- Authoritative Figures: The Constitutional Court Mandates an Investigation
In a dispute over picking the president of the North Rhine-Westphalian Higher Administrative Court (OVG) in Münster, a constitutional complaint in Karlsruhe gave an defeated contender a partial win. The Higher Administrative Court needs to re-look into the case, instructed the Federal Constitutional Court, and sent it back to Münster.
A federal judge filed the complaint, claiming that the successful candidate was favored due to her gender. According to the North Rhine-Westphalian Minister of Justice, Benjamin Limbach (Greens), the choice made wasn't based on the best candidate principle required by the constitution, but was politically predetermined.
Best candidate principle or party affiliation?
Before the candidate's formal assessment was available, the minister spoke to him about the candidate's "lead" and suggested he withdraw his application. A similar message was sent to him by a CDU member of the German Bundestag in a phone call: coalition circles in Düsseldorf had agreed on the woman with a CDU party membership. The federal judge provided sworn statements for both conversations.
The Higher Administrative Court didn't sufficiently investigate and clarify these allegations, found the Karlsruhe judges. Consequently, they overturned the OVG's decision, which raised no concerns about the personnel decision. A predetermination and bias of the minister can't be ruled out.
A slap in the face
The Federal Constitutional Court's decision is a slap in the face for the NRW Minister of Justice, according to the FDP parliamentary group. "Limbach's mess is growing - and the hits are getting closer!" said FDP parliamentary group leader Henning Höne.
The FDP parliamentary group sees its demand for an investigation by a committee of the state parliament confirmed, stated its legal policy spokesman Werner Pfeil, and spoke of a scandal. Many questions, including those about the role of the NRW State Chancellery and the legal advisor of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group in the Bundestag, need to be answered. "This scandal is a heavy blow to the rule of law in NRW and a disheartening signal to all qualified applicants who apply for such top positions."
Resignation demanded again
The SPD parliamentary group has once more asked Limbach to resign: "The ice on which Mr. Limbach is standing has become so thin that he should draw consequences and pave the way for a new beginning," said SPD parliamentary vice-president Elisabeth Müller-Witt.
"The Federal Constitutional Court, unlike the OVG ruling, considers it possible that the principle of the best candidate was violated," said Nadja Lüders, SPD chairwoman in the investigative committee. There, the SPD will apply to summon the defeated candidate and the Minister of Justice as witnesses as soon as possible.
Ministry denies predetermination
The Federal Constitutional Court overturned the OVG decision solely because additional judicial clarification is necessary, stated a press release from the NRW Ministry of Justice. In other aspects, the complaint was unsuccessful.
The Ministry of Justice will maintain its stance in the new round before the Higher Administrative Court in Münster and provide everything required for further clarification. There was no unlawful predetermination by the Minister of Justice, a spokesman emphasized.
The state government's award of the presidency to a candidate who entered the process late had sparked controversy. Emergency applications from unsuccessful candidates had initially halted the appointment procedure. Limbach came under political pressure due to the first-instance decisions of the administrative courts in Münster and Düsseldorf, which contained clear criticism of the appointment process. He had to admit that he had known the candidate, who had introduced herself at a private dinner with the minister, for a long time and on a friendly basis. The contentious appointment is also being examined by a committee of inquiry in the state parliament. From the opposition's perspective, there is suspicion that party affiliation and connections played a role in the appointment, rather than the professional competence of the candidates. The position has been vacant for around three years.
The Federal Constitutional Court's ruling highlighted potential violations of the best candidate principle, raising concerns about party affiliation and favoritism in the selection process. Justice Benjamin Limbach's approach to the case has been criticized, with calls for further investigation into potential predetermination and bias.
