BVerfG 2 BvR 20/11, 2 BvR 2069/11•Constitutional complaints against rehabilitation decisions not accepted
BVerfG 2 BvR 20/11, 2 BvR 2069/11Bverfg / 2. Senat 2. Kammer26.09.2016Dismissed
Von Omnilex extrahiert
The Federal Constitutional Court joined two constitutional complaints and declined to accept them for decision. It held that the main requests were in any event unfounded and that the auxiliary requests were inadmissible. The complaints attacked rehabilitation-law decisions as well as § 1(5) StrRehaG, alone and in combination with § 1(1) StrRehaG. The order is final and not subject to appeal.
§ 90 BVerfGG; admission of constitutional complaints; § 1 Abs. 5 StrRehaG in conjunction with § 1 Abs. 1 StrRehaG: A chamber may decline to accept a constitutional complaint where the main request is at any rate unfounded and subsidiary requests are inadmissible. The provision on rehabilitation law raises no constitutional concerns on the present record. Where the challenged applications merely seek supplementation or extension of the statutory rehabilitation regime, they are inadmissible if they do not satisfy the procedural requirements for constitutional review and do not disclose a cognizable constitutional issue.
Entscheidungsdatum: 2016-09-26
Aktenzeichen: 2 BvR 20/11, 2 BvR 2069/11
ECLI: ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2016:rk20160926.2bvr002011
Dokumenttyp: Kammerbeschluss ohne Begründung
Normen: GG, § 90 BVerfGG, § 1 Abs 1 StrRehaG, § 1 Abs 5 StrRehaG
Vorinstanz: vorgehend OLG Rostock, 1. Dezember 2010, Az: I WsRH 47/10, Beschlussvorgehend LG Neubrandenburg, 12. Februar 2010, Az: 6 Rh 21/05, Beschlussvorgehend Thüringer Oberlandesgericht, 18. August 2011, Az: 1 Ws Reha 21/11, Beschlussvorgehend LG Erfurt, 30. März 2010, Az: Reha 116/03, Beschluss
Spruchkörper: 2. Senat 2. Kammer
Nichtannahmebeschluss mit Tenorbegründung: keine verfassungsrechtlichen Bedenken gegen angegriffene rehabilitierungsrechtliche Entscheidungen sowie gegen § 1 Abs 5 StrRehaG bzw gegen § 1 Abs 5 StrRehaG iVm § 1 Abs 1 StrRehaG - auf Ergänzung des § 1 Abs 5 StrRehaG gerichtete Anträge unzulässig
Die Verfassungsbeschwerden werden zur gemeinsamen Entscheidung verbunden und nicht zur Entscheidung angenommen. Sie sind in ihren Hauptanträgen jedenfalls unbegründet (vgl. BVerfGE 84, 90 <117 ff.>; 94, 12 <33 ff.>; 102, 254 <297 ff.>; 112, 1 <24 ff.>; BVerfGK 1, 227 <228 ff.>; 14, 502 <504 f.>), in ihren Hilfsanträgen unzulässig (vgl. BVerfGE 13, 284 <287>; 56, 54 <71>; BVerfGK 14, 498 <500 f.>; 14, 502 <506>).
Diese Entscheidung ist unanfechtbar.
Von Omnilex extrahiert
Whether the constitutional complaints should be accepted for decision against the challenged rehabilitation decisions and § 1(5) StrRehaG.
The complaints were not accepted for decision.
The main requests were at any rate unfounded; the subsidiary requests were inadmissible.
Whether there were constitutional concerns against § 1(5) StrRehaG, alone or in conjunction with § 1(1) StrRehaG.
No constitutional concerns were found.
The chamber saw no basis to question the provision or its application in the challenged decisions.
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.