The way for the nationwide Corona “emergency brake” is free: After the decision of the Bundestag, the Federal Council also allowed the amendment to the Infection Protection Act to pass. However, there has been significant criticism.
The Federal Council has allowed the nationwide Corona “emergency brake” to pass. The state chamber did not object to the change in the Infection Protection Act, as President Reiner Haseloff announced. Federal President Frank-Walter Steinmeier signed the law, after which it was published in the Federal Law Gazette. In the special session of the Federal Council, however, there was considerable criticism of the bill. The Prime Ministers expressed constitutional concerns and saw problems with the practical implementation. It was also criticized that the federal government had not taken into account the experiences of the states in fighting pandemics.
“Low point of federal culture”
Haseloff himself sharply criticized the transfer of competencies to the federal government. “Today is a low point for me in the federal culture of the Federal Republic of Germany,” said the CDU politician and Prime Minister of Saxony-Anhalt. The regional chamber is advising on a law “the creation, design and result of which are unsatisfactory”. The Saarland Prime Minister Tobias Hans (CDU) said: “Whether this shift of competence to the federal level represents a more effective way of fighting a pandemic, this proof has not yet been produced. And it has to be produced.” Hesse’s Prime Minister Volker Bouffier (CDU) described the rigid exit restrictions as “constitutionally problematic”. There is also the question of how, for example, the planned school closings should be implemented. Lower Saxony’s head of government Stephan Weil (SPD) said the new regulations were “not a big hit”. For his country, the law even means considerable opportunities for relaxation. His assessment: “For my country unnecessary, but I would add: also harmless.” Federal Health Minister Jens Spahn, on the other hand, again promoted the law at the meeting and returned the ball to the federal states. “Since the beginning of March, the instruments have all been named, written down, actually agreed and united, including the exit restrictions,” said the CDU politician. “And we have to be honest: Although the federal and state governments want the same thing, many have got the impression that we have not been pulling in the same direction in the last few weeks.” The unified action, so the impression, has been lost. The law is “the result of all these developments”.
Curfew if the incidence is over 100
The “emergency brake” was decided by the Bundestag yesterday. Despite extensive criticism from the opposition, the majority passed the changes in the Infection Protection Act and thus created the legal basis for implementation. According to the new regulation, if there is a seven-day incidence of 100 new infections per 100,000 inhabitants in a district or a city, people are generally no longer allowed to leave their own apartment or property after 10 p.m. Walking and jogging alone are allowed until midnight. Shops are only allowed to open to customers who present a negative corona test and have booked an appointment. From an incidence of 150, only the collection of ordered goods should be possible. Classroom teaching in schools should be stopped from an incidence of 165, exceptions for final classes remain possible. The law is a so-called objection law. This means that the approval of the Federal Council is not necessary. However, the regional chamber could have called the mediation committee and thus delayed the law.
First urgent application received in Karlsruhe
Even before the vote in the Federal Council, the first urgent motion against the “emergency brake” was received by the Federal Constitutional Court. A lawyer announced that he had lodged a constitutional complaint. His main concern is that the law largely removes the measures from (administrative) judicial control, that the incidence value is unsuitable as the sole benchmark and that exit restrictions in particular are disproportionate. The Free Voters also announced that they wanted to take action against the “emergency brake” with a double constitutional complaint. So they are initially against the night curfew. With a second complaint, they want to bring down the planned rule for the trade. Already yesterday, FDP leader Christian Lindner announced a constitutional complaint about the curfew.
You must log in to post a comment.