Police officers made a visit at Björn Höcke’s home. The opposition leader in the parliament of the state of Thuringen is accused of having posted hate on social media. What is there to search in a home when the “crime” is committed on the internet? The officers just want to see if Björn Höcke’s words were his own words and not maybe … Lock, a squirrel! It is a classic example of intimidation and government overreach in Merkel’s “best Germany we ever had.” (note: That was her last election campaign slogan.)
Justice Minister Zbigniew Ziobro is working on a draft law that might create an anti-censorship regime for social media platforms operating in Poland. Failing to reinstate legal posts despite formal judicial review could carry hefty fines between 50,000 and 50 million Zloty (currently around $13,300 and $13.3 million).
After the platform does not respond positively to the users complaint, he can digitally file a ‘court petition’ which leads to a legal review of his post. If the judge upholds the legality of the post and the platform does not react, the case will go to a newly created ‘free speech council’ that has the power to mete out the penalties.
The EU Court of Justice has delivered another blow to Hungary last weekend. According to the judges, the already dismantled Hungarian transit zones constituted a “detention,” despite its opening towards the perfectly save Serbia where the immigrants came from. Hungary is castigated for not being helpful enough to perfect strangers in their ambition to start masses of expensive and exhaustive legal processes. EU law demands the individualisation of asylum politics and remains an obstacle to bulk solutions. But while the careless elites and advocates have lost themselves in their legalese, they can still not answer the question: Why should people who have travelled to their border be more privileged or more needing than the millions of people in Africa, Asia and Latin America? And when are they too many?