FUnfortunately, Oederalism can also mean that every federal state must agree.At least in the field of public law broadcastThe state of Saxony-Anhalt refuses to ratify a national treaty amending the media. On the other hand, ARD, ZDF and Deutschlandradio sued the Federal Constitutional Court and won the rights.
This shows once again: the eternal protection of the Basic Law basically includes the freedom of public broadcasting. Countries can only decide together. Karlsruhe speaks of “a federal community of responsibility, where each canton shares responsibility.”
Not just a guarantee of existence
Responsibility? Protect basic rights? The compulsion to reach an agreement pushes the perpetual motion machine with the built-in cost increase guarantee into infinity.Saxony-Anhalt may be accused of not fully justifying its refusal, and Federal Constitutional CourtIt played an important role in building this system.
6.30 am on weekdays
But what is needed are sovereigns, members of Congress, and state assemblies.In turn, most people are not interested in changing the system: broadcasters report their needs, are responsible for committee review and make recommendations, and on this basis the federal states have formulated Broadcast fee Contribution is fixed.
Except for a few outliers, this not only guarantees the existence of the so-called non-state broadcasting, but also guarantees its extensive further development, but somehow also guarantees a national broadcasting with 8 billion annual fee revenue. Most members of Congress and the government are very satisfied with this.
Compared with the constitutional deficit, the democratic deficit of the system is also smaller. Basic rights, including freedom of broadcasting, should not maintain the operation of public law institutions, but give citizens and private companies freedom. This is especially important today. Just as important as public service broadcasting that focuses on basic services, so is the existence and diversity of private media, and they must be responsible for their own profits and losses.
Freedom, responsibility, federalism-all of these should serve diversity and justice for the separation of powers. But which decision maker is interested in this?
