Comment on Compact decision: Faeser played and lost

The Federal Administrative Court has overturned the ban on the right-wing extremist magazine Compact. A bitter defeat for Interior Minister Nancy Faeser. But there is one good thing about the whole thing: there could be a fundamental decision.

The Federal Minister of the Interior took a risk and lost. Legally, it was only the first round, but politically it was the whole game. The ban has brought Compact a level of attention that it had not had before. The magazine and its supporters are celebrating the court’s emergency decision as a victory for David against Goliath.

It is only a temporary victory, but who cares about the finer points of an expedited court procedure? When there is a final decision, Federal Minister of the Interior Faeser will probably no longer be in office.

Faeser has been accused of censorship

Should the consequence now be to shy away from such risky decisions? No, not at all. But the counterarguments must be carefully examined from the outset and addressed proactively. The Federal Minister of the Interior and her ministry failed to do this with Compact.

In her statement, Faeser had imprecisely spoken of the ban on the magazine rather than the ban on the company behind it, Compact GmbH – and thus quickly incurred accusations of censorship. She did not mention freedom of the press in the announcement about the ban. And in the ministry’s justification for the ban, the statements on freedom of the press basically only cover two pages – out of around 80.

Criteria for the prohibition of a Media company

One would have hoped for a little more care and a more balanced focus from the ministry. They have now failed in the expedited proceedings before the Federal Administrative Court. They didn’t even need the Federal Constitutional Court. And yet they were so confident of victory. They referred to the success rate of club bans before the Federal Administrative Court.

But there is at least one good thing about the whole thing: the courts now have the opportunity to make a fundamental decision. They can set standards for banning a media company – which are currently lacking.