Case Nos. 2 BvR 2115/01, 2 BvR 2132/01, & 2 BvR 348/03.60 Neue Juristische Wochenschrift 499 (2007)

2007 ◽  
Vol 101 (3) ◽  
pp. 627-635 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Bodansky ◽  
Klaus Ferdinand Gärditz
Keyword(s):  
Police Officers ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
German Constitution ◽  
Federal Constitutional

Case Nos.2 BvR 2115/01, 2 BvR 2132/01, & 2 BvR 348/03.60 Neue Juristische Wochenschrift 499 (2007). At <http://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de>.Bundesverfassungsgericht (Federal Constitutional Court of Germany), September 19, 2006.On September 19, 2006, the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany (Bundesverfassungsgericht) held in jointly decided Case Nos. 2 BvR 2115/01, 2 BvR 2132/01, & 2 BvR 348/03 that a failure to provide consular information to foreign nationals pursuant to Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR) violates the guarantee of a fair trial as provided by the German Constitution (Grundgesetz). The result is in contrast to a recent U. S. Supreme Court decision in Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon, a strikingly similar case.The defendants, two nationals of Turkey and two of Serbia-Montenegro, were arrested in the course of different criminal investigations. They were informed of their rights as defendants as guaranteed by Germany's law of criminal procedure. The prosecuting authorities failed, however, to provide information on the defendants’ right to contact the consular staffs of their own countries in compliance with the VCCR. Three defendants were found guilty of murder and sentenced to lifetime imprisonment by the district court (Landgericht) of Braunschweig. The district court of Hamburg found the fourth defendant guilty of a robbery that resulted in the death of a victim, and sentenced him to eleven years’ imprisonment. Since the defendants refused to make statements, the criminal courts relied, inter alia, on the testimony of the police officers questioning the defendants after their various arrests. During the subsequent criminal proceedings, the defendants, presumably out of ignorance, made no attempt to invoke their consular rights, and the district courts seemed to be equally unaware of those rights.

scholarly journals The Untenable Situation of German Criminal Law: Against Quantitative Overloading, Qualitative Overcharging, and the Overexpansion of Criminal Justice

2012 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 579-605 ◽  
Author(s):  
Volker Krey ◽  
Oliver Windgätter
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Trial Courts ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Established Fact

It is a well-established fact that German criminal trial courts are unacceptably and unreasonably overloaded. The German Federal Constitutional Court—Bundesverfassungsgericht, BVerfG—and the Federal Supreme Court of Justice—Bundesgerichtshof, BGH—frankly admit this fact. Even those legal scholars who are critical towards trial courts emphasize such overloading. This overloading is aggravated in the context of austerity measures, which seem to be based on a system that can briefly be described as follows: In principle, the BGH is not, if ever then only slightly, affected, and the State Courts of Appeals—Oberlandesgerichte, OLG—are not affected in an extensive manner. In contrast, the trial courts fare differently: The Higher District Courts — Landgerichte, LG—are typically severely affected by such austerity measures, while the Lower District Courts — Amtsgerichte, AG—are affected brutally. Pursuant to the authors’ view, this practice demonstrates an evident disregard for the trial courts, despite the fact that their speedy as well as convincing settlement of criminal cases is of the utmost importance for the law in action and a constitutive element of criminal proceedings under the rule of law. Hence, the guarantee of an effective criminal justice system — Gewährleistung einer effektiven Strafrechtspflege—is rightly recognized as a fundamental element of the rule of law.

International Treaties and The German Constitution

2019 ◽  
pp. 171-190
Author(s):  
Stefan Kadelbach
Keyword(s):  
German Law ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
The Status ◽  
German Constitution ◽  
Federal Constitutional

This chapter deals with the making, status, and interpretation of international treaties under the German Constitution. It describes the interrelationship of the different institutions in treaty-making and shows how a comparatively old provision of the German Basic Law has been adapted slowly to new circumstances over the past decades. Thus, even though foreign affairs has remained a domain of the executive, several developments have contributed to an enhanced role of Parliament over time. These developments are partly due to the role of special sectors of law such as EU law and the law governing the use of force and partly due to changes in constitutional practice. As for the status of treaties in German law, the Federal Constitutional Court has developed a stance according to which treaties generally share the rank of the legal act that implements them into domestic law. A notable exception is the European Convention of Human Rights, which has assumed a quasi-constitutional rank by means of consistent interpretation. Some reference is made to other continental systems to assess how far different constitutions bring about certain features; various systems appear similar in many respects at first sight, whereas features in which they differ may be a source of inspiration for future constitutional practice.

The Right to Assisted Dying: Constitutional Jurisprudence and Its Impact in Canada, Germany and Austria

ICL Journal ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerstin Braun
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Assisted Dying ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Right ◽  
Constitutional Jurisprudence

Abstract Many states are grappling with the regulation of assistance in suicide and ending the life of another upon their request. Initially punishable in most countries, a growing number of jurisdictions have now introduced permissive frameworks decriminalising, to varying degrees, rendering assistance in dying. Other countries, however, have proceeded with the criminal prohibition and several courts have upheld the lawfulness of the respective criminal laws during human rights and constitutional challenges. Yet, the Supreme Court of Canada in 2015, the German Federal Constitutional Court in February 2020 and the Austrian Constitutional Court in December 2020 have respectively declared unconstitutional and void national criminal laws prohibiting rendering assistance in dying. This article first outlines the criminal law framework relating to assisted dying in Canada, Germany and Austria. It subsequently analyses the judgments before pondering their impact on the legal landscape in the three countries. The article concludes that while the Canadian Supreme Court decision appears to have had a significant impact on the introduction of subsequent legislation in Canada, the effects of the Constitutional Courts’ judgments seem much more subdued in Germany and are yet to unfold in Austria.

The Decision of the Bundesverfassungsgericht of April 12, 2005 – Concerning Police Use of Global Position Systems as a Surveillance Tool

2005 ◽  
Vol 6 (7) ◽  
pp. 1085-1092 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole Jacoby
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Personality Profile ◽  
Global Positioning Systems ◽  
Positioning Systems ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
Global Positioning ◽  
German Constitution ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
German Federal Constitutional Court ◽  
German Federal Constitutional

On April 12, 2005, the Bundesverfassunsgreicht (German Federal Constitutional Court) ruled that regulations in the Strafprozessordnung (StPO – Code of Criminal Procedure) concerning police use of global positioning systems (GPS) did not violate the Grundgesetz (GG – German Constitution or Basic Law) so long as the investigators did not use the technology in conjunction with other surveillance methods that could lead to the construction of a personality profile of the suspect observed. The following comment examines the facts of the case and evaluates the Court's decision in detail.

German Constitutional Law

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bumke Christian ◽  
Voßkuhle Andreas
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
German Constitution ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Book Covers ◽  
The Right ◽  
German Constitutional Law

This book provides a comprehensive summary of German constitutional law, in particular the case law of the German Federal Constitutional Court. It provides first-hand insight into the complex principles of the Basic Law, or Grundgesetz (GG), and an authoritative introduction to the history of the German constitution, the Basic Law, and the methodology of the Federal Constitutional Court. As well as an analysis of the general principles of German constitutional law, the book covers the salient articles of the German constitution and offers relevant extracts of the Court's most important decisions on the provisions of the Basic Law. It provides notes and discussions of landmark cases to illustrate their legal and historical context and give the reader a clear understanding of the principles governing German constitutional law. The book covers the fundamental rights catalogue of the Basic Law and offers a comprehensive account of its intellectual moorings. It includes landmark jurisprudence on the equal treatment of same-sex couples, life imprisonment, the legal structure of property, the right to assembly, and the right to informational self-presentation. The book also covers the provisions and respective case law governing the state structure of Germany, for instance the recent decisions on the prohibition of the far-right German nationalist party, and the Court's jurisprudence on European integration, including the most recent decisions on the OMT program of the European Central Bank.

scholarly journals The Ban on Strike Action by Career Civil Servants under the German Basic Law: How the Federal Constitutional Court Constitutionally Immunized the German Legal Order Against the European Convention on Human Rights

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 223-239
Author(s):  
Matthias Jacobs ◽  
Mehrdad Payandeh
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Civil Servants ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedom ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
German Constitution ◽  
Federal Constitutional

AbstractThe Federal Constitutional Court has decided that the prohibition to strike for career civil servants, as it has traditionally been part of the German legal order, is in compliance with the German Constitution. The Court thereby put a (provisional) end to a long-lasting debate on how to solve the tension between the fundamental freedom to form associations under Article 9(3) of the Basic Law, which arguably encompasses a right to strike, and Article 33(5) of the Basic Law, which protects the traditional principles of the career civil servants, which arguably encompasses the prohibition to strike. Through recognizing that the ban on strike action by career civil servants is not only allowed but required under the German Constitution, the Constitutional Court navigates the German legal order on a potential collision course with the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights. In this context, the Constitutional Court on the one hand reaffirms the openness of the German constitutional order towards international law in general and human rights and the European Convention on Human Rights in particular. On the other hand, the Court somehow marginalizes the role of the European Court of Human Rights and threatens to not follow the Court should it hold that the European Convention on Human Rights demands a right to strike also for career civil servants.

Wohin steuern die Ultra-vires- und die Identitätskontrolle? Eine Zwischenbilanz anhand der Entscheidungen des Bundesverfassungsgerichts im PSPP-Verfahren

IG ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 211-219
Author(s):  
Christian Walter
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
German Constitution ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
German Federal Constitutional Court ◽  
German Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Eu

The article takes stock of the consequences which the decisions of the German Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) concerning the Public Sector Purchase Programme (PSPP) of the European Union (EU) have had on the relation between EU law and the German constitution. The interplay between the PSPP judgment of 5 May 2020 and a follow-up decision on its enforcement reveals a certain degree of back-paddling by the FCC. Irrespective of the infringement procedure, which the European Commission recently initiated against Germany, there are good chances for a respite for both the FCC and the Court of Justice of the EU. It is up to the FCC to use this period to clarify where it is headed with its jurisprudence on controlling the application of EU law in Germany.

Äußerung von Beamten im Konflikt mit Dienstpflichten

2018 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 265-300
Author(s):  
Klaus Herrmann
Keyword(s):  
Civil Servants ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Present Contribution ◽  
General Duty ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
The Status ◽  
German Constitution ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Administrative Courts ◽  
Historical Developments

Summary Over the past decades, the adjudication handed down by the German administrative courts has consistently derived from the principles of the professional civil service (Grundsätze des Berufsbeamtentums) enshrined in Article 33 paragraph 5 of the Grundgesetz (GG, Basic Law) and in the blanket clauses of the Beamtenstatusgesetz (BeamtStG, Act on the Status of Civil Servants) as well as the Civil Servants Acts applicable at the Federal and the Land levels the duties of civil servants, judges, and soldiers to adhere to the German Constitution and to be loyal to it, to maintain their impartiality, and to protect the respect in which their employer is held, as well as the trust that their employer and the general public place in them, in any statements they may make as part of their service, but also outside of an official context. The present contribution sets out the historical developments and milestone decisions in this regard, such as the judgment handed down by the Bundesverfassungsgericht (Federal Constitutional Court) of May 22nd, 1975, which refused to grant employment as civil servants to applicants seeking such employment who were involved with the Deutsche Kommunistische Partei (DKP, German Communist Party). Furthermore, the contribution addresses the various consequences, based on their severity, which violations against the duty to adhere to the German Constitution, to remain neutral, and to exercise restraint will have, along with the consequences of violations of the duty to observe secrecy in all matters pertaining to the service. Based on the circumstances of the cases adjudicated by the courts, the requirements made on civil servants’ conduct and the „red lines“ constituting a dereliction of official duties when crossed are discussed. Where the punishment under disciplinary law of violations of said duties is concerned, the administrative courts premise their decisions on the assumption that civil servants, judges, and soldiers are aware of what is expected of them. However, the articles’ main focus is on how the duty of neutrality was derived, in terms of jurisprudence, in the court rulings most recently handed down on the „Lights out!“ call by the mayor of a city in North Rhine-Westphalia. The municipal leader had instructed all city-owned buildings to turn their lights off, on the evening of an assembly that had been previously registered with the city administration, in the interests of damaging the attractiveness of the demonstration and its overall impact. While the administrative courts have relied, in dealing with that particular call to action and with other statements made in the battle of public opinion, on the general duty of the state to remain objective and to adhere to the principle of neutrality where party politics are concerned, the present contribution highlights the fact that the duty of neutrality as stipulated by the laws governing civil servants must not be disregarded when this group of people voices religious or political sentiments, nor must the official duties subject to sanctions under disciplinary law be ignored.

Russia

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian Ward ◽  
Dmitri Bartenev
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Court ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Public Agencies ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Justice Of The Peace ◽  
Commercial Courts

Russia is a civil law country. It is a federation of constituent entities (‘entities’). Laws affecting adults are made mainly at the federal level. Entities have very limited powers in this regard, such as defining the structure of public agencies responsible for implementing federal standards. The judicial system comprises courts of general jurisdiction (which hear both civil and criminal cases), commercial courts, the federal constitutional court, and (in some entities) regional constitutional courts. Courts of first instance are justice of the peace, district, and regional courts. The highest court with general jurisdiction is the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. District courts hear most adult protection cases, for which there are no special tribunals.

Lastengleichheit in der grundgesetzlichen Wertordnung

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leila Züllighoven
Keyword(s):  
Tax Law ◽  
Moral Foundations ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Ability To Pay ◽  
German Constitution ◽  
Federal Constitutional

While the ability-to-pay principle is widely accepted as the benchmark for fair taxation, German tax law is characterised by many exceptions to this standard. Notwithstanding some much-debated decisions by the Federal Constitutional Court on tax regulations, the constitutional requirements for unequal taxation are, at the same time, highly controversial. Basing this work on an analysis of the moral foundations of the German Constitution and the position of the principle of equality therein, the author suggests a new doctrine of equality. She pleads for the abandonment of the so-called ‘rule of consistency’ (Folgerichtigkeitsgebot), as upheld by the Federal Constitutional Court, in favour of transparent and consistently applied standards of equality.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document