Federal constitutional court
The Federal Constitutional Court has rejected a complaint by the leftist faction regarding the EU-Canada trade agreement in the Bundestag.
The Federal Constitutional Court has rejected a complaint by the leftist faction regarding the EU-Canada trade agreement in the Bundestag. The parliamentary group was unable to show that Karlsruhe’s decision violated the rights of the Waisestag or the Bundestag on Tuesday. The leftists had complained that the Bundestag had passed only one statement and that there was no law on Sita. (Az. 2 BVE 7/14)
In this statement, in September 2016, the Bundestag, with the votes of the Union and the SPD, allowed the federal government to sign Sita’s provisional application to the European Union Council under certain conditions. The Left viewed Basic Law and thereby violated the BundesTag’s rights themselves, which is why the parliamentary group brought a so-called organ charge before the Federal Constitutional Court. The highest federal court is competent to decide disputes between federal organs about their responsibilities.
The leftist parliamentary group argued that the BundesTag should have obliged the government’s voting behavior in the European Union Council to pre-militarize. This is the only way to ensure that the European Union does not act outside its competencies. It is also unconstitutional that this statement does not specify which areas of the agreement should be exempted from the provisional application.
The Federal Constitutional Court did not follow this line of reasoning. The possible unconstitutional action would be unconstitutional even if the German representative in the council was authorized in advance by a statute to agree on it, it was said to be justified. “Treating constitutional violations by the European Union” is not possible if the EU operates outside its capabilities without prior amendment to the treaties. Therefore, violation of law is dismissed from the beginning due to lack of law.
The Bundestag has also – contrary to complaint – taken responsibility. The MPs must have dealt intensely with Sita. The statement in question has “recognizable requirements for the participation of the federal government in the Council of the European Union”. He also emphasized that Sita’s provisional application “should not be in those areas” which fall under the competence of the Member States.
Ceta regulates the elimination of almost all tariffs between the European Union and Canada. Above all, there is criticism of the fact that conflicts between companies and states have to be resolved before the new arbitral courts. In early October 2016, the Federal Constitutional Court ruled on urgent applications against the agreement. At the time, the judges temporarily allowed German participation under certain conditions.
Among other things, the federal government had to ensure that Germany could leave again. For some time the subject of special dishes was excluded. Following the provisional approval by the European Union Council, the Parliament of the European Union decided on Sita in February 2017. Parts of the agreement came into force temporarily in September 2017.
Once all EU states ratify the agreement, Sita can be fully implemented. Germany is awaiting the decision of Karlsure – the Federal Constitutional Court itself has made more complaints about the settlement, one of which is from the left.
The leftist MP Hunko, who traveled to Karlsruhe to pronounce the verdict, is looking forward to the case. Although he feels that today’s decision is “embarrassing”, he said. “But the main complaint is yet to come.” The main criticism of her party is Sita’s planned special courts. This creates a “parallel justice”.
Elizabeth Winkelmeyer-Baker (CDU), Secretary of Parliamentary State at the Federal Ministry of Economics, saw Tuesday’s decision as a “sign” of how Sita should be evaluated in terms of content. So she was hopeful of further action.
Members of the Bundestag axle spher (SPD) and Philippe Anthor (CDU) also expressed their satisfaction with the decision. The Bundestag “was fully confirmed,” Schfer said. The court made it clear that Parliament carried out its control function, Amthor said.