The above descriptions concentrate on the features of the German courts of civil and criminal jurisdiction that I regard as most important. I do not regard the “Land- / Bund” distinction as important: “Federal” is used only because it’s part of the name Federal Republic of Germany
Naming Laws in Germany August 10, 2017 by Jenny Gesley In April 2017, the Association for the German Language ( Gesellschaft für deutsche Sprache (GfdS)) published its annual list of the most popular baby names of the last year.
In 2001, the federal government, the Bundestag, and the Bundesrat jointly attempted to have the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany ban the NPD. The court, the highest court in Germany, has the exclusive power to ban parties if they are found to be "anti-constitutional" through the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany .
Dec 05, 2017 · In Germany, Transparency International has long been pushing for the publication of court decisions that include the names of the guilty parties, particularly those involved in foreign bribery. A 1998 study by Reinhard Walker found that only 0.5% of all court decisions in Germany are published. Even at the level of federal courts, the ...
People also ask
Is the Federal Republic of Germany illegitimate?
What are the LGBT rights in Germany?
Is military service voluntary in Germany?
Is Germany in freedom in the world?
Oct 09, 2020 · Each state has its own higher regional court (Oberlandesgericht) that hears appeals from the lower courts in its state. Federal Supreme Courts The highest level of the German court system is comprised of five courts: Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof) Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht)
- Jennifer Allison
Germany terrorism prosecution cases soar: report A nearly four-fold increase in terrorism-related cases is stretching the manpower of federal prosecutors. So far this year nearly 900 terrorism ...
Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights in Germany have evolved significantly over the course of the last decades. As of June 29, 2017, Germany legalized same-sex marriage, which provides the same rights as opposite-sex married couples receive.
The self-described Reichsbürger ("Reich citizens") maintain that the Federal Republic of Germany is illegitimate and that the Reich's 1919 Weimar Constitution remains in effect. Most of their arguments are based on a selective reading of a 1973 decision of the Federal Constitutional Court concerning the Basic Treaty between West and East Germany.
- to Whom Is The Law Applicable?
- What Is Unlawful Content?
- Implementation of A Complaint Procedure
- The Reporting Obligation
- Authorised Person in Federal Republic of Germany
Pursuant to Sec. 1(1) and (2) NetzDG, the “Act shall apply to telemedia service providers which, for profit-making purposes, operate internet platforms which are designed to enable users to share any content with other users or to make such content available to the public (social networks)” with more than 2 million registered users in Germany, regardless of where the social network is established.
The NetzDG deals with unlawful content whereat the Act differentiates between “manifestly” unlawful and merely unlawful content. The nature of the content regarding its unlawfulness determines the social network provider’s explicit obligation (see below under 3). “Unlawful” content is content that is shared on social media with other users or in other ways made available to the public which unlawfully opposes the provisions of the Sections of the German Criminal Code that are listed in Sec. 1(3) NetzDG. The listed provisions deal with offences against the democratic constitutional state, the public order, the personal honour and the sexual self-determination. Content is manifestly unlawful if “the illegality can be detected within 24 hours without an in-depth examination and with reasonable efforts, i.e. immediately by trained personnel”. In practice, it will be hard to determine whether content is “manifestly” unlawful, particularly with regard to the user’s intent. According to th...
The NetzDG is infamous for its deletion obligation (see below). The deletion obligation, however, is just one step of the complaint management procedure that has to be implemented by the social network provider pursuant to Sec. 3 NetzDG. Moreover, the deletion of unlawful content is not explicitly listed in Sec. 4 NetzDG (Provisions on regulatory fines) and therefore, the upstream implementation of such a procedure might already lead to penalties if not executed properly. The complaint management procedure should be implemented within three months after the Act has entered into force, hence until 1 January 2018. The procedure shall be easily recognisable, directly accessible and permanently available to users for submitting complaints. The procedure shall ensure that the social network provider takes immediate note of a complaint and checks whether the content in question is unlawful and subject to removal or blocking. The content must be deleted or blocked within 24 hours if it is...
Social network providers which receive more than 100 complaints on unlawful content per calendar year are obliged to produce half-yearly reports on the handling of complaints about unlawful content on their platforms in German language. These reports shall be published in the Federal Gazetteand on the social network’s website. On the website, the report has to be easily identifiable, directly accessible and permanently available. The reports shall cover the points stipulated in Sec. 2(2) NetzDG and inter alia comprise the criteria applied to decide whether to delete or to block unlawful content, and the time between the receipt of complaints and the deletion / blocking. The first report is due for the first half-year of 2018 (31 July 2018 the latest).
Pursuant to Sec. 5 NetzDG, platforms that are not established in Germany “shall immediately name a person authorised to receive service in the Federal Republic of Germany and shall draw attention to this fact on their platform in an easily recognisable and directly accessible manner”. This provision also applies to social networks with fewer than 2 million registered users, as the accordant exemption of Sec. 1(2) NetzDG only applies to Sec. 2 and 3 (Reporting obligation and implementation of complaints management procedure). The authorised person already had to be appointed by 1 October 2017.
A 2017 report by the Federal Road Research Institute reported that in 2015 70.4% of the autobahn network had only the advisory speed limit, 6.2% had temporary speed limits due to weather or traffic conditions, and 23.4% had permanent speed limits.