Primacy of Union Law and Control of Competences: Challenges and Reforms in the Light of the German Constitutional Courts PSPP-Ruling and the EU Commission's Treaty Infringement Proceeding (Vorrang des Unionsrechts und Kompetenzkontrolle im europäischen Verfassungsgerichtsverbund: Zuständigkeiten und Reformen zwischen BVerfG und EuGH im Lichte des Vertragsverletzungsverfahrens der EU-Kommission)

Abstract

Since the EU Commission initiated infringement proceedings in June this year against Germany concerning the alleged infringement union law by the BVerfG’s ECB ruling of 5 May 2020, the tussle for precedence and final decision-making authority in the European constitutional order shows no sign of abating. No matter how strictly the ECB’s purchase pro-gramme (PSPP) and related case law of the ECJ is assessed, the BVerfG’s refusal to con-form to the ECJ’s binding preliminary ruling concerning PSPP is bound to lead down a path of undesirable consequences. As such, in the light of Article 4 (2) TEU and Article 23 (1) GG, such ruling could only have been viable by way of an assertion for respect for the German constitutional identity within the meaning of Article 79 (3) GG as a last resort. The Conference on the Future of Europe promises an array of possible reforms and therewith an opportunity to defuse this tension. These reforms range from imposing a binding test grid for the European competence test to a concretisation of the requirements of Article 5 TEU as well as procedural changes in the relationship between the ECJ and the BVerfG. Finally, even the establishment of a European Judges’ Platform to further dialogue and consultation will be debated.