Forchheim lawyer Bögelein considers the FFP2 mask requirement to be ineffective due to the lack of a legal basis and otherwise disproportionate
The law firm Bögelein and Dr. On January 19, 21, Axmann submitted an urgent application against the FFP2 mask requirement in Bavaria for the cabaret artist Helmut Schleich and on behalf of other applicants.
The urgent application and the associated regulatory review action aims to lift the FFP2 mask requirement for retail purchases.
The plaintiff, the well-known cabaret artist Helmut Schleich, justified his step as follows: “Even according to the recommendations of the Robert Koch Institute, the Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and the German statutory accident insurance, the FFP2 masks are generally not suitable for private use. How should Mr. Müller and Mrs. Meier put on the masks properly? Here the Bavarian state government has clearly overshot the mark. “
Attorney Bögelein adds that the FFP2 mask requirement is also ineffective and disproportionate for other reasons: “The Infection Protection Act does not contain a sufficient legal basis for ordering an FFP2 mask requirement. The measures taken by the Bavarian state government are not suitable for containing the infection process due to the possible health risk for the wearer, as significant groups of people are not allowed to wear the mask at all or only when accompanied by a doctor. “
According to the recommendation of the RKI, the particularly endangered risk groups should only wear the FFP2 masks under medical supervision, if possible, in order to avoid health hazards that can range from breathing difficulties to facial dermatitis to circulatory collapse. These groups of people, who cannot and should not wear a mask for health reasons, are practically excluded from public life, as they can no longer enter grocery stores. For them there is only an exemption certificate.
In addition, the level of protection can only be increased if the FFP2 mask is tight, i.e. airtight, on the skin, which is fundamentally impossible for people with a beard, for example. After all, almost 40% of men in Bavaria have a beard.
“In our opinion, significantly more people now have a right to a mask exemption certificate because, according to the RKI guidelines, they cannot and should not wear a mask. Since the regulation does not provide for a mask requirement at all, i.e. also no mouth and nose covering, we consider the FFP2 mask requirement to be unsuitable for containing the infection rate for several reasons. The introduction of the FFP2 mask requirement does not increase the level of protection for the general public, but rather has the opposite effect, ”lawyer Bögelein explains the lawsuit.
After the consultations on January 19, 2020, the federal government and the other federal states only recommend wearing a medical mask and not an FFP2 mask.
A decision by the Bavarian Administrative Court is expected soon
–
