Legal aid eligibility and admissibility of constitutional complaint by co-complainants under § 93d BVerfGG

The Federal Constitutional Court granted legal aid and appointed counsel for the first complainant, while denying legal aid and refusing to accept the constitutional complaint of the second complainant for lack of prospects of success, rendering the decision final and unappealable. The case involved a dual request for legal aid and court-appointed attorney in a constitutional complaint proceeding, where the court distinguished between the two complainants based on the merits of their respective claims. The decisive legal basis was Section 93d Paragraph 1 Sentence 3 of the Federal Constitutional Court Act (BVerfGG), which permits the court to forgo providing a detailed reasoning when dismissing a constitutional complaint as manifestly unfounded, alongside the general standards for granting procedural legal aid only where the underlying constitutional claim offers sufficient prospects of success.