The press release of the German Federal Constitutional Court of November 30, 2021 (101/2021) summarizes the decision of the Federal Constitutional Court of November 19, 2021 (Ref: 1 BvR 781/21, 1 BvR 889/21, 1 BvR 860/21, 1 BvR 854/21, 1 BvR 820/21, 1 BvR 805/21, 1 BvR 798/21). The decision deals with the extremely controversial exit and contact restrictions under the COVID legislation, the "federal emergency brake." Many protested against this in Germany, and the proportionality was debated widely. The Federal Constitutional Court rejected the constitutional complaints all together - and writes at the very beginning of the press release:
„The curfews and contact restrictions were part of an overall protection strategy devised by the legislator to protect life and health and to maintain the proper functioning of the healthcare system as exceptionally significant interests of the common good. The measures did however seriously interfere with several fundamental rights. The Federal Constitutional Court reviewed these measures on the basis of the constitutional requirements generally applicable to all legislation that interferes with fundamental rights. It held the contact restrictions and even the curfews under review to be compatible with the Basic Law in the extremely dangerous situation of the pandemic; in particular, the measures were proportionate despite the severity of interference they caused.”
Due to the relevance of the pandemic for all countries worldwide, we decided to translate the press release into Arabic.
Please find the official links to both German and English HERE.
About this series
Supporting Comparative Constitutional Law
In the last twenty years, especially as a consequence of the popular uprisings in the region in 2011, the institutions charged with constitutional review in the countries of the Middle East and North Africa – be it Constitutional Courts, Constitutional Councils, Supreme Courts or High Tribunals - are being reformed (e.g. Tunisia, Morocco, Jordan). Some, already earlier too, have been established for the first time (e.g. Bahrain in 2002, Iraq in 2004 or Saudi Arabia in 2009), some have been attributed new competences, and new procedures have been introduced, thus indicating a rising awareness for the importance of constitutional review as an instrument for judicial oversight. With constitution-building processes and reform of constitutional courts ongoing, comparative constitutional law has become a topic on the rise.
Over the past half century, the German post-war constitutional state has gained respect internationally. At the basis of its economic, political and social development lies its constitutional system. The German Federal Constitutional Court has played a fundamental role since in the country’s efforts to establish a stable, balanced system of government, and in upholding the constitution, its principles and the individual rights vested in it. Within more than 70 years of jurisdiction it has continuously done so by applying, interpreting and developing the constitutional framework of Germany.
This - in 2019 - initiated series of the Rule of Law Programme Middle East & North Africa strives to present constitutional concepts that have been of fundamental relevance to the (positive) development of the German constitutional state. In order to meet a growing interest of young Arab speaking scholars from the region in comparative constitutional law, the Rule of Law Programme Middle East & North Africa has decided to complement this endeavour by publishing a series of selected works on German constitutional law in Arabic translation. The works translated into Arabic and published in this series invite to explore, compare and debate existing concepts and solutions that were developed to address certain questions.
Beirut, 2019; by Anja Schoeller-Schletter (edited in 2023)
Philipp Bremer
Head of the Rule of Law Program Middle East and North Africa