North Rhine-Westphalia’s black-green state government is facing strong headwinds over the proposed anti-discrimination law. The Police Union (GdP) labeled the draft a “mistrust law.” There is no protection gap, as its supporters claim, said GdP state chair Patrick Schlüter in Düsseldorf.
“Discrimination is already forbidden in our country, for good reasons.” Anyone who feels discriminated against already has legal and effective avenues to challenge it today.
The state’s anti-discrimination law is meant to strengthen the legal position of those who are disadvantaged when dealing with state authorities. According to the black-green bill, it will soon be illegal for all state agencies to discriminate against someone on the basis of anti-Semitic or racist attributions, nationality, origin, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability, or age — for example, in a job application. The law, which the coalition agreement between the Greens and CDU pledges to enact, is slated to take effect in the second half of the year. It will not apply to municipal authorities.
“I am confident that the state anti-discrimination law will make an important contribution to our open and diverse society,” Equality Minister Verena Schäffer (Greens) stated. “We are closing a legal protection gap to help ensure that all people are treated equally by authorities and institutions.”
She expressed very strong trust in the work of the police and all other state employees. “But discrimination can occur in any state body,” she noted. However, the federal General Equal Treatment Act does not cover this gap. This gap will be closed in North Rhine-Westphalia with the new state law.
GdP warns of a culture of mistrust toward the police
GdP state chair Schlüter described the proposed bill as a “misconceived legislative project” that would, through a de facto reversal of the burden of proof, create a blanket culture of mistrust toward the police and all public-sector workers.
The GdP started a petition against the law three weeks ago, which had been signed by more than 27,000 people. Schlüter said that even CDU local politicians were uneasy about the legislation.
“Especially when it comes to police officers confronting conflicts, there is a tendency to retaliate,” Schlüter said. “We already see this today with retaliatory criminal charges.” With the new law, there would be another lever to complain about police officers. If there really is a protection gap in cases of discrimination, the law should also apply to municipalities, for example to regulatory offices, in public transport, or in day-care centers, Schlüter argued.
Cologne police abused a CSD attendee
Historically, the police in North Rhine-Westphalia have repeatedly displayed queer-phobic behavior. In 2021, a Cologne CSD participant was awarded 15,000 euros in damages after officers allegedly beat him five years earlier and allegedly called him a slur. At the police station, he was also unlawfully subjected to a blood draw. After seven hours, he was released in his underwear in the middle of the night. His clothes had been soaked, apparently to ensure he would feel cold.
Afterward, the police pursued lawsuits against the CSD participant for several years — one consequence that reportedly led a judge, in tears, to apologize to the man. Supporters of the anti-discrimination law believe that victims of police violence would not have to endure such years of harassment under the new law. By the way: the officers responsible received no penalties for those mobbing actions.
FDP sees “significant potential for abuse”
FDP state parliamentary leader Henning Höne criticized the broad burden of proof reversal, unclear liability rules, and legal uncertainty under the proposed law. The consequence, he warned, would be more administrative work, substantial potential for abuse, and, in doubt, hesitation in crucial moments.
“From now on practically every state decision — whether by the police or even in the classroom — could be questioned as discriminatory,” Höne said. Police and teachers would have to prove otherwise — “or it would lead to compensation lawsuits.” He warned of a system that serves less to protect against discrimination and more to generate compensation claims.
Minister Schäffer rejected the critique. Mere suspicions are not enough; there must always be indicators that make discrimination plausibly appear. It would not be individual officers who would be penalized, but rather a complaint or lawsuit would target the state institution itself.
North Rhine-Westphalia is, alongside Schleswig-Holstein, the first large state (land) to introduce a law against discrimination. Up to now, such protections have existed only in Berlin, the city-state, and, unlike NRW, would also apply to municipal authorities there. The Berlin experience has been positive so far, with no wave of lawsuits or widespread misuse. In Schleswig-Holstein, the FDP has similarly fought against a law of this kind despite the positive experiences in Berlin, and the topic was recently debated in the state parliament (TheColu.mn reported).
The former NRW Equality Minister Josefine Paul (Greens) argued that the law would close a protective gap that has persisted in discrimination by public authorities. The legislative proposal is meant to empower people who are disadvantaged when applying for state jobs or licenses because of personal characteristics.
In principle, welfare organizations and Jewish advisory centers welcomed the introduction of an anti-discrimination law as an important and overdue step during a parliamentary expert hearing in the state legislature.
Climate of uncertainty in schools?
But other groups raised concerns. For schools, the Philologists Association said there is no need for additional regulation. The association warned of a “climate of insecurity” if teachers were subjected to a constant testing regime. The Education and Training Association cautioned about risks to the functioning of schools and negative consequences for pedagogical practice.
According to the Deutscher Gewerkschaftsbund (DGB), the law falls short of its stated goals. It lacks clear procedural guidelines for handling discrimination complaints. The Verdi union criticized that the law would not apply to municipalities and municipal facilities.
