the right to take any evidence it deems necessary for discharging its investigation
mandate (cf. BVerfGE 67, 100 <128>). […]
2. Applicants no. 1 and 2 lack standing to assert a possible violation of rights insofar
as they claim a violation of their own rights (a). They do, however, have standing to
assert a possible violation of rights to the extent that they assert rights of the Bundestag in their capacity as individual parliamentary groups and by way of pursuing
such application on behalf of the Bundestag (Prozessstandschaft) (b).
89
a) Pursuant to Art. 44(1) first sentence GG, only a one-quarter minority [in Parliament] is accorded the status of an institutionally entrenched and independent organisational sub-unit of the Bundestag, and as such only this minority is vested with its
own constitutional rights. […]
90
In this regard, the insertion of § 126a(1) no. 1 first sentence GO-BT does not merit a
different result. […] As § 126a GO-BT merely constitutes an internal rule of procedure, it cannot resolve in a definite manner conflicts that arise under constitutional law
between the majority and the minority in Parliament; most notably, such rules of procedure cannot confer any minority rights justiciable under constitutional law that
would go beyond the guarantees of Art. 44 GG. […]
91
b) […]
92
3. Applicant no. 3 lacks standing to assert a possible violation of rights.
93
a) Given that applicants no. 1 and 2, even when relying on the entirety of their membership, already lack standing to assert a possible violation of own rights in this regard, applicant no. 3 in its capacity as representative of 120 Members of the Bundestag only can most certainly not assert a possible violation of such rights under
Art. 44(1) first sentence GG in conjunction with § 126a(1) no. 1 first sentence GO-BT.
94
b) Nor is applicant no. 3 entitled, by virtue of accounting for a one-quarter minority
within the Committee of Inquiry, to assert rights of the Bundestag by way of pursuing
an action on behalf of the Bundestag in accordance with § 18(3) PUAG.
95
§ 18(3) PUAG does not confer upon just any minority in a committee of inquiry
standing to assert a possible violation of rights for such interpretation would completely disregard Art. 44(1) first sentence GG, which permeates the regulatory framework governing committees of inquiry. Therefore, standing to assert a possible violation of rights rests solely with the particular committee minority reflecting the specific
or potential Bundestag minority entitled to establish such committee, within the meaning of Art. 44(1) first sentence GG, in the first place; only such particular committee
minority may pursue an application on behalf of the Bundestag.
96
[…]
97-98
V.
Applicants no. 1 and 2 direct their application against the correct respondents, given
8/25
99