scholarly journals The German Constitutional Court’s PSPP Judgment: Impediment and Impetus for the Democratization of Europe

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 1090-1103
Author(s):  
Isabel Feichtner
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Monetary Policy ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Procedural Requirement

AbstractThe article explores the understandings of democracy underlying the judgment and its implications for the democratization of Europe. I read the judgement, critically, as impediment and, constructively, as impetus for the democratization of money and society. Firstly, I recount how the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) through the construction of a “right to democracy” and the concepts of “ultra vires act” and “integration responsibility” asserted its jurisdiction over the limits of European integration. The court’s reasoning prompts me to understand the judgment not as a defense of democracy, but rather as an instance of upholding a “rule of law” that impedes the democratization of society. Secondly, I turn to the pronouncements on the demarcation of monetary from economic competences by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the FCC. I explain what I hold to be the weaknesses in the FCC’s critique of the CJEU from a doctrinal perspective. I then propose to read the PSPP judgment constructively as introducing a procedural requirement that may democratize monetary policy. Thirdly, I situate my reading of the judgment in the larger debate on the democratization of society and, more specifically, money.

Public Sector Purchase Programme (PSPP) Case

2021 ◽  
Vol 192 ◽  
pp. 451-511
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Central ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
German Federal Constitutional Court ◽  
German Federal Constitutional

451Economics, trade and finance — European Monetary Union — Fiscal sovereignty — Public debt — Monetary policy — Economic policy — European Union — Asset purchase programme — Quantitative easing — Central banks — European Central Bank — European System of Central Banks — BundesbankTreaties — Treaty-making powers — Constitutional limitations on treaty-making powers — Transfers of powers by States to intergovernmental and other transnational authorities — Whether compatible with constitutional prerogatives of national parliament — Overall budgetary responsibility — Basic Law of GermanyInternational organizations — European Union — Powers — Member States as masters of the treaties — Principle of conferral — Whether Union having competence to determine or extend its own powers — Principle of subsidiarity — Court of Justice of the European UnionRelationship of international law and municipal law — European Union law — Interpretation — Application — Judgment of Court of Justice of the European Union — Weiss — Principle of proportionality — Whether application of EU law having absolute primacy — Whether German Federal Constitutional Court having absolute duty to follow judgment of Court of Justice of the European Union — Compatibility with Basic Law of Federal Republic of Germany — Openness of German Basic Law to European integration — Whether purchase programme ultra vires — Whether ultra vires acts applicable in Germany — Whether having binding effect in relation to German constitutional organsJurisdiction — European Union institutions — Whether jurisdiction of German Federal Constitutional Court extending to Court of Justice of the European Union and European Central Bank — Whether acts of EU institutions subject to national constitutional review — Ultra vires review — Review of core identity of national constitution — Whether application of EU law having absolute primacy — Whether absolute duty to follow judgment of Court of Justice of the European Union — The law of Germany

Questions and Answers: Karlsruhe's Referral for a Preliminary Ruling to the Court of Justice of the European Union

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karsten Schneider
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Past ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Questions And Answers ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
German Bundestag

In the environment of ongoing endeavors to “rescue” the Euro, the Second Senate of the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) is meanwhile dealing with several constitutional complaints challenging matters that could be described as “the future of the German Bundesbank” and “the present and the past of the German Federal Government and the German Bundestag.” Or, to be more specific, the complainants currently challenge the prospective participation of the German Bundesbank in possible future implementations of the so called “OMT Framework” of 6 September 2012. They also argue that the German Federal Government and the German Bundestag “failed to act” regarding this OMT framework.

scholarly journals Euro-sceptical or Euro-phile? A critical analysis of the jurisprudence of the German Federal Constitutional Court on the process of European integration and decision-making

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Bernadette Sangmeister
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
German Federal Constitutional Court ◽  
German Federal Constitutional

<p>On 14 January 2014, for the first time in its history, the German Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) decided to refer a decision to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). This referral, which concerned the issue of the legality of the European Central Bank’s bond-buying practices, must be seen as “historic” with regard to European integration and the relationship between European Union law and German constitutional law, forming part of important decisions of the FCC in this field since its first euro-critical judgment, Solange I, 40 years ago. Considering the high influence the German Federal Constitutional Court has had on the process of European integration, this paper aims at identifying and critiquing the lines of argumentation developed by the FCC in recent years in the field of European integration and decision-making before and after the Lisbon judgment in 2009, paying particular attention to the currently suspended OMT Decision proceedings in order to answer the question if a shift in the jurisprudence of the FCC from a euro-sceptical to a euro-phile approach has taken place.</p>

scholarly journals «La integración europea a través del derecho». La contribución del Tribunal Constitucional Federal (alemán)

2017 ◽  
pp. 103
Author(s):  
Andreas Vosskuhle
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
European Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
National Parliaments ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Law ◽  
German Federal Constitutional Court ◽  
German Federal Constitutional

Muchos actores están involucrados en la implementación de la idea de comunidad jurídica, entre ellos, los parlamentos nacionales, administraciones y tribunales internos que son responsables de la puesta en práctica del Derecho de la Unión Europea. En este estudio se aborda la labor del Tribunal Constitucional Federal Alemán en el desarrollo de la integración europea considerando diez impulsos centrales. Además, para finalizar, se aportarán algunas reflexiones realistas sobre las limitaciones del derecho en la solución de vicisitudes en el marco de la Unión Europea.Many stakeholders are involved in implementing the idea of legal community, including national parliaments, administrations and courts, which for their part are responsible for the implementation of European law. This study addresses the work of the German Federal Constitutional Court in the development of European integration by considering ten central impulses. In addition, to conclude, some realistic reflections on the limitations of the law in the solution of vicissitudes in the framework of the European Union will be provided.

Das Karlsruher PSPP-Urteil – ein Corona-Jahr danach

IG ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 227-234
Author(s):  
Peter-Christian Müller-Graff
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Reference Procedure ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Future ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Impact

This article scrutinizes the impact of the widely criticized PSPP-judgement of the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) on the Union´s legal order. It shows that the European Commission´s opening of an infringement procedure was inevitable due to the FCC´s disregard of the rules of the preliminary reference procedure, denies the necessity of a modification of the Union´s judicial architecture and develops recommendations for the future loyal cooperation between the FCC and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in handling such disputes.

scholarly journals DYNAMICS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN UKRAINE AND THE EU: PROSPECTS AND NEW CHALLENGES

2020 ◽  
pp. 17-27
Author(s):  
I. Berezovska
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Integration Policy ◽  
Association Agreement ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Main Challenge ◽  
The Eu

The entry into force of the Association Agreement with the European Union was a fateful event for the contemporary history of Ukraine. Currently, both components of the association: political one, which consists in spreading European values to Ukraine, and economic one, which involves Ukraine's integration into the EU internal market in exchange for legislation approximation, are without exaggeration fundamental factors for further development of Ukraine. The results of the previous years of the Association Agreement implementation testify to both significant achievements and a number of problems in Ukraine's fulfillment of its association with the EU “homework”. The article is devoted to the analysis of dynamics and the recent trends in the process of the Agreement implementation. As a result of the political changes that took place in Ukraine in 2019, including the election of a new president, parliament and government, European integration work on the implementation of the Association Agreement began in the new conditions. The improvement of the national institutional mechanism designed to ensure better coordination of work on the implementation of the Agreement between the competent authorities is among the positive trends in the process of its implementation. The fundamental legal principles and basic directions of work on Agreement updating are analyzed. It is proved that the prospect of updating has become an effective impetus to improve implementation processes. By initiating such an update, in order to strengthen its position in the negotiations with the EU, the Ukrainian side is forced to objectively assess the effectiveness of the Agreement implementation in certain areas and to intensify the completion of processes that are significantly behind. A new challenge in the process of implementing the Association Agreement was the emergence of the pandemic factor in 2020. The introduction of national quarantine and the incidence rate have significantly shifted priorities and affected European integration processes, both within Ukraine and at the EU level. At the same time, it was stressed that the situation to ensure the Rule of law, in particular, the fight against corruption is the main challenge not only to obligations fulfillment under the agreement, but also to the entire European integration policy of Ukraine. It is noted that the decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine to repeal a significant part of anti-corruption legislation threatens the further integration of Ukraine with the EU. It was stressed that the future of not only Ukraine but also the region as a whole depends on whether the Association Agreement with the European Union will continue to serve as a transformational force capable of overcoming the weakness of the Rule of law within the country.

scholarly journals Euro-sceptical or Euro-phile? A critical analysis of the jurisprudence of the German Federal Constitutional Court on the process of European integration and decision-making

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Bernadette Sangmeister
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
German Federal Constitutional Court ◽  
German Federal Constitutional

<p>On 14 January 2014, for the first time in its history, the German Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) decided to refer a decision to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). This referral, which concerned the issue of the legality of the European Central Bank’s bond-buying practices, must be seen as “historic” with regard to European integration and the relationship between European Union law and German constitutional law, forming part of important decisions of the FCC in this field since its first euro-critical judgment, Solange I, 40 years ago. Considering the high influence the German Federal Constitutional Court has had on the process of European integration, this paper aims at identifying and critiquing the lines of argumentation developed by the FCC in recent years in the field of European integration and decision-making before and after the Lisbon judgment in 2009, paying particular attention to the currently suspended OMT Decision proceedings in order to answer the question if a shift in the jurisprudence of the FCC from a euro-sceptical to a euro-phile approach has taken place.</p>

scholarly journals Against Bidimensional Supremacy in EU Constitutionalism

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 1006-1022
Author(s):  
Vlad Perju
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Popular Sovereignty ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Subjective Bias ◽  
German Federal Constitutional Court ◽  
German Federal Constitutional

AbstractScholarly consensus sees EU supremacy as “necessarily bidimensional”: the supranational dimension necessarily stands alongside the national dimension, which rejects the absolute and unconditional supremacy of EU law. I argue that this view of bidimensional supremacy is conceptually flawed and descriptively inaccurate. On the conceptual side, I identify the fallacy of symmetry (the idea that national and supranational perspectives on supremacy are similar in nature and equally reductionist), the fallacy of selection (the view that bidimensionalism alone can overcome what it perceives as an inevitable subjective bias in the choice between national and supranational supremacy claims), and the fallacy of construction (an originally shared popular sovereignty theory, which turns out to be riddled with biases that disrupt the equilibrium within the internally divided sovereign). On the interpretative side, I suggest that the empirical evidence in support of bidimensional supremacy is weaker than it is generally assumed. I then offer an interpretation of the PSPP judgment of the German Federal Constitutional Court, which holds a judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union to be ultra vires, unlawful and thus non-binding. PSPP presents a problem of German origins and cast, rather than one stemming from the inner structure of EU constitutionalism. At most, PSPP represents a contingent, rather than necessary, and thus unexceptional instance of bidimensional supremacy.

Rebel Without a Good Cause: Karlsruhe's Misguided Attempt to Draw the CJEU into a Game of “Chicken” and What the CJEU Might do About It

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mattias Kumm
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Central ◽  
Game Of Chicken ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Good Cause

When the Federal Constitutional Court (hereinafter FCC) decided to refer the question of whether the European Central Bank's (ECB) decision on the purchase of Outright Monetary Transactions (OMTs) is compatible with EU primary law, it effectively forced the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) into a game of “chicken.”

scholarly journals “European Integration Through Law”

2017 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 145-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Voßkuhle
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
German Parliament

AbstractThis article discusses the Federal Constitutional Court’s contribution to European “integration through law” over the past decades. The Basic Law’s openness to integration and to European Law is examined, as well as the co-operation between the Federal Constitutional Court and the European Court of Justice in the execution of European Union law and the protection of fundamental rights. The author provides a number of examples to show how the instruments of identity review andultra viresreview developed by the Federal Constitutional Court secure the agenda of European integration as agreed upon in the European Treaties. He also shows how national governmental bodies are bound by the concept of responsibility with respect to the European integration process and how the Court ensures the necessary democratic legitimisation for the acts of European institutions by requiring the involvement of the German parliament in political decision-making processes related to the European Union. Finally, the author explores the idea of the legal community and the criticisms that have been levied against this concept. He concludes by positing that the European Union can only preserve itself by remaining a legal community, and that the rule of law in EU law is indispensable, particularly in times of crisis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document