MeterAfter February 5, 2020, Thuringia is still very busy. At that time, the CDU, Liberal Democratic Party and AfD appointed Thomas Kemmerich as Prime Minister. The election of DPP politicians triggered a political crisis in the state, and its end is still far away. From a legal point of view, there are still some things that need to be resolved since the AfD has resorted to the Federal Constitutional Court.The party defends itself Angela Merkel Comment on the incident. On Wednesday, the judges of the Second Senate will negotiate the lawsuit.
after this Kemmerich After being elected, the Prime Minister from South Africa spoke. There, she was a guest of President Cyril Ramaphosa. Merkel said that before the actual press conference, she wanted to make a “preliminary comment” for “domestic political reasons.” Then these sentences: “The election of this prime minister is a unique process that breaks the basic belief of the CDU and me that the majority of seats should not be won with the help of AfD.
Since this is foreseeable in the constellation of the third vote, it must be said that this process is inexcusable and therefore the result must be reversed. At least for the CDU, the CDU is not allowed to participate in the government led by the elected prime minister. This is a bad day for democracy. The statement was posted on both the Prime Minister’s website and the Federal Government website.
AfD successfully sued Seehofer
Some people think this violates the federal decentralization; in addition, Merkel cannot make any rules for the CDU regional associations-she has given up her position as chairman of the party two months ago.This AfD Believed that the Prime Minister had violated his duty of neutrality This is a manifestation of equal opportunities between political parties. Therefore, state agencies are obliged to maintain neutrality in political competition.
Since 1976, the most recent time was last summer, the Federal Constitutional Court has often emphasized the importance of equal opportunities. At that time, AfD also filed a lawsuit. The party uses tools that condemn the lack of neutrality as an important tool to “expose” what it considers to be a “pathological system.” She turned to the court, otherwise she would attack the court.
The lawsuit won by AfD last summer was against a statement by the Federal Secretary of the Interior Horst Sihofer (CSU). In an interview, he described the party as “destroying the country.” In their ruling, the constitutional judge emphasized that the duty of neutrality is rooted in democratic principles: democratic legitimacy can only convey elections and votes when they are free.
State agencies must remain neutral
This not only requires free voting, but voters must also be able to form their own judgments in the process of freedom and openness. Contracting parties are crucial. Therefore, they must participate in political competition on an equal footing. Therefore, state agencies with more resources must remain neutral; the same applies to individual members of the government.
The decisive question for the court is whether government members have made statements when they “perform” their government duties.In practice, this distinction is difficult because members Federal government At the same time, he is also a party politician who must participate in the struggle for opinions. In view of this dual role, some constitutional lawyers warn against overly Kantian principles. High-level politicians must also protect themselves from growing hostility.
Karlsruhe thinks so too. However, if the top politician exercises government office, the judge will assume a reasonable asymmetry: the opposition may therefore be particularly aggressive, and the government is obliged to act in a strict manner. For the Constitutional Court, what matters is whether the minister uses resources from his office or refers to them in other ways. Seehofer’s interview was published on the ministry’s website.
AfD has now added several pictures to its complaint to illustrate the official characteristics of the South African National Reception. In contrast, the federal government pointed out that Merkel clearly made “preliminary comments” before the actual press conference of the state visit.
