this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2026
155 points (97.0% liked)

World News

55321 readers
1827 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 37 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Vittelius@feddit.org 32 points 2 days ago (7 children)
  1. The government is obliged to grant your request to leave the country unless there actually is a war.
  2. There is no penalty if you leave the country without government approval.
[–] Tudsamfa@lemmy.world 25 points 1 day ago (1 children)
  1. The water is cold.
  2. The stove isn't even on yet.
    -- Frog in the pot
[–] Vittelius@feddit.org -3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Except the provision in question was copy pasted from an old law where it existed for decades without any change.

I find the tendency on Lemmy to see a conspiracy in every law concerning.

Criticise the law for what it does (there is enough here for it) and be wary of potential abuse. But sometimes warm water is just warm water.

[–] Tudsamfa@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

It existed for decades in times of war and tension.

It is something completely different that they want us to ask for permission in times of peace, which they changed this year.

[–] BackgrndNoize@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

Then what is the point of doing any of thi, oh other than tracking the citizens movements and to set the ball rolling on more draconian shit down the line

[–] nosuchanon@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The government can and will change that law when they decide it is needed. Just because they are not enforcing it right now doesn’t mean they can’t find you guilty at a later date.

You should never need permission from the government to travel.

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

not enforcing

Seems like the law doesn't apply here not that it's not enforced. If war does come similar law will be passed ether way.

I'd agree with you though from philosophical pov - the government should never be allowed to contain you even if you're dodging the draft.

[–] Michal@programming.dev 11 points 1 day ago

It's an extra hurdle to jump through, and it's sexist.

[–] GardenGeek@europe.pub 18 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Also this isn't a new law but a remain of the cold war era.

[–] parson0@startrek.website 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Not quite, this particular paragraph was identical in the cold war era but the other paragraphs, mainly defining when it is in effect and when not, were changed. This made the law applicable since January 1st of this year. So previously this rule was only applicable during war or "conflicting times" and now it always is.

[–] GardenGeek@europe.pub 2 points 8 hours ago

Thank you for the correction! I didn't know that.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

In other words, meaningless paperwork just to keep the population disciplined. Germans 🙄.

[–] somenonewho@feddit.org 2 points 1 day ago

Do you have a source that says the government has to grant your request? I tried scouring the law and it seems true but I struggle with the lingo.

Also the changes that were last made to the law seem to explicitly differentiate between war and none war situation as to which paragraphs are applied so they could have applied that paragraph only to situations of war. So I still think a Discussion and some scrutiny is warrented here as to why we "kept" this rule.

[–] smeg@infosec.pub 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Stop voting for right wing parties, folks

[–] perestroika@slrpnk.net 10 points 2 days ago

In this case, I would advise them to simply ignore the law.

[–] carrylex@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Article is irrelevant - we had this discussion in Germany 1 week ago.

TL;DR See comment below.

[–] somenonewho@feddit.org 1 points 1 day ago

Sorry, last time I checked the Discussion got started with the article in fr on the 03.04. (Friday) which wasn't a week ago but just before the weekend. And the discussion doesn't seem "finished" to me.

Also as I commented at the comment mentioned by you they could have exempted article 3 from situations outside of "war". Or they could have updated/changed it all together.