THE RUDOLF REPORT

11. HUNTING GERMAR RUDOLFthe people of the state, international recognition, political, historicaland cultural identity and continuity with preceding German states—and there is no need to accept the harsh judgment of Bahners and someof his colleagues.Pseudo-legal ContortionsHowever, it was recently made clear by the Ministry of Justice ofBaden-Württemberg that in future, Germany’s judicial system willadopt Bahners’ viewpoint that revisionist works of a scientific natureconstitute incitement to hatred and must therefore be burned. In its answerto a question relating to the seizure of scientific revisionist booksof Grabert Verlag it stated: 557“Legal intervention is not constitutionally excluded even when it isclear that the case involves a work of science or research. Article 5,Para. 3, Cl. 1 of the Fundamental Law contains no expressed prohibitionof limits. In constitutional law it is recognized that even freedoms thatare granted without expressed conditions have limits. Such limits mightcome from the fundamental rights of third parties or from other constitutionally-protectedgoods. In these cases there must be a comparison ofthe competing claims of the equally constitutionally-protected interestswith the purpose of optimizing these claims. There must be a particularexamination of the case making use of the method of proportionality.(Decisions of the Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfGE) 67, 213, 228;77, 240, 253; 81, 278, 292ff.; 83, 130, 143) When these constitutional requirementsare met, in special cases use of appropriate measures is consistentwith freedom of science or of research”The assertion of the Minister of Justice that even a scientific workcan be seized when the fundamental rights of others are involved iscompletely false, and the decisions of the German Federal ConstitutionalCourt cited here are misleading. It is true that no fundamentalright can be guaranteed unconditionally and when there is a conflictwith other fundamental rights that an optimal compromise of interestsmust be found by means of the principle of proportionality. However,this limitation of fundamental rights pertaining to the freedom of sciencecan never extend to the determination of what theses may be stud-557 Dr. Ulrich Goll, ref. 4104—III/185, Sept. 23, 1996; cf. IDN, “‘Appell der 500’ vor Landtag”,DGG 44(4) (1996), pp. 9f. (online: www.vho.org/D/DGG/ IDN44_4.html); VHO, “Zur Wissenschaftsfreiheitin Deutschland”, VffG 1(1) (1997), pp. 34-37 (online:www.vho.org/VffG/1997/1/ VHOWiss1.html).327