(de-news.net) – The German public debate is polarized over proposals by Stefanie Hubig to decriminalize fare evasion, with conservatives and police warning of weakened enforcement and higher costs, while legal experts and the Left argue the current system is inefficient and socially inequitable.
Federal Justice Minister Stefanie Hubig’s proposals to decriminalize fare evasion have been rejected by Germany’s conservative bloc, which has framed the initiative as a misdirection of legal and policy priorities rather than a necessary reform. Günter Krings, deputy parliamentary leader of the CDU/CSU, was reported to have expressed surprise at the renewed effort and to have suggested that the Justice Ministry should instead devote greater attention to more consequential issues within criminal law. He indicated that the Union would not support eliminating criminal penalties in this area, emphasizing that fare evasion should not be regarded as a minor regulatory infraction but rather as a form of fraud with broader social consequences.
Krings further argued that the existing legal classification constitutes the basis for effective enforcement. In his account, ticket inspectors are authorized to detain suspected individuals until police arrive precisely because fare evasion is treated as a criminal offense under current law. A shift toward decriminalization, he suggested, would weaken the deterrent effect of inspections, thereby increasing the number of passengers traveling without valid tickets and ultimately necessitating higher fares for compliant users. Such an outcome, he maintained, would contradict claims of social equity by transferring additional financial burdens onto law-abiding passengers. He also noted that the issue had already been addressed during coalition negotiations between the CDU/CSU and SPD, where it was discussed in detail before ultimately being set aside.
Law enforcement criticizes decriminalization as minister cites efficiency
Opposition to the proposal extends beyond parliamentary actors to include law enforcement representatives. The Gewerkschaft der Polizei (GdP) has likewise criticized Hubig’s initiative. Andreas Roßkopf, who is responsible for federal police matters within the union, was reported to have cautioned that reclassifying fare evasion would trivialize the offense and risk normalizing noncompliance. Because such cases fall within the jurisdiction of the federal police, he argued that weakening legal consequences could foster a broader disregard for ticketing requirements. He additionally criticized the rationale of reducing judicial workload through the downgrading of offenses, characterizing this approach as indicative of systemic strain rather than sound policymaking. In his assessment, maintaining the criminal status of fare evasion remains necessary to prevent wider abuse, particularly given that the financial damages involved may extend beyond negligible amounts.
By contrast, Hubig has defended the proposed reform on grounds of proportionality and administrative efficiency. She has argued that, in the context of overburdened courts and correctional facilities, the prosecution of fare evasion consumes substantial judicial resources that could be more effectively deployed elsewhere. The practice of imposing substitute custodial sentences in cases of unpaid fines, she suggested, raises fundamental questions about the appropriateness of current legal responses, especially when individuals lacking financial means ultimately face imprisonment. Against this backdrop, she has called for a broader modernization of criminal law, including a reassessment of whether fare evasion should continue to qualify as obtaining services by deception under Section 265a of the penal code. According to police statistics, more than 144,000 such cases were recorded in 2024, underscoring the scale of the issue.
Lawyers highlight high costs and limited benefits
Support for decriminalization has also emerged from segments of the legal community and the political left. Clara Bünger of the Left Party characterized the current framework as a form of class-based justice that disproportionately affects individuals with limited financial means. She suggested that a return to the subsidized nine-euro ticket model could constitute a more effective policy response, arguing that any meaningful reduction in fare evasion would require addressing underlying structural factors such as high ticket prices.
In a similar vein, the Deutscher Anwaltverein (DAV) has advocated decriminalization, contending that the financial costs associated with criminal enforcement—estimated at roughly 200 million euros annually for prosecutions and incarceration—are considerable, while the corresponding social benefits remain uncertain. Swen Walentowski, speaking for the association, has argued that enforcement practices disproportionately affect economically disadvantaged groups and divert public resources away from measures that could enhance mobility. He also questioned the rationale for underpinning transport companies’ claims with criminal law, drawing comparisons to other forms of unpaid services that do not result in prosecutorial action. At the same time, the DAV cautioned that a simple reclassification of the offense as an administrative violation would not fully resolve the issue, as individuals who fail to pay fines could still face coercive detention.
Audio: TTSFree
