Online message – Monday, February 5th, 2024
procedural law | Constitutional complaint against video hearing not accepted for decision (BVerfG)
The Federal Constitutional Court did not accept a constitutional complaint for decision that was directed against the way in which an oral hearing before the Finance Court was broadcast by video (BVerfG, decision of January 15, 2024 – 1 BvR 1615/23).
facts: The complainants believe that their right to the statutory judge pursuant to Article 101 Paragraph 1 Sentence 2 of the Basic Law has been violated. By using a camera that captured a long shot of the judge’s bench, and due to the lack of a zoom function that can be controlled by them They were deprived of the opportunity to check the impartiality of the judges by looking at their faces.
The BVerfG judges did not accept the constitutional complaint for decision:
A violation of the right to the legal judge due to a lack of close view of the judges’ faces during a video hearing does not appear possible.
The complainants do not complain that the tax court was actually not properly staffed. They complain that any grounds for bias might not have been apparent to them. This alone is not enough to conclude that there is bad faith or suspicion of bias, which could lead to a violation of the right to the legal judge. Only the actually incorrect occupation, not the lack of the possibility of checking it (in a timely manner), constitutes such a violation.
The lack of an opportunity to check impartiality may potentially violate the right to a fair trial. However, the complainants have neither complained about a violation of this fundamental procedural right nor would such a violation be considered possible based on their statements.
Furthermore, they did not claim that they had complained about the lack of control options in the oral hearing.
Those: BVerfG, press release from 5.2.2024 (il)
Location(s):
NWB AAAAJ-58599