Privileges of MPs and the creeping devaluation of civil rights

Anyone who soberly looks at political reality quickly encounters an unpleasant imbalance: while MPs move in a comfortable special role, independent and employees fight every day with a state that solemnly conjures up their rights, but in practice all too often disregards their rights. This discrepancy is not a coincidence, but an expression of a system thatprotects and loses sight of those who actually wear it.

The construction of a special political position

MPs like to present themselves as simple representatives of the people, but their actual position clearly stands out from the crowd. They enjoy protective mechanisms that go far beyond what is granted to ordinary workers. In the Basic Law, no clear basis for such an exaggeration can be found. The constitution is intended as a bulwark for everyone,Not as a protective shield for a political class that is increasingly moving away from the reality of the population. This special position is rarely defended openly, but rather presented as a necessary prerequisite for political work. But this reference is increasingly acting like an excuse to justify privileges that are neither transparent nor proportionate in their expressionappear. While MPs benefit from far-reaching security, other professional groups are confronted with a network of regulations, controls and uncertainties.

The neglected rights of the employed

The self-employed and employees are by no means in a legally worse offense, at least on paper. Freedom of occupation, general freedom of action and property rights apply to them as well. But there is a significant gap between theoretical claim and lived reality. Especially when dealing with authorities, it shows how little these rights are actually respected.Administrative procedures often develop into a one-sided power game in which the citizen is treated not as a bearer of rights, but as an object of state control. Tax examinations, bureaucratic conditions and opaque specifications interfere deeply in the way of life without the affected people being able to develop effective resistance. The protection of personalFreedom of choice often falls by the wayside.

Informal self-determination as an empty promise

The problem of informal self-determination becomes particularly clear. This right is intended to protect individuals from excessive data collection and state curiosity. In practice, however, it is eroded by a large number of reporting obligations, disclosure requirements and control mechanisms. Self-employed must provide intimate insights into their economic circumstances whileEmployees also face a constant collection of data. Although the case law recognizes the importance of this protection, its application often remains half-hearted. Decisions seem reserved, almost hesitantly, as if the administration shouldn’t be restricted too much. This creates a state in which fundamental rights exist, but their enforcement in everyday lifeis made more difficult.

Courts between aspiration and reality

The courts also contribute to this development. Although they regularly emphasize the central role of fundamental rights, they often fall back from the interests of the state in the specific case. This reluctance causes interference with the freedom of the individual, although they would hardly be tenable under strict interpretation. For those affected, this meansa significant uncertainty. Anyone who wants to defend themselves against state measures is faced with a lengthy and costly procedure, the outcome of which is uncertain. Formal equality before the law loses substance in this way because it is not consistently implemented in practice.

An imbalance with consequences

The ongoing unequal treatment between the political class and the other population undermines trust in state institutions. When MPs act in a protected sphere while other professional groups are under growing pressure, the impression of a system that prefers itself is created. This impression is dangerous because it has the legitimacy of governmental actionIn question. A serious examination of this disproportion is long overdue. It is not enough to refer to existing rights if their enforcement fails in everyday life. A consistent application of the constitutional principles would be necessary, which should protect all citizens equally. Only when this equality not only asserts, but actuallyis lived, one can speak of a just relationship between state and society.