How Long Do Cystics Live

criticism started withdrawal of the Federal President, for constitutional complaint against the IMF-Enabling Act?

(Article by Volker Reusing dated 06/03/2010)
The official version, Federal President Horst Köhler had resigned mainly because of his statements to the Germany radio from 22.05.2010 in Afghanistan military operations for economic interests, are not convincing.
because as President, he has a criminal immunity enjoyed like no other man in our country. Particularly in view a call on the blog "Federal Horst" to denounce him for his statements regarding military operations and economic interests, it would have been much more logical but, if he had the arguments about the complainant (s) are ignored or rejected. But just give up the immunity in the situation seems completely illogical.
Military missions interests since the Lisbon Treaty, officially enshrined in Article 42 TEU expressly related to the EU security strategy. The Federal Constitutional Court, the abuse of those provisions in the Lisbon Judgement of 30.06.2009 at least so far limited that it may indeed help to from countries with which we are not allied, are usable but not the war of aggression, because it was guaranteed constitutionally by the Lisbon ruled that in Germany, the peace bid (Article 1 paragraph 2 GG) and the aggressive war prohibitions under Article 26 Basic Law and Article 2 paragraph 4 of UN Charter on any provisions of EU law on the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) are. The statements by the former President of Afghanistan shows that it the results of the Lisbon ruling has apparently not yet fully realized, or that she might not fallen, in part. But he then expressly declared war on anyone, and do not explicitly called for such a war in a very specific case. If he is with his statements in Afghanistan, so unbearable for them many basic law abiding people in Germany may be, has made even punishable, then most likely related to his oath, has since according to Article 56 GG sworn specifically to the Basic Law. Therefore, it would have been much more logical if he had not given immunity. What then could still have been overweight?

Things worth, his speech from 14.05.2010 before the Federal Constitutional Court on the occasion of the ceremony on the adoption of the old and the inauguration of the new President of the Federal Constitutional Court anzusehen.
In seiner Rede hat Köhler damals für den „Euro-Stabilisierungsmechanismus“ geworben. Zu dem Zeitpunkt lag der deutsche Gesetzentwurf dafür vom 11.05. 2010 (Bundestagsdrucksache 17/1685) erst seit drei Tagen vor. Am 21.05.2010 wurde er von Bundestag und Bundesrat in einer schwindelerregenden Geschwindigkeit beschlossen. Laut der Rede des Abgeordneten Dr. Jürgen Trittin ohne, dass den Abgeordneten der Text zu dem „Stabilisierungsmechanismus“, dem sie mit dem Gesetz blanko zugestimmt haben, vorgelegen hätte.

Genau dieses Gesetz soll dem Internationalen Währungsfonds (IWF) erstmals die Möglichkeit geben, auf eu-rechtlicher Grundlage Kreditauflagen zu machen, und damit aller Voraussicht nach mit eu-rechtlichem Rang. Normalerweise ist IWF-Recht ganz normales Völkerrecht und damit gleichrangig mit den meisten anderen internationalen Verträgen.

Die meisten völkerrechtlichen Verträge stehen über den nationalen Gesetzen (Art. 27 Wiener Vertragsrechtskonvention, WVRK), aber unterhalb aller nationalen Verfassungen und auch unterhalb der zum „ius cogens“ gehörenden internationalen Verträge (Uno-Charta, Menschenrechte der Uno und humanitäres Kriegsvölkerrecht) und unterhalb des nicht zur GASP gehörenden EU-Rechts.

Der Ranganspruch des EU-Rechts steht in Konkurrenz zu dem der höchsten Verträge der Uno (Art. 103 Uno-Charta, Art. 28 AEMR, Art. 1 EUV, Art. 51 EUV, Erklärung 17 zum Lissabon-Vertrag).

Wenn nun IWF-Kreditauflagen mit eu-rechtlichem Rang transportiert werden sollen, dann fordert das die Fähigkeit der Menschenrechte der Uno, der Umsetzung dieser Kreditauflagen Grenzen zu setzen, heraus. Und auch die Grundrechte der Verfassungen anderer Euro-Mitgliedsstaaten, in denen die Grundrechte nicht klar über dem EU-Recht stehen, wie am deutlichsten in Irland.

Am 14.05.2010 hat der damalige Bundespräsident vor dem Bundesverfassungs-gericht für dieses Gesetz, welches dem IWF erhebliche zusätzliche Macht geben würde, geworben. Und er hat auf emotionale Weise Druck ausgeübt, nicht übermäßig durch Urteile in die Aufgaben des Gesetzgebers einzugreifen.

Er hat am 14.05.2010 mitten aus einem Interessenkonflikt heraus gehandelt. Denn Horst Köhler ist in den Jahren 2000 bis 2004 geschäftsführender Direktor des IWF gewesen und ist danach in die immunste Position der gesamten Bundesrepublik Deutschland gewechselt.
Als Bundespräsident hätte er das Gesetz zu Drucksache 17/1685 von sich aus dem Bundesverfassungsgericht vorlegen müssen bereits angesichts der Blankett-Ermächtigungen zu einem Stabilisierungsmechanismus, dessen Regelungen den Abgeordneten bis heute nicht vorgelegt wurden. Stattdessen warb er rhetorisch trickreich ausgerechnet vor dem Bundesverfassungsgericht in einer Einfluss nehmenden Rede für den Mechanismus. Welche Gedanken er dabei auch may have had, his speech was in keeping with the IMF and the affiliated banks and not in accordance with the Basic Law.

has the constitutional complaint from 29.05.2010 due to him this conflict of interest. And some of the most serious human rights abuses of the IMF highlighted with particular reference to world hunger. According to an official document of the United Nations in 2001, which is cited in the lawsuit, the loan covenants of the IMF and World Bank chief obstacle No. 2 for the right to food in the world together ahead of biotechnology and, above all current wars. And the application cited examples in which the IMF has intensified active or passive hunger in Niger and Brazil, and that fall at least partially time in the office Köhler, so one wonders what he would like back then could have prevented.

The covenants of the International Monetary Fund have demanded so much more to dead, the Afghan war. This is one reason to go.

resignations are just like the politicians Wegloben of a psychological mechanism to remove certain issues from the public eye. Often, smaller, more gentle, scandals advanced.
Sometimes there are also agreements to treat no more in return for the withdrawal issues.

It will be interesting to see who may have since met with whom agreements and what in the next time everything will come out through the IMF and its influence on the development of the crisis.


sources

Federal Horst Blog

http://bundeshorst.wordpress.com/


speech of the President from 14.05.2010

http://www.bundespraesident.de/Reden-und-Interviews-, 11057.663872/Das-Bundesverfassungsgericht-i.htm global.back = / -%% 2c11057% 2c0/Reden-und-Interviews.htm 3flink% 3dbpr_liste


http://sites.google constitutional complaint with source references to the IMF

. com / site / civil rights / human rights € stabilization mechanism
video opinion on the constitutional complaint

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dc2mI99lsoM&feature=player_embedded

journal to file a constitutional complaint
http://unser-politikblog.blogspot.com/2010/05/burgerrechtlerin-legt.html
resignation speech of President

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJ2D8UWwYVY&feature=player_embedded

Should Babies Eat Beet Skin

human rights activist files complaint against constitutional speculation support mechanism and against supranationalization of IMF conditions

Sarah Luzia Hassel-Reusing 30.05.2010 (English) (file number of the national Parliament 17 / 1685)

At the 29.05.2010, the human rights activist Sarah Luzia Hassel-Reusing has filed a constitutional complaint against the law, Which calls itself the "Law for the Adoption von Gewährleistungen im Rahmen eines europäischen Stabilisierungsmechanismus" (law on state guarantees within the framework of a European stability mechanism, file number of the national Parliament 17/1685). The law supports the speculation, instead of slowing it down, because it promises the creditors of the other euro member states, that they will, at the cost of the tax payers, get back more of their credit claims, than they would get otherwise in the case of a national bankruptcy. This fund supports massively the power of the creditors in comparison with the inhabitants of the of the debitor coun-try. It is just not an act of solidarity with the population of the other states, which have just got into solvency difficulties because of over-sized bank preservation funds, but with their creditors, again a huge subventionism with tax payer money for the banks, at the cost of the the social, of the real economy, and even of the ability to work of the states.

The law, in addition to that, contains it its §1 Abs. 1 S. 2 a carte blanche – agreement for the creation of a system, which would be by far more dangerous and painful for the people in the euro zone and in the EU, than a national bankruptcy alone could ever be:
It is planned, to transport credit conditions of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to the victim countries with the rank of the EU secondary law.

Ireland is affected even harder, because art. 29 Abs. 4 Nr. 10 of the Irish constitution puts all EU law above the Irish constitution itself, so that Ireland has nearly no protective mechanisms at all against IMF conditions with EU secondary rank – except for possibly leaving the EU.

The IMF may be an independent international organization and as such have the right to draft its conditions independently of the human rights. But that these conditions are implemented even as far as they trample over the limit, which the the national constitutions and the indivisible human rights of the UN are setting, is illegal. According to the view of the plaintiff, it won't take long any more, until in many countries consequences, in terms of liabiliy and of criminal law, will be put through to punish the disregard of the preeminence of the basic rights and of the universal human rights (belonging to the „ius cogens“) above the IMF law.

At Niger, the IMF has prohibited the building of sufficient food reserves, and even amidst the huge starvation catastrophy, the IMF has lobbied against the distribution of millet food aid of the United Nations and of NGOs.

At Brazil, the IMF has not accepted a provisional debt moratorium, so that the Brazilian „fome zero“ program could only get hundred thousands instead of millions out of starvation.

In the 1980ies, cuts into food subventions, ordered by the IMF, have caused hunger riots at Bolivia, Jordan, and Venezuela.

According to a publication of the United Nations on the human right to food (art. 11 UN Social Pact), the credit conditions of IMF and World Bank together are the second-biggest cause world-wide for the hunger, by far more than biotechnology, and also by far more than all wars world-wide together.
In 2005, more than 100.000,- people per day have died of starvation, obviously a significant part of them because of the IMF. These numbers remind of homicides, but with the difference, that it is directed against the poorest and not against specific nations.

As a result of the Latvian Constitutional Court of the 22.12.2009, the IMF has become, at least for the moment, a bit more modest at Europe, in the way, that the IMF now is in favour of respectively does not violate the minimum wages and the minimum pensions.

The recent IMF conditions in the „memorandum of understanding“ towards Greece and in to „letter of intent“ of Romania, however, show which way the IMF wants:

-significant cuts into the pensions
-significant into the public health insurance
-making the the ababondonment of standard wages easier
-lifting the honorary system of the freelancers
-cuts into the subventions of the real economy (in order to have more money for the banks)
-significant cuts into the wages of the public administration
-drastic reduction of the personnel of the public administration (for Greece replacement of only 1 of 5 retiring officers, for Romania only 1 of 7; even though at Romania the police is scarce already today)

The „memorandum of understanding“ with Greece proves, that the IMF has demanded of Greece already at January, that 10,- billion € of the first support package, which the German Parliament has consented to at the 07.05.2010 (file number 17/1544), have to be spent not for the Greeks of for their debts, but as a start capital for another Greek bank preservation fund. Last week, the self-declared „system relevant“ banking circles have, in harmony with the EU Commission, demanded that all euro member states together pay additional 350,- billions of € into a preventive banking preservation fund, as e. g. Radio Utopie and taz have reported.
The IMF has made exactly this as a condition to Greece already at January. And now the whole connection is getting visible. The new „stabilization mechanism“ would, with a probability close to certainty, also be used to fill up such preventive bank preservation funds, financed by the states, which have to take loans to finance their contribution.

The drastic disconstruction of the personnel of the public administration is on the same line as the Lisbon Treaty (art. 14 TFEU, protocol 26 to the Lisbon Treaty), with the goal to force the states, to have significant parts of their sovereign tasks done by private corporations, up to the de-facto dissolution of the sovereignty of the states, to the degradation of democracy to a facace, to the degradation of law and order to a basis for negotiations.

In addition to that, the IMF is also highly controversial with regard to work the with statistics. Its former employee Davison Budhoo has accused the IMF, that the IMF has intentiously incorrectly analysed data on Trinidad and Tobago, in order to just give the false impression to the country, that it had a crisis, in order to put through the conditions expected by the IMF.

Especially spicy is, that Trinidad and Tobago is, according to a Canadian study, one of the countries, in which the IMF has put through the privatization of parts of the sovereign administration and of the weakening of the civil monopoly on the use of force.

The so-called „Gesetz zur Übernahme von Gewährleistungen im Rahmen eines europäischen Stabilisierungsmechanismus" is the carte blanche – agreement to a „terrible beauty“, which must not be born – in order to preserve for the current and for future generations at Germany and at Europe a life in dignity and an international order, which respects and promotes, to the best of its ability, the sovereignty of the states (art. 2 par. 1 UN Charter) and the chance to fully realize and enjoy the full realization of the universal human rights (art. 28 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights).

Politicians, who give everything away to self-declared „system relevant“ banks, instead of deconcentrating them, until they are small enough, so that they cannot any more endanger the system of the economy and of the state, politicians, who listen to the mightiest banks and corporations, instead of to the constitutional order and to the universal human rights, do not belong into the Parliament.


V.i.S.d.P:

Sarah Luzia Hassel-Reusing, Thorner Str. 7, 42283 Wuppertal, 0202 / 2502621

Links:

Ankündigung der Verfassungsbeschwerde vom 20.05.2010

http://unser-politikblog.blogspot.com/2010/05/burgerrechtlerin-kundigt.html


Verfassungsbeschwerde vom 29.05.2010

http://sites.google.com/site/buergerrechtemenschenrechte/euro-stabilisierungsmechanismus