In article 30 ABS. 1 set of 2 BVerfGG is to behold, the decision of the Federal Constitutional Court in writing to Word that, to justify and those judges who have worked with her, is to sign. Article 30 ABS. 3, does that say all decisions to announce the parties are. To reject a provision which allows the Constitutional Court according to 93d BVerfGG only for work relief and relief to constitutional complaints without justification is indeed non-existent.
The BVerfGG is, and this is here once very clearly that no instrument to the work relief or relief from there make people, but should serve the litigants as all laws. It is therefore obviously not speculation, the decisions rejected the Federal Constitutional Court without explanation until 2008 no validity in law are, because is not comprehensible, who has rejected these decisions, is thus not assured that the complaints were ever presented to a judge and reliefs and consulting secrets of the constitutional judges are advanced and represent no rechtswirsame form a decision. The complainant receives only a print copy of the decision and can recognize the signatures of the judge only in printed form. In the case of the constitutional complaint 1 BvR 3282/08 added yet, which was communicated to the complainant that the constitutional complaint is unfounded after reading the page 1 of a 15seitigen complaint. Only the file number of the angefriffenen decisions were included on the first page of the complaint and his desire listed to submit a constitutional complaint. Also this unique of letter of the Federal Constitutional Court is the editorial, so to assume is that upon receipt of all rejected complaints without grounds get a stamp post office Court, business rooms and then Presidential Council and then return to the sender. Extensive files views, at least until four instances may arise or read complaints typefaces is absent after three obviously.