Search
document

Document text Analytics

VOGT v. GERMANYDISSENTING OPINION OF MR. J.-C. SOYER

Doc ref: • ECHR ID:

Document date: November 30, 1993

Inbound citations: 0
•
Cited paragraphs: 0
•
Outbound citations: 0

VOGT v. GERMANYDISSENTING OPINION OF MR. J.-C. SOYER

Doc ref: • ECHR ID:

Document date: November 30, 1993

Cited paragraphs only

DISSENTING OPINION OF MR. J.-C. SOYER

Unlike the majority of the Commission, I consider that the

measure taken against the applicant was justified, under both

Article 10 para. 2 and Article 11 para. 2. The reasons for my opinion

are set out below.

1. The declared aim of the DKP was to overthrow the constitutional

order of the Federal Republic and undermine the bases of democracy, and

it was a matter of public knowledge that the applicant was an active

member of the DKP (paras. 17 and 20 of the Article 31 report).

2. Consequently, for the defence of democracy, the measure taken

against the applicant was "useful", "reasonable" and "desirable"; it

therefore satisfied the criteria of necessity set out in the Sunday

Times judgment (para. 59 of the Article 31 report).

3. Accordingly, it is of little importance that the applicant did

not conduct herself as a political activist while actually teaching

(para. 76 of the Article 31 report). A teacher's influence is often

exerted more effectively through the model of her personality, which

sets up an imitative reflex, than through direct indoctrination. This

was, moreover, one of the known techniques of "hidden persuasion", the

basis of agit-prop.

4. Nor is it of any greater importance that at the time when the

disciplinary penalty was imposed the results obtained by communist

parties in elections had already declined considerably (para. 81 of the

Article 31 report), since Marxism, in general, did not supplant

democracy through free elections.

APPENDIX I

HISTORY OF PROCEEDINGS

Date Item

_________________________________________________________________

13 February 1991 Introduction of the application

27 February 1991 Registration of the application

Examination of Admissibility

7 October 1991 Commission's deliberations and

decision to invite the Government to

submit observations on the

admissibility and merits of the

application

30 January 1992 Government's observations

2 May 1992 Applicant's observations in reply

19 October 1992 Commission's deliberations and

decision on admissibility

Examination of the merits

11 February 1993 Oral hearing on the merits

30 November 1993 Commission's deliberations on the

merits, final vote and adoption of

the Report

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant