Holocaust Survivor Mandate Case

Holocaust Survivor Mandate Case

Holocaust Survivor Jab Mandate Case

Re: the Legality of forcefully Injecting a Person with an alleged Medication Against their Will

 

Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

  • Dates: Dec 14 2022
  • Location: Stuttgart, Germany
  • Court: District Court of Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt
  • Case #:
  • Plaintiff: 85 yr old Holocaust Survivor
  • Plaintiff’s Lawyer: Holger Fischer
  • Defendant: Guardian
  • Trial Type:
  • Judge: Dr. L
  • Status: Under Appeal
  • Verdict: TBD


*updated Jan 19 2023

 

Background

A court in the German city of Stuttgart, in the state of Baden-Württemberg, sought to force COVID-19 vaccinations for an 85-year-old Jewish composer and a Holocaust survivor.  [1]….in order to institutionalise her “for her own good,” [2] 

The composer’s guardian had been trying to institutionalize his charge for years because she had once refused to take her medication. [2] 

Mascha Orel, co-founder of a holocaust survivors’ advocacy organization, comments that this suggests that there are financial interests at play, which also was observed by Report24. Orel published an open letter to the court, asking it to reconsider the order. [8]

Zhvanetskaya was born in 1937 in Vinnytsa, Ukraine, and moved to Germany in the late 1990s. She writes for various musical instruments, including contrabass, tuba, and trombone, and is a prolific composer, having authored two operas, more than twenty song cycles, symphonic works, and numerous sonatas. [8]
 
Issued December 2022, the order authorizes Zhvanetskaya’s guardian and medical support staff to force their way into her home, calling on police if needed, then lock her up in a psychiatric institution until December 2024 at the latest so that she can be administered two shots of the Covid-19 vaccine she has repeatedly insisted she does not want. [2]

According to the verdict of judge Dr. L. at the district court Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt, the accommodation of the affected person in the closed ward of a psychiatric hospital or a closed ward of a care facility was approved by the duty caregiver until December 5, 2024 at the latest. At the same time, two vaccinations against Covid-19 (Corona) for basic immunization were approved as compulsory medical measures, in each case after internal examination of the ability to vaccinate, until January 16, 2023 at the latest, with the consent of the duty caregiver. [7]

The court claims that Zhvanetskaya has been diagnosed with several mental illnesses, including frontotemporal dementia, “change of character,” delusional disorder, “narcissistic self-image,” egocentrism, and logorrhea. She also allegedly suffers from morbid obesity and cardiac issues. [8]

The judgment further states that the forced vaccination against Covid-19 against the will of the person concerned in the context of the accommodation was necessary for the welfare of the person concerned in order to avert an imminent significant damage to her health. [7]

Inna Zhvanetskaya had not been convinced of the necessity of this medical measure, on the contrary. She strictly rejected the vaccination. Therefore, the judge found that the substantial health damage could not be averted by any other measure reasonable for the person concerned, since the expected benefit of the medical measure would substantially outweigh the expected impairment of the person concerned. [7]

The non-consensual treatment is said to be justified by the composer’s alleged mental and physical illnesses, which the order claims include narcissism, egomania, logorrhea, dementia, obesity, heart disease, and an obsession with music. [2]

“She is completely caught up in her compositions and so busy with music that it is impossible to have a meaningful conversation with her,” the document states. [2]

 

The outlet Report24 posted a copy of the court order, which authorizes the woman’s transfer to a psychiatric ward and administering inoculations. According to the translation of the court documents done by Children’s Health Defense, if Zhvanetskaya or her guardians refuse to cooperate, the authorities should use force to make them: [8]

If the competent guardianship authority cooperates in the process of bringing the person concerned to [the] accommodation specified, it may, if necessary, use force and call in the assistance of the police enforcement authorities. [8]

The home of the person concerned may be forcibly opened, entered and searched for the purpose of carrying out the procedure. [8]

The immediate effectiveness of the decision is ordered. [8]

 

Attorney Holger Fischer got the case rolling. He reported about it in his Telegram channel, contacted Masha Orel, a co-founder of “We for Humanity”, who in turn contacted Report24. First, Report24 asked the court for an opinion on Sunday, January 8, 2023. This came on Monday and stated dryly and factually on what basis the deprivation of liberty measures as well as the compulsory medical treatment were ordered and that a complaint was pending (that of attorney Fischer). [7]

In the channel of attorney Holger Fischer one could read: 

With me the year began among other things with a cry for help from Baden-Wuerttemberg: At the request of the duty caregiver, a guardianship court approved the two-year closed accommodation of an old lady, which means compulsory treatment in a psychiatric hospital, followed by admission to the protected area of a nursing home. Without first waiting for the success of the hospital treatment and then, for example, deciding the case anew by obtaining a new expert opinion regarding the need for further accommodation, a decision is immediately made here about the future of this not so dependent woman. [7]

This alone is not disproportionate. Besides, the court expressly approves the compulsory vaccination against Covid-19. [7]

While a forced medication with psychotropic drugs may only be ultima ratio, accordingly not already included in the decision, here a court decides that the affected person receives her Covid injection by force without hesitation, i.e. possibly still directly after her transfer by means of police coercion to the psychiatric hospital. (, with the use of force. ) [7]

All for the benefit of the person concerned in accordance with Section 1906 (1) (2) of the German Civil Code, according to which placement against the will of a person concerned is only permissible because “an examination of the state of health, a medical treatment or a medical intervention is necessary to avert imminent significant damage to health, the measure cannot be carried out without the placement of the person concerned, and the person concerned cannot recognize the necessity of the placement or act in accordance with this insight due to a mental illness or mental or psychological disability.” [7]

Since the order is immediately enforceable, she now waits daily to be removed from her home, transported to the psychiatric ward, and forcibly inoculated by the guardianship authority, which will assist the duty caregiver in carrying out the order, which in turn will call in the police to apply coercive measures. The person concerned was born before the beginning of the Second World War and is of Jewish origin. [7]

In the channel one finds also the first legal statement of him. Among other things one can read there: It is not yet certain how the fate of the old lady will continue, who is to be accommodated today. By the legal remedy of the complaint the decision of the guardianship court to the long-term accommodation and compulsory vaccination is contestable and was contested. The decision of the Appeals Board of the Regional Court is pending. [7]

 
Hiding & Video

Zhvanetskaya was reportedly rescued ahead of their visit by “friendly activists.” On January 10, 2023, 1n a video recorded from her hiding place, the composer told Report24 that “music is my life, and if they take away music from me then they take my life.” [2]

Zhvanetskaya’s acquaintances have countered that the video she made this week proves she is of sound mind and body. While admitting the composer was “introverted and autistic,” Mascha Orel, co-founder of a holocaust survivors’ advocacy organization, told German outlet TKP after speaking to Zhvanetskaya that this was “normal for a highly talented artist”  [2]

According to Report24, the “exclusive video shows: She is neither of unsound mind nor endangering herself or others. She’s just afraid for her life,” rendering the psychiatric admittance questionable. [1]

 
Public Reaction
  • Austrian professor Martin Haditsch has argued that forcibly vaccinating Zhvanetskaya would violate the Nuremberg Code, a set of laws prohibiting non-consensual medical experimentation that was adopted during the Nazi war crimes trials that followed World War II. [2]
  • Politicians and legal experts, including the ‘Alternative for Germany’ (AfD) party’s Martin Sich, have decried the court order against the composer as a violation of Germany’s Basic Law. [2]
  • German outlet TKP and the Society of Physicians and Scientists for Health, Freedom and Democracy reported about lawyers, activists, and physicians defending Zhvanetskaya and criticizing the authorities for violating the Nuremberg Code, committing crimes against humanity by forcing an experimental drug on a person. [8]
 
  • Dr. med. Bodo Schiffmann also picked it up in his channel

“Holocaust survivor is to receive a compulsory medical measure twice tomorrow January 11, 2023: She is to be forcibly vaccinated against Covid-19 against her conscious decision. Furthermore, she is to be forcibly committed to a psychiatric institution. There she is to be vaccinated twice against COVID-19. The woman has consciously decided against this vaccination and is now being subjected to a compulsory medical measure as a Holocaust survivor in Germany.” and urges his readers to share the information widely in order to protect the lady. [7]

 
  • And Beate Bahner, specialized lawyer for medical law, commented:

This decision is a gigantic judicial scandal!!! Immediately executable! Tomorrow the composer is to be picked up. Then she will be vaccinated tomorrow at noon and, in addition, will probably be sedated with medication. I am stunned! A lawyer (Holger Fischer) has already filed a complaint. However, this does not prevent the judiciary and police from the immediate execution of this scandalous decision. This case must go to the public and to the press! Everyone must become active!“ [7]

  • The society of physicians and scientists for health, freedom and democracy e.V., MWGFD e.V., reports comprehensively and additionally publishes the letter of Mascha Orel, which is another Jewish woman living in Germany, born in Ukraine. In her open letter (engl. translation) she asked the court in Stuttgart to reconsider this decision. I spoke briefly with her to get more background information. [7]
 
  • Mascha Orel, co-founder of a humanitarian organization for holocaust survivors and their descendants, “We for Humanity,” reportedly spoke with the woman, and could not “confirm anything that was diagnosed in the report,” describing Zhvanetskaya as “vulnerable and frightened,” but having a “sharp mind.” Her true diagnosis is that she’s autistic, and “finds it difficult to interact with the outside world outside of her music,” said Orel, adding that “if it goes after that, one would have to isolate all autistic people.” [8]

What was your experience with Inna?

I talked to her on the phone for an hour. It is a madness. I wanted to see for myself what her condition is. She is vulnerable, frightened, and has been living in this state for about 2 years, as her duty caregiver has apparently tried to institutionalize her several times. The sword of Damocles of institutionalization has been hanging over her head for a long time. She has drawn an unequivocal comparison, “It’s like when Dad was at the front and Mom had to flee with me and my brother.” [7]

Why was psychiatry pushed forward?

Inna has a good soul around her, a woman who is there for her out of Christian charity. The woman has a sharp mind. She told me that about two months ago the nursing service was given the task of washing and dressing her. She could do that herself, she was always well groomed. Why was this done? Then probably the next instruction came from the caregiver that they had to control the acceptance of medication. These are two knock-out criteria. If you don’t take care of yourself and refuse to take medication, you are worthy of care. But both are just not true, according to Inna Zhvanetskaya’s confidante. Her father was a doctor and pharmacologist, and she pays close attention to the side effects and expiration dates of medications. Her father probably also taught her to weigh the benefits and risks, she has a very conscious approach to the subject and that is probably why she so strictly rejected vaccination. She probably takes the prescribed medication (e.g. because of water in the leg). [7]

Do you know how she feels about her situation?

She finds it difficult to interact with the outside world outside her music. Interaction with the outside world outside of her music is difficult for her. If that were the case, all autistic people would have to be isolated. It was a big effort for her to record the video, simply talking without a piano is not hers. But for her, it’s about her life. She talked and played for her life. That moved me to tears. That’s what Report24 called it: “Inna Zhvanetskaya plays for her life. And how she plays!” [7]

 
  • Children’s Health Defense stressed that “there is no medical or legal justification for compulsory vaccination,” and that the ruling is arbitrary. [8]
  • Martin Arieh Rudolph, chairman of the Jewish community in Bamberg, Bavaria sent a letter to the president of the Jewish community in Stuttgart, Barbara Traub, asking if she and the Jewish community could intervene to help Zhvanetskaya. [1]
 

“The facts seem unbelievable, because Germany has really learned nothing at all from history,” Report24 wrote. [4]

 
  • Michael Blume, the civil servant assigned to protect Jewish life in Baden-Württemberg state, including in its capital Stuttgart, is facing criticism on Twitter for failing to prioritize Zhvanetskaya’s case. There are calls for Blume to resign. [4]
  • Shai Glick, CEO of the Betsalmo—Human Rights in a Jewish Spirit NGO, told JNS,

“Anyone who acts against the people of Israel under the guise of anti-Zionism and anyone who supports the BDS movement, which applies a double standard solely towards the State of Israel, is himself antisemitic…. Mr. Blume should certainly not be in charge of the fight against antisemitism,” said Glick. [4]

 
Appeal

Zhvanetskaya’s lawyer, Holger Fischer, filed for an emergency appeal. On January 12, he posted on his Telegram channel that the Stuttgart regional court granted his application to suspend the compulsory vaccination until the decision on the appeal is made. Still, the composer might be forcefully institutionalized at any time, according to the lawyer. [8]

 “We for Humanity” also contacted the court with an appeal. On the same day, the employees of the care service succinctly informed that Ms. Zhvanetskaya would have to sign the work assignments finally, no more would be needed, as Ms. Zhvanetskaya would be picked up the next day. The supervisor would be there. [7]

 
Current Covid Regulations

Days before (the appeal Ruling) German Health Minister Karl Lauterbach announced an easing of one of the country’s last remaining pandemic restrictions. Lauterbach said Friday that as of February 2, there will no longer be a mask mandate for long-distance trains and buses. [3]

Masks will still be required in doctor’s offices, with masks and negative COVID-19 tests both required for hospitals and nursing homes. [3]

 
The Nuremberg Code

The Nuremberg Code ( from Wikipedia) is an ethical guideline for preparing and conducting medical, psychological and other experiments on humans. It has been part of the medical ethical principles in medical training since its formulation in the verdict of the Nuremberg Medical Trial (1946/1947), similar to the Geneva Vow. It states that in medical experiments on humans [7]

“the voluntary consent of the subject (is) absolutely necessary. This means that the person concerned must be capable, in the legal sense, of giving consent; that he must be able, uninfluenced by force, fraud, trickery, coercion, overreaching, or any other form of persuasion or coercion, to exercise his judgment; that he must have sufficient knowledge and understanding of the field in question in its details to be able to make an understanding and informed decision.” The Nuremberg Code was prompted by the crimes against humanity committed in the name of medical research during the National Socialist era, in particular “criminal medical experiments” and forced sterilizations. [7]

 

Significance

Austrian professor Martin Haditsch has argued that forcibly vaccinating Zhvanetskaya would violate the Nuremberg Code, a set of laws prohibiting non-consensual medical experimentation that was adopted during the Nazi war crimes trials that followed World War II. [6]

Covid Critic Robin Monotti tweeted

“This is opening the floodgates potentially to mass incarceration of people who refuse to be injected with experimental products” [5]

 

Plaintiff’s Argument

The Plaintiff argues that she is of sound mind and understands the risks of the experimental injections

 

Defendant’s Argument

The defendant argues that the Plaintiff is mentally ill and unable to make decisions for herself

 

Relevant Prior Judgements/ Cases

…More information is needed…

 

Decision

First Decision

On December 14 2022 a court order had authorized the forcible removal of Zhvanetskaya from her home in Stuttgart on Wednesday in order to institutionalise her “for her own good,” [2]

Second Decision

On January 12 2023 A regional court has overruled the decision. [1]

 

Aftermath

Soviet-born composer Inna Zhvanetskaya is reportedly in hiding from German authorities after they attempted to have the 85-year-old Holocaust survivor committed to a mental institution and inoculated against her will with a Covid-19 shot, German outlet Report24 said on Thursday. [2]

 

Media


German court orders the forced Injection of Holocaust survivor -Jan 18 2023

source: Odysee / Towards The Light


Holocaust Survivor Pleads for her Life Link -Jan 10 2023

source: DeepThought


Holocaust survivor Vera Sharav speech at Nuremberg 75 -Aug 20 2022

source: Odysee / Towards The Light


Dr. Bodo Schiffmann Reports on the Forced Jab of Holocaust Survivor -Jan 11 2022

source: Odysee / 種 Datenarche


MUST WATCH: C19 Death Data Analysis for Every Country pre & post mRNA -Jan 12 2022

source: Odysee / Towards The Light


Rebel News Confronts Pfizer CEO at World Economic Forum -Jan 19 2023

source: Odysee / Towards The Light


Germany Vaccination Mortality Data -Dec 12 2022

source: Odysee / shortXXvids


Back to All Cases

 

BaWü Anti 2G Case

BaWü Anti 2G Case

BaWü Retailers Anti 2G Case

Re: the Legality, fairness & confusion of 2G rules that apply for some retailers but not for others

 

Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

  • Dates: January 25, 2022
  • Location: Baden-Württemberg, Germany
  • Court: Verwaltungsgerichtshof
  • Case #:
  • Plaintiff: Stationary Store
  • Defendant: Government of Baden-Württemberg
  • Trial Type:
  • Judge:
  • Status: Decided
  • Verdict: for the Plaintiff


*updated: Jan 26, 2022

Background

A woman from the Ortenau district in Baden-Württemberg, challenged the 2G regulation. She runs a small stationery store, which according to the current regulation, unlike a flower store, is not considered to be  an essential needs business. She argues that this is unequal treatment, since the 3G rule applies in a flower store despite the alert level II. [1]

This is one of many such cases now being filed in courts throughout Germany. Five days prior, the regulations for 2G in the Free State of Bavaria had been overruled by the Administrative Court. [1]

Similarly in the judges in Mannheim had ruled in favor of an un-vaccinated student in a similar case. This had been excluded by the regulations of the alarm stage II to a large extent from attendance meetings. The judges overruled the Corona ordinance, which applied to study sessions. [1]

 

Significance

This case is one of now many cases challenging the restrictive 2G rule for every shop and retailer.

 

Plaintiff’s Argument

According to the current Baden-Württemberg Ordinance on Protection against Infection, only vaccinated and recovered persons may enter retail stores. Stores catering to essential needs are exempted. The applicant considered this to be a violation of her freedom of occupation and of the principle of equal treatment. [1]

 

Defendant’s Argument

…More information is needed…

 

Relevant Prior Judgements/ Cases

  • In December, a Higher Administrative Court (Oberverwaltungsgericht) of Lower Saxony in Lüneburg (Case # Az.: 13 MN 477/21) [3] overturned the 2G rule in retail. After the judgment, the German Retail Association called for the 2G rule in retail to be abolished nationwide. [2]
  • On Jan 21, 2022, The Higher Administrative Court of Saarland also overturned the 2G rules for retail citing similar reasons and conditions. [3]
  • In Baden-Württemberg, the 2G regulation at universities will be suspended as of next week (week of Jan 24, 2022). This was decided by the VGH in Mannheim.  [4]

 

Decision

The court has overturned the 2G rule for retail. The Administrative Court considers the freezing of alert level II by the Corona Ordinance to be probably unlawful. [1]

Un-vaccinated people are once again allowed to go shopping with an up-to-date test, effective immediately. The currently applicable 2G rule is thus off the table for the time being. This means that, in addition to those who have been vaccinated and those who have recovered, those who can present a current test may also go shopping in stores again until further notice. [1]

Concerned about the emerging omicron variant, the green-black state government had maintained Alert Level II in Baden-Württemberg’s Corona ordinance. Thus, by the end of the month, the limits on hospital exposure have been suspended. The judges criticized that far-reaching access restrictions for the un-vaccinated, which are not dependent on the 7-day hospitalization incidence, are not in line with the requirements of the Infection Protection Act. [1]

the court’s notice states that significant restrictions on fundamental rights “are not disassociated from the seven-day hospitalization incidence.” This incidence is used to indicate hospitals’ burden of Corona-infected persons per 100,000 population. [1]

 

Aftermath

  • This is already the second setback for the government of Prime Minister Kretschmann within just a few days. [1]
  • This week, therefore, the government intends to reinstate the tier system that has been practiced until now. However, according to the prime minister’s assessment, these will be adjusted once again. The Omikron variant makes these adjustments necessary, he said. [1]
Other Rulings
  •  

 


Further Research

Court Documents:
  • Read the Court Ruling
In the news:

 

Media


Prof Bhakdi: 2G & Impfpflicht

source: orangetower


„2G Plus” für Gastronomie soll kommen

source: Bild


Bayerischer Einzelhandel kippt 2G-Regeln

source: DE Nachrichten

 

References

  1. Baden-Württemberg: Gericht kippt 2G-Regel
  2. Bayerischer Gerichtshof kippt 2G-Regel im Einzelhandel
  3. Oberverwaltungsgericht kippt 2G-Regel für Einzelhandel im Saarland
  4. VGH-Beschluss: 2G-Regel an Hochschulen in BW wird außer Vollzug gesetzt

 

Keyword

2G, 2g-Regel, Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, BaWü, Germany, Lüneburg, Munich, Niedersachsen, Restrictions, Retail, Saxony, Shops, Soeder, Verwaltungsgerichtshof, VGH


Back to All Cases

 

Bavaria Anti 2G Case

Bavaria Anti 2G Case

Bavaria Retailers Anti 2G Case

Re: the Legality, fairness & confusion of 2G rules that apply for some retailers but not for others

 

Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

  • Dates: January 19, 2022
  • Location: Munich, Germany
  • Court: Bayerische Verwaltungsgerichtshof
  • Case #:
  • Plaintiff: Lamp Store
  • Defendant:
  • Trial Type:
  • Judge:
  • Status: Decided
  • Verdict: for the Plaintiff


*updated: Jan 26, 2022

 

Background

In December, a Higher Administrative Court (Oberverwaltungsgericht) of Lower Saxony in Lüneburg (Case # Az.: 13 MN 477/21) [3] overturned the 2G rule in retail. After the judgment, the German Retail Association called for the 2G rule in retail to be abolished nationwide. [1]

According to the 15th Bavarian Ordinance on Infection Protection Measures [4], the 2G rule in retail demands that only vaccinated and recovered people would have access to the shops. [1]

Now an urgent application against the 2G rule in Bavaria has also been heard. [1]

The complaint was filed by the owner of a lighting store in Upper Bavaria that was affected by this policy. Shops that cover daily needs, however are excluded. [1] for example grocery stores, pharmacies, gas stations, bookstores, flower stores, hardware stores, garden markets and Christmas tree sales. [2] In mid-December, the court had already ruled that toy stores also fall under daily needs and are therefore not subject to the 2G rule. At the end of December, clothing stores were additionally exempted. [2] The applicant saw this as a violation of her professional freedom and the principle of equal treatment. [1]
 
In shopping streets, given the many exceptions, only very few stores ended up applying the 2G rule, for example stores for jewelry, watches, electronics or household goods. “In some areas, the demarcations of what is daily necessities and what is not were barely understandable. Then, for example, the 2G rule applied to haberdashery and suspenders, but not to the pants themselves,” says Gärtner (managing director of the trade association in Swabia). [2]
 
“The lack of understanding on the part of customers has therefore recently increased considerably,” Gärtner observed. [2]

 

Significance

This case undoes the restrictive 2G rule for every shop and retailer. It is a major blow to the Covid regime. It is also significant in that Bavaria’s Governor Markus Soeder (CSU) is one of the strictest and most vocal supporters of Lockdowns, Track and Trace and Mandatory Vaccinations.

 

Plaintiff’s Argument

According to the current Bavarian Ordinance on Protection against Infection, only vaccinated and recovered persons may enter retail stores. Stores catering to daily needs are exempt. The applicant considered this to be a violation of her freedom of occupation and of the principle of equal treatment. [1]

 

Defendant’s Argument

…More information is needed…

 

Relevant Prior Judgements/ Cases

…More information is needed…

 

Decision

“We are completely suspending 2G in retail in Bavaria and thus ensuring a quick and practicable implementation of the VGH decision,” Head of the State Chancellery (CSU) announced immediately after the decision became known. [1]

The judges have struck down the entire regulation: they see the Infection Protection Act as a sufficient legal basis for 2G restrictions in retail. However, the Bavarian Ordinance must state clearly and conclusively to which transactions the Regulation specifically applies. [4]

The criterion of “daily need” is explained in the Infection Protection Measures Ordinance by an – exhaustive – list of examples, the Administrative Court explained. Thus, it is not possible to determine with sufficient certainty from the ordinance which business is covered by the access restriction and which is not. [1]

According to the court, however, there must then be “sufficient clarity from the regulation itself” as to exactly which areas the 2G rules apply to and which do not. The government should not hand over this task to offices and courts. [2]

There is no right of appeal against Wednesday’s decision. [1]

 

Aftermath

  • The CEO of the German Retail Association, Stefan Genth, said, “Bavaria and Lower Saxony are leading the way for the other states. 2G in retail makes no sense and must be quickly abolished.” Since the beginning of the pandemic, he said, the food trade has shown that purchasing with a mask, distance and hygiene concept is safe. [1]

“Policymakers in all states and the federal government need to correct themselves and quickly repeal 2G in shopping.” [1]

  • Head of the State Chancellery Herrmann (CSU) also emphasized, “The FFP2 mask requirement in retail continues to apply and provide protection.” [1]
  • We unreservedly welcome this ruling,” says Wolfgang Puff, General Manager of the Bavarian Trade Association. “We hope that sales and frequencies in the retail sector will now pick up again, as many people have recently been very unsettled,” [2]

“We would be happy not to have to make any limitations and control 2G obligations in the future,” he adds. [2]

Puff now hopes that more customers will return to the stores after the ruling. [2]

“Higher retail visitation figures are urgently needed, as Christmas sales have fallen through the cracks for the second time,” he says. “We have to get back to normal at some point, because at some point retailers’ reserves will be exhausted,” Puff warns. [2]

  • The Bavarian Trade Association has welcomed the end of the 2G rule in stores. “We hope the topic is finally out of the picture,” said managing director Bernd Ohlmann. The decision of the administrative court was awaited by many traders. “Now we have clarity.”

    Ohlmann complained that the state government-ordered 2G rule “ruined Christmas business” for retailers. Restricted access did not lead to notorious vaccination refusals, they bought online – as did many vaccinated people who were deterred by queues outside checks in stores. [4]

  • Economy Minister Hubert Aiwanger (Free Voters) welcomed the Administrative Court’s decision. “Retail has been calling for this relaxation for a long time, as 2G screening for the affected ranges required a lot of effort and there is no particular risk of infection in retail due to FFP2 masks,” a- he told the “Passauer Neue”. Press”. It is a relief for traders to be able to work without 2G in the future. [4]
Other Rulings
  • On Jan 21, 2022, The Higher Administrative Court of Saarland also overturned the 2G rules for retail citing similar reasons and conditions. [5]
  • In Baden-Württemberg, the 2G regulation at universities will be suspended as of next week (week of Jan 24, 2022). This was decided by the VGH in Mannheim.  [6]
  • On Jan 25, 2022, also in n Baden-Württemberg, the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (The Administrative Court) overturned the 2G rule for retail. The Court considers the freezing of alert level II by the Corona Ordinance to be probably unlawful. [7]

 


Further Research

Court Documents:
  • Read the Court Ruling
In the news:

 

Media


Prof Bhakdi: 2G & Impfpflicht

source: orangetower


„2G Plus” für Gastronomie soll kommen

source: Bild


Bayerischer Einzelhandel kippt 2G-Regeln

source: DE Nachrichten


Back to All Cases