Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T02:36:45.510Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Direct Cooperation Has Begun: Some Remarks on the Judgment of the ECJ on the OMT Decision of the ECB in Response to the German Federal Constitutional Court's First Request for a Preliminary Ruling

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

Sven Simon

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

By its first request for a preliminary ruling, the German Constitutional Court aired its doubts about the lawfulness of the Outright Monetary Transactions (OMTs) program. In this article it is argued that the ECB's pledge in the summer of 2012 to do “whatever it takes” to safeguard the monetary policy transmission mechanism in all countries of the euro area by buying government bonds was generally compatible with EU law. However, it is argued that there is some potential for the ECB to infringe the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) while acting according to this announcement. The peculiarity of the situation, the author argues, is that we might be dealing with a “self-fulfilling prophecy” in that the ECB announces a particular policy, which might not be compatible with EU law, but the act announced, will never take place because the political problem would have been resolved by the measure previously announced. The critical question in this scenario refers to how a court should react to such a situation. The author argues that a court in such a situation has to show the legal limits of the particular institution, but neither the ECJ nor the German Constitutional Court may replace the central banks' task to maintain financial stability. Finally, a comment is given on how the German Constitutional Court will react to the ECJ's decision in that case.

Type
Special Section
Information
German Law Journal , Volume 16 , Issue 4 , 01 September 2015 , pp. 1025 - 1048
Copyright
Copyright © 2015 by German Law Journal GbR 

References

1 Draghi, Mario, President of the ECB, & Vítor Constâncio, Vice-President of the ECB, Introductory statement to the press conference (Aug. 2, 2012), http://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/pressconf/2012/html/is120802.en.html (“The Governing Council, within its mandate to maintain price stability over the medium term and in observance of its independence in determining monetary policy, may undertake outright open market operations of a size adequate to reach its objective. Furthermore, the Governing Council may consider undertaking further nonstandard monetary policy measures according to what is required to repair monetary policy transmission.”).Google Scholar

2 See ECB Monthly Bulletin (Oct. 2012) 7–9, http://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/mobu/mb201210en.pdf. Under the OMT program, the ECB and the national central banks will conduct outright transactions in secondary sovereign bond markets with the aim of safeguarding an appropriate monetary policy transmission and the singleness of the monetary policy. No ex ante quantitative limits are set on the size of OMTs, but only bonds with a maturity of one to three years may be purchased. Both the amount of holdings and their market values will be disclosed. Moreover, interventions by the ECB on the secondary market will be carried out only for countries that have requested European Financial Stabilization Mechanism (EFSF)/European Stability Mechanism (ESM) support and provided that the request is approved by the Eurogroup. Conditionality will be defined in the context of an EFSF/ESM macroeconomic adjustment program. The ECB would purchase bonds on the secondary market if and until the country complies with the conditions attached to the EFSF/ESM support. However, the ECB Governing Council will maintain full discretion on the start, continuation and suspension of the OMT transactions and it will adopt its decisions in accordance with its monetary policy mandate.Google Scholar

3 Draghi, Mario, President of European Central Bank, Global Investment Conference (July 26, 2012), available at http://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/key/date/2012/html/sp120726.en.html.Google Scholar

4 See Case C-364/92, SAT Fluggesellschaft mbH v. Eurocontrol, 1994 E.C.R. I-43, para. 9; Case C-402/98, ATB and Others v. Ministero per le Politiche Agricole, Azienda di Stato per gli interventi nel mercato agricolo (AIMA) and Maria Pittaro, 2000 E.C.R. I-5501, para. 29.Google Scholar

5 Case C-62/14, Peter Gauweiler and Others v. Deutscher Bundestag, para. 15 (June 16, 2015).Google Scholar

6 Id. at para. 18.Google Scholar

7 Id. at para. 19.Google Scholar

8 Id. at para. 20.Google Scholar

9 Id. at para. 24; with regard to an earlier judgment in the ECJ, see Case C-399/11, Melloni v. Minesterio Fiscal, para. 28 and the case-law cited (Feb. 26, 2013), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

10 Id. at para. 43.Google Scholar

11 See Thiele, Alexander, Das Mandat Der Ezb Und Die Krise Des Euro 26 et seq. (2013).Google Scholar

12 See Hatje, Armin, Art. 119 AEUV, in EU-Kommentar margin no. 4 et seq. and margin no. 14 et seq. (Jürgen Schwarze et al. eds., 3d. ed. 2012).Google Scholar

13 Cf. Case C-370/12, Pringle v. Government of Ireland, Ireland and the Attorney General, para. 53 (Nov. 27, 2012), http://curia.europa.eu/; see Sauer, Heiko, Doubtful it stood…, in this issue, at A.I.1.1.1.Google Scholar

14 See Thiele, , supra note 11, at 27 et seq. Google Scholar

15 Thiele, Alexander, Friendly or Unfriendly Act? The “Historic” Referral of the Constitutional Court to the ECJ Regarding the ECB's OMT Program, 15 German L.J. 241, 259 (2014).Google Scholar

16 Consolidated Version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union art. 5 (1), 120 et seq., May 9, 2008, 2008 O.J. (C 115) 47 [hereinafter TFEU].Google Scholar

17 Id. at arts. 2(3), 5(1); cf. Pringle, Case C-370/12 at para. 64.Google Scholar

18 TFEU arts. 119(2), 127(1) sent. 1, & 282(3) sent. 3.Google Scholar

19 TFEU art. 127(1) sent. 2.Google Scholar

20 See Bundesverfassungsgericht [BVerfG] [Federal Constitutional Court], Jan. 14, 2014, Case No. 2 BvR 2728/13, para. 68, https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidungen/EN/2014/01/rs20140114_2bvr272813en.html [hereinafter OMT Decision].Google Scholar

21 See generally TFEU.Google Scholar

22 TFEU art. 127(2) sent. 1; see Potacs, Michael, Art. 127 AEUV, in EU-Kommentar margin no. 6 (Jürgen Schwarze et al. eds., 3d ed. 2012).Google Scholar

23 See Joined Cases C-46/93 & C-48/93, Brasserie du Pêcheur SA and Factortame Ltd and others, 1996 E.C.R. I-1029, para. 55.Google Scholar

24 See Thiele, , supra note 11, at 31.Google Scholar

25 Bast, Jürgen, Don't Act Beyond Your Powers: The Perils and Pitfalls of the German Constitutional Court's Ultra Vires Review, 15 German L.J. 167, 177 (2014); Heiko Sauer, Doubtful it stood…, in this issue, at A.I.2.1.2.Google Scholar

26 In order to get an idea of how the ECB interprets the independence rule, see Eur. Cent. Bank Opinion of 1 July 210 on the remuneration of the staff of Banca Nationala a Romaniei (CON/2010/51); Eur. Cent. Bank Opinion of 25 March 2010 on independence, confidentiality and the prohibition of monetary financing (CON/2010/25); Eur. Cent. Bank Opinion of 14 July 2009 on the taxation of Banca d'Italia's gold reserves (COM/2009/59); Eur. Cent. Bank Opinion of 18 May 2009 on measures on public sector remuneration with regard to central bank independence (COM/2009/47).Google Scholar

27 See Joined Cases 83 & 94/76, u.a., Bayerische HNL Vermehrungsbetriebe and Others v. Council and Commission of the European Communities, 1978 E.C.R. I-1209, para. 6 et seq. Google Scholar

28 Gauweiler, Case C-62/14 at para 68.Google Scholar

29 See Joined Cases C-120/06 P & C–121/06 P, FIAMM and others v. Council of the European Union and Commission of the European Communities, 2008 E.C.R. I-6531, para. 174.Google Scholar

30 Case 265/87, Schräder v. Hauptzollamt Gronau, 1989 E.C.R. 2237, para. 22; Case C-331/88, The Queen v. Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and Secretary of State of Health, ex parte Fedesa and Others, 1990 E.C.R. I-4023, para. 14; see Brasserie du Pêcheur and Factortame Ltd., Joined Cases C-46/93 & C-48/93 at para. 45.Google Scholar

31 See Bast, , supra note 25, at 176.Google Scholar

32 See id. at 176 et seq. Google Scholar

33 Gauweiler, Case C-62/14 at para. 74.Google Scholar

34 Id. at para. 75.Google Scholar

35 TFEU art 123(1).Google Scholar

36 OMT Decision, BVerfG, Case No. 2 BvR 2728/1 at para. 87 et seq. Google Scholar

37 Häde, Ulrich, Art. 123 AEUV, in EUV/AEUV para. 1 (Christian Calliess & Matthias Ruffert eds., 4th ed. 2011).Google Scholar

38 Wendel, Mattias, Kompetenzrechtliche Grenzgänge: Karlsruhes Ultra-vires-Vorlage an den EuGH, 74 Zeitschrift für Ausländisches Öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht (ZaöRV) 615, 655 (2014).Google Scholar

39 Thiele, , supra note 11, at 60.Google Scholar

40 Eur. Cent. Bank, Decision of the European Central Bank of 18 July 2012 (ECB/2012/14), para. 4, https://www.ecb.europa.eu/ecb/legal/pdf/en_ecb_2012_14_f_sign.pdf.Google Scholar

41 See Deutsche Bundesbank (German Federal Bank), Statement to the Federal Constitutional Court 11 (Dec. 21, 2012).Google Scholar

42 See Mensching, Christopher, Das Verbot der monetären Haushaltsfinanzierung, in Art. 123 Abs. 1 AEUV, Europarecht (EuR), 333, 334 (2014).Google Scholar

43 Häde, supra note 37, at para. 10; Rudolf Bandilla, Art. 123 AEUV, in Das Recht der Europäischen Union para. 6 (Eberhard Grabitz, Meinhard Hilf, Martin Nettesheim eds., 2011); Christoph Herrmann, EZB-Programm für die Kapitalmärkte verstößt nicht gegen die Verträge – Erwiderung auf Martin Seidel, 26 Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht (EuZW), 645, 646 (2010); Thiele, supra note 11, at 66 et seq. Google Scholar

44 See Herrmann, , supra note 43, at 646.Google Scholar

45 See Häde, supra note 37, at para. 10.Google Scholar

46 Lorz, Ralph Alexander, Euro-Krise und Rettungsschirm: Weicht das Recht der Politik?, in Legal Tribune Online (May 14, 2010), available at http://www.lto.de/persistent/a_id/525/.Google Scholar

47 Mayer, Franz C., Rebels without a cause? Zur OMT-Vorlage des Bundesverfassungsgerichts, EuR 473, 487 (2014).Google Scholar

48 See Herrmann, , supra note 43, at 646.Google Scholar

49 Seidel, Martin, Der Ankauf nicht markt- und börsengängiger Staatsanleihen, namentlich Griechenlands, durch die Europäische Zentralbank und durch nationale Zentralbanken-rechtlich nur fragwürdig oder Rechtsverstoß?, EuZW (2010) 521; Walter Frenz & Christian Ehlenz, Schuldenkrise und Grenzen der europäischen Wirtschaftspolitik, Europäisches Wirtschafts - Und Steurrecht (EWS) 211, 212 (2010).Google Scholar

50 Kerber, Markus C. & Städter, Stefan, Die EZB in der Krise: Unabhängigkeit und Rechtsbindung als Spannungsverhältnis, EuZW 536, 537 (2011).Google Scholar

51 Id. Google Scholar

52 Siekmann, See Helmut, “Law and Economics of Monetary Union,” in Research Handbook of the Economics of European Union Law 370 et seq. (Thomas Eger & Hans-Bernd Schäfer eds., 2012).Google Scholar

53 Thiele, , supra note 11, at 60, 66.Google Scholar

54 See generally Eur. Cent. Bank, Guideline of the European Central Bank on the monetary policy instruments and procedure of the Eurosystem, O.J. 2011 L 331/1, § 6.2.1.5.Google Scholar

55 Directive 2004/39/EC, of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on markets in financial instruments amending Council Directives 85/611/EEC and 93/6/EEC and Directive 2000/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 93/22/EEC, 2004 O.J. (L 14), lastly changed by Art. 94(1) EC Directive 2014/65, of 15 May 2014, 2014 O.J. (L 173) 349.Google Scholar

56 Thiele, , supra note 11, at 60, 61.Google Scholar

57 Speech by Mario Draghi, President of the European Central Bank, Global Investment Conference in London, (July 26, 2012), available at http://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/key/date/2012/html/sp120726.en.html.Google Scholar

58 See Gauweiler, Case C-62/14 at para. 113.Google Scholar

59 Id. at paras. 103–09.Google Scholar

60 See Potacs, , supra, note 22, at para. 6.Google Scholar

61 See Herrmann, Christoph, Die Bewältigung der Euro-Staatsschulden-Krise an den Grenzen des deutschen und europäischen Währungsverfassungsrechts, EuZW 805, 810 (2012).Google Scholar

62 See also Thym, Daniel, Anmerkung zu EuGH, Rs. C-370/12 (Pringle), Juristenzeitung (JZ) 259, 263 (2013).Google Scholar

63 OMT Decision, BVerfG, Case No. 2 BvR 2728/1 at para. 102.Google Scholar

64 Cf. Kahl, Wolfang, Bewältigung der Staatsschuldenkrise unter Kontrolle des Bundesverfassungsgerichts – ein Lehrstück zur horizontalen und vertikalen Gewaltenteilung, Deutsches Verwaltungsblatt (DVBl) 197 (2013).Google Scholar

65 Mayer, Franz C., supra note 47, at 509.Google Scholar

66 Mayer, Franz C., Rebels Without a Cause? A Critical Analysis of the German Constitutional Court's OMT Reference, 15 German L.J. 111, 114 (2014).Google Scholar

67 See Mayer, , supra note 47, at 509.Google Scholar

68 OMT Decision, BVerfG, Case No. 2 BvR 2728/1 at para. 59.Google Scholar

69 Fabio, Udo Di, Karlsruhe Makes a Referral, 15 German L.J. 107, 109 (2014).Google Scholar

70 Sester, Peter, The ECB's Controversial Securities Market Programme (SMP) and its role in relation to the modified EFSF and the future ESM, 9 Eur. Co. & Fin. L.R. 156 et seq. (July 2014); Matthias Ruffert, Europarecht: Vorlagebeschluss des BVerfG zum OMT-Programm, Juristische Schulung (JuS) 373, 374 (2014).Google Scholar

71 See Herrmann, , supra note 61, at 811.Google Scholar

72 OMT Decision, BVerfG, Case No. 2 BvR 2728/1 at para. 12.Google Scholar

73 Cf. Weidmann, Jens, Eingangserklärung anlässlich der mündlichen Verhandlung im Hauptsacheverfahren ESM/EZB beim Bundesverfassungsgericht in Karlsruhe am 11.6.2013, available at http://www.bundesbank.de/Redaktion/DE/Kurzmeldungen/Stellungnahmen/2013_06_11_esm_ezb.html.Google Scholar

74 Id. Google Scholar

75 Bundesverfassungsgericht, [BverfG][Federal Constitutional Court], Feb. 7, 1992, 89 Entscheidungen des Bundesverfassungsgerichts [BVerfGE] 155, 204, 207.Google Scholar

76 Gauweiler, Case C-62/14 at para. 126.Google Scholar

77 Opinion of Advocate General Pedro Cruz Villalón at para. 196, Case C-62/14, Peter Gauweiler and Others v. Deutscher Bundestag (Jan. 14, 2015), http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=161370&pageIndex=0&doclang=en&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=10276.Google Scholar

78 See Wiedemann, Andreas, Overview of the Karlsruhe Hearing on OMT, Summary, 13 June 2013, available at http://www.bruegel.org/nc/blog/detail/article/1109-overview-of-the-karlsruhe-hearing-on-omt-summary/.Google Scholar

79 See Gauweiler, Case C-62/14 at para. 87.Google Scholar

80 Uerpmann-Wittzack, Robert, Völkerrecht als Ausweichordnung – am Beispiel der Euro-Rettung, EuR-Bei 49, 53 (2013).Google Scholar

81 Kassiert Schäuble die Wunderwaffe der EZB? Die Kritik am OMT-Anleihekaufprogramm der Europäischen Zentralbank ist groß in Deutschland. Das Verfassungsgericht lehnt es ab. Hat nun ausgerechnet der Bundesfinanzminister das wirkungsvolle Instrument abgeräumt?, F.A.Z. (May 24, 2015), http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/eurokrise/omt-schaeuble-kassiert-die-wunderwaffe-der-ezb-12955803.html.Google Scholar

82 See generally, Bundesverfassungsgericht [BVerfG] [Federal Constitutional Court], Feb. 28,2012, Case No. 2 BvR 8/11 – 9er Sondergremium, paras. 72 et seq. Google Scholar

83 Gauweiler, Case C-62/14 at para. 83; Niels Petersen, Karlsruhe Not Only Barks, But Finally Bites—Some Remarks on the OMT Decision of the German Constitutional Court, 15 German L.J. 321 325 (2015).Google Scholar

84 Bundesverfassungsgericht [BverfG] [Federal Constitutional Court], Sep. 7, 2011, Case No. 2 BvR 1485/10, 124 Entscheidungeng des Bundesverfassungsgerichts [BVerfGE] paras. 129, 179–80.Google Scholar

85 Gauweiler, Case C-62/14 at para. 116.Google Scholar

86 Id. Google Scholar

87 Id. at 119.Google Scholar

88 See, e.g., the resulting problems under the payment system TARGET2 which cannot be explained in detail here.Google Scholar

89 Matthes, Jürgen & Demary, Markus, Überschreitet die EZB mit ihren Staatsanleihekäufen ihr Mandat?, Wirtschaftsdienst 607, 614 (2013).Google Scholar

90 OMT Decision, BVerfG, Case No. 2 BvR 2728/13 at paras 99–100.Google Scholar

91 Eur. Cent. Bank, ECB announces expanded asset purchase programme (Jan. 22, 2015), https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/pr/date/2015/html/pr150122_1.en.html.Google Scholar

92 Koen Lenaerts cited by Andrej Lang, How Constitutional Courts talk to each other: The Potential of the Preliminary Reference Procedure for Europe's pluralist Verfassungsverbund, VerfassungsBlog (VerfBlog), (Nov. 28, 2014), available at http://www.verfassungsblog.de/en/wie-verfassungsgerichte-miteinander-reden-das-potential-des-vorlageverfahrens-fuer-europas-pluralistischen-verfassungsverbund/#.Ve3H2LSPrL8.Google Scholar

93 Pringle, Case C-370/12; Melloni, Case C-399/11; Case C-73/08, Nicolas Bressol and Others and Céline Chaverot and Others v. Gouvernement de la Communauté française, 2010 E.C.R. I-2735; Case C-236/09, Association Belge des Consommateurs Test-Achats ASBL and Others v. Conseil des ministers, 2011 E.C.R. I-773; Joined Cases C-293/12 & C-594/12, Digital Rights Ireland Ltd v. Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and Others, and Kärntner Landesregierung, Michael Seitlinger, Cristof Tschohl and Others (Apr. 8, 2014), http://curia.europa.eu/; Case C-168/13, Jeremy F. v. Premier ministre (May 30, 2013), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

94 Lang, Andrej, supra note 92.Google Scholar

95 Id. Google Scholar

96 Goldmann, See Matthias, Mutually Assured Discretion: The ECJ on the ECB's OMT Policy, VerfBlog, (June 18, 2015), available at http://www.verfassungsblog.de/mutually-assured-discretion-the-ecj-on-the-ecbs-omt-policy/.Google Scholar