Skip to content

The Socialist Party sees no urgent need for action

Karlsruhe has decided. The new voting system is partly unconstitutional. Will there be a reform of the reform before the 2025 Bundestag election? One thing is clear: After the election, the CSU wants to change even more.

After the Karlsruhe electoral law ruling, the SPD sees no immediate need for action
After the Karlsruhe electoral law ruling, the SPD sees no immediate need for action

Reaction to the Karlsruhe verdict - The Socialist Party sees no urgent need for action

The SPD sees no need to immediately change the electoral system following the ruling of the Federal Constitutional Court. "There is currently no urgent legislative need for action," said SPD parliamentary vice-president Dirk Wiese to the German editorial network. "However, the next Bundestag should deal with the issue at the latest, so that the electoral system can be adapted for the 2029 Bundestag elections."

Wiese points out that the Federal Constitutional Court has shown different solution paths in its decision. These include adjusting the so-called basic mandate clause, modifying the five-percent hurdle, or a joint list of CDU and CSU. "Especially the latter would be a legally secure way," said the SPD politician.

Old basic mandate clause temporarily reinstated

The Federal Constitutional Court has ruled that the abolition of the so-called basic mandate clause in the new electoral system is unconstitutional. This rule, abolished by the traffic light coalition, provided that parties could also enter the Bundestag in the strength of their second vote results if they were below the five-percent hurdle but won at least three direct mandates.

The court has now temporarily reinstated this regulation until the legislature passes a new regulation. However, the court has confirmed another key part of the electoral reform, the limitation of the Bundestag to 630 members and the abolition of the so-called overhang and equalization mandates.

CSU criticizes the new seat allocation rule

This means that in the future, the number of seats in parliament will be solely determined by a party's second vote result, even if it has won more direct mandates. In this case, the winners of the constituencies with the worst first vote results will go empty-handed. This criticism, especially from the CSU, which has often won almost all direct mandates in Bavaria, is loud.

CSU leader Markus Söder has already announced that a union-led federal government wants to correct the new allocation rule again: "This is a coalition condition for the next federal government," said the Bavarian minister president.

Esken warns Söder

SPD chairwoman Saskia Esken rejected the demand: "If Söder wants to reverse the now successful reform of the traffic light coalition, he is accepting that the Bundestag continues to grow to over 800 members," said Esken to the RND. Söder has not contributed anything constructive to the reform of the electoral system in the past. The last reform attempt also failed because it provided unjustified advantages for the CSU.

However, criticism of the ruling also came from the former Bundestag president Norbert Lammert. "The only thing the average voter understands about the German electoral system is that they determine the constituency representative with their first vote. And exactly this one transparent part of the electoral system is now being relativized," said the CDU politician to the RND. The really surprising part of the ruling for him, however, is "how strongly the Federal Constitutional Court takes into account the possibility of the formation of factional communities in this case, the Union".

The SPD parliamentary vice-president Dirk Wiese mentioned that the next Bundestag should address the electoral system issue, ensuring it's adapted by 2029, in light of The Commission's different solution paths suggested by the Federal Constitutional Court.

Despite the temporary reinstatement of the basic mandate clause by The Commission, criticism of the new seat allocation rule has been voiced by the CSU, who believe it provides an unfair advantage in some regions.

Read also:

Comments

Latest