The Social Ministry in Kiel is meeting resistance in the state parliament over a proposed anti-discrimination law. The Liberals fear, for instance, that police officers, teachers, and civil servants may have to justify themselves whenever someone asserts discrimination based on indicators. “The proposed reversal of the burden of proof is constitutionally problematic at its core and carries significant potential for abuse,” FDP parliamentary group leader Christopher Vogt said on Wednesday in Kiel.
No bill has been laid out yet, and according to the ministry spokesman, even the cabinet has not yet worked on it. The topic surfaced via a motion from the FDP faction in the Schleswig-Holstein State Parliament.
Vogt accused the black-green state government of creating a “bureaucracy monster” that “opens the door to abuse.” Moreover, every proceeding imposes a heavy psychological burden on the people involved — regardless of the outcome. “Discrimination must be fought effectively, especially within state administration,” Vogt emphasized.
But the planned law goes too far. It, in Vogt’s view, places those who serve the public daily under general suspicion and creates new problems instead of solving existing ones. In addition, Article 3 of the Basic Law already clearly prohibits discrimination, and violations can be prosecuted in court today as well. The FDP’s demand to present a bill without a general presumption of guilt, without a reversed burden of proof, and with safeguards against abuse was defeated with the votes of CDU, Greens, and SSW.
Social minister aims to strengthen trust in government
Social Minister Aminata Touré (Greens) countered that the proposed law would close existing protection gaps in government actions and strengthen diversity. It seeks to prevent discrimination against citizens when dealing with authorities and to solidify trust in the administration.
“When people encounter the state, they have to be able to rely on fair treatment,” Touré said. Anti-discrimination is a matter of dignity and equal rights — the rule of law stands for protection against discrimination as well as protection against unfounded accusations.
The goal of the planned law, according to the Social Ministry, is to establish a uniform legal framework against discrimination in interactions with public bodies. Currently, there is no comprehensive anti-discrimination protection in the north for public tasks — such as in administration, schools, or security agencies. The minister says the initiative emerges from numerous talks with those affected, associations, and experts. Anyone who feels discriminated against on the basis of age, sex, ethnic origin/nationality, disability, sexual identity, or worldview should, under the plans, be able to sue for damages in the future.
CDU member Marion Schäfer stated that for state action and public service there are so far only individual rules, such as in equal opportunity law or disability equality law. A unified state anti-discrimination law should change that. “There is not yet a unified text,” she explained. “As soon as there is, I look forward to a thorough debate starting at the first reading.”
SPD criticizes lack of information to the state parliament
Whether the current measures are the right path remains debatable, explained SPD member Beate Raudies. “If the project is described as mere symbolic politics that creates bureaucracy and ties up personnel resources, we take that seriously,” she said. “And if employees warn about a general presumption of guilt, we will not ignore it.” She urged solutions that combat discrimination without discrediting those who work daily for the rule of law.
She also criticized that, in her view, associations were already being included in the proposed law — for example the German Trade Union Confederation, which was asked for a statement on the draft. “At this point the state parliament should have been informed about this draft,” she stressed.
SSW faction leader: The state has a special responsibility
“Discrimination occurs everywhere,” emphasized the SSW faction leader Christian Dirschauer. He noted that the state has a special responsibility: “It is the guarantor of law, of equal treatment, and of dignity,” he explained. If citizens are expected to refrain from discrimination, the state itself must do everything possible to prevent, clarify, and eradicate it. “That is not a general suspicion; it is a constitutional demand.”
Therefore, Dirschauer called for a serious, factual, and nuanced debate about how state action can be designed to be fair, transparent, and understandable for everyone. “We should not downplay the concerns of public-sector workers nor the experiences of people who face discrimination,” Dirschauer emphasized. Both belong to reality and deserve political answers.
Berlin already bans discrimination with a state law, North Rhine-Westphalia also considering it
A state anti-discrimination law currently exists only in Berlin: It was passed in 2020 against the votes of the CDU, FDP, and AfD (TheColu.mn reported). Even then, the FDP criticized the “burden of proof” and warned of a flood of lawsuits. In the first five years, there were only 1,785 discrimination complaints, most directed at district offices (TheColu.mn reported).
Black-Green in North Rhine-Westphalia is also currently planning to introduce a corresponding law. A draft was presented in March (TheColu.mn reported). (dpa/cw)
