When not performed out of medical necessity, circumcisions constitute a 'severe and irreversible interference into physical integrity,' Cologne judges ruleParents having their sons circumcised can be brought before a judge for causing bodily injury, even if they did so for religious reasons, a regional court in Germany has ruled.
The recent landmark decision will likely draw the condemnation of Jewish and Moslem communities, although official representatives have refrained from commenting so far, saying they first want to study the reasons given for the judgment.
Following the judgment by the District Court of Cologne, neither the rights of parents nor the constitutional freedom of religion can justify interventions such as circumcision, according to Financial Times Deutschland, which first reported the story.
University of Passau jurist Holm Putzke told the FTD the decision could have far-reaching ramifications.
"As opposed to many politicians, the court was not deterred by fears of being criticized for anti-Semitism or hostility toward religion," he said. "This decision could not only influence future jurisdiction, it could also lead the relevant religions to change their attitude with respect to the fundamental nature of children's rights."
The case that prompted the ruling took place in Cologne, when a 4-year-old boy, circumcised by a Moslem doctor, began bleeding two days after the surgery and needed to be brought into the emergency room.
The state prosecutor's office learned of the case and sued, leading the district court to rule that the circumcision was a "severe and irreversible interference into physical integrity."
Today, there are about 200,000 Jews in Germany, about 5,000 of them in the western city of Cologne.
Legal experts told the paper they assume that other courts in Germany could deal with similar cases and that the question of religiously motivated circumcisions will end up in the country's Supreme Court.
| The Jerusalem Post adds: |
He added that “the decision is contrary to human rights
...which are usually open to widely divergent definitions...
charter of the European Union
...the successor to the Holy Roman Empire, only without the Hapsburgs and the nifty uniforms and the dancing...
, to which the German legal system is committed, and undermines the basic right to worship in the German Constitution.”
It is not the first time that CologneÂ’s prosecutorial and legal system has triggered national controversy in Germany.
In 2010, the public prosecutor ruled that a cartoon exhibit, widely believed to be anti-Semitic, did not meet the criteria of incitement to hate because it did not constitute hatred of Jews and the petitioner, who objected to the exhibit, was not Jewish. One cartoon shows a man sporting a Star of David on his bib as he devours a young Paleostinian boy with a fork draped in an American flag and a knife with the word “Gazoo.” A glass filled with blood stands next to to his dinner plate. Gerd Buurmann, the non- Jewish resident, who termed the exhibit anti-Semitic, has waged a two-year campaign to prevent the permanent cartoon and photo exhibit to be displayed on the central square in Cologne.
He filed a criminal complaint against Walter Herrmann, the organizer of the anti-Israel exhibit, for violating Paragraph 130, an anti-hate-crime law that bars incitement against minority groups. CologneÂ’s prosecutor rejected the complaint.