The Higher Regional Court in Hamburg finally rejects the complaints of two participants in the “remigration” meeting. Correctiv can still report.
The research platform Corrective has obtained an important legal victory. The Higher Regional Court in Hamburg rejected the complaints of two participants in the Potsdam meeting, in which right-wing actors discussed the “remigration” of people of immigrant origin. Information about the meeting in the article “Secret plan against Germany” sparked large demonstrations against the AfD throughout the country.
Lawyer Ulrich Vosgerau, who was at the meeting in Potsdam, and another participant appealed against a decision of the lower court of the Hamburg Regional Court. In February this had the report of Corrective he objected to one point, but left two others untouched. The plaintiffs wanted the Higher Regional Court to ban these two passages as well. This makes them inferior. The complainants must cover the procedural costs of 20,000 euros each.
In the decisions available to the TAZ, the Higher Regional Court of Hamburg highlights the “exceptional public interest” of the information.
Ulrich Vosgerau had specifically questioned two claims: first, his response to a request for Corrective been played incorrectly. Corrective Vosgerau had asked how he felt “in retrospect about the central statements made (in Potsdam). Vosgerau responded that, as far as he remembered, no one had said that people who had German citizenship should be repatriated or denaturalized in any way.
He added to his response that legal implementation of this was “normally” not possible.
Corrective had published the lawyer's response summarized as follows: “But he doesn't want to remember what Sellner said about the idea of expatriating citizens.” The court considers this summary admissible.
The omission of the second sentence on the legal application of remigration is also permissible, since, by nature, “information and news must be evaluated, abbreviated, summarized or even omitted.”
As long as a distorted image of reality or a “negatively distorted image” of the person does not emerge, common journalistic practice corresponds to the journalistic duty of care. The legal doubts raised at the Potsdam meeting about the implementation of “remigration” are addressed elsewhere in the text.
Vosgerau also complains that his… Corrective The published statements about the supposed ability to influence young voters of Turkish migrant origin were summarized in an inadmissible manner. The higher regional court sees this differently and follows the lower court.
It's all about the smaller details like the items.
The second plaintiff together with Vosgerau against the publications of Corrective He defended himself against, among other things, the claim that he was a “big AfD donor.” However, the higher regional court dismissed his claim, citing the plaintiff's repeated donations of almost 50,000 euros to the AfD.
The court also did not consider the public mention of his name problematic, since the public interest in reporting outweighed the right to privacy in this case.
As is usual in media law litigation, there are a number of details at play, at one point including whether a definite or indefinite article was used correctly.
It has not yet been decided whether the two plaintiffs will consider taking additional legal action. Lawyer Carsten Brennecke from the Höcker law firm, who represents Vosgerau in court, underlines in a press release that Corrective It is still prohibited to distribute a passage of the text. However, this point was not at all the subject of the proceedings before the Higher Regional Court.
After the first trial in February, much of the media attention focused on: Corrective One passage had to be corrected, although two other passages (and therefore the core of the report) were not objected to.
The passage that cannot be spread further: Vosgerau had considered in Potsdam “a model letter” to question the legality of the elections.
According to the Higher Regional Court in Hamburg, the central point of the investigation can now continue to be made public: that at the Potsdam meeting right-wingers raised money and talked about the expulsion of leftists and people of immigrant origin. that is allowed Corrective continue to spread.