Öffentliche Sicherheit und Freiheit

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Chr. van Ooyen
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Public Security ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
State Of Emergency ◽  
Process Of Change ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Out Of Area ◽  
Right Wing Extremism

From ‘11th September’ to ‘the coronavirus pandemic’, public security has been subject to a rapid process of change: the separation of internal and external security is being eroded, and police and criminal law are being Europeanised and internationalised. The concepts of ‘security states’, ‘friend and foe law’ and ‘a state of emergency’ are endangering freedom. In addition to the threat posed by Islamism, right-wing extremism, which has been increasing for years, has turned into neo-Nazi terrorism. Our allegedly strong democracy is proving to be both brittle and yet, at the same time, necessary for an open (immigrant) society, and security agencies are not unimpeachable. The 3rd redesigned and expanded edition of this book addresses the following points, with special references to political theory and rulings by the Federal Constitutional Court: Security and freedom in a ‘state of emergency’ Security and an open society New security and ‘friend and foe law’ Security, immigration and democracy Terrorism (Right-wing) extremism and bans on political parties Europeanisation of security Out-of-area deployment of the German military and in police situations Internationalisation of criminal justice

Federal Constitutional Court Issues Temporary Injunction in the NPD Party Ban Case

2001 ◽  
Vol 2 (13) ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Democratic Party ◽  
German Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Federal States ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Political Sector ◽  
Temporary Injunction

German Law Journal reported last November on the German Government's plans to take the extraordinary move of seeking a constitutional ban of the extreme right-wing National Democratic Party of Germany. At the end of January, 2001, the Federal Government filed its motion for a ban of the NPD with the Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe. At the end of March, 2001, the Bundestag (Federal Parliament) and the Bundesrat (Federal Legislative Chamber of the States) followed with separate motions. The Federal Constitutional Court now has before it three separate actions, raising distinct claims and presenting distinct evidence, seeking the constitutional excommunication of the NPD. The motions present a unified front from every political sector of the German constitutional order: the executive, the legislature and the Länder (federal states). This lock-step approach to the effort to ban the NPD was part of the master-scheme of Federal Interior Minister Otto Schily, who pressed hard to gain support for the move to seek a ban from all mainstream political parties and all the Länder, at least in part to limit the political fall-out in the case that the Constitutional Court finds against the motions.

Federal Constitutional Court To Review NPD Party Ban Motion

2001 ◽  
Vol 2 (17) ◽  
Author(s):  
Felix Hanschmann
Keyword(s):  
Democratic Party ◽  
German Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Extreme Right ◽  
German Government ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
Short Survey ◽  
Federal Constitutional

As already reported by German Law Journal, the German Government, the Bundestag (Federal Parliament) as well as the Bundesrat (Federal Legislative Chamber of the Länder) filed motions with the Bundesverfassungsgericht (FCC; Federal Constitutional Court) seeking a constitutional ban of the extreme right-wing National Democratic Party of Germany (NPD). Now, some eight, respectively six months, after filing the motions for a constitutional order of the NPD's dissolution, the banning of all of party activities and the confiscation of the party's property, the FCC decided on October 1st, 2001, that the motions were admissible. The following annotation discusses the meaning of the Court's decision to admit the motions, provoding a brief account of what the decision says and what — just as interesting — it does not say. It will also report on the course of events and developments that have taken place during the stretch of time between the filing of the applications and the Court's ruling of October 1. Finally this report will provide, leaving aside speculations as to possible results of the process, a short survey of the legal possibilities that are open to the NPD, once the FCC in Karlsruhe grants the motions and declares the party unconstitutional.

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.

FCC suspends hearing in NPD Party Ban Case

2002 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Hanebeck
Keyword(s):  
Democratic Party ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Legal Questions ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Subject ◽  
High Ranking Official ◽  
Senior Civil Servant ◽  
Basic Order

In a unanimous, surprising decision the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) announced last Tuesday, 22 January 2002, that the hearing in the NPD Party Ban Case - scheduled for five days in early and late February - was suspended. The Court did not yet set a new date. The Court explained that facts had now become known to the Court that raised serious legal questions which can not be resolved in the two weeks before the scheduled hearings. Even the decision from October 1st, 2001, in which the motions by the Bundesregierung (German Federal Government), the Bundestag (Federal Par-liament) and the Bundesrat (Federal Legislative Chamber of the Länder) seeking a ban of the extremist right wing National Democratic Party (NPD) were ruled to be admissible and not evidently unfounded is called into question by the Court. The FCC had been told by a senior civil servant from the Federal Ministry of the Interior that there would be one so-called “V-Mann” among the 14 people to appear as witnesses before the FCC at the scheduled hearing. The motions to ban the NPD build upon numerous sources in order to show that the NPD seeks to undermine or abolish the “freiheitliche demokratische Grundordnung” (free democratic basic order) and therefore must be banned under Art. 21 (2) of the German Basic Law (“Grundgesetz. Among those quoted is the V-Mann, Wolfgang Frenz, a former high-ranking official of the NPD. The rather drastic reaction by the FCC to these news is explained by the significance of the information about the V-Mann, an often dubious source (infra I.) and the way this information made its way to the Court, which is a scandal in itself (infra II.). The fallout from the decision will be the subject of the closing remarks (infra III.).

scholarly journals FORMS OF EXTREMISM IN THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY

2020 ◽  
pp. 25-31
Author(s):  
Nadezhda G. Geymbukh ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Federal Republic ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Federal Republic Of Germany ◽  
Left Wing ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
The People ◽  
Democratic State ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Stability

Representatives of German state (constitutional) law define political extremism as "a set of political beliefs and aspirations... which are aimed at denying the democratic constitutional state and its fundamental values". Based on the definition, the criterion for recognising any "political belief or aspiration" as extremist is the notion of a democratic constitutional state. In line with this, the Federal Constitutional Court of the Federal Republic of Germany has given an expansive interpretation of a "free democratic state" that "constitutes a legal state order whose basis is the self-determination of the people according to the will of the majority, freedom and equality. It excludes all forms of despotism or arbitrariness. Among the basic principles of this order are at least: the protection of human rights as laid down in the Basic Law of Germany, the sovereignty of the people, the separation of powers, the responsibility of the government, the legitimacy of government, the independence of the judiciary and the principle of multi-partyism. According to article 21, paragraph 2 of the Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany (1949), political parties that "endeavour to harm or destroy the foundation of the free demo-cratic order or to endanger the existence of the Federal Republic of Germany" are declared unconstitutional by the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany. The possibility to ban political parties as provided for in the Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany guarantees the development of a democratic political system of the state. It is worth emphasising that the stability and democratism of the German political system and the stability of the constitutional order in the state depend not only on the prohibition provision in the Basic Law of the FRG, but above all on the ability of political parties to reach agreement on the basic principles of a "free democratic state system" and to implement these principles in the minds of the people. To realise these goals, Germany has the Federal Office for the Protection of the Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany of 1949, a public authority whose task is to control and supervise the legality of the activities of political parties. The forms of extremism in the Federal Republic of Germany are "left-wing extremism" and "right-wing extremism". In right-wing extremism, the older generation is gradually being freed from the aggressive youth, in an increased willingness to use force. Left-wing extremism has become less focused on global global themes - it has become more local and regional, more relatable and at the same time integrated. Because of the new nature of the development of extremism in a united Germany a left-right antagonism has emerged. At the same time, different tendencies of West and East Germany can be observed: in West Germany the struggle "left vs. right" prevails, in East Germany the struggle "right vs. left" prevails.

scholarly journals El sistema electoral en Alemania a examen

2020 ◽  
pp. 479
Author(s):  
Yolanda Fernández Vivas
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Reference Model ◽  
Electoral System ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Reforms ◽  
Allocation Procedure ◽  
The World ◽  
El Sistema ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Seat Allocation

El trabajo que aquí presentamos es un análisis del sistema electoral alemán, que se caracteriza por ser un modelo de referencia en el mundo, al combinar elementos del sistema mayoritario y proporcional y en el que se presta especial atención al procedimiento de elaboración de candidaturas en el seno de los partidos políticos. Además, se analizan las últimas reformas efectuadas en el procedimiento de asignación de escaños y la labor desempeñada por el Tribunal Constitucional federal en la delimitación del sistema.This paper analyzes the German electoral system, which is characterized by being a reference model in the world, combining elements of both majority and proportional systems and in which the candidates` nomination within political parties is especially relevant. In addition, there is an analysis of the latest legal reforms that affected the seat allocation procedure and the influence of the Federal Constitutional Court in the delimitation of the whole system.

„Der Staat ist von Verfassungs wegen nicht gehindert..."

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Chr. van Ooyen ◽  
Martin H. W. Möllers
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Domestic Security ◽  
Federal Constitutional

A problematic ‘German constant’ can be observed in the Federal Constitutional Court: It is the ‘Staat’ (state) as a sovereign political entity. And it is the ‘Volk’ (people) as a homogeneous community. The Constitutional Court’s political theory—so the thesis goes—‘oscillates’ between a liberal and pluralistic conception of citizens, constitution and society and a national and identitarian form of statism. In this book, this is exemplified by: the theories of constitution and democracy that are represented, fundamental rights in relation to domestic security, European integration, foreign policy and the emergency constitutional law as a result of 9/11 and the coronavirus pandemic

scholarly journals The Federal Constitutional Court in the German Political System

1994 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 470-491 ◽  
Author(s):  
DONALD P. KOMMERS
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Political System ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Parliamentary Democracy ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Guardian ◽  
German Court

The Federal Constitutional Court is an important policy-making institution in the German political system. As the guardian of the Basic Law, the Constitutional Court has played a critical role in umpiring the federal system, resolving conflicts among branches of the national government, overseeing the process of parliamentary democracy, monitoring the financing of political parties, and reviewing restrictions on basic rights and liberties. In each of these areas, the Court's decisions have shaped the contours of German life and politics. Its influence is fully the equal of that of the Supreme Court in American politics. Despite its “activist” record of nullifying laws favored by legislative majorities, the German Court has managed to retain its institutional independence as well as the trust of the general public.

Campaign and Party Finance in the West German “Party State”

1988 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur B. Gunlicks
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
The United States ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Public Financing ◽  
Business Interests ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Party State ◽  
Billboard Advertising

In contrast to the United States, where there is little or no public financing of parties and candidates below the presidential level, the German “party state” grants generous subsidies in a variety of forms to the political parties, though not to individual candidates. The German Basic Law (constitution), various laws passed by the national and Land (state) parliaments, and the Federal Constitutional Court have been important factors in the development of a complex and costly system of public financing for election campaigns, parliamentary parties and party foundations and for free television and radio time and billboard advertising space. In addition, the federal government incurs large tax expenditures through the encouragement of tax deductible contributions to political parties. In spite of the crucial role which public financing has assumed, recent scandals have occurred involving illegal contributions from business interests. A revised party law of 1984 and a Federal Constitutional Court decision in July 1986 have brought about significant changes, but controversy in Germany over public financing and the impact of recent reforms continues.

Calibrating Liberty and Security: Federal Constitutional Court Rules on Freedom of Speech in PKK Case

2002 ◽  
Vol 3 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan Wielsch
Keyword(s):  
Free Speech ◽  
Democratic Party ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
September 11Th ◽  
The Core ◽  
Preventative Measures ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
The One

In a recently published decision the Bundesverfassungsgericht (BVerfG – Federal Constitutional Court) was concerned with the basic right of free speech of PKK sympathizers. The decision draws a fine line between, on the one hand, preventative measures which aim to inhibit radical associations and, on the other hand, the protection of free speech which lies at the core of democracy. The Court's decision touches upon the debate about security triggered by the events of September 11th and Germany's proactive stance towards right-wing radicalism, characterized by the Court's present consideration of an application to ban the extreme right-wing National demokratischen Partei Deutschlands (NPD – National Democratic Party of Germany).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document