Criticism of the judgment to the parity Of the identity of justice

This week, the highest Thuringian court ruled that you cannot require parties, their electoral lists to fill half of it with women. Some on the Left back led to

Criticism of the judgment to the parity Of the identity of justice

This week, the highest Thuringian court ruled that you cannot require parties, their electoral lists to fill half of it with women. Some on the Left back led to the fact that the majority of the judges who had so decided, is a male. You suggested that it was not to weigh a question of whether the incisions of the law weigh heavier than the benefits it brings for the equality between a man and a woman. But a vote as a representative of a particular sex. And because the men were in the Thuringian constitutional court, in the majority, they would have put themselves through.

Ralf Stegner, Chairman of the SPD group in the Schleswig-Holstein state Parliament, wrote on Twitter, men, "have a little gumption", supported the parity law. According to Stegner, the men at the Thuringian constitutional court, therefore, no Grips. Not even a little bit. Otherwise they would have ruled the other way. The Green party in the Thuringian state Parliament wrote that they regretted "the decision by the predominantly male occupied constitutional court". And the member of the Bundestag Niema Movassat of the Left shared on Twitter a photo of members of the Thuringian constitutional court – many men, a woman. Movassat wrote to him in surprise, the judgment of the Laundry. It had to close: Would have to Say at the constitutional court, the majority of women, would have been the verdict differently.

Movassat was the legitimacy of the court in question, which has shaped his party as hardly any other. The Left is represented with many members in the Thuringian Parliament, for a long time. She has something to say about that in the appointment of judges to the constitutional court. It is also their judges, who have rejected the parity law. That in itself shows how populist Movassat talk. If you think his thoughts more, men can judge only in the sense of other men.

are you unable to in the case of a judgment of their sex in sight, and to decide in favour of women. It must, however, also apply Vice versa: the women come, in principle, for the interests of other women. This is not to say that a majority would say get a female occupied the court of the parity act to a different judgment. Finally, this judgment weighty arguments.

For each group, a judge

Movassat suggests that all of the plays only a subordinate role. It is mainly about the sex, the belonging to a group. So he is not alone. Many politicians in Germany are now represented identity-political positions. Running on a problematic assumption: That no man is able to be impartial. Because everyone belongs to a group. And only he could enter.

Updated Date: 19 July 2020, 13:20

You need to login to comment.

Please register or login.

RELATED NEWS