enforcement procedures. Interior Minister Dr. Tamara Zieschang commented: “By transferring the enforcement of broadcasting fees to Mitteldeutscher Rundfunk, municipalities are significantly relieved. Until now, cities and towns have been heavily burdened – including in terms of personnel – with handling enforcement procedures. The new regulation frees up these resources so they can be directed more effectively toward municipal core tasks.” Background: The enforcement of outstanding broadcasting fees has become a personnel and financial burden for some municipalities. MDR is now to be added to the list of authorities authorized to carry out enforcement; the municipalities previously responsible for enforcement are relieved of this duty. This will enable MDR to forcibly collect overdue contributions and fees in the future. This may be done with specially appointed staff or, as per the VwVG LSA, by using court-appointed bailiffs. Author: Американский интеллект | 14.05.2025 |
|
| Other articles: |
 | Great Success: Poverty Continues UnabatedYou have to celebrate success when it happens – or something like that. One such anniversary was the 25th year of the food bank (“Tafel”) in Zeitz. District Administrator Gö... zum Artikel |
 | District Administrator: No Right to Survive – Welcome to the New GermanyIn a country that likes to see itself as social, just, and Christian, a CDU district administrator now stands up and openly declares what is usually only whispered behind closed do... zum Artikel |
 | Slaughter a pig for me, I just want to taste – no real inquiries for the IKIG (Intermunicipal Industrial Area)You know the saying: The eyes are bigger than the stomach, and there are actually alternatives, but the child absolutely refuses to hear about them. Or it’s really only about a s... 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 |