Finances - AfD Parliamentarian Berndt Challenges Emergency Declaration as Constitutional Breach
In a fiery opposition, AfD Parliamentarian Hans-Christoph Berndt has dismissed the possibility of an extraordinary crisis in Brandenburg, stating, "Neither a natural disaster nor an extraordinary emergency situation beyond the state's control exist." Berndt voiced these assertions during the state parliament's special session on Wednesday. According to Article 103 of the constitutions, these conditions are prerequisites to approve new loan eligibility, an issue the government seeks to address.
Berndt strongly criticized the state government's decision to fund its spending via additional debt, despite record tax revenue figures. He considers the recent proposed emergency declaration as an unconstitutional breach.
Red-Black-Green Coalition Pursues New Declaration of Emergency
The red-black-green coalition government is committed to implementing a new emergency declaration in Potsdam for 2024, citing the need to manage budget expenses. During the special session of the Brandenburg state parliament, the ruling coalition aims to secure financial resources to mitigate the effects of the Ukraine conflict. Previously, the state parliament declared emergency statuses for 2023 and the following year, allowing it to shoulder up to €2 billion in new debt for family, municipal, and business support.
Legal justification for the ongoing financial support package relies on the ruling of the Federal Constitutional Court, which required annual budgets only for the current year. The emergency situation renewal would validate credit authorization for the upcoming year, amounting to €1.06 billion.
Related Articles
Key Insights
- Lack of Urgency: Berndt's argument centers around whether the situation warrants an emergency declaration. The German constitution allows for legislative state of emergency (Gesetzgebungsnotstand) only under specific conditions. If the situation does not meet these criteria, declaring an emergency could be perceived as an unconstitutional overreach.
- Procedural Requirements: The German constitution requires a single legislative state of emergency declaration, with a six-month time frame for implementing relevant law proposals. Regularly declaring emergencies could be seen as an abuse of power.
- Checks and Balances: Constitutional checks and balances ensure that executive actions align with legislative intent to prevent arbitrary decisions. In the German system, the president's decisions require the chancellor or federal minister countersignature for approval.
- Public Debate and Transparency: Public debate and transparency are vital, particularly in dealing with emergency declarations. Historical cases have shown that the German Constitutional Court is committed to upholding constitutional principles when evaluating the legality of emergency measures.
- Legal Challenges: Previous legal challenges have demonstrated the German Constitutional Court's vigilance in ensuring emergency measures comply with the constitution, as seen with pandemic-related restrictions.
- Alternative Measures: Critics maintain that alternative measures could address the situation without declaring an emergency. The strategy should prioritize proportional and situation-specific measures over reliance on emergency declarations.
Berndt's argument against the red-black-green coalition's proposed emergency declaration stems from these considerations, emphasizing the importance of adhering to procedural requirements and genuine urgency when declaring an emergency. Striving for transparency, public debate, and following checks and balances in the German system of government are critical elements to ensuring emergency measures align with constitutional principles.
