The Union is withdrawing from negotiations about better protection for the Federal Constitutional Court

Enlarge image

Opposition politician Friedrich Merz

Photo: Sean Gallup / Getty Images

For the time being, the Union sees no need to provide the Federal Constitutional Court with greater protection from influence in response to the rise of extreme parties.

The Union parties have ended negotiations with the traffic light, according to an email from the Federal Ministry of Justice that SPIEGEL has received.

“The Union faction currently sees no compelling need to change the regulations on the Federal Constitutional Court in the Basic Law,” said Union faction vice-president Andrea Lindholz (CSU) to the “Rheinische Post”.

In discussions with representatives of the traffic light factions, it became clear that restructuring the legal basis of the Federal Constitutional Court would not only have advantages.

Such changes to the Basic Law would have to be very carefully considered, said Lindholz.

Out of concern that extreme parties would gain strength, the traffic light coalition considered setting out details on the election and term of office of constitutional judges not just in a simple law, but in the Basic Law.

This could, for example, prevent judges from being removed from office relatively easily in the event of a change of government.

A two-thirds majority in the Bundestag and Bundesrat would be required to change the Basic Law.

This is only possible with the Union.

So far, the law on the Federal Constitutional Court, which regulates responsibilities and procedures, can be changed with a simple majority in the Bundestag.

Federal Justice Minister Marco Buschmann advocated a “cross-camp proposal” at the beginning of February.

Ampel criticizes the termination of the talks

Buschmann tells the German Press Agency that he regrets that the Union is no longer available for discussions on the matter.

"Especially in the year of the 75th birthday of the Basic Law, it would have been an important sign of strengthening the defenses of our democracy and the rule of law," said the FDP politician.

Further discussions remained possible at a later date.

Green politician Till Steffen told SPIEGEL about the breakdown of talks with the Union: “The talks with the Union were good.

But now Merz has ordered a total blockade.

Opposition tactics are now more important to the Union than protecting our constitutional state.

Party colleague Konstantin von Notz called the Union's decision negligent and also criticized CDU leader Friedrich Merz.

»While millions of people in our country are taking to the streets for our constitutional state and its ability to defend itself and are addressing clear expectations in the direction of politics, Friedrich Merz is still not able to jump over his shadow so that we as democrats can work together and across factions “We can work on better protection of our highest constitutional bodies,” he said.

The latest positioning should not be the end of the cross-party discussions.

"Not increasing the level of protection for the Federal Constitutional Court in an extremely tense situation in terms of security policy is either politically naive or extremely negligent."

SPD parliamentary group deputy Dirk Wiese also attacked the Union for the decision.

“In one of the most difficult times for our democracy in decades, the Union is in no way living up to its role as a responsible opposition,” Wiese told the “Rheinische Post”.

He hopes that the Union will still live up to its political responsibility.

dpa/AFP/kim/so-called