Zur Entwicklung des Polizei- und Ordnungsrechts 2013 - 2019

2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-118
Author(s):  
Hans-Heinrich Trute
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Technical Developments ◽  
The Future ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Digital Investigation ◽  
Principle Of Proportionality

The article provides an overview of the development of case law in the field of police law over the last six years. Against the background of selected aspects such as the differentiation of the central dogmatic figure of the concept of danger and, above all, the information based interventions of the police which have been shifted further and further towards an approach of precaution, the article analyses some important decisions of the Federal Constitutional Court and critically examines some aspects of the development as well as some important clarifications. However, it cannot be overlooked that case law continues to give the legislator very detailed specifications within the framework of the principle of proportionality, which can easily end up in a petrifaction of the circumstances, especially against the background of possible technical developments and possibly increasing needs for prevention. A considered look at the advantages and disadvantages of the future use of new digital investigation tools could open up new possibilities for the legislature beyond the existing solutions.

scholarly journals The Mediation Committee of the Bundestag and Bundesrat: A Special Institution of German Constitutional Law

2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-42
Author(s):  
Claus Koggel
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Political Power ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legislative Process ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Current Case ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Legislative Procedure ◽  
German Constitutional Law

AbstractThe Mediation Committee of the Bundestag and Bundesrat – is it “one of the most felicitous innovations in our constitutional activities”, “the most positive institution in the entire Basic Law” or, as some critics assert “a substitute and superordinate parliament” or indeed the “mysterious darkroom of the legislative process”? This article seeks to provide answers to these questions. It is however clear that the Mediation Committee has become an important instrument for attaining political compromises in Germany's legislative procedure. The Committee's purpose is to find a balance between the differing opinions of the Bundestag and Bundesrat concerning the content of legislation, and, through political mediation and mutual concessions, to find solutions that are acceptable to both sides. Thanks to this approach, the Mediation Committee has helped save countless important pieces of legislation from failure since it was established over 65 years ago, thus making a vital contribution to ensure the legislative process works efficiently. The lecture will address the Mediation Committee's status and role within the German legislative process. It will explain the composition of this body as well as its most important procedural principles also against the backdrop of current case law from the Federal Constitutional Court. Finally, the lecture will consider how particular constellations of political power impact on the Mediation Committee's work.

Der aktive Gesellschafterkreis anwaltlicher Berufsausübungsgesellschaften

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ines Holz
Keyword(s):  
Legal Reform ◽  
Law Firms ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Professional Groups ◽  
Reform Project ◽  
Interprofessional Cooperation ◽  
The Future ◽  
Federal Constitutional

After the Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfG) already declared §§ 59a, 59e, 59f BRAO partially unconstitutional in two decisions in 2014 and 2016 – thus giving new momentum to the discussion on interprofessional cooperation that has been going on for decades – the legislator is now ready to act through a major legal reform to correct these provisions, among others. This thesis is devoted to this aspect of the reform project, namely the question of the extent to which the circle of partners in law firms should be opened up to previously excluded professional groups and how to proceed in the future with regard to the structural majorities (still) prescribed by law.

Verfassungsanalogien – Das Bundesverfassungsgericht an der Grenze der Verfassungsinterpretation

Der Staat ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-41
Author(s):  
Carsten Bäcker
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Sich Eine ◽  
Statutory Interpretation ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Federal Constitutional

Analogien sind methodologisch hoch umstritten; sie bewegen sich an der Grenze der Gesetzesinterpretation. Dem methodologischen Streit um die Analogien unterliegt die Frage nach den Grenzen der Gesetzesinterpretation. In der Rechtsprechung des Bundesverfassungsgerichts finden sich eine Reihe von Verfassungsanalogien. Diese Analogien zum Verfassungsgesetz werden zwar nur selten ausdrücklich als solche bezeichnet, sie finden sich aber in einer Vielzahl von dogmatischen Konstruktionen in der Rechtsprechung – wie etwa der Erweiterung des Grundrechtsschutzes für Deutsche auf EU-Bürger oder der Annahme von Gesetzgebungskompetenzen des Bundes als Annex zu dessen geschriebenen Kompetenzen. Die Existenz derartiger Analogien zum Verfassungsgesetz verlangt nach Antworten auf die Fragen nach den Grenzen der Kompetenz zur Verfassungsinterpretation. Der Beitrag spürt diesen Grenzen nach – und schließt mit der Aufforderung an das Bundesverfassungsgericht, die Annahme von Verfassungsanalogien zu explizieren und die sich darin spiegelnden Annahmen über die Grenzen der Kompetenz zur Verfassungsinterpretation zu reflektieren. Constitutional analogies. The Federal Constitutional Court at the limit of constitutional interpretation From a methodological point of view, the use of analogies in legal argument is highly controversial, for they reach to the limits of statutory interpretation. Underlying the methodological dispute over analogies is the question of what the limits of statutory interpretation are or ought to be. A number of analogies from constitutional law can be found in the case law of the Federal Constitutional Court. Although these analogies to constitutional law are rarely explicitly designated as such, in the case law they can be found in a variety of dogmatic constructions – for example, in the extension of Germans’ fundamental rights protection to EU citizens, or the assumption of legislative powers of the federal state as an appendix to its written powers. The existence of such analogies to constitutional law calls for answers to the question of the limits of the power to interpret the Constitution. It is the aim of this article to trace these limits, and in its conclusion it calls on the Federal Constitutional Court to explicate the adoption of analogies in constitutional law and to reflect on the assumptions found therein – respecting the limits of the power to interpret the Constitution.

Anti-Discrimination Law and Legal Culture in Germany

2019 ◽  
pp. 136-154
Author(s):  
Michael Wrase
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Good Reason ◽  
Legal Culture ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Considerable Influence ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
Federal Constitutional

Drawing on the socio-legal concept of legal culture, this chapter tries to explain the initial objections by many traditionalist legal scholars, politicians, and legal practitioners alike against comprehensive anti-discrimination regulation in Germany. It contrasts the rather weak culture of non-discrimination with a broadly shared appreciation for civil rights fostered by a long-established and extensive adjudication of the Federal Constitutional Court (‘FCC’). It can be shown that the missing national support for the new regulation has led to a very restricted transposition of the EU anti-discrimination directives. The Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz more or less confines itself to implementing the provisions stipulated in the directives, and even contains several shortcomings and potential breaches of EU law, especially with regard the provision of public goods and services. Consequently, mobilization of non-discrimination rights has been rather weak in practice so far. However, there is good reason to conclude that anti-discrimination law has been gaining ground in Germany in recent years, and that it will be even more relevant in future. The ECJ adjudication has exerted considerable influence on the case law of the German labour courts. This might in the longer run also impact on the adjudication of the FCC with regard to the clause on non-discrimination in Article 3 Basic Law.

scholarly journals Beyond the Binary: Towards a Third Sex Category in Germany?

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 627-648 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Dunne ◽  
Jule Mulder
Keyword(s):  
Gender Identity ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Case Note ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Recognition ◽  
The Future ◽  
German Constitutional Court ◽  
Progressive Potential ◽  
Domestic Law

This Case Note discusses the recent judgment of the German Constitutional Court (1 BvR 2019/16) requiring either the legal recognition of sex categories beyond male or female, or the aboltion of sex registration requirements. The Note considers the Court's decision within the broader constitutional case law on gender identity, and explores both the progressive potential, and the future—perhaps unforeseen—consequences, of the ruling. The Case Note proceeds in three sections. Section A introduces the facts of the constitutional challenge, and sets out both the submissions of the complainant, as well as the reasoning of the Constitutional Court. In Section B, the Case Note explores the domestic law novelty of the decision, placing particular emphasis on the application of a constitutional equality framework to persons who experience intersex variance. Finally, in Section C, the Case Note contextualizes the judgment, situating the reasoning of the Constitutional Court within wider movements for transgender—otherwise known as trans—and intersex rights.

scholarly journals La prohibición de partidos políticos en Alemania. Del nuevo criterio de la potencialidad y la reciente reforma constitucional para la no financiación de formaciones antidemocráticas pero constitucionales // The prohibition on political parties in Germany. The new criterion of potentiality and the recent constitutional reform for not funding anti-democratic but constitutional formations

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (102) ◽  
pp. 235
Author(s):  
Pablo Fernández de Casadevante Mayordomo
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
State Funding ◽  
Constitutional Reform ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Implications ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Legislative Framework ◽  
Principle Of Proportionality ◽  
The Right ◽  
New Criterion

Resumen:El año 2017 fue testigo de importantes acontecimientos en relación con el fenómeno de la ideología de ultra derecha en Alemania. Si en enero, el Tribunal Constitucional Federal fallaba en contra de la prohibición del  NPD pese a reconocer el carácter antidemocrático de sus objetivos, en julio entraba en vigor una reforma constitucional para excluir de la financiación estatal a formaciones políticas que, siendo contrarias al orden democrático, no sean objeto de prohibición al carecer del potencial necesario para alcanzar sus objetivos. A modo de colofón, septiembre finalizaba con la celebración de elecciones federales y la entrada de la AfD en el Bundestag como tercera fuerza política. A la luz de todo ello, en el presente trabajo se apuesta por el análisis de las principales implicaciones jurídicas derivadas de dichos hechos, ello con el ánimo de ofrecer al lector una visión actualizada sobre el control jurídico aplicable a la ideología de los partidos políticos en Alemania.Summary1. Introduction. 2. The right of every democratic system to its self-defence. 2.1. Theoretical approach. 2.2. Express intangibility clauses and ideological control. 3. The defense of democracy and political parties in the German legal system. 3.1. The German concept of militant democracy. 3.2. Legal regime applicable to anti-democratic political parties. 3.2.1. Constitutional framework. 3.2.2. Basic legislative framework. 4. The German jurisprudential adaptation to the ECHR conventionality control: the NPD case. 4.1. The necessity test according to the ECHR jurisprudence. 4.2. Potentiality as a substitute for the principle of proportionality. 4.3. Anti-democratic but constitutional. 5. Main observations after the recent constitutional reform. 6. Conclusions. Bibliography.Abstract:2017 witnessed important events in relation to the phenomenon of the right-wing ideology in Germany. First, in January, the Federal Constitutional Court ruled against the prohibition of the NPD, despite recognizing the anti-democratic nature of its objectives; then, in July, a constitutional reform came into effect to exclude from the state funding those political formations that, contravening the democratic order, are not prohibited as they lack the necessary potential to achieve their objectives. To conclude, September ended with the holding of federal elections and the entry of the AfD into the Bundestag, as the country’s third largest force. In light of all this, the present work is committed to the analysis of the main legal implications derived from these events, this with the aim to offer the reader an updated view on the legal control applicable to theideology of political parties in Germany.

scholarly journals Globalization and the Law: Deciphering the Message of Transnational Human Rights Litigation

2004 ◽  
Vol 5 (12) ◽  
pp. 1499-1520 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peer Zumbansen
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Law ◽  
German Federal Constitutional Court ◽  
German Federal Constitutional

On 14 October 2004, theBundesverfassungsgericht(BVerfG – German Federal Constitutional Court) voided a decision by theOberlandesgericht(Higher Regional Court) Naumburg, finding a violation of the complainant's rights guaranteed by theGrundgesetz(German Basic Law). The Decision directly addresses both the observation and application of case law from the European Court of Human Rights under the Basic Law's “rule of law provision” in Art. 20.III. While there is a myriad of important aspects with regard to this decision, we may limit ourselves at this point to the introductoryaperçucontained in the holdings of the case. One of them reads as follows:Zur Bindung an Gesetz und Recht (Art. 20 Abs. 3 GG) gehört die Berücksichtigung der Gewährleistungen der Konvention zum Schutze der Menschenrechte und Grundfreiheiten und der Entscheidungen des Europäischen Gerichtshofs für Menschenrechte im Rahmen methodisch vertretbarer Gesetzesauslegung. Sowohl die fehlende Auseinandersetzung mit einer Entscheidung des Gerichtshofs als auch deren gegen vorrangiges Recht verstoßende schematische “Vollstreckung” können gegen Grundrechte in Verbindung mit dem Rechtsstaatsprinzip verstoßen

scholarly journals Prinsip Proporsionalitas dalam Pengujian Undang-Undang Terhadap UUD NRI 1945 (Studi Perbandingan di Indonesia dan Jerman)

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 1479
Author(s):  
Irene Angelita Rugian
Keyword(s):  
General Principle ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Narrow Sense ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Legal Policy ◽  
Test Norms ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Principle Of Proportionality

AbstractIn several decisions that have been decided by the Mahkamah Konstitusi, some of the judges considerations only test norms with benchmarks contrary to the UUD NRI 1945 or not? However, MK has not tested the basis of the petition itself, there are limitation of rights, open legal policy, and the real harm felt by the petitioner. Therefore, it is necessary to have a principle of proportionality that can be used by judges to assist in deciding cases related to limiting rights and open legal policy. In order to know the concept of the principle of proportionality, it is necessary to conduct a comparative study between Indonesia and Germany by analyzing the concept and development of this principle. The method used is legal research with a statute approach, a case approach, a comparative approach and a conceptual approach. From the results of these studies, it was found that the principle of proportionality in Germany was well conceptualized and developed rapidly. In fact, this principle has become a general principle in the Germany Federal Constitutional Court. Meanwhile in Indonesia, this principle is still unknown and undeveloped like Germany.Keywords: The Principle of Proportionality; Legitimate Aim; Suitability; Neccesity; Balancing in Narrow Sense.AbstrakDalam beberapa putusan yang telah diputus oleh MK, beberapa pertimbangan hakim hanya menguji norma dengan tolak ukur bertentangan dengan UUD NRI 1945 atau tidak? Namun, MK belum menguji sampai kepada dasar dari permohonan itu sendiri, yaitu pembatasan hak, open legal policy, dan kerugian yang nyata dirasakan oleh pemohon. Maka dari itu, perlu adanya prinsip proporsionalitas yang dapat digunakan para hakim untuk membantu memutus perkara yang berkaitan dengan pembatasan hak dan open legal policy. Agar mengetahui konsep dari prinsip proporsionalitas, maka perlu melakukan studi perbandingan antara Indonesia dan Jerman dengan menganalisis konsep dan perkembangan prinsip tersebut. Metode yang digunakan adalah legal research dengan pendekatan statute approach, case approach, comparative approach dan conceptual appoach. Hasil penelitian ditemukan bahwa prinsip proporsionalitas di Jerman telah terkonsep dengan baik dan berkembang dengan pesat. Bahkan prinsip tersebut telah menjadi prinsip umum dalam Germany Federal Constitutional Court. Sedangkan di Indonesia, prinsip tersebut masih belum dikenal oleh MK. Sehingga, proporsionalitas belum memiliki konsep yang jelas dan tidak berkembang seperti negara Jerman.Kata Kunci: Prinsip Proporsionalitas; Legitimate Aim; Suitability; Neccesity; Balancing in Narrow Sense.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document