In the current Corona crisis, it seems that the deadly serious end justifies even the most drastic means. Former Justice Minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger warns of a time limit.
Munich - Former Federal Minister of Justice Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger (FDP) sees the measures taken by the federal government positively. On one point, however, she expresses criticism.
How satisfied are you with the previous legislative measures?
In this situation, action must be taken very quickly. We'll still see if this works so quickly, especially with the economic packages. I think it was done right and gripping. I found the Chancellor's careful and clear words particularly good.
A lot is changing in people's everyday lives. Does the state go too far?
Of course, there will have to be restrictions on freedom in such a situation. The crucial point for me is that it always has to be limited. That is why I cannot make massive restrictions for two or three months without being able to seriously say: Is that still justified?
Do you miss this thought in the current decisions?
I miss that in the public discussion. At the moment everything that means action is visible and tangible - not so much the weighing up and considering. Mr. Laschet made this clear by saying: People, what does a total curfew bring? Shouldn't it be limited to contact restrictions? Without getting into a party-political exchange of blows, we should also see these aspects: When will it expire again? There must also be a time after Corona. It cannot be that something that applies to an absolute exceptional situation also applies to the normal case.
The focus is currently on the Infection Protection Act.
In my view, the current infection control law at federal level, paragraph 28, does not cover a general curfew, but only the sub-quarantine of individuals.
In this context, it is also about the location by mobile phones. Are you entering a gray area?
This location has rightly been removed from the legislative package. You can't do it as general. The very idea that an app could be used to comprehensively observe people, where they are, what they are doing, and who they are talking to is startling. This has to be constitutionally legal and puncture-proof, it cannot be a total surveillance like in China.
Some countries monitor curfews with drones. Does the end justify the most rigid means?
It works quite well for us now. The fact that there were corona parties now seems to be over. I see no need to use drones to monitor Germany. Everything is already empty.
Isn't such a measure also constantly stretching the limits of what is feasible?
When I look at Hungary, the crisis is being used to finally transform the system into an autocratic surveillance system. There is only one power left, that lies with the head of government, democracy is eliminated. Of course I don't see that in many other European Member States. But you can see how responsible or irresponsible someone uses power.
Would you ever have thought it possible that our lives would change so much?
Even if I still have 9/11 in mind: No! What we have today that no one is allowed out because we have an invisible enemy in mind, I could not have imagined.
Interview: Marc Beyer
