Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Kosiek V Germany

    Uploaded by

    gem_mata
    185 views2 pages
    Mr. Rolf Kosiek, a member of the far-right National Democratic Party of Germany, was dismissed from his position as a probationary civil servant at a technical college due to his party membership. Kosiek argued that his dismissal violated his right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The European Commission of Human Rights ruled that while the Convention protects freedom of expression as a general rule for civil servants, states can impose restrictions for members of the armed forces, police, or public administration. It also found that under German law, civil servants must uphold the democratic system, and Kosiek's dismissal was aimed at determining his suitability for the position based on his opinions, not interfering with his

    Original Description:

    Case digest for Kosiek v Germany

    Original Title

    Kosiek v Germany

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Mr. Rolf Kosiek, a member of the far-right National Democratic Party of Germany, was dismissed from his position as a probationary civil servant at a technical college due to his party membership. Kosiek argued that his dismissal violated his right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The European Commission of Human Rights ruled that while the Convention protects freedom of expression as a general rule for civil servants, states can impose restrictions for members of the armed forces, police, or public administration. It also found that under German law, civil servants must uphold the democratic system, and Kosiek's dismissal was aimed at determining his suitability for the position based on his opinions, not interfering with his

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    185 views2 pages

    Kosiek V Germany

    Uploaded by

    gem_mata
    Mr. Rolf Kosiek, a member of the far-right National Democratic Party of Germany, was dismissed from his position as a probationary civil servant at a technical college due to his party membership. Kosiek argued that his dismissal violated his right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The European Commission of Human Rights ruled that while the Convention protects freedom of expression as a general rule for civil servants, states can impose restrictions for members of the armed forces, police, or public administration. It also found that under German law, civil servants must uphold the democratic system, and Kosiek's dismissal was aimed at determining his suitability for the position based on his opinions, not interfering with his

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Case of Kosiek vs.

    Germany

    Facts.
    Mr. Rolf Kosiek who was a member of the National Democratic Party of Germany
    (NDP) worked as a lecturer with a status of probationary civil servant at Nürtingen Technical
    College. As required by law, he swore in that he would uphold the free democratic
    constitutional system. Authorities, in connection thereto, were allowed to take necessary
    action against those who failed in that regard. Although it was recommended that Mr. Kosiek
    be granted tenure for life, the Ministry of Education and Culture dismissed him due to his
    membership in the NDP whose aims were inimical to the Constitution.

    He appealed before the Stuttgart Administrative Court which set aside the decision of
    the Ministry by ruling that such grounds should have been taken into account when he was
    appointed. He appealed to the Administrative Court of Appeal of the Land of Baden-
    Württemberg and Federal Administrative Court; yet, these were denied. Thereafter, Mr.
    Kosiek appealed before the Federal Constitutional Court and argued that his views were
    covered by the freedom of expression and were not directed against the democratic system.
    However, such appeal was not entertained on the ground that it had insufficient prospects
    of success. The Court ruled that any civil servant who cannot uphold the free democratic
    constitutional system ay be dismissed on the ground of personal unsuitability.

    The case thereafter was brought before the European Commission of Human Rights.
    Mr. Kosiek argued that his dismissal violated Art. 10 of the Convention which protects his
    right to freedom of expression.

    Issue
    Whether or not Mr. Kosiek’s dismissal violated his right to freedom of expression

    Held
    No.

    Although the Universal Declaration of Human Rights guarantee the right to equal
    access to public service, such is not set forth in the European Convention. Moreso, States are
    allowed to impose special restrictions on the exercise of freedoms of assembly and
    association by members of the armed forces, of the police or of the administration of the
    State. It confirms that such guarantee in the Convention extend to civil servants as a general
    rule.

    Under the Land Civil Servants Act, a person who seeks a post as a civil servant-
    whether temporary or established- in Germany must consistently uphold the free
    democratic system. This requirement applies to recruitment to the civil service, a matter that
    was deliberately omitted from the Convention, and it cannot in itself be considered
    incompatible with the Convention.

    In refusing Mr. Kosiek such access to civil service, the responsible Ministry took
    account of his opinions and activities merely in order to determine whether he had proved
    himself during his probationary period and whether he possessed one of the necessary
    personal qualifications for the post in question. That being so, there has been no interference
    with the exercise of the right protected under paragraph 1 of Article 10 (art. 10-1).

    You might also like