Left complains against Tornado-use
With a lawsuit before the Federal constitutional court, the left party in the Bundestag against the Anti-IS deployment of the Bundeswehr. This is in breach of the basic law, argues the main opposition group.
A Tornado of the German armed forces prior to the Start of the Nato base at Incirlik, Turkey
After the terrorist attacks in Paris last November, the Federal government decided that the international coalition against the terrorist militia “Islamic state” (IS) to support the military. 250 German soldiers currently part of the Anti-IS use, the the the Bundestag on 4. December 2015.
The core of the German commitment to reconnaissance flights of German tornado over Syria and Iraq. The group of “The Left” voted in the Bundestag against this use. Now she raises an action for annulment before the Federal constitutional court: The use is not covered by the basic law. On Tuesday, the group peak has unveiled the 121-page writ in Berlin, on 31. In may the Federal constitutional court in Karlsruhe, has submitted.
Where is the “collective security System”?
The criticism of the Left focuses on the constitutional legitimacy of the Tornado deployment. As a General rule: If the Bundeswehr outside of Germany, then this use must be integrated according to the basic law into a “System of mutual collective security”. Such as the United Nations or Nato.
It is precisely at this point, the left group looks at the requirements set out in article 24 of the basic law is violated. Neither the security Council of the United Nations have legitimized this use, nor the European Union is a System of collective security within the meaning of the basic law. The EU have also taken a formal decision to the military assistance to France.
Doubts as to the legality of the use: Sahra wagenknecht, Dietmar Bartsch, the chief of the left group
“The whole of logic, we do not agree,” said parliamentary leader Dietmar Bartsch. It could not do that, the Federal government set the basic law, also emphasizes group leader Sahra wagenknecht.
A constructed justification?
The Federal government had justified the Tornado-use: the legal basis of the support of France and of the international Alliance in the fight against the “Islamic state”. In the Charter of the United Nations, including article 51, to be evidenced, the right to collective self-defense.
The UN security Council have also called on all Nations to take the necessary measures to combat the “IS” in Syria. In addition, the assistance of birds of obligation among the member States of the European Union referred to in article 42 (7) of the EU Treaty.
This grounds the left group considers to be unfounded. The UN Charter securitised “collective self-defense” can only be a first response to an attack. It is not to be equated with the “System of mutual collective security”, which will then be activated for a prolonged military intervention, usually by the UN security Council.
“Paradigm shift in security policy”
When several States joined a “coalition of the willing” together, as in the fight against the “Islamic state”, then it was not a question of a collective security System, arguing that the left group. The Federal government have always laid great emphasis to the fact that foreign deployments of the German armed forces were moving in a System of collective security.
Up to six reconnaissance tornados of the German armed forces to collect information about positions of the “Islamic state”
If you deviate from this principle, then this would be a “paradigm shift in German Foreign and security policy,” he says attorney Wolfgang Ewer, representing the suit in Karlsruhe. It is doubtful, moreover, whether the self-defense rights, the UN Charter were also to attacks from terrorist groups (and not of States).
Legally is of the view that the plaintiff is uncharted territory, as these issues have not been brought before the Federal constitutional court. Many eminent constitutional lawyers have expressed the “Anti-IS-use” of the Bundeswehr doubt on the government’s official interpretation of the basic law.
In the ideal case, will, therefore, brought clarity in a legal grey zone. In for the links group in the worst case, the Federal constitutional court does not accept the so-called organ of action, directed against the Federal government and the Bundestag.