|
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
| Home About Contact | ||
|
Once again, I was very, very naughty – because of this real democracy during the county council committee meetingYes, I admit it: I was naughty. Once again, I did not obey. I did not do what was demanded of me. And once again, I did not obey because of this thing called democracy – not because of this so-called “our democracy,” but because of real democracy. And of course, that was annoying. Especially for those who are still struggling to get along with this real democracy in the Burgenland district. At the county council committee meeting on September 8, 2025, held at the MIBRAG premises in Theißen, the topics were supposed to be “Presentation of current status of MIBRAG future projects” and “Current status of H2 infrastructure.” That also costs a lot of taxpayers’ money – so why not record it in picture and sound? But once again it became clear that this video recording was not particularly welcome – by these so-called “our democrats.” MIBRAG had expressed concerns, since future projects would be discussed that, while part of this public meeting, were apparently not supposed to be so public that the Internet could be used as a distribution channel. The Mitteldeutsche Zeitung, if it chose to cover these topics, or any other members of the writing guild, would have been allowed to report on it in letters. Moving pixels with audio, however, were not desired. And so I had to, naughty as I always am in such cases, argue for quite a while. An interesting new development came to light in the process. The attentive Bürgerstimmen reader will recall the prohibition of such a video recording in October 2024 by the much-beloved district administrator Götz Ulrich. Back then, he complained that the video recording should have been registered in advance. I was in the room, he had seen me – but that was not enough for him. Let me emphasize again that this is only about a registration – not an application that requires approval. Just: Hello. Here I am! I’m filming today. A similar situation unfolded on September 8, 2025. Unfortunately, I had no time to quickly send an email to the county council to register in advance. In addition, my arrival at the meeting room was delayed because MIBRAG is very strict with entry controls. Time was short, so I tried to position the cameras as quickly as possible. But Ms. Simon-Kuch (CDU), who chaired the meeting, was in even more of a hurry than I was when I reached for the record button. A discussion then began about whether filming was allowed or not (see video). MIBRAG did not want to announce its future projects too publicly. Not only I suggested moving these matters into a non-public part of the session. But Ms. Simon-Kuch and others apparently had more in mind: to ban the video recording altogether. I again referred to the legal basis. It is a public meeting, video recording is permissible. Nevertheless, they did not want filming to take place. I immediately lodged an oral objection against this decision. An objection has suspensive effect. That means: the decision does not have to be followed immediately. Ms. Wötzel from the Burgenland district administration sided with Ms. Simon-Kuch. She referred to the letter I received from the legal department of the Burgenland district after I had lodged an objection against the district administrator’s decision. The objection has not been processed to this day. However, as someone affected by an orally pronounced administrative act, one has the legal right to receive it in written form as well. The much-beloved district administrator Götz Ulrich has not done this to this day. Yet this is important, because it is also about immediate enforcement – and that must be justified all the more thoroughly. Immediate enforcement is only possible if there is imminent danger or a public interest. And that has to be shown in the justification. Ms. Wötzel argued that the district administrator’s decision in October 2024 had not been an administrative act. This, she said, also followed from the letter of the legal and regulatory office. However, that very office wrote in that letter that the district administrator’s decision could indeed have constituted an administrative act. So which is it now? Ms. Wötzel insisted that the ban on video recording was not an administrative act. Now there was a major problem: If the wish – as it was phrased – of the committee chairwoman that no video recording should be made is not an administrative act, then there is no obligation to comply with this wish. And that was exactly what I did not want to do. It was then explained that house rules could be applied. My response was that they should just go ahead and do that – if they really wanted to exclude the public in this way and suppress the video recording. They withdrew for consultation. During this consultation, I overheard Mr. Jähnig (AfD) talking to Mr. Zschuckelt about this dispute. Mr. Jähnig explained that if it were to become standard practice that video recordings could always be immediately stopped due to the sensitivities of individual county council members or guests, then that would be the excuse every single time to prevent recordings. But that is neither compatible with the municipal constitution law nor with the rules of procedure of the county council. That would not be real democracy, but once again just this so-called “our democracy.” The video recording of the committee meeting will follow in the next article. This realization and this question are very important for youWrite it down, store it deep in your subconscious and conscious mind: If you ever again deal with someone who is in any way connected to politics or administration or comes from that sphere and they make a demand of you – ask him or her:Is this an administrative act?If the answer is that this is not an administrative act, then you can completely ignore this demand – or even this wish. You do not have to comply if you do not want to. If the answer is that this is an administrative act, then if it is announced orally, it must always be justified – and also in writing afterwards. You can immediately lodge an objection. An objection has suspensive effect. You can submit the reasoning for your objection later, because first you need the written justification of the administrative act. If immediate enforcement is imposed, it must be all the more strictly justified, since your rights as a citizen are immediately curtailed. Possibly even in a way that cannot be undone. With video recordings, that would be the case, because once the meeting is over, it is over. Once you have internalized this, many things will play out differently in dealings with employees of offices, authorities, or even committee chairpersons. Author: AI-Translation - Michael Thurm | |
|
| Other articles: |
 | The German Lemming - A People on AutopilotThe German lemming is a fascinating creature. It lives, it breathes, it works – but most importantly: It obeys.... zum Artikel |
 | Filming for ARD TV Series in Naumburg and Surroundings Leads to Temporary Traffic Restrictions and Closures on June 3 and 4, 2024Currently, filming is underway for the new TV series “Two Women for All Cases” commissioned by ARD Degeto Film and MDR in the Naumburg area, Freyburg, and Leipzig.... zum Artikel |
 | The Middle Finger of District Administrator Götz Ulrich and the Shy RepresentativesIt took a long time. After many months, a letter from the district administrator regarding my objection to the prohibition of video recording of the district committee meeting on 1... 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 |