A search of a home on suspicion of \"adbusting\" is unreasonable. The Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfGE) upheld a corresponding constitutional complaint (ref.: 2 BvR 1749\/20). In \"adbusting\", advertising posters are redesigned in such a way that the original meaning is altered or ridiculed. The person concerned was observed exchanging a Bundeswehr poster, which led to a search warrant.<\/p>\n
The search was carried out on the assumption that the person was suspected of theft and damage to property. The district and regional courts considered the action to be an initial suspicion of these crimes. The apartment was searched. However, the complainant felt that her fundamental right to inviolability of the home under Article 13 (1) of the Basic Law had been violated.<\/p>\n
The Federal Constitutional Court agreed, as the severity of the interference was disproportionate to the purpose pursued. The probability of finding relevant evidence was deemed to be low. The search of the home was therefore unreasonable.<\/p>\n
Source: bundesverfassungsgericht.de\/AZ: 2 BvR 1749\/20
\n \u00a9 Fotolia<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Eine Wohnungsdurchsuchung wegen eines sogenannten \u201eAdbusting\u201c-Verdachts ist unangemessen. Das Bundesverfassungsgericht (BVerfGE) gab einer entsprechenden Verfassungsbeschwerde statt (AZ: 2 BvR 1749\/20). Beim \u201eAdbusting\u201c werden Werbeplakate so umgestaltet, dass der urspr\u00fcngliche Sinn abge\u00e4ndert oder l\u00e4cherlich gemacht wird. Die betroffene Person wurde beim Austausch eines Bundeswehr-Plakats beobachtet, was zu einer Durchsuchungsanordnung f\u00fchrte. Die Durchsuchung erfolgte auf Basis der […]<\/p>","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":8751,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[34],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8747","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-guter-rat"],"yoast_head":"\n