MUNICH, March 15, 2023 — The Bavarian state government didn’t fully answer a lawmaker’s questions about its pandemic-era mask purchases, according to a ruling by the Bavarian Constitutional Court. The court found that the government improperly withheld information from a request filed by SPD MP Florian von Brunn regarding the effectiveness of specific corona masks and the involvement of state ministers in procuring costly protective equipment.
Parliamentary Rights Violated in Mask Procurement Inquiry
Table of Contents
The court’s decision underscores the importance of government transparency, even—and perhaps especially—during a public health crisis.
- The court determined that a question about the protective effect of masks in March 2021 received “completely unanswered” response.
- The Ministry of Health was ordered to disclose which ministers were involved in the March 2020 purchase of Emix Corona protective masks.
- The government argued that responding fully would have been too time-consuming during the pandemic, a justification the court rejected.
Judges specifically criticized the lack of response to von Brunn’s inquiry in March 2021 about the protective capabilities of certain corona masks, deeming it “completely unanswered” and “without sufficient justification.” Furthermore, the Ministry of Health should have identified all ministers involved in the purchase of Emix Corona protective masks in March 2020, a deal facilitated by Andrea Tandler’s mediation.
According to the court’s verdict, the initial response to von Brunn’s request—which sought to identify which state government members were informed about mask purchase negotiations—was “not adequately met.” The ministry cited time constraints and the extensive effort required for a “detailed inquiry” as reasons for providing only a limited answer.
The court disagreed, stating, “In the short time available, she could not be expected to identify and compile every information process that took place in conversation. However, it seems possible to review the minutes of the meetings of the disaster management team or the Council of Ministers at short notice.” These records, the court suggested, could have revealed who attended meetings where mask purchases were discussed.
Ministry Offers Cautious Reaction
The Bavarian Ministry of Health responded to the ruling with measured caution. A spokesperson stated, “We took the view during the proceedings that under the exceptional conditions of the corona pandemic with high time pressure and a heavy workload, the state government adequately met the Brunn applicant’s need for information.” The spokesperson added, “It has now been confirmed that this has largely happened – apart from two partial questions.”
During the proceedings, the state government had already characterized von Brunn’s lawsuit as “unfounded,” arguing that the lawmaker had already received substantial information in response to previous inquiries.
Von Brunn: A Win for Oversight
Florian von Brunn hailed the verdict as a strengthening of parliamentary control rights and the opposition’s ability to hold the government accountable. “The government is accountable to parliament and must not simply refuse uncomfortable information – this also applies in a crisis like Corona,” von Brunn said.
What information did the court say the government should have provided? The court ruled the government should have fully answered questions about the protective effect of specific masks and disclosed which ministers were involved in the purchase of Emix Corona masks.
