Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
2 BvQ 33/25 ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2025:qk20250522.2bvq003325 Generato dall'IA

Inadmissibility of constitutional complaint against shock arrest suspension for lack of substantiated showing of non-obvious unconstitutionality

Numero d'incarto 2 BvQ 33/25
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Germania (DE)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Inammissibile (Inadmissible)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Federal Constitutional Court (2nd Senate, 3rd Chamber) rejected the applicant's request for interim relief, leaving the challenged measures in force. The dispute concerned an isolated emergency application seeking the suspension of the execution of a "shock arrest" (a temporary preventive detention measure), where the applicant alleged that the underlying proceedings were constitutionally flawed. The court determined the application was inadmissible because the applicant failed to meet the procedural requirement of § 32(1) of the Federal Constitutional Court Act by not providing a sufficiently substantiated argument that the main constitutional complaint was neither initially inadmissible nor obviously unfounded.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

§ 32 Abs. 1 BVerfGG; Inadmissibility of constitutional complaint against shock arrest suspension for lack of substantiated showing of non-obvious unconstitutionality: Der Antrag ist unzulässig. Es fehlt an einem hinreichend substantiierten Vortrag zu den Voraussetzungen von § 32 Abs. 1 BVerfGG, da der Antragsteller nicht substantiiert dargelegt hat, dass der Antrag in der Hauptsache weder von vornherein unzulässig noch offensichtlich unbegründet ist (vgl. BVerfG, Beschluss der 3. Kammer des Zweiten Senats vom 6. Juli 2021 - 2 BvQ 62/21 -, Rn. 1).

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
requisito costituzionale eccezione di incostituzionalità internamento misura cautelare sospensione dell'istruzione stato d'eccezione

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
§ 32 Abs. 1 BVerfGG
Es fehlt an einem hinreichend substantiierten Vortrag zu den Voraussetzungen von § 32 Abs. 1 BVerfGG, da der Antragsteller nicht substantiiert dargelegt hat, dass der Antrag in der Hauptsache weder von vornherein unzulässig noch offensichtlich unbegründet ist (vgl.
Generato dall'IA
1 BvR 2283/23
Inadmissibility of constitutional complaint challenging criminal sentence execution due to failure to exhaust prior judicial remedies and substantiate specific imminent harm
2 BvQ 40/25
Inadmissibility of constitutional complaint for insufficient identification of challenged acts and fundamental right infringement
2 BvQ 40/15
Inadmissibility of constitutional interim relief for suspension of prison execution due to insufficient justification and violation of subsidiarity
2 BvR 991/18
Inadmissibility of constitutional complaint for interim relief due to failure to request suspension of effect in administrative proceedings
2 BvQ 52/22
Inadmissibility of interim relief in criminal proceedings for lack of substantiated showing of fundamental rights violation and non-manifestly unfounded complaint

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

Erfolgloser isolierter Eilantrag auf Aussetzung des Vollzugs eines "Warnschussarrests" - mangelnde Antragsbegründung

[TENOR]

Der Antrag auf Erlass einer einstweiligen Anordnung wird abgelehnt.

[GRUENDE]

Der Antrag ist unzulässig. Es fehlt an einem hinreichend substantiierten Vortrag zu den Voraussetzungen von § 32 Abs. 1 BVerfGG, da der Antragsteller nicht substantiiert dargelegt hat, dass der Antrag in der Hauptsache weder von vornherein unzulässig noch offensichtlich unbegründet ist (vgl. BVerfG, Beschluss der 3. Kammer des Zweiten Senats vom 6. Juli 2021 - 2 BvQ 62/21 -, Rn. 1).

Diese Entscheidung ist unanfechtbar.