Independent youth welfare organisations may organise their youth work according to their own guiding principles. The exclusion of certain persons does not prevent this in principle. This is because independent organisations are not subject to the state or a comparable ban on discrimination. The Dresden Administrative Court pointed this out in a recent decision (media release dated 15 May 2025; case reference for parallel summary proceedings 1 L 926/23).

An independent provider that operates several child and youth work facilities as an »alternative centre«, including a day care centre that requires a permit, had filed a lawsuit against the state youth welfare office. For the independent organisation, its premises were a „protected area“ for its youth work. Therefore, a father of a nursery school child, who is a police officer, should no longer enter the premises. The organisation considered its ideas and concept incompatible with the police officer's profession and banned the father from the premises.

However, the state youth welfare office took a different view and cancelled the kindergarten's operating licence. The ban would show that the provider did not recognise the free and democratic basic order of the Federal Republic of Germany and therefore lacked the necessary reliability. Therefore, the welfare of the children in the centre was no longer guaranteed.

The Dresden Administrative Court has now cancelled the cancellation notice. It considers the discrimination against the father due to his profession, which is associated with the ban, to be permissible. Such unequal treatment may be carried out by independent providers if this is justified in the childcare concept. Unlike the state, independent providers are not subject to the ban on discrimination. Nor are they subject to a comparable prohibition. Therefore, it could not be concluded from the ban that the provider was unreliable or that the child's welfare was at risk.