The corona emergency brake is the subject of many proceedings.
The Federal Constitutional Court has now rejected an application for bias against its own president in one of them.
Karlsruhe - The Federal Constitutional Court has
denied
bias allegations in connection with the Corona emergency brake because of
a dinner with members of the federal government and rejected a corresponding application as unfounded (Az. 1 BvR 781/21, decision of October 12, 2021). The plaintiffs in the proceedings for the so-called federal emergency brake had previously submitted a rejection request against court president Stephan Harbarth and the judge Susanne Baer.
The background was a dinner in the Federal Chancellery on June 30th.
All 16 constitutional judges and most of the federal ministers also took part in the meeting with Chancellor Angela Merkel (CDU), as stated in the government response to an earlier AfD request.
One plaintiff saw a reference to the ongoing proceedings before the Federal Constitutional Court about the federal emergency brake created due to the corona pandemic, which gave the federal government extensive decision-making options for corona restrictions.
Federal emergency brake before BVG: bias with the president?
decision made
At the meeting in the Federal Chancellery, the topic of "Decision making under uncertainties" should be discussed.
Baer had also given a lecture in the group.
Likewise, Federal Minister of Justice Christine Lambrecht (SPD).
According to
Welt am Sonntag,
the
request for rejection was
submitted by the Berlin lawyer Niko Härting, who claims to be conducting proceedings for members of the Free Voters before the Constitutional Court.
Federal emergency brake
The federal emergency brake came into force on April 23.
The controversial law regulates nationwide what happens if the seven-day incidence of new corona infections is stable above 100.
The federal emergency brake ran out at the end of June, but it could be reactivated.
At the end of September he wrote on Twitter that Harbarth had given Lambrecht the opportunity to explain the federal emergency brake.
At the same time, the court wants to forego a negotiation on the emergency brake.
This raises doubts about the impartiality.
The court had announced that it would probably decide in writing so that it would go faster.
Procedure for the federal emergency brake: Harbarth and Baer are not biased
According to the resolution on the request for bias, "Meetings to exchange ideas and experiences between the Federal Constitutional Court and the Federal Government as such, including the meeting of June 30, 2021 in question, are
a completely unsuitable reason to justify the concern of bias." Legal issues related to the subject of “decision-making under uncertainties” are also diverse and abstract, they also concern a number of other proceedings before the Constitutional Court.
"Meetings for the exchange of ideas and experiences between the Federal Constitutional Court and the Federal Government as such are a completely unsuitable reason to justify concerns about bias."
Federal Constitutional Court (Az. 1 BvR 781/21, decision of October 12, 2021)
There are no indications that the topic was chosen so that members of the federal government could comment on the procedure on the federal emergency brake.
According to the manuscript of Lambrecht's lecture submitted by the plaintiff himself, Lambrecht did not comment on specific current proceedings.
The fact that Harbarth was involved in the selection of the topic without positioning the content as to how to deal with it legally does not speak in favor of a possible lack of impartiality.
Federal Constitutional Court decides: petitions of baptism rejected
Because of the meeting, the AfD had already accused the judges of bias - in a procedure on statements by Chancellor Merkel about the Thuringia election.
The court rejected this request in July on the grounds that the regular meetings were an expression of the respect between the constitutional organs.
The court is permanently involved in proceedings that affect the actions of the government.
If a meeting raises doubts about the impartiality, an exchange would be impossible.
Such mistrust also contradicts “the constitutional and simple law presupposed image of the constitutional judge”.
Federal emergency brake: Many proceedings on controversial law
The federal emergency brake is the target of a large number of constitutional complaints.
The Federal Constitutional Court may decide on several of the cases this month or in November.
The complaints concern individual regulations such as the regulations on exit restrictions or all of the regulations of the so-called fourth civil protection law.
(
AFP / dpa
)
List of rubric lists: © Hendrik Schmidt / dpa