Mutti Puts a Thumb on the Scales of Justice

The latest political and judicial shenanigans by German Chancellor Angela Merkel bring to mind the notorious confab between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch on the tarmac at Sky Harbor Airport in Phoenix during the 2016 presidential campaign. Mutti could give Slick Willie a run for his money as a consummate shady political operator.

Many thanks to Hellequin GB for translating this article from PolitikStube:

Trial against Merkel because of the Thuringia election: AfD [Alternative für Deutschland, Alternative for Germany] rejects constitutional judges as biased

Angela Merkel invited the judges of the First and Second Senate of the Federal Constitutional Court to a joint dinner at the Chancellery, including those judges who had to adjudicate a lawsuit by the AfD against Merkel and the federal government on July 21 because of the Thuringian election in 2020. From the perspective of the AfD, both of them have violated their duty of neutrality.

Specifically, it is about Merkel’s statements on the Thuringian election, which she uttered at a state reception in South Africa: “The election of this Minister-President was a unique process that broke with a basic conviction for the CDU and for me, namely that no majorities with help from the AfD should win.” The process is “unforgivable”, the result must be reversed. “It was a bad day for democracy.”

How independent are the highest judges with their party books? To what extent does the executive or even Merkel exert influence? Can connections between the invitation to dinner and the upcoming trial be ruled out?

For the AfD, these judges have lost credibility [from RT]:

The AfD has sued Angela Merkel: The Chancellor has to answer to the Federal Constitutional Court regarding her statements about the Thuringia election.

Spicy: Merkel recently invited the constitutional judges, who are supposed to dispense justice over her, to dinner at the Chancellery.

The Federal Constitutional Court’s hearing on questionable statements by Chancellor Angela Merkel (CDU) on the Thuringian election in February 2020 will begin in two weeks. The AfD interpreted this as a violation of the “duty of neutrality”. Specifically, it is about the election of the FDP politician Thomas Kemmerich with votes from AfD, CDU and FDP as head of government in Thuringia on February 5, 2020. For the lawyers, the question is to what extent Merkel, at a state reception in South Africa on February 6, 2020, influenced the proceedings in the Kemmerich election. She described this as “unforgivable” and stressed that the result had to be “reversed”.

A transcript of the press conference was available on the website the Chancellor and the Federal Government. From the perspective of the AfD, both of them have violated their duty of neutrality. Kemmerich resigned under pressure three days after his election.

Now the AfD has submitted an claim of bias against the responsible judges. The visit of a delegation from the court to the Federal Chancellery at the end of June was the reason for this, as the AfD federal executive announced on Friday. The fact that Doris König, of all people, the chairwoman of the Second Senate, and presumably also other competent lawyers “meet with the defendant for dinner at their invitation and in fact at their expense, raises the question of whether they can continue to be regarded as impartial in these proceedings,” it said further.

A court spokesman in Karlsruhe confirmed on Saturday that a rejection request had been received. Further details were not disclosed, and the future course of the proceedings is currently not clear. On July 1, representatives of the Constitutional Court announced that a delegation led by Chairman Stephan Harbarth and Vice-President König had been to a meeting with members of the government in Berlin the day before. The visit, which also included a joint dinner in the Chancellery, “continues a tradition that has existed for many years.”

The translator adds this afterword:

Somehow all this smacks of the tried and tested German adage: “Fuehrer befehl, wir tragen die folgen” (“Fuehrer command, we bear the consequences”).

5 thoughts on “Mutti Puts a Thumb on the Scales of Justice

  1. “How independent are the highest judges with their party books?” (Wie unabhängig sind die höchsten Richter und Richterinnen mit ihren Parteibüchern?)
    What is a party book?

  2. She saw Biden and the Democrats doing the same thing so she tried it, and apparently it will work. I would say that the halls of power and authority are cloistered so that no public input is allowed. Tusk, tusk says the harrumphant.
    BTW, is ‘mutti’ German for mongrel dog?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.