{"title":"德国宪法法院关于气候裁决的决定","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":"{\"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}","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}
Die Figur eingriffsähnlicher Vorwirkungen: Zum Klimabeschluss des Bundesverfassungsgerichts
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.