scholarly journals Soberanía y democracia en el discurso europeo del Tribunal Constitucional alemán : ¿una nueva defensa ad extra de la democracia? = Sovereignty and democracy in the european speech of the Constitutional German Court

2013 ◽  
pp. 259
Author(s):  
Leonardo Álvarez Álvarez
Keyword(s):  
Political Identity ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Court Case ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Constitutional Tradition ◽  
German Federal Constitutional Court ◽  
German Federal Constitutional

Este trabajo se ha propuesto analizar la jurisprudencia del Tribunal Constitucional Federal alemán sobre al proceso de integración europeo. Las categorías de soberanía y democracia, los dos pilares en los que se ha apoyado tradicionalmente su argumentación, se han concebido como cualidades de un ordenamiento nacional. Por ello, la naturaleza, las funciones y límites de la UE se han definido por el Tribunal Constitucional Federal a partir de categorías de derecho interno. Este trabajo ha tratado de demostrar cómo desde la Sentencia sobre el Tratado de Lisboa (2009), se han parecido sentar las bases para definir los conceptos soberanía y democracia, a partir de la tradición constitucional común de los Estados miembros. En definitiva, de lo que modernas escuelas de pensamiento científico denominan un iuspublicum europaeum. Esta transformación metodológica se lleva cabo por el Tribunal Constitucional Federal alemán retornando a la concepción material de democracia presente en su jurisprudencia de los años 50 y 60. Si esta sirvió entonces para construir una democracia militante ad intra frente a los enemigos de la democracia, es posible que pueda servir también ahora para la defensa militante ad extra de la democracia. El respeto de la identidad política alemana impuesta a la UE en la Sentencia Lisboa puede hablar a favor de ello.This paper analyzes the German Federal Constitutional Court case-law about the European integration process. Both concepts of sovereignty and democracy, base of its reasoning, have been constructed as related to a national legal system. Therefore, the nature, functions and limits of the EU has been determined by the BVerfG in relation to state categories. This paper tries to show how since Lisbon’s ruling (2009), the bases for a definition of sovereignty and democracy from the point of view of the common constitutional tradition of Member States may have been established. That’s to say, what modern Schools for Scientific Thought call iuspublicum europaeum. The German Federal Constitutional Court makes this methodological transformation returning to the material concept of democracy established during the 50’s and 60’s. If it was then used in order to construct a militant democracy ad intra against the enemies of democracy, it may be now used to the militant defense ad extra of democracy. The respect for German political identity imposed by Lisbon’s ruling supports this idea.

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 Constitutional Identity and Ultra Vires Review in Germany

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 185-205
Author(s):  
Sven Simon
Keyword(s):  
Detailed Analysis ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
German Federal Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Identity ◽  
German Federal Constitutional ◽  
Insight Into

This article aims to provide insight into the relationship between constitutional identity and ultra vires review in Germany. First, a brief introduction is provided on the issue of the relationship between EU law and national law, then the diverging grounds for validity are presented concerning the interpretation of the CJEU and of the German Federal Constitutional Court. After the detailed analysis of the German case law, limits of a national reservation are scrutinised. In the end, a conclusion is drawn up.

Neue verfassungsrechtliche Vorgaben für die Steuerpolitik – Ordnungspolitische Einordnung und wirtschaftspolitische Relevanz

1997 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Johann Eekhoff ◽  
Axel Wehmeier
Keyword(s):  
Tax Reform ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Tax System ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Economic Point ◽  
General Rules ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
German Federal Constitutional Court ◽  
German Federal Constitutional

AbstractThe article discusses recent judgements of the German Federal Constitutional Court concerning the German tax system. In a landmark decision from June 26, 1995, the judges not only ruled the former German wealth and inheritage unconstitutionally, but also put forward general rules to prevent excessive taxation. Though this ruling constitutes a further market orientation of the constitutional law, several inconsistencies are criticized by the authors from an economic point of view. However, policy makers have to accept the judgements as new restrictions on tax policy. Regarding the discussion about a German tax reform some of the current proposals appear to be unconstitutional. In order to avoid such conflicts with the law the authors advocate a consumption based tax.

Casenote –– Euro Rescue Package Case: The German Federal Constitutional Court Protects the Principle of Parliamentary Budget

2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (11) ◽  
pp. 2071-2075 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Recker
Keyword(s):  
Financial Aid ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Federal Republic Of Germany ◽  
European Monetary ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
German Federal Constitutional Court ◽  
German Federal Constitutional

In its Aid Measures for Greece and Euro Rescue Package case, the German Federal Constitutional Court affirmed the Parliament's budget authority to provide financial aid measures to the European Monetary Union. The judgment conforms to the German Federal Constitutional Court's case law concerning the transfer of sovereign power to international organizations and reaffirms that German participation in international organizations is linked to constitutive pillars of the German Basic Law. One of these pillars is the Principle of Parliamentary Budget. This principle provides that any financial aid package has to be approved by the Parliament of the Federal Republic of Germany (Bundestag) before guarantees can be given to other states by the Federal Government. In its holding, the German Federal Constitutional Court ruled that the aid measures for Greece and the euro rescue package were consistent with the Principle of Parliamentary Budget and German Basic Law.

Do Lawyers Knead the Dough? – How Law, Chaos, and Uncertainty Interact

2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 371-381
Author(s):  
Thomas Burri
Keyword(s):  
Complex Systems ◽  
Chaos Theory ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
European Court ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Law ◽  
German Federal Constitutional Court ◽  
German Federal Constitutional

This article deals with complex systems. It takes the reader on a journey to the origins of the paradigm shift which has taken place in the sciences since the path breaking works of Edward N. Lorenz, Benoît B. Mandelbrot, Mitchell J. Feigenbaum, and others. Gradually, linear “twodimensional” thinking has been replaced by non-linear “multi-dimensional” reasoning and multi-factorial genesis, risk, and uncertainty have come into focus. The article looks at the beginnings of the conception of complex systems — chaos theory — and reveals the implications for the law and legal science. Having explained the premises of chaos theory by means of a metaphor (the kneading of dough) the article proposes to look at the law through the lens of chaos: the law, especially case law, is perceived as a system which is itself subject to the phenomenon of chaos. The power of the image of chaos is illustrated by means of a study of the case law of the European Court of Justice on family reunification of moving persons and its projection to Switzerland in an attempt to create parallel regimes. The article also takes advantage of chaos theory to portray the broader implications for society and the law, tentatively illustrating them by thoughts on the Lisbon judgment of the German Federal Constitutional Court of 30 June 2009 and on UN Security Council Resolution 1244 of 10 June 1999 (on Kosovo).

scholarly journals The German Federal Constitutional Court's Ruling on Outright Monetary Transactions (OMT) – Another Step towards National Closure?

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 329-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dagmar Schiek
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
German Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Impact ◽  
German Federal Constitutional Court ◽  
German Federal Constitutional

The German Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) ruling of 14 January 2014 deserves a thorough evaluation on several accounts: It is the first ever reference by the FCC to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), it represents a continuation of FCC case law aimed at restricting the impact of European Union law as interpreted by the Court of Justices of the European Union (CJEU) on German law as well as questioning Germany's participation in an ever closer European Union, and it has the potential to dictate the future course of the EU's Economic and Monetary Union (EMU).

scholarly journals THE CONTINUING MYTH OF EURO-SCEPTICISM? THE GERMAN FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURT TWO YEARS AFTER LISBON

2012 ◽  
Vol 61 (3) ◽  
pp. 665-695 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beke Zwingmann
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Positive Influence ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Practical Support ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
High Level ◽  
German Constitutional Law ◽  
German Federal Constitutional Court ◽  
German Federal Constitutional

AbstractThe German Federal Constitutional Court's 2009 decision on the Lisbon Treaty immediately provoked passionate criticisms and revived the Court's image of the Eurosceptic par excellence. However, if one uses the Court's general case law on the interaction between European law and German constitutional law—in particular the Mangold follow-up (Re Honeywell) and the EURO bailout decision—as a background for analysis, a high level of practical support becomes apparent, that is quite the opposite to the all-out war some commentators predicted. It also illustrates how the Lisbon principles can be used to exert a positive influence on the European integration process.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document