Andreas Scheuer and his dangerous game with the judiciary

Of course this is not a nice situation for Andreas Scheuer. He was once CSU General Secretary and Federal Minister of Transport and otherwise quite important. Now he is no longer all of this, but it is blamed.

The Berlin public prosecutor has charged Scheuer because of the wrongly false statement in the toll investigation committee of the Bundestag. Formulates colloquially: the ex-minister is said to have lied.

The fact that Scheuer rejects all allegations with maximum outrage and that his lawyer has the investigative authority criticized is not only expected, but legitimate. Even more: it is his right.

However, this finding expressly does not apply to his assertion that the accusation reveals “politically motivated” to him. By insinating that the public prosecutor has a political agenda, he questions a democratic basic principle: the independence of the judiciary.

This is exactly what has always been the strategy of right extremists. As systematic as they try to defamate government action and to raise parliamentary processes, they specifically feed doubts about the rule of law.

There are many examples of this. The permanent campaign against the election of the federal constitutional judges is there. There are the attacks on dishes that have to deal with the party and its officials. And there is Björn Höcke.

The Thuringian AfD chairman, who was condemned twice for using a Nazi slot, stylized himself as a judiciary and claims that the “cartel parties” in a “GDR 2.0” steered the judiciary with the help of “muzzle paragraphs” and willing judges. “I have the feeling that the opposition should be silenced with the help of the judiciary,” he said in the trial of in Halle.

Even if it is nonsense to equate Scheuer and Höcke: the ex-minister seems to be willing to work with similarly absurd assumptions as the right-wing extremist. He also does not care that they lack any initial suspicion.

Because what is the political motive of the public prosecutor please? Or does the accused even think that the Governing Mayor of Berlin or the Justice Senator (both CDU) would have helped?

It is a dangerous game that Scheuer started. And the CSU has to be careful not to be drawn in. The fact that her state group leader Alexander Hoffmann describes the indictment as “not understandable” is what a politician who is a party in the word sense is. Maybe it’s too much.

In the United States, it has been observed over the past few years how populists undermine the reputation in the judiciary. Now that trust in the rule of law is ruined, his institutions are attacked. At the top is a convicted president who thirsts for revenge.

To prevent misunderstandings: Of course there are also attacking investigations, unauthorized accusations and malfunctions in Germany. This is exactly why there is a multi-stage instance system. And that is exactly why factually well-founded criticism of public prosecutors and courts is not only allowed, but also offered-as in the process against the upper “lateral thinker” Michael Ballweg.

But the separation of powers in Germany works. And the most recent example of this is that the public prosecutor’s office in CDU-ruled Berlin has charged a former minister of the current government party CSU. Without reputation of the person.

The Berlin Regional Court can now reject the indictment. Or the main procedure can end with an acquittal. Anyway, the presumption of innocence applies until a final conviction in whatever instance.

That is the rule of law. UND It shouldn’t be the parties that are willful, but unfounded.