Cologne circumcision court judgment: Difference between revisions

The so-called '''Cologne circumcision court judgment''' means a judgment<ref>http://dejure.org/dienste/vernetzung/rechtsprechung?Gericht=LG%20K%F6ln&Datum=07.05.2012&Aktenzeichen=151%20Ns%20169/11</ref> issued by the regional court of Cologne (Germany) on 7 May 2012 in the second instance. The court considered [[circumcision]] (''Beschneidung'') a bodily injury, which will not be justified by a religious motivation and the desire of the parents and is not in the best interests of the child. The decision was taken in view of the fundamental rights provided by the Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany (''Grundgesetz für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland'').

The German Basic Law was drafted in 1948 under the oversight of the Allied Powers to serve as an interim constitution until such time as Germany was reunified.  The authors of the Basic Law sought to ensure that a potential dictator would never again be able to come to power in the country, so the authors elevated human rights and human dignity to core values protected by the Basic Law. The Basic Law was approved in Bonn on 8 May 1949, approved by the Allied Powers on 12 May, and went into effect on 23 May 1949.

The first title of the Basic Law serves as a bill of rights.  It has nineteen articles that enumerate various fundamental human rights. Article 2(2) provides:

Underlaying the following case: On November 4, 2010 a Muslim doctor circumcised an at the time four years old boy of Muslim parents at their request on the rules of medical art in his practice. Strong haemorrhage resulted in that the mother brought the boy on November 6, 2010, in the University Hospital of Cologne, where the bleeding could be stopped. The ''Süddeutsche Zeitung'' reported that the treatment after the [[circumcision]] was carried out "in general anesthesia". The boy had come for several days in a children's ward. Three dressing changes have also taken place in anesthesia. The doctor's letter also states the exposed [[penis]] surface and the [[Glans penis|glans]] were "uneven, corroded and fibrinous". The boy had been for ten days in clinical treatment over all.<ref>{{REFweb

The Cologne circumcision court judgment was the catalyst of the so far most violent and longest [[Circumcision Debate]] in Germany. Especially religion representatives of the cutting religions put the policy under pressure to prevent as soon as possible in legal ways, that this judgment would endure universal. After today's state of knowledge, the public debate was sparked especially by statements from the European Rabbis Conference in July 2012. While the judgment had been related to a boy with Muslim parents, the Muslims in Germany did neither at the beginning nor in the course of the debate argue with such [[Anti-Semitism club|harsh accusations]] like the Jewish religious leaders did. The Cologne circumcision court judgment has since been repeatedly cited internationally as a change of direction, whenever [[circumcision]] proponents, [[intactivists]] and lawyers discuss about [[circumcision]].

  |website=Durham University

[[Category:Jurisprudence]]

[[Category:Laws]]