Angela Merkel vehemently promotes the emergency braking law in the Bundestag. But even experts from government and parliament are now warning of a bitter legal flop.
Berlin – Angela Merkel (CDU) used comparatively sophisticated rhetoric on Friday morning to advertise her Corona brake in the Bundestag. “The virus does not forgive half-heartedness, it only makes everything more difficult. The virus does not forgive hesitation, it just makes everything longer. The virus only understands the language of determination, ”explained the Chancellor in plenary. However, there is also another inexorable touchstone for the federal government’s corona plans: the jurisdiction.
Even after the debate in Parliament, there are considerable doubts, especially about the exit restrictions provided for in the law. Merkel herself admitted that there were “pros and cons” with a view to the curfew between 9 p.m. and 5 a.m. The experts from the federal government and parliament are even more skeptical about the situation. Experts from the Chancellery and the Scientific Service of the Bundestag doubt the durability of the rules. And the opposition also took the plans to court.
Are curfews unconstitutional? Merkel’s law apparently risky – scientific service warns
So the key question that could tip the entire law in retrospect: Are the curfews for incidences over 100 unconstitutional? The Scientific Service – Parliament’s supplier of expertise – fears that, like them world reported on Friday.
“The exit restriction at night is to be assessed critically. It is doubtful whether it would stand up to a final constitutional examination, ”the newspaper quotes from an opinion by the Bundestag institution. Perhaps the measure is “suitable and necessary”. However, it is unclear whether there could be milder measures. It is a “significant encroachment on fundamental rights”.
The parliament’s experts apparently see the role of incidence as the only key value as a point of attack: there is “a broad criticism of viewing the incidence value as the sole factor in triggering infection control measures”. If you use more values, the regulation becomes less vulnerable. “Necessary exceptions for vaccinated people” * are also missing from the expertise, writes the world.
Corona exit restrictions in focus: Experts in Merkel’s Chancellery are also skeptical
Already on Thursday the picture learned of a warning from several Chancellery departments. The curfew was problematic in terms of “proportionality” and “currently unproven effectiveness” and has already been cashed in by the courts in countries, according to the paper, in one of seven papers signed to Chancellor Helge Braun (CDU). In addition, the incidence can be challenged as the sole benchmark for the proposed regulations. Other factors, such as the R-value or the occupancy of the intensive care beds, would also have to be included in the law, according to the report, according to an expert opinion.
In fact, several parties and politicians have already announced lawsuits. These include the FDP, the Bavarian CSU government partner Free Voters – but also a politician in the governing coalition with SPD MP Florian Post. The AfD has also repeatedly criticized the regulation as “unconstitutional”.
Curfews from 9 p.m. in Germany: FDP and Greens against Corona rule – Lauterbach sees it differently
FDP leader Christian Lindner urged the plenary again shortly after Merkel’s speech. The Liberals also see an urgent need for action, he said. Measures such as the mask requirement or contact restrictions are necessary and proportionate. The curfew could have devastating social consequences – for students, for example, who would now have to remain “in a permanent lockdown” in small rooms while it was light outside. He missed exceptions for vaccinated people and differentiated limit values. Studies also give rise to doubts about the effectiveness of the measure.
The SPD health expert Karl Lauterbach, who had exchanged blows with Lindner in a talk the evening before, saw it differently. Lauterbach spoke out in favor of the exit restrictions at “Illner” despite legal imponderables – “every hour” helps, he explained. “We need pragmatism and not mutual enlightenment,” Lauterbach criticized Lindner in an immediate counter-speech in the Bundestag. In no country has it been possible to get a corona wave with the mutation B.1.1.7 under control without resorting to curfews, he warned.
Incidentally, the Greens are also critical of the curfew. Apparently less for fundamental considerations than in the overall package of rules envisaged in the Emergency Brakes Act. It is “not proportionate” to be lax in business and tough in private, said parliamentary group leader Katrin Göring-Eckardt.
It is still unclear whether improvements will be made or whether the government and the coalition will risk a flop of the law in judicial review – and thus once again appear ill-prepared. “The damage to the pandemic policy as a whole would be immense,” warned Lindner. At least the SPD warned on Friday to make adjustments to the plans for the amendment. (fn)
#Merkels #curfew #unconstitutional #Experts #Chancellery #Bundestag #warn #Immense #damage