An infamous review of the Federal Administrative Court 60th Anniversary of the Basic Law:
on 18/06/2009, the Federal Administrative Court, an unfortunately not very helpful contribution to the problem of the theory of so-called public goods delivered and placed both his disdain for the pursuit of freedom and the protection of property expressed.
went to the substance, it comes to the question of whether private companies under so-called commercial collections according to § 13 paragraph 3, sentence 1 number 3 of the Recycling and Waste Management Act (KrW-/AbfG) may be allowed, private households, which - mind you free - disposal of waste paper to offer. Many know these last few years, common result of higher paper prices Practice of private collectors, private households to put on prior request a "blue bin", and the resulting paper in this way, a coveted commodity, to recycling.
How often during business initiatives or opportunities in the competition was actually the much-vaunted "win-win situation: consumers could dispose of their waste paper for free. Because of the drop free pick any incentives for environmentally harmful waste to zero. The private collector is funded to cover costs through the profitable resale of recovered paper, which now serves about 90% as a feedstock for the production of virgin paper. If
two agree to mutual advantage, but is annoyed by a third party. In this case, the public waste management companies in the municipalities. This prompted the government waste management authorities, commercial collection for allegedly "overriding public interest" to prohibit. What had happened? The public waste management, utility companies and public utility companies, such as public utilities, had discovered the lucrative business with the paper for themselves, and used proceeds from the sale of waste paper to cross-subsidize loss-making public enterprises throughout. Of course, the local service was not free, as in the private sector. Added is that in many counties and municipalities to the emergence of private, waste paper could be presented only in the central collection points or recorded only sporadically in bundles collections. Most waste paper ended up unused in the normal household waste. was for fear of revenue losses in many cities and counties, but ultimately, prohibited the commercial collection of waste paper. Because of these regulatory prohibitions began several administrative courts in Germany.
While the Supreme Administrative Courts in several states, most recently in Bavaria in 2008 confirmed the freedom of occupation of Altstoffgewerbes, the Federal Administrative Court took place contrary to all law-systematic historical and legal concerns, a radical U-turn. After the now "paper" case genanten decision of the Federal Administrative Court from 18.06.2009 would the term 'commercial collection within the meaning of § 13 para 3 sentence 1 No. 3 KrW-/AbfG allegedly exclude activities related to the manner of a waste authorities of the the contractual ties between the collecting companies and private households are settled in permanent structures. But that's not enough: to the private waste industry right to permanently deprive the floor, expanded the Federal Administrative Court and the possibility of the ban on commercial collections through the assertion of "overriding public Interests "unmanageable from, for avoiding the private waste disposal in the future a formal contract and is suitable only ownerless become waste in households, is interpreted as meaning that" collected waste outside of permanent structures ", ie not everywhere and not permanent business are. So that the "predictability" for the public waste management authorities should no longer exist. Given the unpredictability of these collections stood thus "overriding public interests" opposed.
is an important constitutional principle in addition to the proportionality principle not in doubt for freedom? Finally, among my old newspaper or cardboard only my old me. And as long as I do not waste paper in the front yard burning or polluting throw away, I can do it and leave with what I wanted, so one would think at least. The Federal Administrative Court accepted this point but not even before a balance between public provision requirements for waste and the fundamental right to property, nor between the predictability of the public waste authorities and the professional freedom of the private paper industry, which pays at least substantial taxes and provides for tens of thousands of jobs .
"Fundamental Rights on the siding," subtitled today Kleine-Cosack the Bar Journal January 2010, but without mentioning a word that decision, instead of restricting asylum law is criticized, but which is actually not a fundamental right, but an act of mercy as the essentially related pardon. Fundamental rights can not but be only interesting when it comes to criminal or foreign, but must be understood as a more comprehensive defense rights, especially in government intervention in the free economic life, including and especially in freedom of contract.
The Federal Administrative Court would have probably held against it and to the important national objective of Environmental reference: ". We were the first to have declared that freedom of the individual, the more limited needs, the more complicated the civilization is" How plausible this quote from 18.06.2009 and the decision may be, but it arises a totalitarian vision. The quote comes from the fact of Benito Mussolini, 1929.
will probably tell you now that a prohibition to collect waste paper is not the end of the world, and certainly not the end of democracy and freedom. Karl Popper, a famous philosopher and Nobel Prize winner saw this in terms of "Resist the beginnings" cope differently: "I would add that any have kind of economic intervention, the tendency is to increase the power of the state .... If we give the state by the interventionist planning additional violence, it can easily happen that we lose our freedom "
0 comments:
Post a Comment