Connectivity and the Diffusion of Power – Constitutional Complaint filed against EU Data Protection Regulation (2 BvR 865 17)
19.04.2017 | Unser Politikblog
Freedom of speech in danger – Will politicians, journalists, bloggers, human rights activists, and people wearing hearing aids soon have nothing to say anymore in Europe?
|(c) Sarah Luzia Hassel-Reusing|
At Thursday, the 13.04.2017, at 21.20, the human rights activist Sarah Luzia Hassel-Reusing has in time file a constitutional complaint against the EU Data Protection Regulation (file number (EU) 2016/679), including applications for interim injunction (one of those for urgent interim injunction ) and rejection of two judges for presumed bias regarding „breaking up and pushing aside the eternity guarantuee (art. 79 par. 3 Basic Law)“ and „bias regarding Bilderberg“. With letter of the 12.04.2017, the European Parliament, the EU Council of Ministers, the EU Commission, the Federal Government, the Bundestag, and the Bundesrat have been informed about the filing. The constitutional complaint claims the violation of the basic rights to human dignity (also in connection with the peace principle), to freedom, to freedom of speech, of information, and of the press, to freedom of occupation, to property, to the guarantuee of the course of law, and to vote, as well as of the universal human right to freedom of speech and of information. Her attention had been attracted to the draft regulation by the guest article „Ein Abschied von den Grundrechten“ („a goodbye to the basic rights“) by constitutional judge Prof. Dr. Johannes Masing of the 09.01.2012 in the newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung.
The EU Data Protection Regulation, which has been concluded at the 14.04.2016, is a tool for censorship and surveillance, which is unique in this form, and which is going to be implemented from the 25.05.2018 on in all 28 EU member countries. And that, even though the EU is not entitled at all in its treaties, to set law on data protection, which obliges, in addition to the institutions of the EU and of the member states, also private persons. The constitutional complaint directs itself directly against the EU regulation, because it is directly applicable and ultra-vires (exceeding the EU's competences). And in this case only filing the complaint directly against it can suffice in view of the obligation of the Constitutional Court, which has been established in the Lisbon Judgement and in the Maastricht Judgement, to control the EU law not only regarding the basic rights, but also regarding ultra-vires.