Party money injection of the GroKo in court - necessary or "completely arbitrary"?

During the 2018 World Cup, GroKo increased party funding.

Greens, FDP, Left and AfD complain - now it is getting serious in Karlsruhe.

Karlsruhe / Rheinstetten - A politically explosive topic will be negotiated by the Federal Constitutional Court on Tuesday and Wednesday: It is about questions of party financing that have not yet been "conclusively answered", as Judge Peter Müller put it.

In essence, above all this: Was the Bundestag allowed to approve the parties 25 million euros more per year - with reference to expenditures as a result of digitization?

That is exactly what the Union and the SPD did in the Bundestag in 2018.

The parliamentary groups of the FDP, the Left and the Greens * therefore went to the Constitutional Court.

Just like that of the AfD, which submitted its own application.

The outcome seems open.

"There is a need to break new ground in constitutional law," said Müller on Tuesday at the start of the two-day negotiation.

GroKo decision now case for constitutional judges: Left suspects the decision during the 2018 World Cup

The Groko had increased the state share of party funding by 25 million to 190 million euros. The amount is regularly adjusted to the price development and this year is more than 200 million euros. The money not only benefits the parties represented in the Bundestag, but also smaller ones. In order to guarantee independence, the state's share must not make up more than half of the party's finances; other sources of income are donations and membership fees.

At that time, the parliamentary groups in the black-red majority in government argued primarily with higher spending on data security, the moderation of interactive websites and the defense against hackers.

The Greens, the Left Party and the FDP moved to Karlsruhe because they see a violation of the principle of freedom of the parties enshrined in the Basic Law (2 BvF 2/18).

The unusual alliance had repeatedly made common cause in opposition work.

The AfD parliamentary group submitted an organ charge against the Bundestag because the grand coalition had passed the law in such a short time that there was no time to mobilize opposition movements in the population (2 BvE 5/18).

Both procedures will be negotiated together over two days.

A judgment is expected later.

The Left MP Jan Korte raised similar accusations on Tuesday - he referred to the time of the decision: “WM 2006: GroKo increases VAT. WM 2010: Union & FDP increase health insurance contributions.

WM 2018: GroKo increases state party funding by 25 million euros, ”he tweeted.

"Union & SPD must have had some idea that it is difficult to explain to people 15% more money for the parties."

Party funding: Greens demand modesty - Left criticizes "completely arbitrary" increase

Legally, the situation is more complex. The Constitutional Court had already specified in 1992 that the upper limit will be adjusted to the price trend, but otherwise only be increased if the situation has "changed dramatically". But was there such a drastic change before 2018? And if so, does the legislature owe a special justification for the increase? Dietmar Nietan, the SPD's federal treasurer, argued before the court that the parties are dealing with a “costly duality” of analog and digital communication and participation options.

The FDP, the Left and the Greens criticize that the justification is insufficient. It must be demonstrated that the increase is justified in terms of content, said her representative, Sophie Schönberger. In addition, the three parliamentary groups see the increase in the upper limit as a violation of the principle of political freedom for parties and point out that the interests of MPs and parties are closely intertwined - Parliament has practically decided on its own here. Ultimately, “the credibility of the democratic institutions and their actors is at stake,” argued Schönberger. "If parties lose their approval, they have to come to terms with it, that means dismantling structures and not simply increasing state funds," said the Green MP Manuela Rottmann.

It is about transparency and traceability, said Bundestag Vice President Petra Pau (left).

The grand coalition had broken the custom of negotiating funding between all parliamentary groups, "and raised the amount completely arbitrarily without any objective justification".

But as the person responsible for IT security in the Bundestag Presidium, she also admitted that a lot has changed in the past two or three years.

So-called fake news, for example, played a major role, also in other EU countries and the USA.

However, that was not the basis of the legislation in 2018.

AfD application before the Constitutional Court: allegations to the GroKo address

The AfD's application was first negotiated on Tuesday. The faction is concerned that the course of the legislative procedure, which was "unusually shortened" with nine working days *, violated her rights. Your representative Ulrich Vosgerau several times expressed the suspicion that there had been a kind of “secret preliminary proceedings”, since, for example, the experts appointed by the coalition would otherwise not have been able to write their reports so quickly.

The AfD parliamentary group was unable to prepare adequately in this way. It is the task of the opposition to raise concerns in parliament and also to mobilize the public against the government's plans in order to prepare for future elections, said Vosgerau. In this context, questions were raised from the ranks of the court as to whether it could be the task of a parliamentary group to “mobilize the streets” and whether it would not be a good idea to seek advice from experts before legislating. The representative of the Bundestag, Karsten Schneider, argued for his part that the AfD could also assert its rights in the legislative process. But she didn't do that.

Because of the pandemic, the hearing was postponed twice and, as an exception, relocated to a hall of the Karlsruhe Exhibition Center in the nearby town of Rheinstetten.

In this "branch office of the Federal Constitutional Court", as Vice President Doris König put it, there is more space than in the actual courthouse.

(

) *

.