The controversy surrounding the planned election of the politically controversial publicist Ferda Ataman as the federal government’s anti-discrimination commissioner has drawn attention to a special feature of the political establishment that is somewhat reminiscent of an iceberg, of which only the tip is sticking out of the water: the big one Number of officers that the federal government appoints for all sorts of special tasks. Under the traffic light coalition, their number has increased again. the list includes a total of 42 positions, although there are actually 41, because the “Coordinator of the Federal Government for strategic foreign projects in the interests of the Federal Republic of Germany” strangely appears twice in the list.
“We have an inflationary development there,” says political scientist Wolfgang Schroeder from the University of Kassel. In fact, it is a very colorful, difficult to understand mixture of themes and functions that has emerged over the years.
It is still easiest with the important federal commissioners who have to be elected by parliament, such as the military commissioners or the Data Protection Officer. The officers for the Stasi documents, whose authority was always named after the office holder for the sake of simplicity, were also appointed in this way. Most recently, it was the Jahn authority that was dissolved a year ago and transferred to the Federal Archives and is thus an example of how such special functions can also be abolished again if the tasks are no longer applicable.
Otherwise it’s a wild mess, even from the designations. There are Federal Government Commissioners, Independent Commissioners, Normal Commissioners, Special Commissioners, Coordinators, Plenipotentiaries, Special Envoys. Sometimes state ministers or state secretaries take on such tasks, sometimes they are civil servants. In these cases, “there are no additional personnel costs for the officers,” according to a 2008 report by the Bundestag’s scientific service.
“You create visibility for a topic”
The situation is different when outsiders or members of the Bundestag are entrusted with such tasks. Then there are costs for offices and additional staff, which can vary greatly depending on the task. The competences and tasks of the respective officers are also not generally specified. “In terms of content and legal status, the legal bases for the respective officers should be taken from the legal bases,” says the 2008 report.
Looking at it sympathetically, the appointment of government officials can be seen as evidence that the purpose is to underline the importance of an issue. “They create visibility for a topic,” says political scientist Sabine Kropp from Freie Universität Berlin. Viewed less benevolently, such special functions give the government the opportunity to put off problems and be content with regular reports.
And the various officers enable the governing parties, according to Kropp, to “balance party-political proportional representation” by providing MPs with special posts that often raise the question: is that really necessary? For example, a “Coordinator of the Federal Government for Maritime Economy and Tourism”. Or a “Federal Government Commissioner for Rail Transport”. This task is performed in the Ministry of Transport by Parliamentary State Secretary Michael Theurer (FDP), but he could probably perform it just as well without this title.
The Bundestag is to decide next Thursday on the election of the controversial publicist Ferda Ataman as the federal government’s anti-discrimination commissioner.
(Photo: Metodi Popow/imago)
Above all, the many MPs (at the moment there are ten) are a problem. Not only because part of the legislature is suddenly integrated into the executive. But also because it “gives the impression of a self-service mentality,” says political expert Schroeder. In addition, political responsibilities are blurred. “People don’t know who is actually responsible,” says Schroeder. If political problems are transferred to federal commissioners who – unlike ministers – have no decision-making powers themselves, this could “contribute to political delegitimization”.
The constant proliferation of officers for all sorts of special issues also harbors another problem. “The fragmentation into a large number of particular interests, which are then articulated by the respective officer, undermines the task of balancing,” says Kropp. The fragmentation is particularly clear when it comes to discrimination.
Several federal commissioners are already dealing with discrimination
Because it is by no means the case that the fight against discrimination in all possible fields is a marginal issue in the government’s system of commissioners, quite the opposite. The traffic light coalition has even massively expanded this area. In addition to the officer who is supposed to take care of national minorities, there is now a dedicated Antiziganism officer. The newly appointed “queer officer” is responsible for the “acceptance of sexual and gender diversity” and is therefore supposed to fight against discrimination in this area. And in the Chancellery, the Commissioner for Migration, Refugees and Integration, Minister of State Reem Alabali-Radovan, SPD, was also appointed Commissioner for Anti-Racism.
There are a total of eight Federal Government Commissioners whose area of responsibility also includes the fight against discrimination and stigmatization. Which certainly raises the question of whether an additional anti-discrimination officer is necessary. In any case, the danger that instead of a polyphonic togetherness there will be a rivalry confusion is obvious.
Political turf wars were also a major reason in the last Merkel government why the position of anti-discrimination officer remained vacant for four years. Minister of State Annette Widmann-Mauz, CDU, who was responsible for migration, refugees and integration in the Chancellery at the time, is said to have attached great importance to not having any competition in this field.