Press Conference of Scientists4Future on 12.3.2019

BPK: "Scientists for Future" zu den Protesten für mehr Klimaschutz - 12. März 2019

Watch the video here

The joint statment of 12.3.2019 you can find here (PDF Download).

Epochal Speach by Greta Thunberg

Watch the Video here

"...We need to focus every inch of our being on climate change. Because if we fail to do so then all our achievements and progress have been for nothing.

And all that will remain of our political leaders legacy, will be the greatest failure of human history. And they will be remembered as the greatest villains of all time because they have choosen not to listen and not to act. But this does not have to be. There is still time...."

from the Speech by Greta Thunberg, Climate Activist, at the Congress of the European Economic -and Social Committee on 21.2.2019 in Brussels.

The whole speach you can read here (PDF Download)

Presseerklärung zur JEFTA-Klage v. 29.01.2019

Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren,


anbei übersende ich Ihnen eine Verfassungsklage gegen das Freihandelsabkommen neuer Generation zwischen Japan und der EU (JEFTA) , die heute eingereicht wurde.

Die 9.394 BeschwerdeführerInnen fordern, angeführt von Frau Grimmenstein-Balas, die Feststellung, dass das Abkommen schwebend unwirksam ist, weil die Zustimmungen aller EU-Mitgliedstaaten fehlen.

Denn das EU-only-Gutachten des EuGH verstößt u.a. eindeutig gegen Art. 191 Abs. 4 AEUV und wird in der Verfassungsklage noch mit vielen weiteren Argumenten wiederlegt. Damit müssen ab sofort alle Freihandelsabkommen als „gemischte Abkommen“ verhandelt werden.

Zudem ist JEFTA nichtig, weil es gegen höchstes Völkerrecht (ius cogens) verstößt, weil durch Art. 16.4.5 JEFTA Klimaschutzmaßnahmen nur erlaubt sein sollen, wenn sie kein Handelshindernis darstellen.

Das ist insofern absurd, als praktisch jede Klimaschutzmaßnahme – wie die Schließung von Kohlekraftwerken oder der Entzug von Ölförderkonzessionen – den betroffenen Betreiber an der Fortsetzung seines bisherigen Handels hindert.

Wir machen hierbei geltend, dass man das UN-Klimaschutzabkommen von Paris als höchstes Völkerrecht bewerten und in dessen allerhöchsten Schutz stellen muss. Schließlich soll es als Notstands-Abkommen durch eine neue klimaneutrale, soziale Weltwirtschaft das Überleben der Menschheit ermöglichen.

Weiter stellt JEFTA aufgrund des Ausschusswesens eine Entmachtung der parlamentarischen Demokratie dar.

Und schließlich soll JEFTA offenbar als Instrument des Neoliberalismus eingesetzt werden, um massiv die verfassungsrechtlich geschützten sozialen Rechte und die ebenfalls verfassungsrechtlich geschützte soziale Marktwirtschaft zurückdrängen.

Hierzu legen wir dar, dass der Neoliberalismus inzwischen so aggressiv wird, dass er sogar die Menschenrechte und die UNO für überholt erklärt (siehe: WEF-The Global-Risks-Report und Presseerklärung v. 18.1.2019 auf, um diese als Handelshemmnisse beiseiteschieben zu können.

Zur Umsetzung des UN-Klimaschutzabkommens ist der Erhalt der sozialen Marktwirtschaft jedoch wichtiger denn je.

Wir erwarten hiernach umgehend eine Erklärung der EU-Kommission und auch der Bundesregierung, dass JEFTA aus rechtlichen Gründen bis auf weiteres schwebend unwirksam ist.

Und wir erwarten eine breite lebhafte öffentliche Diskussion.

Zum Schutz der parlamentarischen Demokratie, der sozialen Marktwirtschaft und des UN-Klimaschutzabkommens muss JEFTA für verfassungswidrig, völkerrechtswidrig und nichtig erklärt werden.

Karlsruhe, 29.1.2019

Gisela Toussaint
Geigersbergstr. 31
76227 Karlsruhe

Verfassungsbeschwerde gegen JEFTA

Gegen das „Freihandelsabkommen neuer Generation“ zwischen Japan und der Europäischen Union (JEFTA) ist zum Schutz

- des Wirtschaftssystems der sozialen Marktwirtschaft
- der parlamentarischen Demokratie
- der Durchführbarkeit des UN-Klimaschutzabkommens von Paris

am 29.1.2019 Klage vor dem Bundesverfassungsgericht eingereicht worden von Frau Marianne Grimmenstein-Balas sowie insgesamt 9.393 weiteren BeschwerdeführerInnen.

Aufgrund schwerwiegender Verstöße gegen das Völkerrecht wird ebenfalls beantragt,

- die Nichtigkeit von JEFTA gem. Art. 53 WVRKIO festzustellen.

Die Verfassungsklage können sie hier abrufen.

Gordi Kerner: Rap gegen die Klima-Katastrophe

Der Rapper, Gordian Kerner, hat einen sensationellen Rap zum Thema Klimakatastrophe geschrieben. Das Musik-Video (Gordi - Anthropozän (2019)) können Sie sich unter folgendem Link anschauen.

Press Release on WEF-The Global Risks Report 2019

The World Economic Forum (WEF) declares in its „The Global Risks Report 2019“, released on 16th of January 2019,

nothing less than that Human Rights, the UN and the Western liberal democratic norms are politicized, outdated and nostalgic.
The historical tipping point would have come to replaced them by economic, trade and political power rules.
Here there are the most explicit quotations:


Renewing and improving the architecture of our national and internationale political and economic system is this generation’s defining task.
The Future Shocks section again focuses on potential rapid and dramatic changes in systems we rely on – topics this year include quantum computing, human rights and economic populism.“ (P.5)

„Power and Values - Evolving Risks in a Multiconceptual World
A period of change in the international system is destabilizing assumptions about global order. Last year’s Global Risks Report argued that the world is becoming not just multipolar, but also “multiconceptual”. This chapter further examines how changing power dynamics and diverging norms and values are affecting global politics and the global economy.

The chapter begins by outlining how normative differences increasingly shape domestic and international politics. It then highlights three trends with the potential to trigger disruptive change: (1) the difficulty of sustaining global consensus on ethically charged issues such as human rights;..“ (P.21)

„No room for nostalgia
It should be no surprise that a multipolar world is also more multiconceptual: as global power is diffused, there is more room for divergent values to shape geopolitics than there has been since the end of World War II. After the bipolar Cold War gave way to unipolar US power, some argued that the battle of ideas was over and Western liberal democratic norms would, in time, prevail globally. That was a bold claim then and it looks like hubris now. In today’s world, narratives of gradual convergence on any set of overarching values look unconvincing. Values seem to be a source of division rather than unity, not just globally but also within regions and countries.

Nostalgia is an inadequate response, especially as previous decades were hardly risk-free. The imperative now is to understand the changes that are happening and learn how to safely navigate the challenges they entail. After a period of globalization that has deeply integrated many countries, reconfiguring relationships is unlikely to be easy.“(P.22)

„However, the most acute challenge may be posed by human rights, which have become a litmus test for the changing role of values in the international system.
As geopolitical tensions and competition have intensified, human rights have been increasingly politicized.6 The complex global picture that is emerging in that area—nominal alignment on shared values, marked differences in interpretation and implementation, fragmented approaches to multilateral institutions—is a microcosm of the wider role of values in the international system. An optimistic scenario sees the kind of flux that is evident around human rights as an opening for states and other stakeholders to find better ways of doing things. However, values divergence means that it will be difficult even to align on what „better means in this context. As sketched out in one of our Future Shocks (see page 74), it is possible to imagine a tipping point is reached where states simply abandon ideas – and institutions – that limit their autonomy.“ (P.24)

Amid a new phase of strong-state politics and deepening domestic polarization, it becomes easier for governments to sacrifice individual protections to collective stability. This already happens widely: lip service is paid to human rights that are breached at home or abroad when it suits states’ interests. What if even lip service goes by the wayside, and human rights are dismissed as anachronisms that weaken the state at a time of growing threats?

In authoritarian countries with weak human rights records, the impact of such a tipping point might be one of degree—more rights breached. In some democratic countries, qualitative change would be more likely—a jolt towards an illiberalism in which power-holders determine whose rights get protected, and in which individuals on the losing side of elections risk censorship, detention or violence as “enemies of the people”.

Battles are already under way among major powers at the UN over the future of the human rights system. In a multipolar world of divergent fundamental values, building far-reaching consensus in this area may be close to impossible. “Universal” rights are likely to be interpreted locally, and those interpretations then fought over globally. Even superficial changes might be of modest help, such as new language that is less politicized than “human rights”.“ (P.74)

This planned destruction of the International Declaration of Human Rights as well as of the United Nations Organisation and the Western liberal democratic norms by the members of the World Economic Forum would mean the destruction of the so called „ius cogens – the absolute elementary binding law of the whole global community and right and shelter for each single global citizen on earth“

This attack is the most thinkable aggressive attack against each single global citizen as well as global mankind and world peace.

This attack would as well undermine and destroy all constitutional and legal systems and all constitutional states on earth.

This attack would as well undermine and destroy all constitutional and legal systems and all constitutional states on earth

And this attack would destroy the eternal international peace balance.

But the real and most desastrous economic and global risk – the unstoped massive CO²-pollution fueled by the mighty fossil industry – is not even mentioned by the World Economic Forum.

So the WEF does not really want to protect us against global risks. They obviously just want to go on protecting „big industry“ against the existentially needed worldwide economic regulation for common goods and for the survival of all mankind.

To globaly survive the climate catastrophe global mankind needs a strong UN to fullfill the UN-Paris Agreement and strong democracies to make quick, strong and sharp regulative cuts against the ongoing activities of the fossil industry.

So the UN and all democratic organisations and NGOs are called to protest against the desastrous plans of the WEF and to most powerfully protect our international Human Rights, our United Nations, our international goal of national and global Democracy and our UN-Paris Agreement to be very quickly fullfilled.

Karlsruhe, 18.January 2019

Gisela Toussaint
Geigersbergstr. 31
76227 Karlsruhe

Greta Thunberg at COP 24

Watch the Video here