Child Trafficking in 21st Century Germany


A comparison with 19th Century Britain

by Peter Briody About the Author



19th Century Britain


In 19th Century Britain during the latter half of the Industrial Revolution there was a chronic shortage of cheap labour. As a result children were sold by orphanages and workhouses to the owners of factories and other enterprises. Some were sold to concerns, where child nimbleness was much prized, for example mines or chimney sweeping businesses. Child mortality was very high in the times: More than half of the recorded deaths were of children under 10 years of age.  Charles Dicken’s novel ‘Oliver Twist’ (1838) was a damning indictment of British society at the time and probably contributed much to the abolition of child labor.


The social and economic pressures of the times lead to immense cruelty to children, which was opposed by public individuals leading to the formation of the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) in 1884.



Thomas Savage was sent to Prison for absconding from his employers at the age of 12 (ca. 1832 ). Photo by Courtesy of Spartacus.

17 July 2007 German Police issued this ‘Wanted’ poster  of 15 year old Sandra H after she absconded from closed psychiatric care. Her ‘crime’ had been a period of acute school phobia. Sandra’s whereabouts  are unknown at the time of writing.


 The Situation in 21st Century Germany


When drawing comparisons between Britain and Germany, as far as child welfare is concerned, there is a real qualitative gap of about 170 years between the two societies. The economic base is also different and this has to be reconciled with the other factors, to arrive at comparable parameters.  


Germany suffers not from the high child mortality rate of the Industrial Revolution but rather from the fact that the children are not being born. The supply of children for children’s  homes, child care and child psychiatry is thus drying up and has to be helped along. The cost of fostering is about € 900 – 3,800 per month per child, the figures for homes and child psychiatry is about € 4,000 – 6,000 per month per child (see Bibliography [8]), About 72 children per day are taken into care in Germany today leading to an annual expenditure of  € 284 Million – 1.892 Billion. As it is not yet known, how many children wander respectively into foster care and homes, it is only possible to give a range for the costs.( The ratio of children’s home to foster homes in the static population case is 60:50 ) . In all probability, therefore, we are talking about costs well in excess of € 1 Billion just for Child Trafficking or the taking of children into custody, mostly for dubious reasons. This does not take account of the costs of the youth  organization itself, which currently run at about € 21 Billion (see Bibliography [9] ), according to the official statistics.  This is of course a very large ‘care’ industry and forms the economic base for child trafficking.


Unless the care industry is to close establishments or run down their staff levels, they have to get their clients from somewhere. The youth  organization, aided and abetted by a highly corrupted justice system, see to that in good measure.


Germany’s Human Rights Violations and Corruption

 The Corruptible Structures


To understand the way in which corruption works, it is necessary to take short look at the complete picture. For this purpose a model was defined in 2004 showing the interplay of all corrupt elements. Human rights violations can only occur where there is corruption of some sort. It is, however, possible for corruption to exist where there are no human rights violations.


The LLAMS-Model: A Packet of Abuses


There is ample evidence of systematic human rights abuses having been perpetrated in West Germany ( now the re-unified Federal Republic ) during the post-war occupation and thereafter. This went largely unnoticed even by the western powers, mainly because the abuses were surreptitious and well camouflaged, kept at low level, "under the radar" of the watch organizations.


The LLAMS ( Low Level Abuse Model ) Model [1] has three major organizational components, Administration, Justice and Industry. The perpetrated abuses take place mostly at municipal level, where they are best organised and easiest to conceal. Certainly nobody would seriously go looking for pulled-out finger nails and cigarette burns in Germany in 2007. Closer scrutiny, however, reveals multiple structure systems capable of extreme viciousness against selected victims and their families. Because all three organizations are controlled by the extraneous structures of local government ( the municipalities in Germany are thoroughly corrupt with the asynchronous form of corruption known as "Vetternwirtschaft" or "Brotherhood Economies") , a frontal attack on individuals and their families can be conducted using all three elements to make up a packet of abuses, which is known as the "Total Sociological Attack (TSA)" and is mostly characterized by an almost unbelievable viciousness.


The way in which the LLAMS works in the Justice System was described by "Attorney X" in a letter to the author on 11.01.2001. What "Attorney X" said about the Constitutional Court, the highest in Germany, is very revealing:

“These subordinate courts do not take any notice whatsoever of the verdicts of the supreme constitutional court. They know that the constitutional court is practically out of reach for the normal citizen. It could take about 5 years just for him to get a hearing."


A detailed description of the model is at present only available to certain NGOs. At the time of writing it is not known when the Model can be generally released.


The Structure of the Youth Organizations


Essentially the Youth is regulated by German Law. Each Youth Office is controlled by the Regional Youth Committee (LHA), which meet about 6 to 8 times per year, and above that the State Youth Committee (LJHA) which meets about twice per year. Administrative and organization matters are controlled by the Local District Administrator.   





























Fig. 1 Organization of  Youth Matters for each German State ( 16 )


The structure of the organization is tailor-made for corruption. The chain of responsibility for the activities of the Youth Service is broken below state level. There is no supervision of the State Youth Committees at all, and the committees are staffed by such people as officials, judiciaries, medical doctors, experts, church dignitaries, child protection organizations and people with a commercial interest in the children as articles of ware.  Getting somebody to take responsibility for what goes on in any organization is traditionally a difficult task in Germany ( see Goering’s Management Principle [2] ). The structure, because of the absence of any form of supervision, has very high corruptibility factor. This combined with the high susceptibility of German officials to corrupt influences makes the Youth Service one of the most corrupt organizations in Germany.


Many District Administrations are led by either extremely weak individuals or they are part of the corruptible structures. Essentially, it does not matter which, because the result is the same. It takes only about 5-10%  of profit-makers to establish corrupt structures, the rest is made up of the “Heap Syndrome” [3], which can be summarized both as a servility model and a kind of “Saddam City” democracy. The leadership  is determined by the most poisonous and vociferous  members of the community. The others follow willingly.


The War of Attrition against Parents

How it Works


Child Trafficking is made possible, mostly as a result of the following procedures:


·        A process of selection.

·        Allegations against the parents mostly:

o       Allegations that either the parents or the child or all parties have psychiatric problems.

o       Allegations of mistreatment or abuse of the children.

o       Allegations of parental incompetence.

o       Allegations of neglect.

·        “Expert Evidence” on the family circumstances can easily be produced.

·        Some form of judicial procedure.

·        Inducement of financial hardship.

·        Induced psychiatric problems

·        Any Combination of the above measures.


The Selection

 In 19th Century Britain, it was largely the economic factors which gave rise to child trafficking. Children were forced into workhouses or pauper orphanages. From there,  assuming that they had reached the required ages and were healthy enough,  they were sold to industry.


The selection process in 21stCentury Germany is based on conspicuousness: Anything which the Youth Organization can latch onto is part of the process: It may start with an application for assistance from a mother with a large family, a school report, a child with bruises or anything similar.   


A system of checking for child maltreatment or abuse was introduced in Germany earlier this year and consists of compulsory periodic medical tests on all children up to a certain age. One might think that this would largely protect also the parents from the allegations of the local Youth Service. However, looking at the list of known measures available to German authorities under “How it Works”, this would only solve a small part of the problem.    


The Allegations against the Parents

 In 19th Century Britain, it was not necessary to make allegations against the parents, because there was a ready source of labor already in the institutions. The only theoretically possible allegation against the parents would have been, that they were poor.    


In 21st Century Germany, it is necessary to make allegations against the parents. Anything in the list, which would put their fitness to raise children in doubt, will do. Most Youth Services produce vague allegations, wild suppositions or concocted lies, which are subsequently used to discredit the parents. Such “evidence” is all accepted by the family courts -  even if they know that the Youth Workers are perjuring themselves.


Expert Evidence





 In 19th Century Britain there was a contractual examination of the candidate child at the time of sale, to establish his or her fitness for hard labor. If the child met with an industrial accident or died, there were plenty more replacements available.






In 21st Century Germany, it is usually necessary to recruit a specialist from the “usual sources” and ask him or her to produce the “right kind” of report. The usual sources will be the structures surrounding the Youth Service. The specialist will, in all but exceptional cases, be a psychologist or a psychiatrist. 


The competence of these experts can be simply determined.  A questionnaire ( F2010P [4] ) was created, containing simple questions ranging from the important “did the specialist understand the tasking ?” to the trivial such as “did the specialist number the pages of the report ?”.  The analysis does not make the mistake of including specialist topics in the questionnaire, which would give rise to discussions. The requirements are, that the specialist clearly declares the state of the art, the methods applied and the reference works used for his or her report.


The additional question “was the report credible or not ?” has to be answered by aggregating the answers to the important questions. This does not answer the question “was the report right or wrong ?”. It could be that asking a specialist, who had written a muddled report, to repeat his work would produce a satisfactory conclusion. The courts in Germany are apparently not in a position to exercise this supervisory task. A vast accumulation of mistakes in the report would, in any case, preclude this. The other important question is “would it be possible to task a counter-expertise on the basis of the report, as it stands ?” is a “make or break” for the specialist report. Seven cases, in which the care of children is a topic, were analysed and the results plotted (Fig. 2).   


Fig. 2 The Results of the F2010P Measurements on Expert Reports


In one case ( G04 ) there was a surpise score of 95% of the total points awarded.  This was a psychiatric report from the University Clinic of Tübingen ( Prof. Günter Klosinski and Dr. M. Clauß)  and it was all the more surprising because it is the best report seen in 6 years from any branch. It is hardly surprising that this report could be classified as “Credible”.  In the other six cases, the news was not so good, however: they exhibited most of the defects of all expert reports in Germany. One can only describe the standard of workmanship as utterly appalling. None of the reports ( G01-G07 ) with the exception of G04 could be classified as in any way credible. Furthermore, with the maximum score of 20% there is every reason to also gravely doubt the standards of specialist workmanship.


The judicial Procedure


The justice system in Germany has grave problems dating back to at least 1924. It is not the purpose of this paper to discuss all its defects – just enough to show it up as a flawed system.  A major credibility deficit is caused by the lack of separation of the judicative and the executive in Germany.  


Judiciaries for the higher courts are chosen by political quotas. The vast majority of these judiciaries are card-carrying members of the political parties and many take part in active politics.  Active pursuance of commercial interests over and above the usual publication royalties is allowed, even encouraged. Poignant is the fact that Youth Committees boast a high proportion of court judges in their membership.  In short, it is a system just begging to be corrupted. For just a fraction of the transgressions a judiciary in Ireland or Britain would face instant dismissal.


On 14.10.2004 the Constitutional Court abrogated the Treaty Article covering the binding nature of the decisions of the  European Court of Human Rights [5]. Whilst German Judiciaries have never observed the Convention in practice, other than by accident, this declaration will make it easier to press for sanctions against Germany and to isolate her as a renegade state.


The quality of professional work of German judiciaries is well reflected in the assessment of their work as tasking authority for the expert evidence analysed in Fig 2. ( Fig.3).



Fig 3. The F2010P Evaluation of the Tasking Authorities for Expert Evidence


None of the reports could be classified as “Credible”. In all cases there was no reference to any lists of experts, so that it was not clear how or why (what qualifications and experience were needed) the expert was selected. In general no deadline for the delivery of the report was given. Only vague references or none at all to the regulations to be applied to the report were made. There were no supervisory check-marks laid down and in particular there were no acceptance tests defined. In all it is only possible to say that German judiciaries do not know how to task expert evidence. ( It is ironic that the same breed of people are sitting in judgement on contractual matters ). 


It appears that the main aim of the exercise is to provide alibis for the court and for the Youth Services. The reports themselves, except for G04, bear all the hallmarks of  “desired result” expert evidence.


Apart form these pieces of expert evidence, the lack of professional competence is  also evident in the court judgements. (At present an evaluation scheme for court judgements is under development) At present, it can be said these court documents in Germany are mostly vague and lacking in the essential formalities. A common defect in civil cases is the apparent absence of an application, which would be essential to constitute a court at all. For criminal cases such student mistakes as the statement “The police thought … “ are very common. Evidence is introduced in the judgements, without any indication as where it came from. If there are cross-references, they are not summarized, so that a file can disappear at a later date ( and they frequently do) and nobody will be able to reconstruct the reasoning behind the judgement. German judiciaries as a general rule do not know the difference between facts, rationale and deduction. They lump everything together under the heading “Gründe” (grounds). The Work Quality seems to improve with increased notoriety of the accused. Ironically, therefore, top terrorists are more likely to receive a fair hearing ( as fair as can be in Germany, with her flawed Rules of Procedure ) than any normal person.   


Anyone thinking that there must be national laws against perversion of justice is right: there are such laws. However, these are hardly ever applied, so that perversion of justice is  the perfect crime in Germany.


The Inducement of Financial Hardship


In 19th Century Britain, it was not necessary to artificially induce financial hardship on the parents to get their children, because poverty was sufficiently widespread for this purpose. In 21st Century Germany this is not the case, so a war of attrition has to be conducted against the selected parents, so that their children can be taken away from them.


The use of financial pressure as a weapon is well known (LLAMS-Model). This weapon has been systematically applied against the Himmel Family, living in Kornwestheim ( Baden-Württemberg, S. Germany )  for 13 years to try to get their son and daughter away from them. Rolf Himmel is an Undertaker and Regina Himmel is a part-time administrative assistant, who at the moment is not working because of the necessity to take defensive measures against the Youth Organization. They adopted the children (twins) in Poland in July 1994 at the age of two, and gave them an excellent home, with all the attention that they needed.



Fig 4 Rolf and Regina Himmel

with Son Sascha


Fig 5 Daughter Sandra in the Garden at Home



Although the Youth Office had accused the parents of an infringement of German adoption procedures, the adoption had been perfectly legal under polish law. Immediately on the couple’s return to Germany with the children, the Youth Office in Ludwigsburg accused the couple of buying the children. The purchase of children, may well be one of the “customs” in the structures around the Youth Offices of Germany but certainly not in a regular polish home for children, where the adoption had taken place. The Youth Office subsequently tried to allocate the children to another German family through the polish courts and finally tried to annul the adoption through the Polish High Court. They failed on both counts, but not before the Himmel family had paid a lot of money for polish attorneys for the legal battle.  In particular, on their own initiative, they obtained certificates from doctors,  psychiatrists and psychologists to counter the untruthful inputs from the District Administration in Ludwigsburg to the polish courts.


The District Administration Ludwigsburg has since taken Rolf and Regina Himmel through the whole gamut of persecution listed under “How it Works”.  Because of this, they have been forced into the permanent defensive. They have learned the major behaviour patterns of the Youth Service. For example, as soon as a child injures itself, be it in the school or in the home, they obtain an independent medical certificate to prove that they did not mistreat the child. Hardly a day goes by without some form of threat from the Youth Service. This of course has an economic effect on the parents, because while they are being kept busy by the District Administration in Ludwigsburg there is a net loss of working hours.


Sandra developed a school phobia and started running away from school. The District Administration used this golden opportunity and committed her to the closed section of the child psychiatry of the St. Lucas Clinic in the Catholic Liebenau Trust ( see below ). She was transferred after three months in June 2007 to the Evangelical Children’s home in Herzogsägmühle, from where she escaped ( she has not yet, at the time of writing, been found). The District Administration in Ludwigsburg, which now has the custody of Sandra, are now taking action to deduct a proportion of the costs of this incarceration (€4.000 ) from Rolf Himmel’s salary as an undertaker. He will not  be able to withstand that kind of economic squeezing.


Allegations of Parental Incompetence  

Parental incompetence was certainly not a factor in 19th Century Britain for child trafficking. Poverty saw to that. In 21st Century Germany however, it is easy to allege - and just as easy for German courts not to ask what is behind the allegations. Gossip is always right for a hearing in Germany - if it comes from the ‘right’ side.

On the subject of incompetence, it should be borne in mind that the campaign against the Haase Family started with an expert evidence report. This report was also evaluated ( Fig. 2 - G05). It had the appearance of a good report at first sight, but on closer examination it was found to be a prefabricated cutting and pasting exercise, in which nothing fitted together. There was no adequate explanation of the methods used. There is an unnumbered bibliography for example, which is largely unused in the report and where it is cross-referenced, it is not clear why. There is mention of a questionnaire which was supposed to have been completed and signed by the mother. However, the specialist refers to it occasionally but did not include it in the report. The mother denies ever filling in such a questionnaire.  The fact that the specialist did not include the questionnaire in the report would tend to confirm this. It was only possible to award 20% of the marks to this report, making it the “best of the bad ones”. Because there were so many mistakes and omissions, it was not possible to classify the report as in any way “Credible”.

It is clear, also from the results of the other reports that, save for one case, the specialists were all massively incompetent. That these so-called experts should be assessing the parents’ competence just beggars belief. These reports also indicate what degree of competence is prevalent in the courts.  

Induced psychiatric Problems

This section should not be confused with the entry in the list of allegations. This section is a measure of the psychological terror perpetrated against parents, in the hope that they will become psychiatric cases or commit suicide.

In 19th century there was certainly the same anomaly, some of it may have been deliberate and some of it caused by poverty.

In 1805 when Samuel Davy was seven years of age he was sent from the workhouse in Southwark in London to Mr. Watson's Mill at Penny Dam near Preston. Later his brother was also sent to work in a mill. The parents did not know where Samuel and his brother were. The loss of her children, so preyed on the mind of Samuel's mother that it brought on insanity, and she died in a state of madness.

This unfortunate woman must have felt bad enough but in 21st Century Germany they do the job much more thoroughly.

The Haase Family:

As Cornelia Haase was burying her daughter Lisa in January this year she said to SAM Television “I feel as though I am in a deep black hole” and explained how she felt. The Youth Office used this as an opportunity to taunt her with a renewed psychological attack. They wrote to the family court  saying,

“The psychic condition of Mrs. Haase gives rise to concern. It raises questions about her ability to be able to care adequately for her three daughters”

It should be said that Germany was roundly condemned by the European Court of Human Rights for its illegal actions against the Haase Family and was ordered to return the children. Of the seven children taken into care on the basis of an amateurish and highly defective report, only two have been returned. One has died.

The Himmel Family:

The Himmel Family was not in principle treated any differently: In the presence of a witness, they were told by the District Administration Office that they would never see their daughter again. In the closed section of the Catholic St. Lucas Clinic daughter Sandra was forcibly pumped with psycho drugs and locked up for 5 hours a day. At the Evangelical children’s home in Herzogsägmühle Sandra was told that she would never return home again and that her parents would give her up. All the abuses against the Himmel Family cannot be discussed here but a separate report has gone to some non-German members of the European Parliament.

Combinations of Measures

The Haase Family:

It is not necessary for the authorities to select just any one  measure from “How it works”, they can use any combination of measures as described in the LLAMS-Model up to a Total Sociological Attack (TSA).

The Haase Family lost 7 of their children in 2002 to the whims of a totally incompetent Youth Office and based on a thoroughly  amateurish expert evidence report ( Fig. 2 - G05). One of the children was confiscated at the hospital soon after birth.  It stands to reason that any court capable of accepting such  expert evidence quality, also puts the competence of its judiciaries and all the higher instances, that were called up, into question.  

The perversions stretched to telling one of the trafficked children, that the parents were dead. This surpasses even what the Evangelical Children’s Home at Herzogsägmühle  told Sandra Himmel, i.e. that she would never return home and that her parents would abandon her.

The war of attrition against the Haase Family is perhaps the worst case of its kind in Germany, if not the whole of Europe. To go into all the details of this piece of savagery would be outside the scope of this paper (there is, however, much material on the Internet, in German [6] )  It would nevertheless be appropriate to look at an invoice for €1.423,26 which the Haase Family received from the City of Münster. That is a lot of money for a family in their situation.



Fig. 6. The Bill for Daughter Lisa’s Funeral sent to Cornelia Haase by the City of Münster, although she did not have custody of the child. Picture by courtesy of SAM the television channel.

Lisa took the break up of her family by the Youth Service hard followed by three years as the inmate of a children’s home, had left their mark. Lisa died in December 2006, they say of an acute Lung infection. However, the family doctor, with some logic, does not believe this. She had previously made two suicide attempts. 

There are gruesome historical parallels to this, as reflected in Fig. 7.

Fig. 7 The Bill for the Execution of Journalist Erich Knauf which was sent to his Widow immediately afterwards. His ‘Crime’ had been to crack Hitler-Jokes in an Air-Raid Shelter.

The two invoices ( Figs 6 & 7 ) are separated in time by 63 years. The reader is left to contemplate the depths of barbarism to which the German official mentality is prepared to sink. This mentality does not reflect the spirit of the World Cup 2006, it is rather one of many Monsters that outlived the 1000 year Reich, and is still on the rampage.

Digressing slightly on the subject of Hitler Jokes:  German officials still protect themselves from criticism, publicity and insult by applying their infantile laws against insult and defamation - despite OSCE demands for their abolition. Not only is Germany retaining these ridiculous laws from the age of the monocle and duelling, she is, with approaching 180.000 cases per year, statistically at the top of Europe. The figure represents nearly 20% of all criminal cases. This fact, together with the numerous side jobs of German judiciaries, indicates drastic underemployment in the courts at the cost of the taxpayer.     

Human Rights: the International Repercussions

Some Statistics

It is clear that Germany is a renegade state, which does not accept or observe the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. Her abrogation of the article in the treaty is official confirmation of this. The fact that she violates human rights in an exceptionally grave way is illustrated not only in this paper but also in the following statistics:

Fig 8. The Human Rights Statistics

Although Germany does not publish any statistics on  her human rights violations - not surprisingly -  some of these have been measured by the NGOs [7]. The offenses against Art. 6 of the convention on human rights have been  recorded in a data base. Because every process , that we have seen,  contains systematic violations of human rights, it was decided to produce a plot of the 'pollution' of each hearing by offenses against Article 6, otherwise there would just be a saturation of the data.  Not altogether surprising is that offenses against Art 6-1 ( fair hearing etc. ) occur most frequently. Whilst it would be appropriate  to measure this 'pollution' on an annual basis -  to show trends, leading hopefully to zero in a few years -, there is not yet  enough data to support this. At present there are only about 70 cases recorded.   

It can be assumed the human rights violations would have been massive in 19th  Century Britain, there is, however, no sensible way of measuring them.

It is clear that state, which thumbs its nose at the convention is no partner for the EU. For that reason we are producing a basis for pressing for EU- and OSCE-Sanctions against Germany e.g. exclusion from  international human rights councils. The decisions of the family courts will need to have international restrictions imposed on their international acceptance, because such  decisions can only be classed as "unsafe and unsound".    

The Conclusion

Whether the German Youth Service backed up by the Justice actually does the right thing on occasions is unknown. That is the classic problem of the disingenuous - Nobody will believe them, even on the occasions when they are telling the truth. The huge defects in the system and the its eminent lack of professional competence suggest that this would otherwise be a matter of pure chance.

It is clear that Germany is, as far as the care of children goes, comparable with Britain in the latter half of Industrial Revolution. In other words there is a progress deficit of about 170 - 200 years in the attitudes to parents and their children in Germany. The primeval behaviour of the Youth Organizations would mean that there is an additional excursion backwards well beyond the 170-200 year point.  There are some very sick people in the Youth Offices, and there are quite a lot of social misfits who, thanks both to the lack of supervision in Germany and the lack of training, do not get discovered   On this point, the “viciousness factor”, the comparison with 19th Century Britain is redundant. In Britain of the 19th Century, there existed at least economic factors as an excuse for the excesses.   

Although on an international basis, corruptibility would not necessarily mean that corruption is present in the system. In Germany, however, it must be assumed that there is a maximum of corruption present, mainly because the state organizations have an extraordinarily high corruptibility factor, due to the universal lack of supervision and the eminent lack of judicial independence in a broken-down justice system.

The international acceptance of the decisions of Germany's  family  courts will have to be suspended until such time as Germany can guarantee human rights, proper supervision of departments, proper training of specialists as well as  judicial independence in her courts.  


 Peter Briody

institut voigt


SkyPe:  "institutvoigt"

Tel:   07545 941980

Fax:  07545 941981



Public key: Auf Anfrage


1. LLAMS-Model (in English ). Restricted distribution. On application only.

2. Görings Management Principle ( in German ). Menu: Grundlagen -> Modelle -> Deutsch -> Göring

Alternative in English: The Protocoll of the 88th Day of the Nuremberg Trials: Exchange between Göring and Prosecutor Gen. Rudenko.

3. The Heap Syndrome ( in German) Menu: Grundlagen -> Modelle -> Deutsch -> Heap Syndrom

4. Assessment Questionnaire F2010P ( in German ) Menu: Hilfsmittel -> Formulare / Werkzeuge -> Übersicht

5 Complaint against Germany (in English / German) before the European Court of Human rights Menu: Berichterstattung -> Deutsch -> EuGMR Klage

6. Website of the  Haase family.

7. Human rights database ( in German )  Button: EMRK-Datenbank

8. Link to statistics ( in German )
9. Further Link to the statistical figures ( in German )

Download pdf Version