In legal proceedings before the Dresden Administrative Court (case no.: 6 K 2405/16), the Free State of Saxony, represented by the Görlitz Police Directorate, suffered a clear defeat regarding various points of contention in connection with a police check. Following extensive examination of evidence, the Administrative Court, on March 13, 2019, ruled that the traffic stop, the identification of the young man from Göttingen, the search of a vehicle, the taking of photographs and videotapes, and the refusal of the officers to provide their names were all unlawful.
The plaintiff, now 25 years old, had peacefully participated with friends and acquaintances in a welcome festival for refugees in Bautzen on October 8, 2016, under the motto "Bautzen Remains Diverse." After the event, the group's rental car was followed by police vehicles on its return journey to Göttingen and subsequently subjected to a large-scale, multi-hour check. During this check, the officers, without any legitimate reason, inspected the plaintiff's driver's license and vehicle registration, searched the vehicle, photographed and filmed the plaintiff and his companions, and refused to provide the names of the officers involved, despite repeated requests. Furthermore, the officers changed their reason for the check several times during the course of the operation.
According to the now available written grounds for the judgment, the police violated the relevant provisions of the Road Traffic Regulations (StVO), the Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO), and the Saxon Police Act (SächsPolG). The plaintiff and his companions had neither given cause for the checks nor was there any danger to public safety at the time of the checks. All checks were therefore unlawful. Furthermore, the obligation to state the names of the officers involved is clearly stipulated by law (§ 8 sentence 1 SächsPolG).
“On that day, the police, with a large number of officers, may have deliberately done everything wrong that they could legally do against the plaintiff and his companions,” says Göttingen lawyer Sven Adam, who represents the plaintiff, expressing his anger at the police's conduct in Bautzen. Following these actions, the police even initiated investigations against three of the plaintiff's companions for alleged violations of the Assembly Act. These proceedings were immediately dropped by the Görlitz public prosecutor's office (Case No.: 210 Js 9142/17 gö). “The impression arises that anti-fascist protest in Bautzen is being intimidated by the police even after the conclusion of a peaceful event against right-wing ideology. This is unacceptable for a police force committed to democracy,” Adam concludes.
The written grounds for the judgment are attached to this communication.
