Hartz-IV-sanctions on the test bench

May be reduced Hartz IV benefits? No: sanctions are an existential threat, they say. Admonition was necessary, say others. Now, the constitutional court decides. Votes from the first day of the trial.

By Klaus Hempel, ARD-right-editorial

Stephan Harbarth is only recently that the new Chairman of the first Senate. Today's hearing is the first, which he directs. Right at the beginning of Harbarth made it clear what the Federal constitutional court will not, for example, the amount of the unemployment benefit II or to the current discussion about an unconditional basic income. "For the first time, the question of what is allowed to challenge the state, and thus the community of people before they receive social security benefits, however," he says - "and what he is allowed to enforce, possibly, by the application of sanctions."

the reason for the negotiation is not to take on the case of unemployment in Eastern Germany, where the job centre in Erfurt has reduced the unemployment money II: only 30 percent, because he has rejected a Job offer; then to 60 percent, because he got a Job on a trial basis. The man sued the job center in front of the social court Gotha. The court considers the statutory provisions to be unconstitutional and has, therefore, presented to the Federal constitutional court for examination. Justification: The state should guarantee to all people the existence minimum. This is no longer ensured, if the Hartz IV benefits.