Lothar Maier, June 24, 2021, Consumer Protection

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/236, pp. 30731-30732.

Right honorable Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen.

“Fair Consumer Contracts” stands out on the packaging of this law and I fear it is a trick packaging. The pretentious title of this law lets it be imagined that it deals with a comprehensive regulation of the law of consumer contracts. Of that, there can be no talk. Here will be regulated two, three clearly important yet nevertheless plainly specific matters.

In the hearing on this, the expert Schmidt-Kessel not by chance said word for word, I may quote him – :

This law is in the tradition…of inflated legislative labeling which indeed declares itself politically, yet is not justified as good Legistik [drafting of legislation].

Colleague von Notz of the Greens delegation has recently presented this with a bit more grip when he correctly said in the address to the Justice Minister: You give your laws “stupefied [benackte] names”. That is what is there; at least on this point, he is right.

When we ourselves look at the specifics of the regulation – I will not go into the general analysis, but select only two, three things – , then we see there the very problematic regulation of the term of the contracts. It is extremely complicated and not practical. This unconditionally requires a further alteration and improvement. This regulation works in such an intimidating way that scarcely any of it can be supported. The term of two years effectively remains; this ought no longer be the case. Consider some of the telephone contracts: Technical changes proceed so quickly that an agreement to a two-year term is not appropriate for the customer. Here, the market itself would lead to a better regulation.

The rolling back of telephone solicitation as a goal is to be welcomed. In this area, there will be scarcely anyone who is not ordinarily irritated that he is called for the purpose of closing some contract. It is sensible that the consumer’s consent and the keeping of documentation will be made the basis for that. I however fear there will be very many excuses from the side of the vendors which can be easily contrived and will then make the whole less effective.

Also not to be understood is why the regulations should apply only for the energy delivery contracts. In the counseling centers and somewhat in the consumer centrals, it is stated that the energy delivery contracts are plainly not foremost, but the telephone contracts. Why at all this restriction? It is not nearly substantiated and it is not comprehensible.

Allow me with this my last speech in the German Bundestag a brief word in conclusion – I deliver no tearful farewell, do not worry! – : I wish for the German Bundestag many reforms, root and branch. But at this late hour, I may content myself with one, modest wish: It would be really nice if the Bundestag would at least bring the labeling of its laws into better agreement with their contents.

I thank you and wish you all well.

            (Sustained applause from the AfD – members of the AfD rise)

 

 [trans: tem]

 

 

 

Lothar Maier, April 21, 2021, Western Sahara

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/223, p. 28316.

Right honorable President. Ladies and gentlemen.

To enforce international law – that subsumes two of the three motions upon which we are consulting here. This naturally puts the questions: Of which international law is it a question in this case, and who are the people thereby affected?

To better understand the conflict in its essence, let us go back a piece in history; 120, 130 years. The territory of today’s western Sahara was then a no man’s land. It belonged to none of the regimes in the entire region of northwestern Africa.Yet it was not an economic and it was also not a cultural no man’s land; it was to an extent evidently aligned with the sultanate in Morocco. Besides: Scarcely anyone lived there. It was a sand heap, a colossal, 250,000 square kilometer, giant heap of sand. This changed somewhat when the Spanish opened up the territory for their colonial endeavors, initially for strategic reasons and then, not till much later, when they sought oil there, found none – but phosphates for sure.

The Spanish colony Saguia el Hamra – so it is called since 1912 – carved up this once economically, culturally and religiously closed area. When you look at the borders of today’s western Sahara, which were also those of the Saguia el Hamra colony, then you will ascertain: They were drawn with a ruler. And this was known from the beginning: There was no notice taken of ethnic concerns.

With the territory’s de-colonization, there was in no way a conclusion. When the Spanish withdrew, the large, northern part of western Sahara went to Morocco, the south nevertheless to Mauritania. Mauritania withdrew following armed conflicts with the Polisario movement. Morocco followed up and now occupies the entire area. The Polisario nevertheless rose up and, as far is known to me, at the bidding of elements of the Mauritanians.

The population figure meanwhile has become somewhat larger. It is estimated on the whole at approximately 150,000 – that is not much; that is a German mid-sized city – , in a territory as large as the old, western Federal Republic. Of these, 40,000 people moreover do not live in this territory, but in camps in Algeria, where they form the recruitment potential for the Polisarios.

Morocco has quite considerably developed the territory economically; that has just been mentioned. Phosphate production continues, fisheries play a large role.

What however is now the solution for this conflict? One thing needs to be made clear: Morocco will no longer withdraw from this territory without a war. Spain has recognized this. France has recognized this. The U.S.A. has recognized this. Morocco offers a solution which I hold to be entirely acceptable; namely, an autonomy, one which permits all political areas pertaining to a Saharan government with the exception of defense and foreign policy. Much more is, at the moment, not to be attained. The Polisario will need to give up their maximalism which they in the past have practiced here. The Federal Republic should also orient itself on this. Pragmatism is demanded and not the adherence to old dogmas.

Thank you.

 

[trans: tem]

 

Lothar Maier, March 24, 2021, Piracy

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/217, p. 27398.

Right honorable Herr President. Ladies and gentlemen.

Operation Atalanta was successful; it has achieved the goals advanced for it. It deserved and further deserves our support. This, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to be able to say of the operations in Mali, in Niger – of Afghanistan, it is safer to be quite silent, where the goals have not only not been approached but are far distant. Yet, for all that – we first of all persist in the mission in the Horn of Africa – : Germany’s freedom was certainly not defended in the Hindu Kush, but it was defended in the Horn of Africa and this with good result.  

The numbers for the first phase of this operation are frightening. In the time period from 2008, as Atalanta began, until 2012, there were, believe it or not, 571 armed attacks on ships. Many of these had been repulsed, many of these had been deterred by the sudden appearance of warships, but much too many were plainly successful, leading to the capture of the ships, taking the crew hostage, which often extended over many months until by payment of ransom the crew could be freed.

This then continually improved: In the time period of 2013 to 2017, there were only ten such attacks, in 2018 two, in 2019 one, and no more in the past year; quiet now rules there. Yet this is no guarantee that quiet will continue to rule. The deterrent effect of such an operation will need to be maintained for a long time.

The Navy with larger units participated in these operations, and with a considerable number of servicemen [Soldaten] who by replacement have ever again taken part and could collect good experience which will in the future be of use to them. So far, the positive balance. Yet no if without but: It has taken twelve years to arrive at this point. On that account, there was also a lot of early criticism of the much too hesitant appearing preliminaries. For fighting piracy, it simply cannot be sufficient to assault only the ships which carry the pirates and make possible their attacks, but not their bases and resources; the entire history of piracy teaches this.

We are experiencing a form of asymmetric war: On one side, brutal pirates fight against forces which on the other side must act strictly according to the legal standards of their countries. And if one looks at what has happened with the pirates who have been captured, who in part have passed through judicial procedures in Germany: That is not impressive. Most of them after a few years have again been set free and – it is terrifying, what State Minister Annen has said in this regard – can now continue to be active as smugglers, drug dealers and human traffickers [Schlepper], and what there otherwise is in this way of fine vocations.

            Alexander Ulrich (Linke): What would you have done then? Shoot to kill,                                or what?

In any case, that is no deterrent.

It must be asked: What comes next? Need we now participate in the missions in connection with the piracy of West Africa, in the Straits of Malacca, etc.? We need to attempt to learn from the problematic practical experiences which we obtained from Atalanta and to avoid them in future operations.

I thank you.

 

[trans: tem]