The right of association action is no longer what it should have been. It has transformed, secretly, almost unnoticed, into a mechanism that redistributes power. Not the parliament, not the elected representatives, decide more on the direction, but those who cleverly entrench themselves behind legal formulations and legal finesse. courts that actually do thatto apply law, begin to create laws themselves. Any judgment that goes beyond the individual case becomes a course, as if a chamber would like to determine where society has to move. And while that happens, Parliament watches powerlessly, trapped in the facade of a democracy that seems more and more like a spectacle.
The state finances its opponents
It is a first-class political spectacle: private organizations that appear to be of the common good are supported with public funds in order to sue the state that pays them. This is not a coincidence, but a system. It is those organizations that are largely considered politically acceptable, as loud representatives of a direction thatinterests. This is where tax money flows to finance legal campaigns, the aim of which is to force political results that would never have found a majority in parliament. The democratic process is circumvented, the people’s representation is disempowered, and that is through a tool that impersonates legal protection, but is in fact a lever to dictate directions. thatis not a step forward of the law, that is its deformation.
judicial design instead of interpretation
The principle that courts should speak justice but not create a new one seems to have been lost. More and more often, decisions are made that act as if they are not springing from the law, but from the will to fill gaps with political messages. Concepts are stretched, norms are reinterpreted, and at the end there is a judgment that overshoots its framework. what is happening hereis not a legal precision, but a creeping appropriation of political power. Judges law becomes a tool of social control. The confidence that the right to be clear is the right foundation breaks down when people get the feeling that laws on paper mean something different than in practice.
The self-empowerment of judicial authorities
When courts empower themselves, something fundamental is lost. They are changing from the guardian of law to the actor of politics, who rules the heads of the population. The citizen is amazed at a judiciary that is immersing itself more and more deeply and pretends to only interpret the law. But the interpretation has long been interpretation, the interpretation has long since beeninfluence. This creates decisions that work like political decisions and define social models. The actual foundation of the rule of law – the separation of powers – becomes opaque. The clear separation gives way to a mixture that is hardly controllable.
the citizen as an involuntary investigator
The development is particularly cruel where legal constructions meet private life. With the secondary burden of proof, the individual is pushed to a level that he never wanted to enter. Relatives should reveal and burden each other, reveal intimate processes from their own lives in order to free themselves from responsibility. The accused becomes an investigatorAgainst will, to the police officer in his own house. He should find out for himself who uses his Internet connection, who is doing what and thus deliver what the state would actually be. It is an act of degradation, a shifting of state responsibility to the individual who is overwhelmed and incapacitated. Thus, the citizen becomes a tool of a system that has his duty to regulate clear rulesto worry, unloads.
The dissolution of rule of law
All of this is a profound violation of the basic idea of the rule of law. Where courts invent laws, where private actors dominate the state, where family ties are torn apart by legal constructions, law loses its reliability. The principles of the constitutional framework become flexible formulas. The clear orientation that is supposed to protect people willto the illusion. Those who are looking for justice will find interpretation, and those who are looking for security will find uncertainty. The citizen, once a bearer of trust, begins to alienate himself from his state. He senses that justice no longer comes directly from the law, but from the will of those who interpret it.
The dwindling trust in democracy
This development is quietly eating away in the consciousness of society. The idea of democratic control, of reliability and responsibility, is shattered. Decisions that were previously held in public debates are now being concluded in closed court proceedings. The judge’s bank replaces Parliament, the verdict replaces the discussion. the citizen becomesViewers of a field that is getting further and further away. Confidence in political processes, in legal stability, in justice itself – everything becomes fragile. Living democracy becomes a technocratic game in which legal constructions determine the course. The result is not justice, but disappointment, not order, but fainting.
The fainting of those who no longer understand
Those who witness this development feel at the mercy of them. They no longer recognize who is responsible, who actually decides who has to give an account. Everything blurs in the fog of judicial formulations, in judgments that cross borders without anyone pulling them. This fainting gnaws, it becomes a silent anger, the feeling that democracydecoration has degenerated. When judicial power replaces the political, the people lose their vote. This is not a development of a strong constitutional state, this is the beginning of its decay.
The longing for restoration of clear order
In the end, there is a deep longing for justice that is right again, for a law that applies to everyone and is not interpreted as they please. After a judiciary that does not shape but preserves, which leaves room for Parliament to fulfill its task. After a state that does not delegate its responsibility to organizations that sue him, but himself stands for rules that are clearlyand are understandable. This longing is not nostalgic, it is existential. It arises from the need for security, for truth, for order. A constitutional state can only exist if its norms are clear, its judges are modest and his politics remains democratic. The right of association action symbolizes the opposite of this – for the shifting of political power behindLegal walls, for the erosion of responsibility, for a democracy that loses its voice.
Screenshot youtube.com
