Even before the heating law was passed, a member of parliament filed a lawsuit against it. The CDU politician Thomas Heilmann sees the short parliamentary procedure as a violation of his rights as a member of parliament.
The CDU member of the Bundestag Thomas Heilmann has applied to the Federal Constitutional Court for a temporary injunction against the federal government’s approach to the heating law. At the same time, Heilmann requested that, as part of a dispute between organs, it should be established that his rights as a member of parliament to equal participation in parliamentary decision-making had been massively violated in the legislative process.
A dispute between organs is a legal dispute between federal organs about their constitutional rights and obligations. Heilmann argues that the final text of the heating law – which is officially called the Building Energy Law – should have been sent to MPs at least fourteen days before the final discussion and vote.
“Last Minute Law”
Heilmann emphasized that his complaint was not against the substantive goal of the law, but against the parliamentary procedure, which he saw as inadequate. “The traffic light is ruining the heat transition with a last-minute legislative package and an unconstitutional procedure,” said Heilmann. “The deliberations on the amendment to the Building Energy Act, which have been truncated to the maximum extent possible by Parliament, do not allow the conceptual weaknesses of this legislative package to be identified and changed.”
Union faction deputy Jens Spahn had already spoken at the first reading of the law – still with the original text, which was already clear at the time that it would not be decided – of a “messed up” procedure that was an “imposition”. The CDU energy politician Thomas Gebhart called the parliamentary procedure “a complete absurdity”. “The traffic light government has been arguing about this law for months, and Parliament does not even get the minimum amount of consultation time,” he told ntv.de.
Constitutionalists skeptical
Experts are skeptical about the lawsuit’s chances of success. The constitutional lawyer Alexander Thiele from the Business & Law School in Berlin points out that MPs have the right to adequate preparation time in legislative processes. “However, concrete minimum processing times cannot be specified,” says Thiele ntv.de. In case of doubt, the Federal Constitutional Court must “evaluate all the circumstances of the specific case in order to decide whether the period of time was still appropriate or was already too short”.
With regard to the GEG, Thiele sees “at least no clear constitutional concerns about the procedure”. The coalition wants to make the revised draft law available to MPs by Friday at the latest. In order to work through the text of the law, it is important to “use the weekend”, as the SPD member of the Bundestag, Verena Hubertz, who was involved in the negotiations, told Deutschlandfunk. At the same time, she pointed out that the entire text would not have changed. A second hearing of experts is to take place on Monday in the Committee on Climate Protection and Energy. The actual passage of the law by the Bundestag could then take place on Friday, the last day of the last week of sessions before the summer break.
Thiele said the changes are significant, but the Bundestag has already dealt with the bill in the first reading and the public has been discussing the topic for months. “So it doesn’t come as a serious surprise to any member of parliament,” said the constitutional lawyer. The procedure was certainly “unusual and politically not particularly convincing, but not yet unconstitutional, especially since it is clear that the traffic light was not about reducing the rights of MPs, but was preceded by a serious and less than happy argument”.