No trial against Cicero journalist Bruno Schirra
On Monday, the Potsdam Regional Court rejected the motion to open proceedings against Cicero journalist Bruno Schirra. The court ruled that there was insufficient evidence to support the allegation of aiding and abetting the disclosure of classified information, since the informant had already committed the act of disclosing classified information.
On Monday, the Potsdam Regional Court refused to open proceedings against Cicero journalist Bruno Schirra, as reported by Spiegel online. There was no sufficient suspicion against the reporter.
The case has developed into a fundamental dispute about the limits of press freedom. In March 2005, Schirra had quoted an article from a confidential document of the Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) about the top Jordanian terrorist Abu Mussab al-Sarkawi, as a result of which the Cicero editorial offices were searched in September (see Editorial office of the Ringier magazine Cicero searched).
However, the regional court's reasoning now states that the BKA report in question had already been quoted in a book by a French journalist in November 2004 and that the information was therefore already in the public domain. However, Spiegel online considers the second point of the reasoning to be more far-reaching. The motivation of Bruno Schirra's unknown and unidentified informant could also have been to provide Schirra with mere background information and not to obtain the publication of the report. By publishing the report, the betrayal of secrets had already been committed and the charge of aiding and abetting the betrayal of secrets against the journalist was therefore invalid, as Spiegel online quotes from the five-page document of the regional court.
Whether the Potsdam judges' reasoning is legally sound remains to be seen if the public prosecutor's office appeals against the decision.
The case has developed into a fundamental dispute about the limits of press freedom. In March 2005, Schirra had quoted an article from a confidential document of the Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) about the top Jordanian terrorist Abu Mussab al-Sarkawi, as a result of which the Cicero editorial offices were searched in September (see Editorial office of the Ringier magazine Cicero searched).
However, the regional court's reasoning now states that the BKA report in question had already been quoted in a book by a French journalist in November 2004 and that the information was therefore already in the public domain. However, Spiegel online considers the second point of the reasoning to be more far-reaching. The motivation of Bruno Schirra's unknown and unidentified informant could also have been to provide Schirra with mere background information and not to obtain the publication of the report. By publishing the report, the betrayal of secrets had already been committed and the charge of aiding and abetting the betrayal of secrets against the journalist was therefore invalid, as Spiegel online quotes from the five-page document of the regional court.
Whether the Potsdam judges' reasoning is legally sound remains to be seen if the public prosecutor's office appeals against the decision.
