The ECB monetary policy scrutinized by the German Constitutional Court: the judgment of 21 June 2016 in OMT case
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18042/cepc/rdce.55.08Keywords:
European Central Bank, Eurosystem, reliminary ruling, German Federal Constitutional Court, monetary policy, economic policy, euro, public debt market.Abstract
This article describes the several steps of a four-year long litigation before the German Federal Constitutional Court, concerning the compatibility with the German Constitution of the announcement by the ECB in 2012 of a program of possible interventions in the secondary sovereign bond market. This litigation is peculiar because of (a) its purely intra-German character, i.e. only between German parties, without the ECB being brought to that procedure in spite of being the author of the contested act; (b) the fact of this litigation being the first-ever case in the history of the German Constitutional Court having been submitted for a preliminary ruling by the European Court of Justice, albeit with elements somehow atypical for this kind of judicial dialogue; (c) the adoption by the ECB, and implementation by the Eurosystem, in spite of the ongoing litigation and concurrent with it, of a new program for interventions in the secondary sovereign bond markets, which has not been contested; and (d) the peculiarities of the final judgement of the German Federal Constitutional Court on 21 June 2016.Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Downloads
How to Cite
Sáinz de Vicuña Barroso, A. (2016). The ECB monetary policy scrutinized by the German Constitutional Court: the judgment of 21 June 2016 in OMT case. Revista De Derecho Comunitario Europeo, (55), 1067–1099. https://doi.org/10.18042/cepc/rdce.55.08
Issue
Section
CASE LAW GERMAN FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURT
License
Copyright
Submission of a manuscript to the RDCE implies having read and accepted the journal's editorial guidelines and instructions for authors. When a work is accepted for publication, it is understood that the author grants the RDCE exclusive rights of reproduction, distribution and, where appropriate, sale of his manuscript for exploitation in all countries of the world in printed version, as well as any other magnetic, optical and digital media.
Authors shall transfer the publishing rights of their manuscript to RDCE so that it may be disseminated and capitalised on Intranets, the Internet and any web portals and wireless devices that the publisher may decide, by placing it at the disposal of users so that the latter may consult it online and extract content from it, print it and/or download and save it. These activities must comply with the terms and conditions outlined on the website hosting the work. However, the RDCE authorises authors of papers published in the journal to include a copy of these papers, once published, on their personal websites and/or other open access digital repositories. Copies must include a specific mention of RDCE, citing the year and issue of the journal in which the article was published, and adding a link to the RDCE website(s).
A year after its publication, the works of the RDCE will be under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivative 4.0 International license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which allows third parties to share the work as long as its author and its first publication is indicated, without the right to commercial exploitation and the elaboration of derivative works.
Plagiarism and scientific fraud
The publication of work that infringes on intellectual property rights is the sole responsibility of the authors, including any conflicts that may occur regarding infringement of copyright. This includes, most importantly, conflicts related to the commission of plagiarism and/or scientific fraud.
Practices constituting scientific plagiarism are as follows:
1. Presenting the work of others as your own.
2. Adopting words or ideas from other authors without due recognition.
3. Not using quotation marks or another distinctive format to distinguish literal quotations.
4. Giving incorrect information about the true source of a citation.
5. The paraphrasing of a source without mentioning the source.
6. Excessive paraphrasing, even if the source is mentioned.
Practices constituting scientific fraud are as follows:
1. Fabrication, falsification or omission of data and plagiarism.
2. Duplicate publication.
3. Conflicts of authorship.
Warning
Any breach of these Rules shall constitute a ground for rejection of the manuscript submitted.
