Die Figur eingriffsähnlicher Vorwirkungen: Zum Klimabeschluss des Bundesverfassungsgerichts

C. Franzius
{"title":"Die Figur eingriffsähnlicher Vorwirkungen: Zum Klimabeschluss des Bundesverfassungsgerichts","authors":"C. Franzius","doi":"10.5771/2193-7869-2021-2-136","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Federal Constitutional Court declared the transformation path to climate neutrality as established by the legislature in the Climate Protection Act to be unconstitutional. Not mainly the result of this climate decision but the reasoning of the Federal Constitutional Court is spectacular. Above all, the innovation in the German “Dogmatik” of fundamental rights is surprising. The Federal Constitutional Court does not modify its jurisprudence on the duty to protect resulting from fundamental rights but rather adheres to it and finds that “currently” the duty is not violated, nonetheless not ending its examination there. With the concept of advanced interference-like effects of fundamental freedom rights, the Court refers to fundamental rights as rights of defense against the state. This has caused irritation, remains partially vague and should be used as an opportunity to take a closer look at the new figure of advanced interference-like effects in the context of intertemporal safeguarding of freedom.","PeriodicalId":275616,"journal":{"name":"Kritische Vierteljahresschrift für Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft","volume":"64 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kritische Vierteljahresschrift für Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5771/2193-7869-2021-2-136","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Federal Constitutional Court declared the transformation path to climate neutrality as established by the legislature in the Climate Protection Act to be unconstitutional. Not mainly the result of this climate decision but the reasoning of the Federal Constitutional Court is spectacular. Above all, the innovation in the German “Dogmatik” of fundamental rights is surprising. The Federal Constitutional Court does not modify its jurisprudence on the duty to protect resulting from fundamental rights but rather adheres to it and finds that “currently” the duty is not violated, nonetheless not ending its examination there. With the concept of advanced interference-like effects of fundamental freedom rights, the Court refers to fundamental rights as rights of defense against the state. This has caused irritation, remains partially vague and should be used as an opportunity to take a closer look at the new figure of advanced interference-like effects in the context of intertemporal safeguarding of freedom.
德国宪法法院关于气候裁决的决定
联邦宪法法院宣布,立法机关在《气候保护法》中规定的向气候中立转变的道路违宪。不仅仅是这个气候决定的结果,联邦宪法法院的推理也是引人注目的。最重要的是,德国关于基本权利的“教条主义”的创新令人惊讶。联邦宪法法院没有修改其关于由基本权利产生的保护义务的判例,而是坚持这一判例,并认定“目前”这项义务没有受到侵犯,但并未就此结束审查。根据基本自由权利的高级干涉效应的概念,法院将基本权利称为反对国家的辩护权。这引起了人们的愤怒,在一定程度上仍然含糊不清,应该利用这一机会,在跨界保护自由的背景下,更仔细地研究先进干涉效应的新数字。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信