Proposals for Christ’s Successor
- In an unexpected move, Germany's Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfG) has submitted three candidates to succeed Josef Christ, whose term ended last autumn.
- normally, the Bundestag and Federal Council jointly elect the 16 judges of the BVerfG, ensuring democratic legitimacy.However, Section 7a (1) of the Federal constitutional Court Act (BVerfGG) allows...
- The vacancy arose with the departure of Judge Josef christ.
Constitutional Court Proposes Judges Amidst election Stalemate
Table of Contents
- Constitutional Court Proposes Judges Amidst election Stalemate
- Constitutional Court Proposes judges: navigating Germany’s Election Stalemate
- What’s Happening with the Federal Constitutional Court?
- Why Did the Constitutional Court propose Judges?
- Who Are the Proposed Candidates?
- Why is the Nomination process in Germany Typically Complex?
- What Led to the Stalemate in the Current Election?
- Who is Robert Seegmüller?
- How Does The Two-Thirds Majority Hurdle Work?
- What Happens Now That the Court Has Proposed Candidates?
- Is the Court’s List Binding?
- Has the Court Done This Before?
- What Role Does the CDU/CSU Play in This Process?
- What About the Federal Council (Bundesrat)?
- Negotiations in the Current Election
- What’s the Bottom Line?
In an unexpected move, Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfG) has submitted three candidates to succeed Josef Christ, whose term ended last autumn. The nominees are Günter Spinner, a judge from the Federal Labor court (BAG), and Oliver Klein and Eva Menges, both judges from the Federal Court of Justice (BGH).
normally, the Bundestag and Federal Council jointly elect the 16 judges of the BVerfG, ensuring democratic legitimacy.However, Section 7a (1) of the Federal constitutional Court Act (BVerfGG) allows the court to propose candidates if the political process stalls.
The vacancy arose with the departure of Judge Josef christ. The CDU/CSU party bloc initially held the right to propose a successor, with the Bundestag responsible for the election, requiring a two-thirds majority.
Seegmüller nomination Stalls
The CDU/CSU initially nominated Robert Seegmüller, a presiding judge at the Federal Administrative Court known for his conservative views on asylum. However, his election failed in the previous Bundestag. The Green party voiced concerns, and Seegmüller’s inconsistent presentation during a personal hearing further complicated matters.
The situation worsened for Seegmüller in the newly elected Bundestag, where support from left-leaning parties is now essential for achieving the required two-thirds majority.While the CDU/CSU has not formally withdrawn Seegmüller’s nomination, informal negotiations suggest his candidacy is unlikely to succeed.
Court Steps In With Proposals
According to Section 7a BVerfGG, the Federal Constitutional Court can offer its own suggestions if a new judge is not elected within two months.The BVerfG election committee requested the court’s intervention in late January.
Initially, the BVerfG opted to delay its proposal list, hoping the newly elected Bundestag would resolve the matter independently. However, after determining that the Bundestag had not made progress in selecting a successor, the court convened and decided to present its own list of candidates.
This decision is notable because the new Bundestag had only recently formed its election committee, responsible for preparing the judicial election.
The Nominees: Spinner, Klein, and Menges
the BVerfG’s list includes Günter Spinner (BAG), Oliver klein (BGH), and Eva Menges (BGH). Spinner and Menges serve as senate chairpersons, while Klein dose not.
In a press release, the BVerfG emphasized that it considered the ”proposal sustainability,” suggesting awareness of the CDU/CSU’s right to propose a successor. The three proposed judges are generally perceived as aligned with the CDU.
The selection process is governed by §§ 56ff of the BVerfG’s business order. Each judge has the right to propose candidates, and a secret vote is held. The three individuals receiving the most votes are placed on the list. Fifteen judges participated in the plenary session.
Spinner received 15 votes, followed by Klein with 13 and Menges with 12.No other judges received sufficient votes to be included on the list.
List Not Binding
The Bundestag has rarely utilized its legal option to propose its own candidates, even when facing impasses in constitutional judge elections. The last instance of such a list occurred in 1993, concerning the successor to Vice President Ernst-Gottfried Mahrenholz.
The BVerfG’s proposal list does not alter the election process. The Bundestag remains free to choose individuals not on the list, and the order of suggestions carries no legal weight.
Historically, lawyers proposed by the Federal Constitutional Court have been elected, including Hans Joachim Faller (1971), Ernst Träger (1977), and Ernst-Gottfried Mahrenholz (1981). Though, individuals not on the court’s list have also been chosen.
The CDU/CSU could still nominate Angelika Allgayer, a conservative BGH judge previously shortlisted alongside Robert Seegmüller. The constitutional judges clarified in their press release that their list does not constitute a “disadvantageous judgment” regarding other potential candidates.
Negotiations Resume
The CDU/CSU must now identify a new candidate. Jens spahn, the new parliamentary group leader, is not a lawyer, perhaps increasing the influence of legal experts within the CDU/CSU.
Given the two-thirds majority requirement, the CDU/CSU’s proposed lawyer must gain support from other political groups.The election committee convenes only when a majority for a candidate is secured.
The role of the Left party remains uncertain. Clara Bünger, a member of the election committee representing the Left, stated, “In terms of perspective, the Left should also get a right of proposal for new constitutional judges; we know that our voices are also crucial.”
In the past two election periods, securing a two-thirds majority in the Bundestag required votes from the CDU/CSU, SPD, Greens, and FDP. Proposal rights were informally distributed according to a 3:3:1:1 formula, with the CDU/CSU and SPD each proposing three constitutional judges per Senate, and the Greens and FDP each proposing one.
Whether the CDU/CSU grants the Left a proposal right remains to be seen. An elegant compromise could involve the SPD effectively ceding its decision to the Left, formally maintaining an SPD proposal while granting the Left a de facto veto right.
Federal Council as a Last Resort?
The BVerfG’s proposal list triggers a three-month period under Section 7a (5) bverfgg. If the Bundestag fails to elect a successor to Josef Christ within this timeframe, the Federal Council can assume the election obligation.
This replacement selection mechanism was established in december to address potential blockades. However, established parties are hesitant to invoke it, fearing perceptions of unreliability and loss of control. The Federal Council is unlikely to act against the Bundestag’s wishes if an agreement remains possible.
The BVerfG’s proposal list introduces time pressure, but its impact is largely symbolic.
The german political landscape recently witnessed an unexpected move: the Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfG) stepping in to propose candidates for a vacant judge position. This article breaks down the situation, answering key questions to help you understand this complex process.
What’s Happening with the Federal Constitutional Court?
In a departure from the usual process, Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfG) has proposed three candidates to fill a vacant judge position. This action occurred as of a political deadlock in the Bundestag (the lower house of parliament).
Why Did the Constitutional Court propose Judges?
The court’s intervention is permitted under Section 7a (1) of the Federal Constitutional Court Act (BVerfGG).This provision allows the court to suggest candidates when the usual election process stalls. The primary reason for this is to prevent the court from operating understaffed, which could hinder its ability to fulfill its duties.
Who Are the Proposed Candidates?
The BVerfG has proposed three individuals:
- Günter Spinner, a judge from the Federal Labor Court (BAG).
- Oliver Klein, a judge from the Federal Court of Justice (BGH).
- Eva Menges, a judge from the Federal Court of Justice (BGH).
Why is the Nomination process in Germany Typically Complex?
Judges of the BVerfG are usually elected jointly by the Bundestag and the Federal Council (Bundesrat). This process is in place to create democratic legitimacy.Elections typically require a two-thirds majority in the Bundestag.
What Led to the Stalemate in the Current Election?
The vacancy arose with the departure of Judge Josef Christ. The CDU/CSU party initially had the right to nominate a successor. However, their initial nomination, Robert Seegmüller, failed to gain the necesary support in the previous Bundestag. Concerns from the Green Party and inconsistencies in Seegmüller’s presentation further complicated matters causing his election to fail.
Who is Robert Seegmüller?
Robert Seegmüller is a presiding judge at the Federal administrative Court. He is known for his conservative views on asylum.
How Does The Two-Thirds Majority Hurdle Work?
Securing a two-thirds majority often requires collaboration amongst several political parties. In recent elections in Germany securing a two-thirds majority traditionally required votes from CDU/CSU, SPD, Greens, and FDP.
What Happens Now That the Court Has Proposed Candidates?
The Bundestag is still responsible for electing the new judge but it may feel pressure to consider the Court’s candidates.
Is the Court’s List Binding?
No, the BVerfG’s list is not legally binding. The bundestag can still elect someone who isn’t on the list. However, the court’s suggestions carries a lot of weight because of the prestige of the BVerfG.
Has the Court Done This Before?
the last instance of the court proposing candidates was in 1993, related to the successor of Vice President Ernst-Gottfried Mahrenholz.
What Role Does the CDU/CSU Play in This Process?
The CDU/CSU initially held the right to propose a successor candidate. They now must identify a new candidate to propose.
What About the Federal Council (Bundesrat)?
The Federal Council could assume the election obligation if the bundestag fails to elect a successor within three months. However, it is unlikely that the Federal Council will go against the Bundestag’s wishes. Established parties are hesitant to invoke it, fearing perceptions of unreliability and loss of control
Negotiations in the Current Election
The role of the Left party remains uncertain. Clara Bünger, a member of the election committee representing the Left, has also stated, “In terms of perspective, the Left should also get a right of proposal for new constitutional judges; we know that our voices are also crucial.
What’s the Bottom Line?
The BVerfG’s list introduces time pressure to the process and serves more as a symbol of the gravity of the situation. However, the bundestag and other parties involved have the ultimate authority to select a new judge.
This situation underscores the checks and balances that are in place in the German political system to ensure the independence and continuation of the judicial branch.