Federal Constitutional Court
What the ruling on the federal emergency brake means for the Corona winter
Desolate: This is how it looked at the beginning of the night curfew on Odeonsplatz in Munich
© Sven Hoppe / DPA
The Federal Constitutional Court has dismissed several lawsuits against Corona restrictions in the spring and has basically backed politics. But that does not mean a free ticket in the fight against the pandemic.
The Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe dismissed several lawsuits against the most important corona restrictions as part of the so-called federal emergency brake in the spring and supported politicians in the fight against the pandemic. Specifically, the judges decided in two cases that the measures such as the exit and contact blocks and the controversial school closings were constitutional.
But what does that mean for future measures? Are hard lockdowns possible again in the future? There is no general answer to the question. It depends on the type of restriction, but the decisions from Karlsruhe are not a free ticket for all possible measures.
Political struggle for interpretation
Basically, what the legal expert Prof. Anna Katharina Mangold said days ago in the “Constitution blog“stated:” The constitutional assessment of individual measures or control ordinances depends on a number of factors: the structure of the norm, the local individual case and the basic rights involved. “So it always depends on the individual case. Courts repeatedly conceded individual measures like that Ban on accommodation or curfew in individual federal states.
In politics, the struggle for the interpretation began immediately after the notification of the Federal Constitutional Court. The executive head of the Chancellery, Helge Braun (CDU), saw himself strengthened in his demands before the federal-state consultations and called for a further emergency brake: “We now need an emergency brake that works nationwide according to uniform rules that are comprehensible to the citizens,” said Braun German press agency in Berlin. “The judgment makes it clear that binding nationwide action is possible in the corona crisis. And I add: In the current, difficult situation it is also necessary.” Bavaria’s Prime Minister Markus Söder (CSU) sees it the same way. He wrote on Twitter: “This is the basis for a new federal emergency brake. We have to act quickly now.”
Greens welcome decision
The green health expert Janosch Dahmen also welcomed the decisions of the Federal Constitutional Court. The verdict gives legal certainty for additional protective measures in order to now consistently fight the fourth wave, wrote the Bundestag member on Twitter. It would be necessary to implement further measures quickly. “We need a uniform partial lockdown in many regions of the country,” said Dahmen previously to the German press agency. This does not mean general, but targeted closings where the situation is out of control. “Schools and daycare centers should be equipped with masks and daily However, tests should remain open as possible. “
For unvaccinated people there should be contact restrictions in private as in the first lockdown, demanded Dahmen. In addition to access rules only for vaccinated and convalescent (2G) and for vaccinated, convalescent and tested (3G) in shops, work and traffic, catering, bars, discos and the prohibition of larger events are necessary – including the audience at Bundesliga games.
FDP is “disappointed”
FDP politicians see it differently. Interior expert Konstantin Kuhle points out the differences in the pandemic situation today and at the time of the introduction of the federal emergency brake: “The fact that the legislature was allowed to introduce exit restrictions in April 2021 does not mean that the legislature must introduce exit restrictions in December 2021,” wrote the Member of the Bundestag on Twitter. FDP Vice Wolfgang Kubicki has expressed disappointment with the judgment of the Federal Constitutional Court on the so-called Corona emergency brake.