Judge election: Saskia Ludwig drums against Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf

Ms. Ludwig, you have publicly drummed to prevent Ms. Brosius-Gersdorf as a constitutional judge. Do you play with the stability of the coalition?
The professor from Potsdam would have presented a danger to independence and, above all, the neutrality of the Federal Constitutional Court, but certainly not for the stability of the coalition. The MPs in our faction are subject to their conscience exclusively. In his summer interview, the Federal Chancellor repeated this again several times – and rightly – again for the interested public.

Wait a minute, a danger to the neutrality of Karlsruhe? She is considered a top candidate among constitutional lawyers.
All citizens, including the constitutional lawyers you cite, have the opportunity to look at the statements of the Gersdorf couple entitled “General vaccination against Covid-19 virus” on the website of the University of Potsdam and to form their judgment itself.

They often represent controversial conservative positions themselves. Why don’t you stand by Ms. Brosius-Gersdorf?
Because Ms. Brosius-Gersdorf did not stand for election as a member of the Bundestag or the Greens. This is about a judge who is limited to twelve years, not a four -year MP. My full commitment in this legislative period applies to the processing of the failure of almost all democratic institutions in the Corona period. And this also includes the judges, whether as a district judge or even more so at the Federal Constitutional Court, which are obliged to neutrality.

In your opinion, she disqualifies that Ms. Brosius-Gersdorf was for the obligation to vaccinate for the constitutional court?
Yes, clearly. It is important to protect the Federal Constitutional Court. Therefore, the highest demands are placed on all judges. Of course, this also includes Stephan Harbarth, the current President of the Federal Constitutional Court. It would be interesting to find out how in June 2021 the “Corona Dinner” with constitutional judges in the Chancellery-just before the court’s decisions on the Corona policy of the Federal Government.

We can calm you down: There is an Enquete Commission for processing.
Yes. But the question is: How have the democratic decision structures been undermined? Where were these structures not resilient? The research becomes very exciting, especially at the Federal Constitutional Court. The professor from Potsdam would have been the Super-Gau at this point.

Jens Spahn has only given in the last moment. Did he underestimate the case?
That is not the question. Why did she not withdraw her application for the highest judge’s office at the Federal Constitutional Court from the state policy responsibility before the scheduled election date? It was more than foreseeable that the professor – especially for us Ossis – was not selectable and will never be.

Mr. Spahn is said to be good with Mr. Miersch, whom you once described as fundamentalists. What do you expect from him now?
I have already exchanged my expectations with him personally. The proposal formula in which the SPD occupies three positions since 2018, Greens and FDP, each, no longer corresponds to the social image. Nobody can explain to anyone today why Mr. Miersch, together with radical lines and leftists, may fill a total of four constitutional judges in the green.

The Chancellor obviously sees it differently. He had promised the Union last week. A mistake?
The Chancellor belongs to the executive. Therefore, I am very grateful for the clarification that the MPs are subject to their conscience and make their decisions regardless of government action.

The AfD relies on precisely those moments when the political center becomes unable to function. Doesn’t that bother you?
What is the political center in Germany and what does that mean? The AfD in Brandenburg has won nine out of ten constituencies in the last federal election. Her unique selling point in the Bundestag election campaign was the topic of Corona. This is also why there must now be a Corona investigation committee at the federal level, which should be decided in particular by all those parties that have not yet been aware of the importance and explosive of this topic.

This would hit her own parliamentary group leader, which is under pressure in the masking affair.
This is not about party -political games, as they can currently be experienced at the comrade Miersch. Anyone who made mistakes at the time should face their responsibility, especially in federal politics. At that time, entire population groups – keyword “pandemic of the unvaccinated” – were excluded, which therefore also made their cross in the blue. Lost trust has to be recovered into the political center here. This cannot be achieved with the choice of a radical vaccination advocate.

Ms. Brosius-Gersdorf has offered to appear in front of the Union. Does that make sense?
No, but it would have made no sense five weeks ago, because it was and is never selectable. However, their legal motives and technical explanations for the implementation of a general corona vaccination in Germany in a necessary Corona investigation committee of the German Bundestag would be interesting.