Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
2 BvE 1/25 ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2025:es20250120.2bve000125 Generato dall'IA

Inadmissibility of Organklage for non-compliance with deadline and failure to engage with prior jurisprudence on Bundestag election signature thresholds

Numero d'incarto 2 BvE 1/25
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Germania (DE)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Inammissibile (Inadmissible)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Federal Constitutional Court dismissed the institutional challenge (Organklage) filed by a state-level political party, ruling that the application was inadmissible and the request for interim relief was thereby moot; the Court further denied the applicant's claim for reimbursement of necessary legal expenses. The dispute concerned the threshold requirements for collection signatures in favor of electoral lists for political parties not yet represented in the German Bundestag. The decisive legal basis for the dismissal was the failure to meet the strict deadline prescribed by Section 64(3) of the Federal Constitutional Court Act (BVerfGG), coupled with a procedural deficiency in which the applicant failed to adequately engage with relevant prior decisions of the Second Senate from December 2024 regarding pre-election legal remedies and signature thresholds.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

§ 64 Absatz 3 Bundesverfassungsgerichtsgesetz; Inadmissibility of Organklage for non-compliance with deadline and failure to engage with prior jurisprudence on Bundestag election signature thresholds: The dispute concerned the threshold requirements for collection signatures in favor of electoral lists for political parties not yet represented in the German Bundestag. The decisive legal basis for the dismissal was the failure to meet the strict deadline prescribed by Section 64(3) of the Federal Constitutional Court Act (BVerfGG), coupled with a procedural deficiency in which the applicant failed to adequately engage with relevant prior decisions of the Second Senate from December 2024 regarding pre-election legal remedies and signature thresholds.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
rispetto del termine requisito della firma partiti politici spese elettorali contenzioso elettorale procedimento sommario

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
§ 64 Absatz 3 Bundesverfassungsgerichtsgesetz
Cited as the procedural basis for deeming the institutional challenge inadmissible due to the non-compliance with the application deadline.
Generato dall'IA
2 BvC 19/21
Federal Constitutional Court non-recognition complaint for Bundestag party status inadmissible due to expiration of four-day filing deadline
2 BvC 9/21
Failure of written notice of electoral participation due to non-compliant email submission and missed statutory deadline
2 BvC 16/21
Denial of Party Status in Federal Elections: Inadmissibility of Complaint Due to Expiry of Four-Day Filing Deadline and Prohibition of Analogous Reinstatement in Accelerated Proceedings
2 BvC 2/21
Inadmissibility of non-recognition complaint due to failure to meet pleading requirements and inability to cure pre-deadline defects in party recognition.
2 BvE 5/21, 2 BvE 6/21
Mootness of constitutional challenge to Bundestag election support signature thresholds after legislative reduction

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

Generato dall'IA
§ 64 Absatz 3 Bundesverfassungsgerichtsgesetz

Cited as the procedural basis for deeming the institutional challenge inadmissible due to the non-compliance with the application deadline.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

Erfolglose Organklage der ÖDP Sachsen bzgl der Quoren für Unterstützungsunterschriften zugunsten von Wahlvorschlägen bislang im Deutschen Bundestag nicht vertretener Parteien - A-limine-Abweisung - Antragsfrist nicht gewahrt, unzureichende Auseinandersetzung mit einschlägigen Senatsentscheidungen - Tenorbegründung

[TENOR]

1. Der Antrag zu 1. wird verworfen, weil er unzulässig ist. Er wahrt schon die Antragsfrist des § 64 Absatz 3 Bundesverfassungsgerichtsgesetz nicht. Auf die Gründe des Beschlusses des Senats vom 10. Dezember 2024 im Verfahren 2 BvQ 73/24 (Bundestagswahl 2025 - Vorgelagerter Rechtsschutz) wird Bezug genommen. Auch setzt sich die Antragstellerin mit dem genannten Beschluss sowie dem Beschluss des Senats vom 10. Dezember 2024 im Verfahren 2 BvE 15/23 (Unterschriftenquoren Bundestagswahl II), dort insbesondere Randnummer 76, nicht auseinander.

2. Der Antrag auf Erlass einer einstweiligen Anordnung wird damit gegenstandslos.

3. Der Antrag der Antragstellerin auf Erstattung ihrer notwendigen Auslagen wird abgelehnt.