Here's a one of those potentially big stories that does not make the lamestream controlled media radar, but it could be one of those stories that we're looking at that is more potential fallout from the ripple-effects on society of the corona virus madness. It was spotted by K.M., to whom a big thank you for bringing it to our attention:
The language of the court's decision is - for a legal decision - oddly not filled with the usual flannel-mouthed obfuscations, but cuts straight to the point:
This morning, the German constitutional court issued a 86-page decision in which it upholds the constitutional complaint against the German ratification of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court [decision here]. According to the Court, the German act by which it was to accede to the UPC Agreement, violates the German populace's democratic rights under Article 38 Basic Law, because it was not passed with the parliamentary majority required by Article 23 Basic Law.
Article 1 of the UPC Agreement provides that "A Unified Patent Court for the settlement of disputes relating to European patents and European patents with unitary effect is hereby established." According to the German constitutional court, this constitutes a transfer of adjudication authorities, which implicates the constitutional rights of the German populace.
Such a transfer of authority requires, by German law, a two-thirds majority in the Bundestag [the German federal parliament]. German constitutional law only recognises international obligations to the extent they are compatible with the national constitution [even in the context of the EU: see the infamous decisions Solange Iand Solange II]. This means that the recognition of international adjudicatory authority requires strict constitutional safeguards, which were not met in this case. Thus, the complainant's rights under Article 23 Basic Law were not observed.
Putting all that into plain English, the regulatory powers of the Unified Patent Court of the EU are, as far as the German constitution is concerned, unconstitutional. And that translates into a major blow against the European Union, whose open borders policies are a bit tattered in the wake of the corona virus story. One of the things I find odd and ironically refreshing, is that when one looks at the EU patent arrangements, they appear - at least to me - to be an updated version of the sort of patent regulation that Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy put into place as a (little known) component of the Rome-Berlin pact, and that was subsequently expanded in the thinking of wartime Nazi jurist and lawyer Walther Hallstein, and then subsequently incorporated into the 1942 Reichsbank-I.G. Farben study sponsored by Nazi economics minister Walther Funk. That study, as I reviewed it in my book The Third Way, planned to create a European federation via regulatory authority bypassing national parliaments, and that authority included patents. Indeed, patents were a special and principal concern of these studies. It is therefore ironic that while the structure of the EU so closely resembles these wartime studies, that one primary concern of the study - patents - should be struck down as being in opposition to fundamental law of post-war Germany!
Time will tell, of course, whether this is a signal of the potential unraveling of the EU or not, but for the moment, this cannot be good news to the unelected regulators in Brussels, especially in the wake of Brexit.
Let me know what you think...
See you on the flip side...