1 Bundesministerium des Innern, Verfassungsschutzbericht 2005 (Berlin 2006), 34.Google Scholar

2 25 BGH Entscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshofs in Strafsachen (BGHSt) 30, 33; 28 BGHSt 394, 397; 47 BGHSt 354, 359.Google Scholar

3 Landgericht (Regional Court) Frankfurt am Main, Neue Zeitschrift fuer Strafrecht (NStZ) 187, 188 (1986).Google Scholar

4 Troendle, and Fischer, , § 86a in: Strafgesetzbuch (53rd ed., 2006), margin number 2.Google Scholar

5 23 BGHSt 267, 270; 25 BGHSt 30, 32; 47 BGHSt 354, 359.Google Scholar

6 Troendle, and Fischer, , supra note 4, § 13 margin number 9.Google Scholar

7 72 BVerwG Entscheidungen des Bundesverwaltungsgerichts (BVerwGE) 183, 185.Google Scholar

Article 5 GG reads:Google Scholar

“(1) Every person shall have the right freely to express and disseminate his opinions in speech, writing, and pictures and to inform himself without hindrance from generally accessible sources. Freedom of the press and freedom of reporting by means of broadcasts and films shall be guaranteed. There shall be no censorship.Google Scholar

(2) These rights shall find their limits in the provisions of general laws, in provisions for the protection of young persons, and in the right to personal honour.Google Scholar

(3) (…)”Google Scholar

8 61 BVerfG Entscheidungen des Bundesverfassungsgerichts (BVerfGE) 1, 8; 65 BVerfGE 1, 41.Google Scholar

9 BVerfG, Neue Juristische Wochenschrift (NJW) 3050, 3051 (2006).Google Scholar

10 BVerfG, NJW 2814, 2815 (2004); NJW 3050, 3051 (2006).Google Scholar

11 Oberlandesgericht (Higher Regional Court) Hamburg, Juristische Rundschau (JR) 76, 77 (1982); OLG Hamm, Neue Zeitschrift fuer Strafrecht Rechtsprechungsreport (NStZ-RR) 231 (2002).Google Scholar

12 23 BGHSt 64, 70.Google Scholar

13 Bettermann, , Die allgemeinen Gesetze als Schranken der Pressefreiheit, Juristenzeitung (JZ) 601, 603 (1964).Google Scholar

14 Article 21 GG reads:Google Scholar

“(1) Political parties shall participate in the formation of the political will of the people. They may be freely established. Their internal organization must conform to democratic principles. They must publicly account for their assets and for the sources and use of their funds.Google Scholar

(2) Parties that, by reason of their aims or the behaviour of their adherents, seek to undermine or abolish the free democratic basic order or to endanger the existence of the Federal Republic of Germany shall be unconstitutional. The Federal Constitutional Court shall rule on the question of unconstitutionality.Google Scholar

(3) (…)”Google Scholar

Article 9 GG reads:Google Scholar

“(1) All Germans shall have the right to form corporations and other associations.Google Scholar

(2) Associations whose aims or activities contravene the criminal laws, or that are directed against the constitutional order or the concept of international understanding, shall be prohibited.Google Scholar

(3) (…)”Google Scholar

15 23 BGHSt 64, 71.Google Scholar

16 Luebbe-Wolff, Zur Bedeutung des Art. 139 GG fuer die Auseinandersetzung mit neonazistischen Gruppen, NJW 1289, 1294 (1988).Google Scholar

17 2 BVerfGE 1.Google Scholar

18 107 BVerfGE 339.Google Scholar

19 Troendle, and Fischer, , supra note 4, § 86 margin number 9.Google Scholar

20 23 BGHSt, 64, 65.Google Scholar

21 BayObLG decision 5 StRR 87/98 – 30 July 1998 (unreleased).Google Scholar

22 OLG Hamburg, JR 76, 77 (1982).Google Scholar

23 OLG Frankfurt am Main, NStZ 333 (1982).Google Scholar

24 BayObLG Entscheidungen des Bayerischen Obersten Landesgerichts in Strafsachen (BayObLGSt) 1998, 181.Google Scholar

25 BGH, NStZ 81 (1996).Google Scholar

26 OLG Koeln, NStZ 508 (1984).Google Scholar

27 Article 103 (2) GG reads:Google Scholar

“An act may be punished only if it was defined by a law as a criminal offence before the act was committed.”Google Scholar

28 Koenig, and Seitz, , Die straf- und strafverfahrensrechtlichen Regelungen des Verbrechensbekaempfungsgesetzes, NStZ 1, 3 (1995).Google Scholar

29 BayObLG, NStZ 190 (1999); OLG Dresden, NStZ-RR 42 (2001).Google Scholar

30 47 BGHSt 354.Google Scholar

31 LG Landshut decision 4 Qs 326/05 – 20 Dec 2005 (unreleased).Google Scholar

32 Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Higher Administrative Court [VGH]) Mannheim, Neue Zeitschrift fuer Verwaltungsrecht (NVwZ) 935 (2006).Google Scholar

33 BVerfG, NJW 3050 (2006); BGH, NJW 3223 (2005).Google Scholar

34 OLG Hamm, NStZ-RR 12 (2004).Google Scholar

35 10 BGHSt 194, 196.Google Scholar

36 OLG Frankfurt am Main, NStZ 356 (1999).Google Scholar

37 Kammergericht (Chamber Court [KG]) Berlin, NJW 3500 (1999).Google Scholar

38 Hoernle, , Case Commentary, NStZ 309 (2001).Google Scholar

39 Collardin, , Straftaten im Internet, Computer und Recht (CR) 618, 621 (1995)Google Scholar

40 23 BGHSt 267; 25 BGHSt 30; 28 BGHSt 394.Google Scholar

41 OLG Stuttgart decision 1 Ws 120/06 – 18 May 2006 (unreleased).Google Scholar

42 LG Stuttgart decision 18 KLs 4 Js 63331/05 – 29 Sept 2006 (unreleased).Google Scholar

43 OLG Muenchen decision 4 StRR 142/06 – 7 Aug 2006 (unreleased).Google Scholar

44 OLG Muenchen, NStZ-RR 371 (2005).Google Scholar

45 29 BGHSt 73, 84.Google Scholar

46 BVerfG, NJW 2814, 2815 (2004).Google Scholar

47 BGH, NJW 3223, 3225 (2005).Google Scholar

48 BVerfG, NJW 3204 (2005).Google Scholar