Administrative court in Weimar: "No health concerns"
Photo: Martin Schutt / picture alliance / dpa
The Weimar Administrative Court has rejected an urgent application that was intended to cancel the obligation to wear mouth and nose protection in class.
A mother had filed a lawsuit with the family court because she saw the health of her two eight and 14-year-old sons endangered by compulsory tests and masks as well as the requirement of distance in their schools.
A family judge had upheld the mother's complaint at the beginning of last week: he ordered face-to-face classes by means of a temporary injunction, and at the same time prohibited distance, testing and masking requirements.
And not just for the two students, but for all children at the two schools concerned.
The decision was celebrated among "lateral thinkers" and "corona deniers" as if a family judge from Weimar had annulled the pandemic policy across the country.
The administrative court in Weimar has now also confirmed the mask requirement for smaller classes.
It does not see any health concerns for the children from wearing a mouth and nose covering.
"If there should be complaints from individual students, the provisions of the general decree would provide for exceptions to the obligation to wear on a case-by-case basis," said a statement from the court.
In addition, the public interest in protecting the life and health of people in the vicinity of the applicants, the other pupils and the entire population outweighs the interest of the applicants in being spared from the measures for the time being.
Family court has no power
In addition, the family court has no power to issue orders to authorities and representatives of authorities as public authorities. There is a lack of the necessary legal basis for such authority. The judicial control of the authorities' actions, including with regard to health protection measures in schools, is the sole responsibility of the administrative courts, the statement said.
As the "Thüringer Allgemeine" had initially reported, it was no coincidence that a certain judge at the family court was responsible for the mother's complaint.
A lawyer is said to have specifically searched for plaintiffs in a Telegram group whose children have surnames beginning with the letters B, E, F, H, I, J, L, Q, R, S, T, U, V and X.
According to the newspaper, these are exactly those first letters for which the single judge Christian Dettmar is responsible according to the business distribution plan of the local court.
The judge is happy to point out to those involved who wear a mask in his negotiations about the prohibition of veiling in court.
Unsurprisingly, then, in the current case, which involves two 8 and 14 year old boys, he decided in favor of those affected.
The decision is not yet final.