A refusal of “mutton jump”, a special voting procedure in the Bundestag, is political. So at least it want most of the German right wing. The dispute is not in the thing, quite simply – but typical.
The incident in question, is already a few days busy, but now the Federal constitutional court, the highest court in the land. It happens at 28. June 2019, it is 1:27 PM. Not unusual last meetings of the Bundestag often deep into the night. This means layer service for the members, after all, no one from 9 o’clock in the morning can be up to 4 o’clock in the night present. Not rarely the seat are rows of half-empty.
Three laws are to be adopted in this long session. However, the AfD group is to doubt the quorum of the Parliament. Actually, half of the deputies would have to be present, to be allowed to a law decide. Half of the deputies would be 355 representatives of the people. But it was – the AfD has later counts on the basis of a TV recording after only about 100 members. The session Director to this time, the Green party politician Claudia Roth, also says in the name of the two present Secretary: “We are of the opinion that there is a quorum.” AfD-application for a so-called “mutton jump”, a voting procedure, with the exact number of those present could have been found, is rejected.
As in the Small so in the Large
This was not lawful, says the AfD. Now this is not uncommon that laws are passed in the Bundestag, if far less than 355 members present. So no one long complained, as it did, the AfD now, it is a parliamentary custom, provided for in the rules of procedure also. Because the actual legislative work in the Bundestag is done in the committees – and there is usually – as in a Test coordinated in advance. The individual members of the group then later in the rule to the vote of the committees.
This can be explained from the double character of the German Bundestag. For one, it is the presence and work of Parliament. As the AfD moved in in September, 2017, in the Reichstag, was not many by the way is obviously clear. First, all or almost all of the 92 AfD were always members present. In the meantime, many, as is the case with the other groups sit too, in the often parallel to the plenary meetings, committees. Here will be discussed in small round – also with experts and lobby representatives.
The Green party politician Claudia Roth decided on the “mutton jump”
Proceedings before the Federal constitutional court
The AfD complained to the Council of Elders of the Bundestag and the Presidium – the session leader Claudia Roth in the 28.June against the rules traded, and not enough with the font guides, tuned. Both bodies but Roth saw in the right. The quorum may be revoked according to law and also contrary to the actual situation – out.
Then, a request for a preliminary injunction went to the Federal constitutional court in Karlsruhe, to prevent the entry into force of the laws. In Parallel, the Federal President has asked that laws are not to sign. Only with this act, the signature of the highest officer, a law comes into force in Germany in force. If there were in the entire process of interference, it is necessary to speak of the “spirit of laws”, said the legal policy spokesman of the AfD group, Stephan Brandner, now in Berlin. Everything would then be adopted, so to speak, illegitimate.
How the Supreme court reacts, is still open
A response from Karlsruhe, did not receive the AfD, it was still called. But the files of characters – AKZ2BVQ59-19 – had been informed.
How to deal with the AfD?
Behind this individual case, there is more. The question is: How are parties in the Parliament to deal with a party that operates in part according to the protection of the Constitution against the liberal legal order? So far, the other groups in the law are not working together issues with the AfD. Debates inflamed by questions of procedure. There was dispute on the question of the age of the President and the first speech in the Bundestag. After several attempts, still no AfD managed-member of Parliament, to Bundestag Vice-President elected.
From the AfD is that they wanted to be treated “normal”. The rejection of the mutton jump is interpreted by the AfD under this point of view. “Old parties against the AfD” and “abyss of parliamentarism”, as formulated, the legal policy spokesman of the AfD group, Brandner.
“Only bigoted lamentations”
The AfD just wants to denigrate “the democratic institutions”, said the parliamentary Secretary of the FDP parliamentary group, Marco Buschmann. “You miss the Constitution requires the court as a propaganda stage.” It would have gone the AfD really is in the majority, it would immediately force a roll-call vote in the plenary. “That should have been clearly documented, which deputies participate. This has not happened but, and it is clear that it was only an occasion for hypocritical lamentations.”
The AfD represents that the three laws will be re-tuned. Two of them deal with privacy issues. Only the government parties CDU/CSU and the SPD in the vote. The opposition parties had many of them been present, the law can fall. But even the AfD is only a dozen members were there. To another practice: That it is aware of even a few present on the majority situation in the Bundestag, and thus on the Voters ‘ wishes. But this also means that the results of the vote will probably not change anything, no matter how the Supreme court about the non-approved division judge. With a judgment, or at least a response from the highest German court, the AfD is expecting in about three months.