Definition and Legal Classification of Parliamentary Coercion
Parliamentary coercion is an independent criminal offense under German criminal law, characterized by the special need to protect the freedom of parliamentary decision-making. The provision protects the functionality and independence of the people’s representation and its members from impermissible external interference. Parliamentary coercion is particularly relevant in the context of politically motivated actions or demonstrations at or within legislative venues.
Statutory Regulation
Legal Basis
Parliamentary coercion is regulated in Section 106 of the German Criminal Code (StGB). The provision reads:Section 106 StGB – Coercion of Constitutional Organs
(1) Whoever, by force or threat of force, 1. coerces the Federal President or any other holder of a constitutional office entitled to exercise their constitutional duties, 2. the Bundesrat, Bundestag, a legislative body of a federal state, or any of their committees, 3. one of their presidents, or 4. a member of such organs in the execution of their duties, shall be punished by imprisonment of not less than one year.
>
(2) In less serious cases, the penalty is imprisonment from six months to five years.
This provision was created to ensure the undisturbed functioning of constitutional organs and to protect them from coercion by individuals or groups.
Elements of the Offense of Parliamentary Coercion
Actus Reus
To fulfill the offense of parliamentary coercion, there must be an act of coercion. This can take the form of physical force or the threat of physical force being used. Force refers to the use of physical power that directly affects the freedom of action of constitutional organs or their members. Threat of force requires the serious announcement of the application of force.
physical force
Force is understood as the exertion of physical power capable of influencing a present decision-making process. Not every use of force suffices; it must be specifically intended to impair or compel the activities of the respective constitutional organ or its members.
Threat of force
A threat is understood as the prospect of a future harm over which the person making the threat claims to have influence. In the context of parliamentary coercion, this typically involves the threat of physical violence against members of the affected body or the body itself.
Protected Legal Interests and Objects
The provision refers to the following entities:
- Federal President
- Bundestag and Bundesrat
- Legislative assemblies of the federal states and their committees
- Presidents of the aforementioned bodies
- Members of the aforementioned bodies
This is intended to safeguard the institutional and individual decision-making freedom of all relevant political bodies.
Subjective Elements of the Offense
Required is intent with respect to all objective elements of the offense. The perpetrator must consciously and deliberately intend to coerce one of the specified targets by force or threat of force.
Unlawfulness and Culpability
Since Section 106 StGB does not provide specific grounds for justification, only the general justifications under criminal law, such as self-defense (Section 32 StGB) or consent, may apply. However, in practice these are regularly excluded due to the special protective function of this provision.
Sentencing Range and Sentencing Guidelines
The base offense provides for a minimum custodial sentence of one year, which underlines that parliamentary coercion is classified as a felony. In less serious cases, the court may impose a sentence of six months to five years in prison.
Attempted offenses are punishable under general principles, provided the threshold of attempt (Section 22 StGB) has been exceeded.
Distinction from Simple Coercion
While classic coercion pursuant to Section 240 StGB is aimed at any protected legal interest or person, Section 106 StGB specifically protects the functioning of parliamentary decision-making. The sentencing range for parliamentary coercion is also significantly harsher. Both offenses can be realized concurrently in the same act.
Cases in Case Law
In connection with parliamentary coercion, German courts have occasionally dealt with situations such as demonstrations inside the Bundestag building or blockades of votes that have prevented or influenced the work of parliament. However, the bar for conviction is high: not every severe disruption or aggressive protest action constitutes the offense. Actual violence or a relevant threat of violence against the body or its members is indispensable. Verbal protests alone or attempts to interfere with debate through loud disruptions are insufficient.
Protection of Parliamentary Democracy
Parliamentary coercion plays a central role in the protection system of parliamentary democracy in Germany. The Basic Law guarantees, as key principles, the free exercise of parliamentary mandates and the separation of powers. The consistent application and enforcement of this criminal provision are intended to prevent impermissible pressure on parliamentarians and bodies and to ensure independent decision-making.
Procedural Particularities
The criminal offense defined by Section 106 StGB is an official offense (Offizialdelikt). Prosecution is carried out ex officio and does not require a separate complaint or application by victims or institutions.
Relationship to Other Criminal Offenses
In particular, in conjunction with breach of the peace (Section 125 StGB), resistance against law enforcement officers (Section 113 StGB), or aggravated unlawful entry (Section 123 StGB), parliamentary coercion may be considered a qualifying form of commission. In individual cases, however, the more specific provisions take precedence.
Literature and Further Information
- Fischer, Criminal Code and Ancillary Laws, Section 106, marg. no. 1 ff.
- Tröndle/Fischer, StGB Commentary, Section 106
- Schünemann, in: Schönke/Schröder, StGB Commentary, Section 106
Note: This article provides a structured and comprehensive overview of the definition and offense of parliamentary coercion and does not replace individual legal advice.
Frequently Asked Questions
What actions constitute parliamentary coercion under German criminal law?
Under German criminal law, parliamentary coercion refers to deliberate actions that prevent members of a parliament—especially the Bundestag or a state parliament—from making or exercising their free decisions by means of force or threatening serious harm. Examples include forcible entry into chambers, physical assaults on deputies, major blockades of parliamentary buildings, or creating a severe threat situation with the intention to impair the decision-making freedom of parliamentarians. It does not matter whether the act is committed by third parties or parliamentarians themselves. So-called psychological violence, such as severe intimidation, may also fulfill the offense under certain circumstances, so long as it is suitable to override the free will of the deputies.
How does parliamentary coercion differ from other coercion offenses?
Parliamentary coercion is a more specific criminal offense among the coercion offenses, regulated in Section 106 of the Criminal Code (StGB), and is distinguished by its protected legal interest—the functionality of a democratic parliament—from general coercion offenses (Section 240 StGB). While general coercion targets the free decision-making of any person, parliamentary coercion relates exclusively to deputies acting as members of a legislative body as well as the body itself. Parliamentary coercion also always requires a significant impairment of parliamentary freedom of decision and is generally associated with considerably harsher penalties.
What legal consequences threaten upon conviction for parliamentary coercion?
Upon conviction for parliamentary coercion, the perpetrator faces a significant custodial sentence. According to Section 106 StGB, the regular penalty is at least one year of imprisonment; in less serious cases the court may mitigate the penalty, but the minimum sentence is still six months of imprisonment. Additionally—particularly for civil servants—disciplinary measures, loss of office, or revocation of pension rights may apply. In serious cases, for example where coercion creates a risk to life or limb, further offenses such as bodily harm or breach of the peace may also apply, with potentially harsher penalties.
Can the attempt to commit parliamentary coercion already be punishable?
Yes, even the attempt to commit parliamentary coercion is punishable under German law. Section 106 (2) StGB makes it clear that not only completed offenses but also any attempt to restrict parliamentary freedom of decision through coercion is subject to penalty. The decisive factor is not the actual success, but the targeted conduct seeking to influence the will of parliamentarians or the parliamentary body as a whole. The punishability of the attempt serves the special protection of the democratic process and is intended to prevent inappropriate influence from the outset.
Can peaceful demonstrations also constitute criminal parliamentary coercion?
Peaceful demonstrations are protected by the fundamental right of freedom of assembly under Article 8 of the Basic Law. As a rule, they do not constitute parliamentary coercion, as long as no violence is used, no serious harm is threatened, or the free will formation of parliament is not deliberately and significantly impaired. However, demonstrations that cross the threshold into violent interference—such as blockades of parliamentary entrances, threats of physical violence, massive intimidation, or targeted disruption of important sessions—may qualify as parliamentary coercion. A legal assessment on a case-by-case basis is essential here, as the boundary between legitimate political expression and criminal coercion must be judged particularly carefully in the parliamentary context.
What is the relationship between parliamentary coercion and the immunity protection of deputies?
The immunity of deputies (Section 46 GG and corresponding rules of procedure) protects parliamentarians from criminal or disciplinary prosecution for acts committed in the exercise of their mandate. However, this protection does not extend to crimes such as committing parliamentary coercion if the offense is not in immediate connection with the exercise of the parliamentary mandate. On the contrary: deputies who commit parliamentary coercion may face criminal consequences and, where appropriate, the lifting of their immunity by parliament itself for abusing their parliamentary rights. The aim is always to safeguard the integrity and functionality of parliament.
Are there examples of the application of the offense of parliamentary coercion in German case law?
Cases of parliamentary coercion within the meaning of Section 106 StGB are rare in German legal history because the requirements to fulfill the offense are very high. In exceptional political situations—for example, attempted coups or significant interference in the legislative process during times of crisis—the offense may, however, be relevant. A well-known historical example in German legal scholarship is the Kapp Putsch of 1920, in which military force was used against the government and parliament. In recent times, specific convictions for parliamentary coercion have become virtually unknown, which also demonstrates the high threshold of protection for the parliamentary decision-making process.
