Articles for tag: DemokratieMigrationMigrationskontrollePolitikpolitisches StrafrechtSchleuserStrafrecht

Das Strafrecht als Mittel der Migrationskontrolle?

Das Strafrecht ist zur Waffe der Migrationspolitik geworden, allen voran der Schleusertatbestand. Hinter der Erzählung vom skrupellosen Schlepper verbirgt sich ein System, das Flüchtlinge ohne legale Zugangswege in die Abhängigkeit von Schleusern drängt. Zugleich kriminalisiert das Gesetz auch solidarische Hilfe und stellt NGOs wie Flüchtlinge selbst unter Verdacht. Damit rückt das Strafrecht gefährlich nah an autoritär-populistische Instrumentalisierung.

Verwundbare Demokratien und das Strafrecht

Verwundbare Demokratien sind kein Naturzustand, sondern Resultat politischer und rechtlicher Kämpfe, in denen auch das Strafrecht tief verstrickt ist. Als Teil des staatlichen Gewaltmonopols definiert es, was als legitime oder illegitime Gewalt gilt – und stabilisiert damit bestehende Machtverhältnisse. Statt sich auf entpolitisierte Rechtslogik zu verlassen, braucht es ein Strafrecht, das seine politische Verantwortung anerkennt und im Rahmen demokratischer Auseinandersetzungen transformativ weiterentwickelt wird.

Das Politische im Strafrecht stärken

Strafrecht gerät ins Rutschen – nicht, weil es politisch wird, sondern weil es das Politische verliert. Technokratische Verdrängung und affektive Überhitzung spielen autoritären Kräften gezielt in die Hände. Sie schmieden ein regressives Strafrecht, gegen Pluralität, Dissens und das „Andere“. Was also tun? Es gilt, das Politische im Strafrecht zu stärken: nicht als parteipolitisches Kalkül, sondern als emanzipatorisches Projekt.

A Fallen Curtain and Open Questions

On 25 June 2025, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights delivered its Decision on Kovačević v. BiH. This ruling could completely change the legal assessment of strict ethnic quota systems in political institutions for worse. While the case originates from Bosnia and Herzegovina, it will likely have far-reaching political consequences for other power-sharing systems in and beyond Europe, as well. Crucially, it is prone to “overrule” all previous judgments of the ECtHR against BiH. This means that it will render all future efforts to support constitutional reform in the country futile, because it seems to legitimize the de facto strict ethno-national cartel of power materialized in its constitution.

Three Opposites in Taiwan’s Refracted Constitution

Civil society groups have initiated a mass recall movement in Taiwan, targeting the main opposition party KMT. On 26 July, it received an electoral setback. The movement has been hailed as the most recent evidence for Taiwan’s robust democracy. But its result suggests a more complicated and nuanced story concerning Taiwan’s constitutional image.

Consolidating Parliamentary Democracy in Mongolia

In May 2025, Mongolia witnessed peaceful youth-led protests in Sukhbaatar Square reacting to the Government’s handling of corruption and a perceived lack of transparency. The demonstration led to the Government’s resignation after a failed vote of confidence. Such governmental crises are not unprecedented in Mongolia, but the reaction to it is: the current political episode stands for an emerging constitutional culture in which civil society is reclaiming constitutional mechanisms for a more participatory and responsive democratic system.

An Elusive Touchdown with a Political Football

On July 19, Congress voted to revoke funding from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting – something it has not done in the 60 years since its creation. In countries with strong public media traditions, this may seem astonishing: Why would Congress defund NPR and PBS after already having appropriated the money? And what does this mean for the First Amendment? To answer these questions, we must consider the peculiar history of public broadcasting in the United States.

The Great Recall Movement

Confronted with lawmakers they themselves elected just eighteen months ago, Taiwanese citizens have creatively repurposed the antiquated mechanism of "recall" as a last-resort check on a runaway legislature. Sparked by a year of legislative overreach and erosion of constitutional checks, this unprecedented campaign reflects Taiwan's spirit of civic constitutionalism, and its determination to defend its democratic institutions.

Laboratories of Authoritarianism

In Mahmoud v. Taylor, the U.S. Supreme Court expanded the 1st Amendment Free Exercise Clause to grant conservative religious parents a constitutional right to remove their children from any classroom where a teacher includes LGBTQAI+ people in the curriculum. In effect, the Court has allowed public schools to discourage mutual tolerance, parents to opt out of Equal Protection, and fringe legal strategists to continue to use children’s constitutional rights as a test case for authoritarianism. In doing so, the erosion of children’s rights becomes the foundation upon which other rights are eroded.

The Limits of Limiting Democracy

The intellectual and institutional architectures built around democracy are under pressure – and evolving: Germany reformed its fiscal constitution in March, Europe’s Stability and Growth Pact is undergoing a stress test, and in the United States, the White House is questioning the independence of monetary policy. Historically, democracy has an ambivalent reputation: Plato described it as both the freest and the most unstable of governments. But how far and in what ways can democracy be limited before it loses its democratic nature?