Federal Constitutional Court Act

Signed by Mrs Dr.Barnstedt in a letter to the Federal Constitutional Court of a constitutional complaint, 07.Januar 2009, it literally means the rejection of applications: Please have understanding for the fact, that the President (Hans Jurgen paper, also Chairman of the first Senate and the first and third Chamber of the first Senate D.r..) and the judges of the Constitutional Court due to the high workload unable, to answer all the entries. In addition, it is not possible, according to law …die detailed reasons, led to the refusal to accept haben…zu explain. The refusal to accept of a constitutional complaint without justification can be done according to 93d BVerfGG. This rule is used for the discharge of the Constitutional Court. It would be the sense and purpose of the section 93d ABS. 1 sentence contradict 3 BVerfGG, as well as the secrecy of the deliberations constitute a Verfassungsbeschwerde…zu. Basically, refusal to accept decisions which are not fitted with reasons are not published. Plain text: The Internet-Courier.com already published a report at the beginning of this year and asked the legitimate question whether constitutional judges erred in law modest and generally have taken complaints amendments to the Federal Constitutional Court Act.

The legal opinion of the editorial staff has been confirmed by the present letter of the Constitutional Court from 07.01.2009. It is confirmed in bolder and more dramatic way to write that the Chambers and the Senate at least in the period 1998-2008 rejected over 4000 constitutional complaints only through a Presidential Council without justification relief reasons and the constitutional appeals to the classified said (secrecy?), so that citizens do not know why his complaint was rejected, requiring necessarily a judicial decision by the Senate or the Chambers. It is simply demonstrated that the falsehood, of the Federal Constitutional Court Act in the latest version and the rules of procedure of the Constitutional Court that constitutional complaints without Explanatory statement not published are, because this has been exactly 3337 times and in 2008 the case from 1998-2007, since the rules of procedure of the Constitutional Court decision or judgment forcing the publication by the Presidential Council prescribes and governs.