Why Wissing is bringing driving bans into play

According to Transport Minister Wissing, there could be a risk of driving bans on weekends due to the Climate Protection Act. Otherwise his sector would not be able to meet the targets. What’s behind it? And would that be legally possible? An overview.

Why are people talking about driving bans?

It’s about a possible scenario from the perspective of Transport Minister Volker Wissing – in the event that the new climate protection law takes longer to come. Then there could be drastic cuts for drivers. In a letter to the chairmen of the traffic light factions SPD, Greens and FDP, Wissing warns of drastic cuts for drivers if the traffic light coalition does not agree on a reform of the climate protection law soon – up to and including driving bans on weekends.

That would be something that hasn’t happened in Germany for more than 50 years. From Wissing’s point of view, there could be a risk again if one continues to look at the CO2 consumption of individual federal ministries and not of all areas together, as the new climate protection law provides. That would be good for Wissing’s ministry: its rather poor climate footprint would then be offset against those of the other areas.

How does Wissing justify his initiative?

The sector consideration in the currently applicable climate protection law means that “we have to save 22 million CO2 equivalents immediately,” said the FDP politician Deutschlandfunk. “And ‘we’ in this case are all citizens who are affected by car traffic, by delivery traffic – basically each and every one of us.”

Wissing reiterated his proposal that such savings cannot be achieved with a speed limit or other measures, but only on an ad hoc basis by giving up cars and trucks.

Why does Wissing do this?

Wissing wants to put pressure on the new climate protection law to come quickly. According to the currently applicable climate protection law, the transport minister would have to present an immediate program that would reduce road traffic emissions. Because road traffic remains the problem child of climate protection policy. It runs predominantly on fossil fuels; So far there have only been small steps towards reducing emissions. The registration numbers of electric cars remain far behind the federal government’s plans. After the traffic light also canceled the purchase bonus for electric cars at the beginning of the year, sales plummeted.

That’s why it’s in Wissing’s interest that the previous rules are no longer applicable – and that he no longer has to hold his head, so to speak, as the federal government’s climate sinner.

Is this legal?

The past has shown that general driving bans can generally be imposed in Germany: there were a few “car-free Sundays” in the 1970s, a reaction to the international oil crisis. And in the recent past there were local driving bans for diesel vehicles in some cities. The Federal Administrative Court had confirmed at the time that such measures were in principle possible under certain conditions.

However, the prerequisite for a general driving ban is always an appropriate legal basis. With such a measure, the state is massively interfering with several basic rights of citizens – and it is not allowed to do that “just like that”. In the case of possible driving bans to achieve environmental goals, there is currently no sufficient legal basis.

Also the climate protection law, to which Volker Wissing in an interview with the Deutschlandfunk refers, does not provide such. The legislature would therefore first have to create a basis for nationwide driving bans.

The initiative for this would then have to come from Wissing himself. According to the Climate Protection Act, the respective federal ministry is obliged to propose how the climate goals should be achieved in the relevant sector. Wissing would then have to propose to the federal government the legal introduction of driving bans if he actually sees no other options – such as speed limits – to sufficiently reduce CO2 emissions.

Would driving bans be verifiable?

If, after all the political discourse, general driving bans actually come about, the citizens affected could have them reviewed by the courts. The crucial points are: Every state intervention in a fundamental right must serve a legitimate purpose. The interventions must be suitable for achieving this purpose, represent the mildest means and, ultimately, be proportionate in the narrower sense.

At this point, for example, it would be checked whether there are sufficient exceptions, for example for hardship cases such as ambulances, fire services or necessary food transport. Ultimately, the Federal Constitutional Court would have to decide whether a driving ban is compatible with our Basic Law.

What is it about? Climate protection law?

The Climate Protection Act has been in place since 2019. It sets binding guidelines for how much greenhouse gas emissions must be saved in various sectors each year. This applies to energy production, industry, buildings, transport, agriculture and waste management.

The goal is to achieve greenhouse gas neutrality in Germany by 2045. By 2030, emissions of harmful CO2 should be two-thirds lower than in the comparable year 1990.

The Climate Protection Act specifies the figures, and the associated climate protection program sets out the measures with which the targets are to be achieved. Germany has already achieved a significant part of the reduction. Electricity generation via wind turbines and solar energy, for example, has made a large contribution to the fact that the Federal Republic, as an industrial nation, now emits around 46 percent less CO2 than in 1990. The so-called Heating Act with its support for heat pumps is also intended to help make further progress in CO2 reduction.

What should change about the law?

Last June, the federal government introduced an amendment to the Climate Protection Act; the first reading in the Bundestag was in September. The change stipulates that the focus will no longer be on annual sector targets, but rather the annual total greenhouse gas emissions. So if too much is emitted in transport, but less than estimated in energy production, this can be offset in the future as soon as the Bundestag has passed the amended Climate Protection Act.

The reformed climate protection law would give the transport sector more time to achieve its climate goals. Because then the federal government would above all commit itself to advancing climate protection across all areas – industrial production, building heating, agriculture, electricity generation – and also road traffic.

Why isn’t there a new one yet? Climate protection law?

The chronic dispute in the traffic light coalition has worsened since the agreement was reached last summer. A package for solar funding, which is also overdue, has been put together. According to coalition circles, the FDP only wants to approve it if the climate protection law is passed according to their ideas. The coalition committee on Wednesday evening did not make any progress, said Ampel representatives to the Reuters news agency.

What reactions does Wissing’s initiative trigger?

“It is not responsible for a minister to stir up unfounded fears,” said Green Party leader Katharina Dröge on Friday. The Greens didn’t think driving bans made sense. “Instead, Volker Wissing should carry out his task and finally make sensible suggestions for more climate protection in the transport sector.” There are enough measures. “And we’ve been waiting for the transport minister to act for two years.”

The Green transport expert Stefan Gelbhaar said it was surprising that Wissing had rejected climate protection instruments such as a speed limit for years. “He should explain how it fits together,” Gelbhaar told the Reuters news agency.

His SPD colleague Isabel Cademartori spoke out in favor of a quick conclusion of the traffic light on the new climate protection law. But there are a variety of options for saving CO2. Wissing’s approach is also questionable. “We have enough uncertainties in the transport sector,” she told the Reuters news agency.

Greenpeace’s reaction is more drastic: the transport minister is shamelessly trying to turn the possible consequences of his own failure into political pressure, according to the environmental protection organization. Wissing paints horror scenarios on the wall so that he doesn’t have to do anything about climate protection in the future.

With information from Lothar Lenz and Oliver Neuroth, ARD capital studio, and Christoph Kehlbach, ARD legal department