In the relationship between religions and world views and between religious and non-religious people, there is a lack of non-discriminatory, contemporary and comprehensible regulations at many levels in the Federal Republic of Germany. The Humanist Association of Germany points this out once again. The reduction of discrimination against non-denominational people, the practical equality of non-religious world views and the renewal of religious constitutional law: these are the central themes of a current appeal to the members of the German Bundestag. In the letter sent to the 631 Members of Parliament on Wednesday, Frieder Otto Wolf, President of the Humanist Association, recalls the resolution on the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union 2013/2078(INI) adopted by the European Parliament (EU Parliament) at the end of February 2014. The resolution affirms the right of all people in the Union to freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief, as well as the right not to be required to have a religious belief and to change their religion. It also states that a clear separation between non-confessional political authorities and religious authorities and the impartiality of the state are the best means of guaranteeing equality between religious and non-religious people and between religions and world views. The European Parliament has also called on the member states to protect the freedom of people without religion from discrimination, for example through excessive exemptions for religions in equal treatment and anti-discrimination laws. In the Federal Republic of Germany, more than a third of the population does not belong to a traditional religious denomination, Frieder Otto Wolf recalled in his letter. Despite this, there is still “discrimination and considerable shortcomings in the equal treatment of people without a denomination or with a different ideological denomination”. These result, among other things, from the privileged treatment of Christian churches in labour law, monopolies or the lack of appropriate alternatives in the social and education system, in the representation of interests in the committees of public broadcasting, lack of consideration at public events such as state mourning ceremonies and similar occasions or also through the “lack of state involvement in organized public discourse spaces, such as those offered to Muslims within the framework of the German Islam Conference.” Due to the religious and ideological pluralization that has taken place in recent decades, there is also “a considerable need for political action”, according to Frieder Otto Wolf. The considerable disadvantages for non-denominational and non-religious people, the consistent equality of ideological communities and the development of a modern ideological constitutional law are tasks that the members of the German Bundestag must urgently take up. In conclusion, Frieder Otto Wolf emphasized that “our society can only overcome the fundamental rights problems addressed in the European Parliament’s resolution by working together”. “We expect you not to accept the systematic discrimination against non-denominational and non-religious people in Germany.” The ruling of the Federal Constitutional Court on the ZDF State Treaty is one of the current reasons for necessary reforms, including beyond specific federal policy.
Although representatives of churches and other religious communities have so far been included in this and other state broadcasting treaties for the composition of supervisory bodies, there has been no inclusion of representatives of non-denominational and non-religious people. In its reasoning, the highest German court explained that the task of the collegial bodies is to “bring together people with the most diverse perspectives and horizons of experience possible from all areas of the community.” And further: “In addition to large associations that determine public life, smaller groups that do not have easy access to the media and perspectives that are not organized coherently must also be represented.” On the occasion of the political debates surrounding the mandate enshrined in Article 140 of the Basic Law to replace the so-called historical state contributions to the religious communities, the Humanist Association presented its own key issues paper at the beginning of this week for the first time on the question of the objectives with which the federal and state governments should implement the constitutional mandate that has existed since 1919. Academic experts have also repeatedly pointed out the clear need for political and legal reform. For example, Ulrich Willems, researcher at the “Religion and Politics” Cluster of Excellence at the Westphalian Wilhelms University in Münster, assessed the religious policy situation in the Federal Republic of Germany as “poorly prepared”. According to an article published last year for a themed magazine of the Protestant Church in Germany, politicians “bear a considerable degree of responsibility for the current pressure of problems due to the long-standing and persistent neglect of religious policy.” This was “designed in its practical regulations for a predominantly Christian society”, and “in the early phase of the Federal Republic at state level, it was often deliberately designed to give the two large Christian churches as much room for maneuver as possible to shape society in a Christian way.” According to an internal survey conducted in December 2013, 411 of the 631 members of the German Bundestag share a Christian faith and four members share an Islamic faith. 26 members of the Bundestag stated that they were non-denominational or atheist. No information was provided by 190 MPs.
