The attempted election of constitutional court judges adjourned on Friday without a result, sparking internal debate and criticism regarding the handling of the situation. The postponement, initiated by CDU parliamentary group leader Jens Spahn, was justified by newly surfaced allegations of plagiarism against legal expert Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf, the candidate proposed by the Social Democrats (SPD).
CDU member of parliament Thomas Bareiß voiced concerns about the circumstances surrounding the postponement, stating the sudden appearance of the plagiarism accusations created a “very unsettling disturbance”. While acknowledging his own reservations about Brosius-Gersdorf’s previously expressed views, Bareiß suggested greater caution and restraint were warranted by his own party and the parliamentary group leadership in addressing the allegations. He emphasized expectations for a high standard of conduct, particularly within the Christian Democratic Union.
Bareiß’s criticism extended to the SPD, whom he deemed to have acted imprudently. He specifically referenced the SPD’s immediate declaration on Friday to stand by their nominated candidate, calling the rapid response “certainly not clever”. Bareiß argued this action complicated the ongoing selection process and ultimately harmed the candidate’s reputation.
He now urges the SPD to present a new proposal, emphasizing that reservations about Brosius-Gersdorf are not limited to CDU and CSU members, but are also shared by prominent figures within the SPD itself. The situation highlights the challenges in securing consensus on constitutional court appointments and underscores the need for careful consideration and procedural transparency.
