Federal Constitutional Court: Federal emergency brake was constitutional | tagesschau.de

The Federal Constitutional Court assessed the federal government’s contact and exit restrictions from the spring of this year as proportionate. Complaints against the “Federal Emergency Brake” were rejected.

According to a decision by the Federal Constitutional Court, the federal emergency brake to contain the corona pandemic was not an inadmissible interference with fundamental rights. The Karlsruhe judges declared today that exit and contact restrictions “as a whole served life and health protection” and the maintenance of the health system. The prohibition of face-to-face teaching did not violate the right to school education either.

The judges admit that the measures significantly interfered with various fundamental rights. The Federal Constitutional Court examined the measures. “According to this, the contact and even the exit restrictions to be assessed here in the extreme danger of the pandemic were compatible with the Basic Law.”

Decisions should have a guiding character

The federal emergency brake expired at the end of June, but the Karlsruhe decisions are likely to have a leading role. Court President Stephan Harbarth recently said on ZDF that it was about “a certain law at a certain point in time.” However, the detailed explanations would usually result in “hints for follow-up questions that will arise, for example for upcoming pandemics or for measures in the current pandemic for the coming months.”

With the emergency brake, the federal government wanted to ensure that the same measures take effect everywhere as soon as the corona situation in a region worsens. It had to be drawn automatically since April 24, if the so-called seven-day incidence in a district or an urban district exceeded 100 on three consecutive days. The value indicates how many new infections per 100,000 inhabitants there were within a week.

Contact restrictions above a certain incidence value

Among other things, it was planned that at night between 10 p.m. and 5 a.m., apart from a few exceptions, nobody was allowed to be outside. People from one household were only allowed to meet with one other person and their children up to the age of 14. Schools were required to switch to alternating lessons from the threshold value 100, so some of the students had to stay at home. From a seven-day incidence of 165 onwards, face-to-face teaching was completely prohibited. There were exceptions here as well.

The introduction of the emergency brake triggered a wave of lawsuits at the Federal Constitutional Court. Because the measures were prescribed directly by federal law, the detour via the administrative courts was no longer necessary. By the second half of August, the Constitutional Court had received more than 300 constitutional complaints and urgent motions.

The judges of the responsible First Senate rejected urgent motions against the most controversial measures such as the nocturnal exit restrictions in May. However, they emphasized that the outcome of the main proceedings was still open.

In order to be able to conclude the proceedings more quickly, the Senate had waived a hearing. Comments were requested from experts from a wide variety of specialist areas, such as virologists, intensive care physicians and paediatricians.

(Az. 1 BvR 781/21 et al.)