Independent information makes public scrutiny possible.
A newsroom can investigate the government without needing its political approval. People should be able to obtain information from different sources. If the government allowed only favourable reports, that public scrutiny would no longer be free.
Article 5 guarantees freedom of the press. The Federal Constitutional Court describes free media as foundational to democratic government. The exam asks about abolishing this protection, not about a particular legal rule governing a specific publication.
The other three answers
The wrong answers treat abolition as merely a question of numbers or institutional competence.
Yes, if more than half of the members of the Bundestag are in favor.
A simple Bundestag majority is not above fundamental rights. It cannot remove press freedom through an ordinary decision.
Yes, but two-thirds of the members of the Bundestag must be in favor.
Even two thirds of the Bundestag is not a blank cheque. Constitutional amendments generally also need two thirds of Bundesrat votes and must respect Article 79’s substantive limits.
No, because only the Bundesrat can abolish freedom of the press.
The Bundesrat has no exclusive power to abolish press freedom. It too is bound by the constitution.
Not every constitutional provision is unchangeable word for word.
The catalogue answer is a learning simplification. Article 79 permits amendments while protecting, among other things, the principles in Articles 1 and 20. That does not make every formulation of a fundamental right wholly unamendable. Abolishing a free press would, however, remove a foundation of democratic opinion formation.
Press freedom is not unlimited either. Article 5(2) identifies general laws, protection of young people and personal honour. A permissible restriction that respects fundamental rights is different from abolishing the right itself.
Article 5 · Basic Law ↗Majorities decide within the constitution.
Distinguish abolition, constitutional amendment and a specific restriction. The question does not justify claiming that nothing in the Basic Law can ever change.
Three words for this question
- die Pressefreiheitfreedom of the press
- Protection of independent journalistic work and publication.
- abschaffento abolish
- To remove something altogether, rather than limit it in one case.
- die Mehrheitmajority
- A share of votes needed for a decision, not a power without legal limits.