It was one of the hundreds of laws that come into effect every year in the European Union with little hoopla. After deciding that the air quality in major cities within the 25-member club was too poor, the EU came up with a modest but seemingly effective plan. The solution? As of Jan. 1, 2005, air pollution levels in any given city may not exceed 50 micrograms of soot particles per cubic meter of air more than 35 days in a year. Otherwise, hefty penalties can be imposed and citizens can take the city to court.

On Easter Sunday, just 86 days into the year, Munich already managed to exceed its allotted days of dangerous dust levels -- becoming the second German city behind Stuttgart to do so. At the same time, citizens across Germany are preparing lawsuits which may cost city governments millions and have a large effect on inner city traffic patterns as well. In short, municipalities may have to severely curtail driving within city limits -- especially for diesel-powered vehicles, since diesel engines are the main culprits. It is that prospect, and the implications the dust particle law has for European cities as a whole, that captures the imaginations of German commentators on Tuesday.

Munich's center-left Sueddeutsche Zeitung leads the way with a front-page article. The piece focuses primarily on the fact that German automakers waited far too long to outfit their new models with filters that can significantly reduce the amount of carcinogenic dust released by diesel motors. Now, up to 30,000 Germans are delaying the purchase of a diesel car until they are outfitted with filters. "That which politicians have been unable to achieve," the paper writes in its editorial pages, "is now being forced by consumers." The German government has been unable to come up with a comprehensive plan to meet the new EU air quality requirements and has even shown sympathy with an automobile industry that was, until recently, reluctant to add filters -- and thus extra costs -- to its new car models. "Now, though, German car manufacturers are struggling to catch up with their French competitors," who have already started outfitting diesel cars with filters. "The introduction of driving restrictions cannot be ruled out."

After describing the nasty effects soot particles can have on the lungs and on the circulatory system, the financial daily Handelsblatt warns against hysteria. After all, the issue was ignored for a long time with few worrying much about city air quality. Now that it has become an important problem, the German federal and state governments are to blame -- they have been bickering for far too long about how to pay for the necessary countermeasures. "The rational consequence (of poor air quality) must be the quick outfitting of motor vehicles with particle filters. Aid from the government is a virtual given. But the federal and state governments haven't yet agreed on who will fund the assistance. The threat of sanctions from Brussels will hopefully be enough to speed up the process."

The left-leaning Die Tageszeitung points its finger directly at the government and its complicity with the German auto industry. Despite presenting itself as environmentally friendly, the governing coalition absolved German car manufacturers of having to quickly develop particle filters for their diesel-powered vehicles. After all, any price add-ons -- each filter adds roughly €750 to the price of a typical four-door -- would adversely affect car sales. "The automakers are now making it obvious that this was a bluff. BMW, Mercedes and Opel are now all making filters standard in 2005 instead of the 2009 they promised Chancellor Schroeder. It's no wonder. Nobody can exclude the possibility that diesel vehicles without filters may be banned from the main traffic arterials."

German papers also take a look once again at the situation in Kyrgyzstan. It appears as though the crisis in the country may slowly be waning. Over Easter weekend, it was unclear who was in power  in the country since two separate legislatures -- the old one that was in power prior to the March 23 manipulated elections or the new one that took over following the disputed vote -- both claimed legitimacy. On Monday morning, the lower house of the old parliament decided to give way, and on Tuesday the upper house chose to dissolve itself, thus handing over the reigns to the new parliament.

The move may have avoided a crises, but it is a long way from ensuring the creation of a democracy, argues the Berliner Zeitung. Indeed, the people of Kyrgyzstan have had precious little opportunity to indicate what they do want and there is very little indication that the opposition enjoys much support at all. In fact, "there is no parliament that could provide the government with any kind of democratic order and there are apparently no politicians who can secure the success of this revolution for the majority of the population. Especially not after the decision to recognize a parliamentary body elected through an undemocratic vote."