From the point of view of non-denominational people in Germany, it is incomprehensible why representatives of religious communities should be involved in the planned site selection procedure of the Federal-Länder Commission on the search for a final storage site for radioactive waste.
Frieder Otto Wolf, President of the Humanist Association of Germany, pointed this out in Berlin on Monday afternoon. Wolf called on the parliamentary groups in the Bundestag and the environmental associations to work towards compliance with the constitutional requirement of state neutrality. “Neither the final storage of nuclear waste nor the search for a suitable site are matters of faith, so the involvement of representatives of religious communities requires a great deal of explanation,” Wolf emphasized when looking at the draft legislation. The draft of the so-called Repository Search Act (Drs. 17/13471) presented by the CDU/CSU, SPD, FDP and Bündnis 90/Die Grünen parliamentary groups in May provides for the formation of a federal-state commission. The commission’s tasks would be to prepare a site selection procedure for final repositories, evaluate relevant fundamental issues for the disposal of radioactive waste and make recommendations for action to the Bundestag and Bundesrat. The commission is to be made up of 24 members, including members of the Bundestag, representatives of the state governments as well as representatives of science, environmental associations, industry and trade unions. Two members are to be representatives of religious communities. “The extent to which theological considerations can play a role in these tasks or the interests of people with religious affiliations are particularly important is a complete mystery to me,” said Frieder Otto Wolf. He recalled the multitude of faiths as well as the large group of non-denominational people who would once again be exposed to state discrimination as a result of the planned participation. Wolf: “The planned regulation must therefore definitely be put to the test.” If a representation of religious people in the future commission is considered absolutely necessary by the parliamentary groups, for example to serve as a necessary communication interface between a world view shaped by faith in God and the findings of science or political problems, a voice for the group of non-religious people must also be able to have their say in the commission. The ability to discuss ethical and moral aspects and to formulate positions that go beyond the level of science and politics does not represent the primacy of religious worldviews here either. “In our view, the one-sided participation of representatives of religious communities either acts as a job creation measure or as a privilege that contradicts the provisions of our Basic Law. The draft cannot remain as it is and must be significantly revised,” said Frieder Otto Wolf.
