[tannhaeuser]

But Art. 14 (2) literally states that "property [...] should also serve the public good", rather than "solely". This isn't just a nuance or gradual difference; it touches the matter of the principal basis of the law. Similarly, the right of assembly is a basic right with no conditions at all, and postulated in and granted in reference to the Déclaration des Droits de l’Homme et du Citoyen from 1789, which found its way to Germany via napoleonic laws. Property is also a basic right granted therein.

[kuschku]

Actually, Germany limits both of these rights, heavily.

The right of assembly is only given in indoor spaces, which you own, as long as zero aggression happens.

For outdoor assemblies, you'll need approval of the municipal government (and the police can dissolve your assembly, as happened in Hamburg during the G20 protests).

In the same way, as I mentioned, the right to property is frequently limited by nations. In the US, commonly for public projects the state seizes land without repaying the owners, and Germany does similar stuff.

[DocTomoe]

> you'll need approval of the municipal government

* not in all cases (e.g. Spontandemonstration, where there is no time to file an application)

* the municipal government needs a really good reason to not give approval

* the courts are very sympathetic to virtually any cause should a municipal government decide to forbid a gathering.

> (and the police can dissolve your assembly,

* if there is true danger to the general public. Again, courts are going to slap the police around if they do this just because.

I know how easy it is to use a blanket statement as a base for another blanket statement which is equally one-sided, but please try to build arguments in a less ... attackable way.

[kuschku]

That’s in theory.

Have you looked at even one of the cases in Hamburg with G20?

Spontandemonstrationen that were immediately dissolved with teargas.

No approval for demonstrations without reason, or even situations where courts said the demonstration is legal, and the police dissolved them anyway.

[DocTomoe]

And because we are in a Rechtsstaat, the courts will take care of that.

[kuschku]

And because it’s a Rechtsstaat, obviously the people that decided that this should happen (considering that there have been memos leaked showing that Scholz and Merkel both were involved in these decisions personally) will resign, right?

Yeah, I doubt there will be any repercussions, de Maiziere will jail some more left-wing journalists, Merkel will become chancellor again, and in Hamburg instead of the Mayor maybe some low-level police officer will resign.

Although every police officer involved in this said that the ridiculous orders came from high up.

[DocTomoe]

What has a will to resign an office has to do with us being in a Rechtsstaat?

Have a look at Stuttgart. They lost a high-ranking police officer and the MP was not reelected.

[germanier]

> For outdoor assemblies, you'll need approval of the municipal government (and the police can dissolve your assembly, as happened in Hamburg during the G20 protests).

For outdoor assemblies you need to inform a designated authority (which is not the same as an approval) and comply with certain restrictions.