As of: March 27, 2024, 10:25 a.m
By: Andreas Schmid
Comments
Press
Split
Health Minister Karl Lauterbach: There is a lot of redacting in the RKI protocols of the Corona crisis team.
© Bernd von Jutrczenka/dpa/Screenshot RKI protocols
The calls for a political approach to the corona pandemic are becoming louder - especially after the heavily redacted RKI protocols were published.
But the chances of this seem slim.
How to deal with the Robert Koch Institute’s Corona protocols?
The documents that have been released are increasingly becoming a political issue.
Some MPs are calling for a Corona investigation committee to be examined - others suspect political calculation.
A compromise could be a special commission.
But only one traffic light party is really convinced of this.
Why is so much blacked out in the Corona protocols?
On Monday, Health Minister Karl Lauterbach was forced to comment on the more than 1,000 pages of documents.
The magazine
Multipolar
had previously acquitted them and the RKI then presented them in a partially heavily redacted form.
The protocols provide insight into decisions made during the pandemic.
There were then allegations that the RKI, which reports to the Ministry of Health, came to its assessments on the instructions of politicians instead of on the basis of scientific findings.
Lauterbach strongly disagreed.
“The RKI worked independently of political instructions,” said the minister.
The fact that the protocols are so heavily redacted is due to the protection of RKI employees.
“Employees in particular were blacked out to protect them from hatred and agitation.” However, in some cases entire passages are blacked out.
How the RKI assesses the Corona situation remains unclear for several days.
For example, on February 21st, March 2nd and March 5th, 2020. © Screenshots of the RKI protocols from February 21st, March 2nd and March 5th, 2020.
RKI minutes blacked out: Law firm with justification on 1000 pages
The Robert Koch Institute meanwhile commissioned a law firm to process the protocols.
That law firm sent a 1,059-page statement to the magazine in which it gave detailed reasons for the redactions.
It is said that the personal rights of RKI employees must be protected.
Some members of the Bundestag made similar statements when asked by
IPPEN.MEDIA
.
The Green politician Armin Grau, chairman of the health committee, said: “Redactions are necessary to protect personal rights.” The health policy spokesman for the CDU/CSU, Tino Sorge, said: “Redactions are appropriate where, for example, personal data needs to be protected .
However, if the redactions leave more questions than answers, they should be questioned.”
FDP Vice President Wolfgang Kubicki called on Lauterbach on Monday to publish the minutes without redaction.
“Sooner or later he will be forced to do this anyway, either judicially or politically,” Kubicki told
dpa
.
He directed serious accusations at the RKI and also at the former Federal Health Minister Jens Spahn (CDU).
“It is becoming increasingly clear that the Robert Koch Institute for Health Policy served as a scientific facade for Jens Spahn and probably also Karl Lauterbach.”
My news
Baby happiness after the end of his career: Olympic ski champion becomes a father for the first time a few days after retirement
Bankruptcy of German industry giant: next traditional company goes bankrupt
After attack in Moscow: Putin ally Lukashenko accidentally torpedoes Ukraine claim read
“Technical problems” with the Leopard: Denmark points to Germany after bumpy Ukraine donation
2 hours ago
Prisoner escapes while being treated at the clinic - and is caught two days later after being tipped off
Sweater, park bench, daffodils: The hidden messages in Princess Kate's video reading
RKI Corona protocols: What happens now?
Kubicki's party friend Frank Schäffler is also calling for an investigation: "There finally needs to be an investigation into Corona policy in the German Bundestag," says Schäffler to
IPPEN.MEDIA
.
“It is shocking that the Union, the SPD and the Greens have so far prevented this reappraisal.”
However, there are certainly voices within the Union for a reappraisal.
“An objective and scientific analysis of the corona pandemic is my top priority,” says CDU health politician Simone Borchardt to
IPPEN.MEDIA
.
She warns against “hasty conclusions and interpretations that could be taken out of the context of the RKI files.” But: “The fact is that mistakes were made.
That’s why it’s all the more important to work through the measures as part of a study commission in order to be better prepared for future challenges.”
Drosten against study commission
The Enquete Commission is a special working group in the Bundestag that deals with specific topics.
A few days ago, parts of the FDP called in a letter to the leaders of the SPD and Greens to enter into discussions about setting up a study commission.
In order to set up such a commission, the consent of a quarter of the members of the Bundestag is required.
CDU colleague Sorge therefore also holds the federal government responsible: “Without an honest assessment of Corona, we will not be able to draw any real lessons for future pandemics,” says Sorge.
“We expect a coordinated proposal from the traffic light.”
The virologist Christian Drosten recently took a position against such a commission.
Drosten said on Deutschlandfunk
that he would like to see a social reappraisal process instead of a study
: “A political commission would rather lead to certain forces being given a stage that should not be the focus of the discussion.”
Corona processing: “Some want to capitalize on it”
The SPD politician Christos Pantazis also fears such political instrumentalization.
The doctor is the SPD's deputy health policy spokesman and said in an interview with our editorial team: "I have the impression that some actors want to make political capital out of this issue."
Pantazis names the AfD and BSW and warns of a “backward-looking sham court” or a “one-dimensional investigative committee that serves the interests of individuals”.
In principle, a review is correct, says Pantazis.
“But we’re already doing that.”
The politician from Lower Saxony refers to the review of child and youth protection within the framework of an interministerial working group between the Ministry of Health and Family Affairs.
“Measures were taken based on the state of the art at the time.
It was clear that these findings were constantly in flux.” Certain measures, such as taping off children’s playgrounds, “would be considered totally exaggerated and scientifically untenable today.”
According to Pantazis, the processing must always be “scientifically guided”.
The demand for a study commission would not only be politically feasible, but also one year before the upcoming federal election.
After all, once it has been set up in parliament, it would only have a few months to develop far-reaching findings.
Not to mention the calls for a committee of inquiry that would be “exclusively politically motivated and entirely backward-looking.”
AfD and Wagenknecht call for a Corona investigation committee
The Green Party politician Armin Grau makes a similar statement.
“An independent, factual review is needed,” said Grau when asked by
IPPEN.MEDIA
.
“A study commission and especially a committee of inquiry would, above all, stir up political disputes and invite attempts to raise profiles.”
The AfD in particular and, more recently, the Alliance Sahra Wagenknecht (BSW) are calling for an investigative committee.
“A study commission is not enough,” said Sahra Wagenknecht to the German Press Agency.
“A committee of inquiry is necessary to shed light on the period with the greatest restrictions on fundamental rights in the history of the Federal Republic.”
(as)