## Facts

- In early 2003, the Iraq crisis escalated and military action against Iraq appeared imminent.
- Turkey requested NATO consultations under Article 4 of the North Atlantic Treaty; on Feb. 19, 2003, NATO authorized stationing AWACS aircraft and defensive systems in Turkey.
- NATO AWACS aircraft relocated from Geilenkirchen (Germany) to Konya (Turkey) and began operations over Turkish territory on Feb. 26, 2003.
- German soldiers comprised roughly one-third of AWACS crews; AWACS provided airborne surveillance and command-and-control functions, including directing fighter aircraft.
- The Federal Government treated German participation as execution of NATO obligations within executive foreign affairs powers and did not seek prior Bundestag approval.
- The FDP parliamentary group asserted the mission was a “deployment of armed forces” requiring Bundestag constitutive approval and that the Iraq-war context created a concrete risk of involvement in armed hostilities.
- The mission ended on Apr. 17, 2003; the parliamentary group nevertheless pursued an Organstreit action seeking a declaration of violated parliamentary rights.

## Issues

1. Whether Germany’s participation with soldiers on NATO AWACS flights over Turkey constituted a deploy­ment of armed forces requiring prior Bundestag approval under the Basic Law’s defence provisions.
2. Whether the Federal Government violated Bundestag participation rights by omitting to obtain that approval.
3. Whether the case remained admissible after the deployment ended due to a continuing interest in declaratory relief.

## Decision

- The Federal Constitutional Court held the application admissible despite completion of the mission, citing a continuing interest in a declaratory ruling due to risk of repetition and need for clarification.
- The Court held the AWACS mission was a deployment of armed forces triggering the parliamentary approval requirement because the deployment context and concrete circumstances created a specific, non-remote expectation of involvement in armed conflict.
- The Court declared that the Federal Government violated the Bundestag’s participation right by failing to obtain parliamentary approval for the AWACS deployment from Feb. 26 to Apr. 17, 2003.
- The Court rejected attempts to characterize the operation as merely “routine” or as a foreign-affairs measure immune from the parliamentary reservation.

## Legal Principles

- Under the Basic Law’s defence-related provisions, deployments of armed forces generally require constitutive, in-principle prior approval of the Bundestag.
- Parliamentary approval is required when the deployment context and specific legal and factual circumstances indicate a concrete expectation that German soldiers will be involved in armed conflicts, even if no combat has yet occurred.
- Whether this “concrete expectation” threshold is met is fully subject to judicial review; it is not committed solely to executive political assessment.
- Participation in collective security systems (including NATO) does not permit the executive to bypass Bundestag authorization for concrete troop deployments by re-labeling them as general foreign affairs implementation.

## Conclusion

The Court ruled that Germany’s participation in NATO AWACS surveillance over Turkey during the Iraq crisis required prior Bundestag approval because the mission carried a concretely expected risk of involvement in hostilities, and it declared the Federal Government’s failure to seek authorization a violation of parliamentary participation rights.


FDP Parliamentary Group v. Federal Government (AWACS II), 121 BVerfGE 135 (BVerfG 2008)