Mirror judgement

As Mirror judgement designates one in German Jurisprudence the judgement of the Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfG) of 5. August 1966. (official place of discovery: BVerfGE 20, 162-230). In this judgement the Federal Constitutional Court put the public task out of the press for the democratic will formation and called effective precautions in for the protection of the free press.

Circumstances

The magazine The mirror had to 10. October 1962 under the title "conditionally defense ready" on the military situation in Germany and NATO reports. Because of suspicion of the landesverrats became thereupon approximately Rudolf August stone issue editor detention and search warrant as publishers and against the responsible person. The areas of the mirror publishing house in Hamburg and Bonn thereupon scans, extensive material was seized. The mirror publishing house raised Constitutional complaint against the arrangement of Search and Seizure.

The Federal Constitutional Court rejected the constitutional complaint.

Summary of the judgement

The court determines, that the press in the democratic State of a public task fulfills. It is divided into three aspects: task of communication, the task of forming of an opinion and the task of politicalization.

The free press is substantial factor in the democratic will education process. From that Pressefreiheit in Art.5 Abs.1 S.2 GG therefore also one follows Institute warranty for a free press. This covers on the one hand the private-economical structure of the Presseunternhemen, contained however on the other hand also a national obligation, the danger of opinion resulting from press concentration and Information monopolies to repel.

After the court appreciated abstractly the meaning of the press and the pressefreiheit, becomes the concrete restriction of the pressefreiheit by the search and seizure due to that StPO in relation to the security of the state and the suspicion of the Landesverrates weighed out. Although the Federal Constitutional Court recognizes, that the population must be informed also about important procedures in defense policy, evaluates it the suspicion of the landesverrats here as more serious and sees the search and seizure as appropriate means, the suspicion to follow on. Thus here the higher weight comes to the existence of the state.

The constitutional complaint was rejected with equality of votes. The condition judges, those the reason did not carry, the pressefreiheit had more highly evaluated.

For the reasons

"a free, not of the public force steered, a censorship subjected press is not a nature element of the liberal state; in particular is a free, appearing regular press for the modern democracy indispensably. ... In it the public opinion articulates itself. ... In the representative democracy the press stands at the same time as constant connecting and control organ between the people and its selected representatives in parliament and government."

"press enterprises must be able themselves to form in the social area freely. They work after private-economical principles and in organization forms under private law. They stand with one another in mental and economic competition, in those the public force fundamental not to intervene may. ... but could be imagined about also of an obligation of the state, To repel driven, a free press from the formation of opinion monopolies grown-up could."

Consequences of the judgement

As consequence of the judgement regulations became the press concentration control in GWB taken up.

See also

• Law of communication media
• Press right
• Pressefreiheit
• Press
• Mirror affair

Web on the left of

Text of the decision of the Federal Constitutional Court

Please you consider also that Reference to right topics!