Repercussions from hitting protesters blocking highways

Question

From “What power do I have as a driver if my interstate route is blocked by a protest?”, I understand that intentionally hitting protesters who block the road is considered “Vehicular Misdemeanour”. However, what if the protesters were blocking a freeway/highway?

I’ve seen a clip somewhere (no source) of a single person standing on the Autobahn, seemingly trying to block traffic, and they got dragged of the road by a police officer. I think it’s quite normal for people to travel at much higher speeds on large highways, and stationary humans would come into view a lot more suddenly than on a normal road, leaving drivers with much less time to react. Even if the driver was able to brake, it feels quite likely that they skid and would still hit the protester unless the protester jumped out of the way.

I do realize that the scenario sounds quite similar to “a random pedestrian on the highway”, but the fact that they’re intentionally standing/sitting there in the way of traffic seems like it should give the driver a better case. Of course, this would also give malicious drivers an excuse to just hit protesters even if they were able to react in time.

Considering (1) most road-blocking protests I’ve seen are in the USA, and (2) the Autobahn has the “no speed limit” rule, I’d like to know how such “traffic accidents” would play out it the USA and Germany.

Answer 1

In the US, you can't intentionally run over someone, even if they are in the road. This is outside of traffic law and is a criminal offense - you aren't allowed to injure other people just because they inconvenience you. Hitting a pedestrian on an interstate who wandered into a lane would likely not be the fault of the driver.

In most states, blocking a road is unlawful, but it is not a justification for committing assault/battery/manslaughter.

There may be exceptions. Some states have tried to introduce laws to protect drivers who are blocked by protesters but I don't think any passed. Ostensibly these died in committee when lawmakers were reminded that people of their race and political orientation do protest also.

Answer 2

It is illegal to be a pedestrian on the Autobahn

The Road Code "Straßenverkehrsordnung" StVO dictates where you may walk as a pedestrian in §25:

• You have to use a pedestrian way.
  • You are only allowed to use the car part of the road if there is no pedestrian way and then only in a specified manner.
  • If you transport bulky objects as a pedestrian that would block other pedestrians, special rules apply for using the car part of the road.
  • Crossing the car part of the road has to be done in a specified manner.

But there is a special paragraph that declares the Autobahn, the german Highway/Interstate system, to be off limits for pedestrians. §18 dictates:

(9) Zu Fuß Gehende dürfen Autobahnen nicht betreten. Kraftfahrstraßen dürfen sie nur an Kreuzungen, Einmündungen oder sonstigen dafür vorgesehenen Stellen überschreiten; sonst ist jedes Betreten verboten.

(9) People on foot may not step onto the Autobahn. Vehicle-restricted Roads are only allowed to be crossed at crossings, intersections or other dedicated places; otherwise any stepping on them is forbidden.

Luckily it is only a misdemeanor to violate StVO §18(9) and is only punished with a 10€ fine...

Criminal Pedestrians on the Autobahn

However, being on a vehicle-only road and trying to stop cars for nefarious reasons or doing something in a manner that impacts the traffic and creates danger is not just a misdemeanor, it can result in criminal charges.

First, let's assume the pedestrian is not just crossing the highway in a (somewhat) safe manner, such as to get off the Highway after a crash or to assist with a crash, or behaves reasonably at the sideline in a manner to warn of a present danger ahead. Those examples would surely be excusing emergencies when the StVO violation is put aside.

Instead, let's assume the pedestrian is intentionally trying to stop cars without a current imminent danger to those car drivers. Maybe he just feels like it. This could constitute a crime: §315b StGB, dangerous interference with road traffic, applies to creating obstructions that can result in the loss of life or limb. A pedestrian who stands on the Autobahn and juggles with flags to distract the traffic is likely to create a crash and this would fall under that.

Car user liability

A pedestrian's actions might still result in the driver being liable for the crash in some way. In 2019, a car collided with a pedestrian who was walking on the wrong side of the road at night at the halfway point of the lane. Despite the blatant violation of the road code §25, the car having been 40 kmh below the speed limit, and the pedestrian being the main reason for the crash, the driver was deemed 20% at fault because an ideal driver could have seen the man and averted the crash.

Why? Because to take part in road traffic, you are mandated to put full attention on the road at all times and be somewhat courteous in StVO §1.

Only when there was no chance to prevent the crash, the car user will get 0% fault for a crash. That is typically found when even an ideal, perfect driver would have ended in a crash, such as with a pedestrian throwing themselves from hiding in front of an oncoming car at high speed.

Answer 3

germany

The German Straßenverkehrsordnung (StVO) — the federal Road Traffic Regulations — very intentionally starts with the following paragraph 1:

(1) Die Teilnahme am Straßenverkehr erfordert ständige Vorsicht und gegenseitige Rücksicht.

(2) Wer am Verkehr teilnimmt hat sich so zu verhalten, dass kein Anderer geschädigt, gefährdet oder mehr, als nach den Umständen unvermeidbar, behindert oder belästigt wird.

Translation:

(1) Participating in traffic requires constant prudence and mutual consideration.

(2) Anyone participating in traffic must behave in such a way that no one else is harmed, endangered or hindered or inconvenienced more than is unavoidable under the circumstances.

These are the principles from which all traffic regulation emanates. Note that these provisions are unconditional. In particular, they do not contain any wording from which one could construe that traffic rule violators are exempt from their protection.

They are, lamentably, not well known. In particular, and particularly in Germany, people think that because somebody else violates a traffic rule, they now have a license to be inconsiderate, reckless, or even endanger the offender. For example, car drivers routinely do not slow down or change lanes when a pedestrian illegally crosses through a red light, which would be the prudent and considerate behavior required of them by the quoted §1 of the StVO. Instead, they honk, because they are right, and the pedestrian is wrong.

This is utterly wrong. Never, under no circumstances, may a driver intentionally endanger a pedestrian (or anyone else). Whether the pedestrian is legitimately on a crosswalk, walked through a red light or just fell from the sky: The driver must always, under all circumstances, drive carefully and mitigate any dangers; whether they have arisen because of the reckless behavior of the pedestrian or because of any other reason is entirely irrelevant.

This is also, exactly, what is required of drivers who encounter pedestrians on the motorway. It is irrelevant why the pedestrians are there and what their intentions are: The drivers must always and under all circumstances do everything under their control to minimize any danger for the pedestrians.

That said, intentionally walking onto a motorway in Germany is suicidal and, indirectly, may endanger others' lives as well. On some stretches, people regularly drive faster than 180 km/h (100 mph, 50 m/s or 164 feet/s, distance to full emergency stop more than 200m or 650 feet) and are not prepared to encounter stationary objects or people. Accidents happen frequently when drivers try to retrieve items that have fallen off cars on the motorway.