Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- AUTHOR'S NOTE
- PART ONE CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS AS POSITIVE LEGISLATORS IN COMPARATIVE LAW
- CHAPTER 1 JUDICIAL REVIEW OF LEGISLATION AND THE LEGISLATOR
- CHAPTER 2 CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS' INTERFERENCE WITH THE CONSTITUENT POWER
- CHAPTER 3 CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS' INTERFERENCE WITH THE LEGISLATOR ON EXISTING LEGISLATION
- CHAPTER 4 CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS' INTERFERENCE WITH THE LEGISLATOR REGARDING LEGISLATIVE OMISSIONS
- CHAPTER 5 CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS AS LEGISLATORS ON MATTERS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW
- PART TWO NATIONAL REPORTS
- ARGENTINA
- AUSTRALIA
- AUSTRIA
- BELGIUM
- BRAZIL
- CANADA
- COLOMBIA
- COLOMBIA
- COSTA RICA
- CROATIA
- CZECH REPUBLIC
- FRANCE
- GERMANY
- BELGIUM, FRANCE, GERMANY
- GREECE
- HUNGARY
- INDIA
- ITALY
- MEXICO
- NETHERLANDS
- NORWAY
- POLAND
- PORTUGAL
- SERBIA
- SLOVAK REPUBLIC
- SWITZERLAND
- UNITED KINGDOM
- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
- VENEZUELA
- PART THREE SYNTHESIS REPORT: CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS AS POSITIVE LEGISLATORS IN COMPARATIVE LAW
- APPENDIX
- INDEX
GERMANY
Constitutional Courts as Positive Legislators
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 August 2017
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- AUTHOR'S NOTE
- PART ONE CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS AS POSITIVE LEGISLATORS IN COMPARATIVE LAW
- CHAPTER 1 JUDICIAL REVIEW OF LEGISLATION AND THE LEGISLATOR
- CHAPTER 2 CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS' INTERFERENCE WITH THE CONSTITUENT POWER
- CHAPTER 3 CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS' INTERFERENCE WITH THE LEGISLATOR ON EXISTING LEGISLATION
- CHAPTER 4 CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS' INTERFERENCE WITH THE LEGISLATOR REGARDING LEGISLATIVE OMISSIONS
- CHAPTER 5 CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS AS LEGISLATORS ON MATTERS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW
- PART TWO NATIONAL REPORTS
- ARGENTINA
- AUSTRALIA
- AUSTRIA
- BELGIUM
- BRAZIL
- CANADA
- COLOMBIA
- COLOMBIA
- COSTA RICA
- CROATIA
- CZECH REPUBLIC
- FRANCE
- GERMANY
- BELGIUM, FRANCE, GERMANY
- GREECE
- HUNGARY
- INDIA
- ITALY
- MEXICO
- NETHERLANDS
- NORWAY
- POLAND
- PORTUGAL
- SERBIA
- SLOVAK REPUBLIC
- SWITZERLAND
- UNITED KINGDOM
- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
- VENEZUELA
- PART THREE SYNTHESIS REPORT: CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS AS POSITIVE LEGISLATORS IN COMPARATIVE LAW
- APPENDIX
- INDEX
Summary
The Court responsible for the review of constitutional questions in the Federal Republic of Germany is the Bundesverfassungsgericht (BVerfG), situated in Karlsruhe. It is mentioned in article 92 of the German Constitution, called Grundgesetz (Basic Law – GG). Article 93 GG contains the catalog of jurisdiction, and Article 94 GG regulates its composition. The Bundesverfassungsgericht consists of federal judges and other members; the members of the Bundesverfassungsgericht are elected half by Parliament (Bundestag) and half by the Bundesrat (German Federal Council). The judges are not allowed to be members of the Bundestag, the Bundesrat, the government, or corresponding institutions at the Federal-State level.
As a court, the Bundesverfassungsgericht is part of the judiciary, but nevertheless the Constitutional Legislator grants the Bundesverfassungsgericht an accentuated position. It is mentioned in Article 92 GG as prior to all other courts, and Article 93 f. GG comprehends further detailed specifications. The main function of the Bundesverfassungsgericht is to ensure and to enforce Constitutional Law against the bodies of sovereign power. In literature, the Bundesverfassungsgericht is called Hüter der Verfassung (guardian of the Constitution).
Beyond this, the Bundesverfassungsgericht is a constitutional body like the Bundestag, the Bundesrat, and the Federal Government. Therefore, the Bundesverfassungsgericht has autonomy to create bylaw, it is not seated by a ministry, it is not under supervision, and it establishes its budget on its own.
Because of its specific position, critical voices have arisen in the literature. In their opinion, the Bundesverfassungsgericht interpreted its jurisdiction by itself and thus broke the mold of the prevalent system of “checks and balances in a democracy.”
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Constitutional Courts as Positive LegislatorsA Comparative Law Study, pp. 497 - 520Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2011