Failure to substantiate admissibility and merits of main constitutional complaint bars interim relief

The Federal Constitutional Court rejected the applicant’s application for interim relief, finding the request inadmissible as it failed to provide sufficient substantiation of the prerequisites under Section 32(1) of the Federal Constitutional Court Act; specifically, the applicant did not adequately demonstrate that the main application would not be inadmissible or obviously unfounded. The dispute involved a constitutional complaint where the procedural requirements for an emergency injunction were not met due to the lack of detailed argumentation regarding both admissibility and merits. The decisive legal basis was the substantive requirement of Section 32(1) BVerfGG, which mandates that a party seeking interim measures must conclusively present why their main constitutional complaint has a sufficient prospect of success, a standard the applicant failed to satisfy.