Parliament

The term "Austrian Parliament" refers to the two bodies of federal legislation, the National Council and the Federal Council.

According to Article 24 of the Federal Constitutional Law, "the National Council, together with the Federal Council," exercises federal legislative power. However, the roles of the two bodies in the legislative process are very different, as is their composition.

The Federal Assembly, consisting of the Members of the National Council and the Federal Council, is a third parliamentary body. It does not perform any legislative tasks, but only those assigned to it by the Federal Constitutional Law (e.g. swearing in the Federal President).

On 1 October 1920, the Constituent National Assembly adopted the Federal Constitutional Law (B-VG). In doing so, it created the The National Council and the The Federal Council as organs of federal legislation and theFederal Assembly as a third parliamentary organ.

The first session of the National Council (I. legislative period) took place on 10 November 1920. The Federal Council met for the first time on 1 December 1920. The Federal Assembly held its first session on 8 and 9 December 1920.

The word "parliament" originally meant "conversation" and was derived from the French "parler" (to speak or converse) and the Latin "parliamentum". Matthew Paris of St Albans was the first to apply the word "parliament" to a Grand Council of prelates, magnates and barons in 1239 and again in 1246. Since that time, the word has been used increasingly, though not exclusively, to refer to such an assembly. The word, which had initially referred to the conversation itself, gradually came to be applied to the group of people who gathered for discussion. Since the reign of Edward I, it has been used regularly to refer to a national assembly.

Source: Norman Wilding / Philip Laundy (1961): An Encyclopaedia of Parliament.

The Members of the Federal Council are delegated by the Provincial Diets. The delegation is valid for the duration of the legislative period of the delegating Provincial Diet. Therefore, the Federal Council does not have its own legislative period, but rather undergoes a partial renewal of its Members after Provincial Diet elections, which take place at different times.

The re-election of the Members of the Federal Council to be delegated by each Provincial Diet usually takes place at its constituent meeting. From the moment of their election by the Provincial Diet, Members of the Federal Council have a seat and a vote in the Federal Council. (And after the end of a Provincial Diet's legislative period or after its dissolution, the Members delegated by it remain in office until the new Provincial Diet has elected Federal Council Members.)

Changes in the distribution of the number of Federal Council Members among the individual parties as a result of a Provincial Diet election can therefore only be reflected in the composition of the Federal Council once the election of the Federal Council Members has taken place in the constituent meeting of the Provincial Diet, usually a few weeks after the provincial election.

The terms "left", "centre" and "right" for certain political orientations are derived from historical parliamentary seating arrangements. However, the specific political content associated with these terms has changed in many ways over the last 200 years.

The basis of the political left-right scheme is the semi-circular seating arrangement in continental European parliaments, which is modelled on ancient Greek theatres. It differs fundamentally from the seating arrangement in the English "Westminster type Parliament". Since the 18th century, the governing and opposition parties have sat opposite each other, with the more prestigious right- side reserved for the respective governing party from the Speaker's perspective. It was not until the last century that "right" and "left" became common terms for political orientations in England as well.

In continental Europe, however, the tradition of these terms dates back to the late 18th century, the time of the French Revolution. In the various parliamentary bodies of the revolutionary period, the more conservative forces sat to the right of the presiding president, while the more progressive forces sat to the left. Even during the revolutionary years, the associated political spectrum shifted significantly (in this case to the "left").

In the 19th century, following the example of the French National Assembly building, the Palais Bourbon, parliamentary chambers with a semicircular seating arrangement became established in continental Europe. In addition, the aforementioned political right-left terminology gradually became established.

Although the shift in the meaning of these terms was slower from the 19th century onwards than during the years of the French Revolution, it has become no less clear over longer periods of time.

This was, of course, also linked to the further development of the electoral system, which included more and more sections of the population. In the Austrian half of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the electoral reforms of 1896 and 1907 in particular left visible traces in the right-left distribution in the House of Representatives of the Imperial Council. Until 1896, liberalism had been the "left", while the "right" represented conservative large landowners. After 1907, conservative large landowners almost completely disappeared from the political spectrum, and the "left" now consisted of the Social Democrats. At the same time, liberalism developed into German nationalism and moved further and further to the "right" in its positions.

The symbolic significance of the seating arrangement in parliament can still be observed today in discussions about the distribution of seats in parliamentary chambers. In recent decades, there has been a tendency for former "ideological parties" to become "people's parties" with as broad a programme as possible in order to appeal to a wide range of voters. This development is reflected in the new preference for seats in the middle, which are identified with the political "centre".

According to the Federal Constitutional Law, "the National Council, together with the Federal Council," exercises federal legislative power. However, this does not mean that both have equal influence on legislation. The National Council has considerably more weight in this regard.

Every law must first pass through the National Council before it can be submitted to the Federal Council. Only the National Council can influence its content – the Federal Council is limited to the possibility of a veto, which usually only has a suspensive effect (objection), but in certain cases can also be absolute (right of approval). In the case of some laws, the Federal Council has no right of participation at all.

• Tasks of the Federal Council
• Federal Council in the legislative process

The Federal Council also has the right to control the Government. It has some, but not all, of the control instruments available to the National Council. The more stringent control instruments in particular are reserved for the National Council.

Like the National Council, the Federal Council has the right to submit interpellations or questions (written questions, oral questions during question time, urgent questions, holding of topical debates), it can express its wishes to the Government in the form of resolutions (right of resolution), and it can also demand the presence of Members of the Government by majority vote (right of citation).

However, it does not have the right to set up Commissions of Enquiry, nor can it express no confidence in the Federal Government or its Members. This means that, since it does not depend on the confidence of the Federal Council, a government can govern even against a majority in the Federal Council.

In the area of EU legislation, the Federal Council has similar participation rights to the National Council:

Participation rights of the Austrian Parliament in EU matters

In recent decades, there has been much debate about whether we really need the Federal Council, given that it can only delay a law for a short period of time and even then, such cases often do not occur for years.

How, then, can we explain the fact that in 2021, for example, individual laws – some of which were considered urgent, were passed under great time pressure and were adopted by the National Council – ultimately had to be "put on hold" for eight weeks, meaning they could not be promulgated because the Federal Council refused to approve them?

And how was it possible that two laws were even completely overturned by the Federal Council in 2019?

The nature of the Federal Council's involvement varies depending on the subject matter:

In most cases, it has a right of objection. However, the National Council can then repeat its original decision (known as a perseverance decision), meaning that the Federal Council's objection only has a suspensive effect.

In some cases, it also has a right of approval. This corresponds to an absolute right of veto.

In some areas, it has no right of participation, particularly in matters concerning the National Council itself, the Federal Budget, and disposition of federal assets, federal liabilities, or federal debts.

In most legislative decisions, the Federal Council has the right to raise a reasoned objection. The Federal Constitution grants it a period of eight weeks to do so (Art. 42(2) and (3) B-VG - in German).

If the majority of the Federal Council disagrees with a legislative decision of the National Council, it can raise a reasoned objection to it. This usually takes place at the next meeting, i.e. long before the eight-week period expires.

However, this objection can subsequently be overruled by the National Council by repeating its original legislative decision (known as a perseverance decision) (Art. 42(4) B-VG - in German). At least half of the Members of the National Council must be present for such a vote (known as an increased quorum). This usually takes place immediately at the next National Council meeting, which can also be convened specifically for this purpose in cases of particular urgency.

A perseverance resolution is forwarded directly to the Federal President for certification without being referred back to the Federal Council and, after being countersigned by the Federal Chancellor, is finally promulgated by the latter.

An objection therefore usually only leads to a certain delay (of a few days or weeks) in the legislative process. This is why the right of objection is also referred to as a suspensive veto of the Federal Council.

If the National Council did not pass a resolution to persist, the legislative process would be terminated. In the past, this was particularly the case when an error became apparent during the ongoing legislative process. The Federal Council then objected to the National Council's resolution and the National Council introduced a new bill. The contested resolution was not renegotiated, meaning that the flawed resolution never came into force.

As a third option, the National Council could also pass an amended legislative resolution. In this case, it would again be subject to the Federal Council's right of objection.

Decision not to raise an objection

As long as the Federal Council has not commented on a legislative decision and the eight-week period has not expired, the procedure (certification, countersignature, announcement) cannot be continued.

If the Federal Council agrees with a legislative resolution by a majority anyway, it usually passes an explicit resolution "not to raise any objections" at the earliest possible meeting ( (Art. 42(4) B-VG - in German)) so that the legislative decision does not "remain pending" until the expiry of the eight-week period and the further procedure is not unnecessarily delayed.

Expiry of the eight-week period

How can it happen that waiting is required for the expiry of the eight-week period?

This is always the case if the legislative resolution does not obtain a majority either in the committee or in the plenary session of the Federal Council.

a) No majority in the committee

If there is no majority in the committee for the motion, objection or no objection, the committee negotiations on this matter are not concluded in a final manner, and there is neither a written committee report nor a rapporteur for the plenary session. The matter remains "pending in committee" and the eight-week period continues to run for matters subject to objection.

This was the case, for example, in 2020 with resolutions 52/BNR  (in German - concerning the 21st COVID-19 Act) and 104/BNR (in German - concerning amendments to the General Social Security Act).

In such cases, is there still a possibility of debating the matter in plenary?

Yes, as in the National Council, the Federal Council also has the option of setting a deadline: the plenary session can set a deadline for a committee to report on a matter referred to it for preliminary consideration. Once this deadline has expired, the matter in question must then be dealt with in the next plenary session, even if no written committee report is available. This applies to matters subject to objection during the eight-week period and to matters subject to approval without any time limit.

However, such a deadline can be set only if it is approved by a majority vote in the plenary session.

At the 915th Federal Council meeting (in German) on 3 December 2020, for example, three motions to set a deadline were tabled by the ÖVP and the Greens, but none of them received a majority in the vote.

Apart from that, the committee could take up the matter again within the eight-week period (in the case of approval matters without a time limit).

b) No majority in the plenary session

The Federal Council committee may decide by a majority to submit the motion to the plenary session not to raise an objection; however, in that case, no majority is reached in the plenary session for such a decision, nor is there a majority for a decision to raise an objection. In this case, the eight-week period must be waited out before the legislative decision can be announced.

This was the case, for example, with the 2003 Budget Accompanying Act (in German) (17/BNR, XXII. GP - in German), because some FPÖ Federal Councillors did not vote for either of the two decisions. (See stenographic minutes, pages 198-200 - in German)

What happens if no decisions are reached in the committee due to a tie vote?

If there is a narrow majority in the plenary session, then in the committee, if there is an even number of Members, there may be a tie between the Government and opposition factions. This was the case in the committees of the Federal Council from the beginning of December 2020 to November 2021: ÖVP 7, Greens 1; SPÖ 5, FPÖ 3. This led to repeated tied votes, which, according to § 32 (1) GO-BR (in German), means that motions are considered rejected.

In this case, however,  Rule 32(6) (in German) of the Rules of Procedure expressly stipulate that a rapporteur must nevertheless be elected, who in this case "shall merely report on the course of the proceedings". The matter is placed on the agenda of the plenary session and may also be put to a vote there. To this end, a new motion must be tabled in the plenary session to raise an objection or not to raise an objection. This was repeatedly the case during the period in question, for example in the case of Resolution 284/BNR (Federal Act amending the Federal Act on a COVID-19 Investment Premium for Companies (Investment Premium Act – InvPrG)).

If a motion to raise a justified objection or not to raise an objection submitted in the plenary session does not obtain a majority, no decision is reached by the Federal Council. The subject matter of the negotiations "remains pending" and is only forwarded after the eight-week period has expired.

Can there also be a delay of more than eight weeks?

The Federal Council could delay a bill for the longest possible time if it decides to raise an objection just before the expiry of the eight-week period. In this case, the eight weeks would be extended by the additional delay caused by the need for a perseverance decision.

How frequent are objections by the Federal Council?

Objections are frequent when the majority ratios in the Federal Council differ from those in the National Council.

In the 27th legislative period, there have been seven objections to date (as of January 2024), most of them in 2020.

In the 25th legislative period (2013-2017), there was only one, which was based on formal grounds due to a voting error in the National Council caused by a fire alarm.

In the 23rd GP (2006-2008), there were two objections.

In the 22nd GP (2002-2006), there were 24 appeals, almost all of them in 2006. At that time, from autumn 2005 to autumn 2006, an SPÖ-Green majority in the Federal Council was opposed by an ÖVP-FPÖ/BZÖ majority in the National Council.

In the 26th GP (2017-2019), 24th GP (2008-2013), 21st GP (1999-2002) and 20th GP (1996-1999), there were no objections.

In some cases – precisely defined by the Constitution – the Federal Council has not only a suspensive veto but also an absolute veto. This is referred to as the Federal Council's right of approval. In most cases, this further requires increased attendance and approval quorums. If the Federal Council refuses to give its approval in such a case, the procedure is terminated, and the bill is rejected. The National Council has no way of overruling the Federal Council's decision, so no perseverance resolution can be passed.

What are these laws and resolutions?

Probably the most important right of consent for the Federal Council as the Chamber representing the provinces is that relating to constitutional laws or constitutional provisions that restrict the powers of the provinces in legislation or enforcement ((Art. 44(2) B-VG (in German)).

Other rights of approval of the Federal Council relate in particular to amendments to those articles of the Constitution that regulate the composition and rights of the Federal Council, to international treaties that regulate matters within the independent sphere of activity of the provinces, to international treaties that amend the contractual basis of the European Union, and to certain initiatives and resolutions at European level.

(See Articles (all in German) 15(6), 23i(1) to (4), 30a, 35(4), 50(2) and (4), and 100(1) B-VG.)

These rights of consent were not all introduced at the same time. While those in Art. 15(6) and Art. 35(4) date back to the First Republic, others are more recent, such as those relating to decisions at European Union level (Art. 23i, Art. 50(4)) or to decisions or amendments to the Information Order Act (Art. 30a). The right of consent under Art. 44(2) is of more recent origin, having been introduced in 1984, thereby fulfilling part of the Federal Provinces' list of demands from 1976.

How often has the Federal Council exercised its absolute veto to date?

To date, there have only been two cases in which a legislative decision was overturned by an absolute veto of the Federal Council. The first was the amendment to the Green Electricity 505/A (XXVI. GP - in German)), which failed to obtain the required two-thirds majority in the plenary session of the Federal Council in February 2019. Similarly, the planned enshrinement of a debt brake in the Federal Constitution failed in October 2019 ((928/A, XXVI. GP (in German)). In these cases, the right of approval was based on Art 44(2) B-VG.

Those legislative decisions in which the Federal Council has no right of participation are listed in Art. 42(5) B-VG (in German). These are decisions regarding

the rules of procedure of the National Council or the premature termination of its legislative period,

the Federal Budget Act, the Federal Financial Framework Act, the Federal Finance Act, a provisional budget, dispositions of federal assets, the assumption or conversion of a federal liability, the incurring or conversion of a federal financial debt, or the approval of a federal financial statement.

A committee is a parliamentary body that is generally responsible for preliminary deliberations on items on the agenda. In the committee, expert Members of Parliament discuss the items on the agenda. There are two methods for calculating the composition of committees.

Section 30(3) and (4) (in German) of the Rules of Procedure of the Austrian National Council lay down a procedure for determining the composition of committees which, after its creator, is known as the "d'Hondt (in German)" method (divisor method). In accordance with the principle of proportional representation, the d'Hondt method accurately reflects the balance of power in the plenary session in the committee. This means that the composition of the committees is exactly proportional to that of the plenary session.

The Shapley method (in German) regulates the composition of committees, taking into account the majority formation ratios in the plenary. The following principle applies: majorities that are possible in the large unit, i.e. in the plenary, must also be possible in the small unit, i.e. in the committee. Majorities that are not possible in the plenary must also not be possible in the committee. The fractional composition of the committee does not have to be proportional to that of the plenary.

The Shapley procedure makes sense when there is a very large difference in numbers between the large and small factions. It ensures that all factions are represented even in smaller committees, while at the same time reflecting the majority ratios in the plenary session in the committee.

The possibility of its application (by resolution of the National Council on the proposal of the President after consultation in the Presidential Conference) was created by the 1993 reform of the Rules of Procedure (Section 32(2) GOG-NR (in German)). The Shapley procedure cannot be applied to the Main Committee, whose composition is regulated in Section 30 GOG-NR (in German).

Parliamentary enquêtes serve to hear (and obtain written statements from) experts and other persons on topics that can be regulated at the federal level, i.e. for the whole of Austria. They last half a day or a whole day.

The decision to hold an enquiry is made by the Main Committee. This requires a motion from five Members of the National Council, which must include the topic, the group of participants and the date. The enquiry is chaired by the President of the National Council. However, he or she may also propose to the Main Committee that another Member of Parliament be appointed for this task. Unless the Main Committee decides otherwise when setting up the enquiry, enquiries are open to media representatives. Unless the Members of Parliament involved decide otherwise, a stenographic record is made and published for each enquiry.

A parliamentary enquiry does not make any substantive decisions. However, the stenographic record of the enquiry can then form the basis for deliberations in a specialist committee of the National Council, and legislative proposals can be introduced on this basis.

Commissions of Enquiry are set up to prepare decisions on extensive and significant matters. The establishment of a Commission of Enquiry is also decided by the Main Committee. The relevant motion must contain the commission's mandate and its composition. The provisions on committee procedure apply mutatis mutandis to the procedure. This means that a Commission of Enquiry does not, in principle, meet in public, but it may decide to hold parts of its meetings in public. A study commission usually meets over a longer period of time. Experts also take part in its deliberations. However, as in the case of the Study Commission on Strengthening Democracy 2014/15, citizens may also be invited to participate and submit comments.

The Commission of Enquiry shall conclude its work with a report to the National Council. No more than three Commissions of Enquiry may be established at any one time.

Parliamentary enquiries and Commissions of Enquiry

Enquiries and Commissions of Enquiry should not be confused with the so-called right of enquiry. This refers to the right to set up Commissions of Enquiry. Unlike some other supervisory rights, such as the right of interpellation or the right to ask questions, which are also available to the Federal Council, the right of enquiry is reserved for the National Council.

Independent legislative motions, known as initiative motions, must be submitted in writing and supported by five Members of Parliament in order to be considered by the National Council (committee, plenary session). The same applies to independent motions for resolutions (Section 26 GOG-NR (in German)).

Amendments and supplementary motions (Section 53(3) GOG-NR (in German)) to a bill being discussed in the plenary session of the National Council must be submitted in writing and also require the support of five Members of Parliament. The same applies to motions for resolutions on an item on the agenda (dependent motions for resolutions) (Section 55 GOG-NR (in German). Motions of no confidence are also considered motions for resolutions.

In the committees of the National Council, every Member entitled to vote is entitled to submit a motion for a resolution, a bill, an amendment or an additional motion in writing (Section 41(8) GOG-NR (in German)).

Motions for the order of business do not have to be submitted in writing and may be tabled by any Member of Parliament, such as a motion to set a deadline.

They are put to the vote immediately. If the National Council decides by a majority to hold a debate on the matter, the vote takes place after this debate (Section 59 GOG-NR (in German)).

In accordance with the Rules of Procedure of the National Council (Section 74a GOG-NR (in German)), five Members may request, before the agenda is adopted, that an independent motion containing a resolution be dealt with as a matter of urgency (urgent motion). However, Members of Parliament may not sign more than one such request or request for an urgent question (in German) within a year. In order to give smaller Parliamentary Groups the opportunity to submit several urgent motions, each Parliamentary Group also has the right to submit four additional urgent motions per year.

The debate on these motions must take place after the agenda has been dealt with, but no later than 3 p.m. and no earlier than three hours after they have been submitted. This is followed by a vote. However, the President may postpone the vote until the beginning of the next sitting.

In very few cases, a bill was first sent out for review by the responsible Federal Ministry as a ministerial draft and then submitted in identical wording as an independent bill by Members of the National Council. This bill was then also the subject of further parliamentary proceedings.

This was the case, for example, with the draft COVID-19 Compulsory Vaccination Act: the ministerial draft (164/ME (in German)) was sent for review on 9 December 2021, and the identical initiative 2173/A (in German) was introduced in the National Council on 16 December 2021.

What is the reason for this "duplication" of procedures? It has procedural reasons: despite the pre-parliamentary review process, it still allows legislation to be passed within a relatively tight schedule.

Once the review period has ended and the draft bill has been finalised by the Federal Ministry, taking into account any comments received, it must be submitted (as a so-called ministerial council presentation) to the other Members of the Federal Government for a decision by the ministerial council (which must be unanimous). Only then can it be introduced as a government bill in the National Council.

The introduction of the government bill must be announced in a plenary session of the National Council. Before being debated in plenary, a bill must in any case be referred to a committee for preliminary consultation, which in turn can only take place in a plenary session. Since the referral cannot take place in the same session in which the receipt was announced, an additional, purely formal so-called referral session is often held after this in order not to delay the further procedure unnecessarily.

Before the government bill can be placed on the agenda of a National Council session, the following is required:

• a meeting of the Council of Ministers
• two plenary sessions of the National Council (one of which may be purely formal)
• at least one meeting of the relevant committee of the National Council. (only if the plenary session sets a deadline for the committee to report – which can be done in the same session in which the assignment was made – can the bill be dealt with in the plenary session without prior committee deliberation).

An independent motion (which can only be tabled in a plenary session of the National Council) can be submitted independently of a pre-parliamentary review procedure for a government bill. After referral to the committee – possibly immediately after tabling in a purely formal referral session – the bill can be placed on the agenda of the next committee meeting.

If the review period for the ministerial draft has already expired, proposed amendments can be incorporated into the committee negotiations and decided upon at committee level on the basis of an amendment motion. (This was the case, for example, with the Compulsory Vaccination Act at the meeting of the Health Committee on 11 January 2022.)

If the proposed amendments are not yet available, it is also possible to table the amendment motion in the plenary session of the National Council and put it to the vote.

After a decision has been taken in the National Council, the decision is forwarded to the Federal Council. Once the decision has been received, it is assigned to a committee by the President (this is possible without a plenary session), provided that the Federal Council has a right of participation.

The rules of procedure of the Federal Council also provide for the possibility of dealing with resolutions of the National Council in plenary without prior committee deliberations, which can further speed up the process. However, this requires a two-thirds majority.

It is also possible to submit a motion to set a deadline in the Federal Council.

Information about the above-mentioned ("classic") pre-parliamentary assessment procedure – which has been carried out as an "extended assessment procedure" since 2017 – and the parliamentary assessment procedure introduced in August 2021 can be found on the pages Pre-parliamentary assessment procedure (in German) and Parliamentary assessment procedure, as well as in the two FAQs on this topic with citizen participation.

Article 28(1) (in German) of the Federal Constitutional Law stipulates that the National Council shall be convened by the Federal President each year for an ordinary session, which "shall not begin before 15 September and shall not last longer than until 15 July of the following year". The session is the period during which the President of the National Council may convene meetings of the National Council. Between regular sessions there is a so-called recess period.

If it becomes necessary or is requested that a session of the National Council be held during the recess, the Federal President must convene the National Council for an extraordinary session. Such a request may be made by one third of the Members of the National Council, by the Federal Government or by the Federal Council (Art. 28(2) B-VG). In such a case, the meeting must take place within two weeks of the request being received by the Federal President.

If the National Council convenes for an extraordinary session at the request of one third of its Members, this is often for the purpose of introducing and dealing with an urgent motion or an urgent question.

However, the National Council has also been convened in the summer to debate and decide on highly urgent proposals – for example, on 17 July 2015 to authorise the Minister of Finance to negotiate the granting of stability assistance to Greece within the framework of the so-called euro rescue package (i.e. the European Stability Mechanism) – or to hear statements by Members of the Federal Government on current events (e.g. on 1 September 2015 on a joint statement by the Federal Chancellor and the Vice-Chancellor on the asylum situation, or on 19 August 2002 on a statement by the Federal Chancellor on the "flood situation in Austria").

If the Federal President appoints a new Federal Government during the recess, the National Council must be convened for an extraordinary session. The new Federal Government should be presented to the National Council without delay. The purpose of this provision is to give the National Council the opportunity to express its lack of confidence in the new Federal Government. This is because the Federal President is expected to appoint only a Federal Government that also has the confidence of the National Council. In such a case, the National Council must convene within one week (Art. 70(3) B-VG (in German).).

If only one or more individual Members of the Federal Government are newly appointed, the Federal Constitution does not provide for the mandatory convening of an extraordinary session, but in practice this also occurs in such cases, as was the case on 2 September 2014, for example, when – following the election of Doris Bures as the new President of the National Council – a statement was made by the Federal Chancellor and the Vice-Chancellor on the occasion of the appointment of new Members of the Federal Government.

The Constitution also requires an extraordinary session to be convened if the Federal President (on the recommendation of the Federal Government, which in turn must obtain the consent of the Standing Subcommittee of the Main Committee) has issued a so-called emergency decree (see Art. Art. 18(3) B-VG) (in German)). This is a decree that allows measures to be enacted at a time when the National Council is not in session, for which a federal law would otherwise be required. The aim is to avert obvious, irreparable damage to the general public.

Such an emergency decree must therefore be submitted to the National Council immediately after it has been issued (so that the National Council can either pass a federal law with the same content or require the Federal Government to repeal the emergency decree immediately). However, if the National Council is not in session at that time, it must be convened by the Federal President within eight days.

No, because unlike the National Council, the Federal Council does not have sessions and therefore no recess period, but meets permanently. This means that it can be convened for meetings at any time. In recent years, the last session of the Federal Council in the summer has usually taken place around 20 July (approximately two weeks after the last sessions of the National Council before its summer recess) – and thus, after the start of the National Council's recess. The Federal Council could also be convened for a special session at any time if a request to do so is made (which can be made by a quarter of its Members or by the Federal Government).

It should also be noted that the Federal Council does not have legislative periods, as its Members are not re-elected en masse at any point in time; instead, the principle of partial renewal applies to the Federal Council. This means that after provincial elections – which take place at different times in the individual Federal Provinces – the Members of the respective Federal Province are re-elected.

When the National Council holds its last plenary sessions before the summer in July, we read every year about the start of the "parliamentary recess" or a "parliamentary summer break" of over 80 days (calculated until the next plenary session at the end of September).

That is both true and not true. The recess period lasts around 60 days and usually ends at the beginning of the second week of September. However, this period is not the same as a holiday for those working in the Parliament, neither for the MPs nor for the Parliamentary Administration staff.

One or two weeks after the July sessions of the National Council – and thus already during its recess – the Federal Council holds an annual plenary session (usually lasting two days) to deal with the items decided by the National Council in July. Two days before the plenary session of the Federal Council, its committees meet. Unlike the National Council, the Federal Council meets permanently, so it has no recess and can be convened for meetings at any time.

For some committees with very important tasks, the (constitutional) legislature has stipulated from the outset that they may also be convened outside the sessions of the National Council. This applies primarily to the Main Committee and the Budget Committee, as well as their standing subcommittees. In addition, the standing subcommittees of the Internal Affairs and National Defence Committees and the Immunity Committee may also meet at any time if necessary. If matters relating to a a Commission of Enquiry are to be dealt with, the Rules of Procedure Committee may also be convened at any time. The provisions governing Commissions of Enquiry themselves were revised by law in 2014 to allow them to meet on a permanent basis.

The National Council is also free to instruct other committees by its own decision at the end of a session, a so-called permanent declaration, to continue their work during the recess. This mandate may also relate to individual items on the agenda.

Most Members of the National Council were elected on regional or state lists and are therefore the point of contact at constituency level for citizens, businesses or interest groups who raise their concerns and in this way often highlight the need for legislative action in a wide variety of areas. Of course, there is no summer break for work in the constituencies.

If the National Council is to convene for a plenary session during the recess (e.g. to pass an urgently needed piece of legislation or to discuss an urgent question that is to be tabled), an extraordinary session must be convened. This can be requested by one third of the Members of Parliament. In this case, too, even if the meeting falls in the middle of the holiday season, the attendance of most Members is required, as otherwise (especially if a coalition has only a narrow majority) random majorities could result in votes.

For several years now, Members of Parliament have been able to submit written questions to Members of the Federal Government even during the recess. Members of Parliament make extensive use of this option.

Various visits by delegations of parliamentarians and civil servants, conference participation, etc. also take place during the recess.

Investigating Committees meet permanently, so they can also hold meetings in the summer. Experience has shown that they take a break from their hearings in August, but resume them at the beginning of September, i.e. before the start of the session.

The situation was different in 2019, for example, due to the early termination of the legislative period decided by the National Council. In such a case, Commissions of Enquiry must terminate their hearing of evidence upon announcement of the relevant federal law (which in this case took place on 14 June 2019, see see Federal Law Gazette I No. 52/2019) (in German)).

In the two weeks between the start of the session and the first scheduled plenary sessions, various preliminary committees also hold their meetings, in which the items to be decided in plenary are discussed in advance and made "ready for plenary".

The employees of the Parliamentary Administration are public servants and have the same holiday entitlements as other federal civil servants and contract employees. In some areas, the summer offers an opportunity to catch up on backlogs or devote time to projects that could not be addressed during the current session, while other areas are particularly busy during this period.

The National Council and the Federal Council meet as the Federal Assembly in a joint public session to perform certain tasks assigned to the Federal Assembly by the Federal Constitution. These tasks are exhaustively listed in the Federal Constitutional Law (B-VG). The Federal Assembly meets solely to perform these tasks. As it has no other ongoing agenda to deal with, no other (quasi-regular) meetings of the Federal Assembly take place.

The National Council and the Federal Council also meet for other occasions, such as ceremonial sessions, mourning sessions and commemorative sessions, but these are not sessions of the Federal Assembly.

All tasks of the Federal Assembly, with the exception of those relating to the declaration of war (Art. 38 B-VG (in German)) – which, however, has been considered obsolete since the Federal Constitutional Law on Austria's neutrality – are related to the function of the Federal President.

To date, only the swearing-in of the Federal President after his or her election or re-election has been of practical significance. In this case, the Federal Assembly must be convened by the Federal President (Art. 39(1) B-VG (in German)). If the office of Federal President is permanently vacant (e.g. due to the expiry of the six-year term of office of the incumbent), the convocation is the responsibility of the Collegium of the three Presidents of the National Council (Art. 64 (1) and (4) B-VG).

Before the introduction of popular elections for the Federal President, the main task of the Federal Assembly was to elect the Federal President. Popular elections were introduced with the 1929 amendment to the Federal Constitutional Law, but were not actually used until 1951.

All Federal Assemblies held to date have served to swear in – or, up to and including 1945, to elect – a Federal President.

The other tasks mentioned in the Federal Constitution are those that are only relevant in exceptional situations and have never been relevant to date. These relate to the assertion of the political, criminal or constitutional responsibility of the Federal President. Accordingly, the Constitution does not assign the task of convening the Federal Assembly in such cases to the Federal President himself or herself, but to the Federal Chancellor. These tasks are

• the decision to hold a referendum on the removal of the Federal President (Art. 60 para. 6 B-VG (in German)): For the purpose of such a decision, the Federal Assembly must be convened if the National Council has passed a motion to this effect by a two-thirds majority (with half of its Members present). If the people vote against the removal of the Federal President in such a referendum, the Federal President is considered newly elected; this also results in the dissolution of the National Council which initiated the referendum.
• Approval of the official prosecution of the Federal President (Art. 63(1) B-VG (in German) The Federal Assembly shall be convened for this purpose if the National Council decides that the Federal Assembly should deal with a motion to prosecute the Federal President. (Such a motion must be submitted to the National Council by the competent authority.)
• Decision on the indictment of the Federal President before the Constitutional Court for violation of the Federal Constitution (Art. 68 (in German) in conjunction with Art. 142 B-VG (in German)): For this purpose, the Federal Assembly shall be convened if either the National Council or the Federal Council so decides. When deciding on such an indictment, special decision-making requirements apply in the Federal Assembly: A two-thirds majority of the votes cast is required, with more than half of the Members of both the National Council and the Federal Council present. (The literature also points out that any related decisions to withdraw the indictment would also have to be taken by the Federal Assembly.)
• Requesting a decision by the Constitutional Court on the loss of office of the Federal President for a reason provided for by law (in particular, loss of eligibility for election to the National Council due to a corresponding criminal conviction).

The Federal Assembly is chaired alternately by the President of the National Council and the President of the Federal Council; the Rules of Procedure of the National Council are "applied mutatis mutandis" to the proceedings ((Art. 39(1) and (2) B-VG) (in German).).

The provisions on immunity from prosecution also apply to the meetings of the Federal Assembly (Art. 39(3) B-VG (in German)).

The resolutions of the Federal Assembly are certified by the chairperson and countersigned by the Federal Chancellor (Art. 40(1) B-VG (in German)).

• Information about the Federal Assembly
• Stenographic minutes of meetings of the Federal Assembly

The Federal President does not have a "deputy" in the position of a vice-president, for example. In the event that he or she is temporarily unable to perform his or her duties, Article 64 of the Federal Constitutional Law provides for special rules of representation. Such "incapacity" of the Federal President may arise, for example, in the event of illness or after an accident. In such cases, it must always be examined whether official duties can be performed with the assistance of the Presidential Chancellery.

If the Federal President is prevented from performing his or her duties, the Federal Chancellor initially represents him or her in all functions. However, if the impediment lasts longer than 20 days, the three Presidents of the National Council assume the functions of the Federal President as a collegiate body.

In both cases, the representatives assume all the functions of the Federal President. However, it is customary that no state visits or similar representative duties are undertaken in such cases.

A distinction must be made between temporary incapacity and "permanent discharge" from office. The office is "discharged" when

• the term of office has expired (it cannot be extended under any circumstances),
• it can no longer be exercised (e.g. coma) or the office holder dies,
• the Federal President resigns,
• if the Federal President has been removed from office by a referendum, or
• if the Federal President loses his or her office (e.g. due to loss of eligibility as a result of a criminal conviction).

In all of these cases, the functions are to be performed by the Collegium of the three Presidents of the National Council. In addition, the Collegium assumes the functions as soon as the National Council decides to initiate impeachment proceedings.

The Collegium must exercise its functions in the same way as the Federal President. This means that, as a rule, it can make decisions only on the basis of a proposal from the Federal Government or a Federal Minister.

In previous cases in which the three presidents of the National Council have exercised their official duties, this has been limited to decisions that were absolutely necessary.

A separate oath of office for the representative function is not required.

The Federal Constitution precisely defines the rules according to which the Collegium makes decisions on behalf of the Federal President. The Collegium of the three presidents decides by majority vote. The Collegium is chaired by the President of the National Council, who also represents the Collegium in public.

In the event that one or both of the presidents of the National Council are unable to attend or their positions are permanently vacant, the Collegium remains quorate. If there is a tie when only two Members are present, the vote of the senior president is decisive.

As in other countries and at the European Union level, a clearly-formulated security strategy is considered the central security policy document in Austria. The most recent Austrian Security Strategy (ÖSS) (in German) was adopted by the National Council in the form of a resolution (313/E, XXIV. GP (in German)) and dates from 2013. It replaced the 2001 security and defence doctrine, which in turn replaced the earlier doctrine dating from 1975. In April 2023, the National Council unanimously called on the Federal Government to revise the 2013 security strategy (318/E XXVII. GP (in German)). This has now been done, and the Austrian Security Strategy 2024 (in German) was submitted to the National Council at the end of August as Federal Government Report III-1214 d.B. (in German)  and assigned to the National Defence Committee at its meeting on 18 September 2024.

"Security policy is a cross-cutting issue that affects almost all areas of life and politics and thus represents a challenge for society as a whole. Against this background, Austrian security policy should be comprehensive, integrated and preventive in order to be able to actively shape and contribute in a spirit of solidarity. (...)

Austrian security policy encompasses all measures at the national, European and international level

• to actively shape a secure and peaceful environment for the people and Austria,
• to prevent threats and risks from arising or taking effect,
• to protect against threats or to contain and manage them, and
• to establish a sustainable and inclusive understanding of security, democracy and values among all citizens."

This is according to the Federal Government's report on the Austrian Security Strategy 2024.

The constitutional principle of the state's monopoly on the use of force is of fundamental importance in the context of security tasks: only the state or its competent bodies are authorised to enact laws (Parliament) or to enforce them and, in the event of violations, to enforce them – if necessary with state coercive measures – (administration and judiciary).

Article 9a(1) (in German) of the Federal Constitutional Law defines comprehensive national defence as a state objective. The articles on competences assign competence for military affairs (Art. 10(1)(15) (in German)) and for maintaining public peace, order and security (with the exception of the local security police) (Art. 10(1)(7) (in German) and are assigned to the Federal Government in terms of legislation and enforcement. These tasks are carried out in accordance with Art. 102(2) (in German) and are under direct federal administration.

Fundamental provisions on the federal security authorities and the Federal Armed Forces can be found in Articles 78a (in German) to81 of the Federal Constitutional Law. Examples of provisions at the level of ordinary law are the Security Police Act (in German) and the Defence Act (in German).

Austria's obligations in the field of security policy also arise from the Vienna State Treaty (in German) (e.g. prohibition of special weapons) and the Neutrality Act (in German) (see also the dossier (in German) on Austrian neutrality).

Austria's participation in the Common Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union is regulated in Article 23j (in German) of the Federal Constitutional Law.

In 2001, the National Security Council was established on the basis of a federal law (Federal Law Gazette I No. 122/2001). This merged the Foreign Affairs Council and the National Defence Council into a single advisory body. The resulting streamlining and increase in efficiency appeared particularly desirable in view of the attacks in New York and Washington and the subsequent measures to combat international terrorism.

The National Security Council (in German) advises the Federal Government and the individual Federal Ministers on all fundamental matters of foreign, security and defence policy. The National Security Council currently has 24 Members: the Federal Chancellor (as chair), the Vice-Chancellor, the Federal Minister for European and International Affairs, the Federal Minister for Defence, the Federal Minister of the Interior, the Federal Minister of Justice and representatives of the parties represented in the (Main Committee of the) National Council. In addition, nine Members with advisory votes belong to it. Although the Security Council is not a parliamentary body, the representatives of the parliamentary parties play an important role in the Security Council.

The decisions of the Security Council are available on the Internet. (see www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/themen/sicherheitspolitik/nationaler-sicherheitsrat.html (in German))

The activities of the Federal Government are subject to parliamentary control. This also applies to security policy. The instruments of general parliamentary control are also used in this context, i.e. the various forms of the right to ask questions, the right to pass resolutions, the receipt of reports and the right of enquiry (establishment of a Commission of Enquiry). In the current XXVIIth legislative period, for example, 17 resolutions in the National Council and two resolutions in the Federal Council relating to security were passed by the end of 2023. Topics included:

• Focus on (combating) violence against women and girls (58/E (in German))
• Development of a strategy on the topic and risks of deepfakes (104/E (in German))
• Further solidarity and support for Ukraine (358/E-BR/2022 (in German))

These resolutions were always a response to current events, negative conditions or developments, or emerging threats.

Members of Parliament repeatedly submit questions under the heading of security.

Security is also often a topic in plenary debates in the National Council and the Federal Council, both by the opposition and the governing parties, for example in current affairs debates, urgent questions, or government statements. For example, on 20 January 2022, at the request of NEOS, a current affairs debate was held on the topic of "Russia-Ukraine: A strong Austria must actively support the EU in maintaining peace in Europe" was held on 20 January 2022, a topical debate on "Stop violence against women!" was held on 11 December 2019 at the request of the SPÖ, and a topical debate on "Security for Austrians instead of capitulation to asylum fraud!" was held on 22 September 2021 at the request of the FPÖ. A current affairs debate in the Federal Council on 30 March 2021 addressed "The Austrian Armed Forces in the Corona Pandemic". The crisis between Russia and Ukraine was the subject of statements by the Federal Chancellor and the Vice-Chancellor on both 24 February and 8 March 2022. On 9 March, the Vice-Chancellor and the Federal Minister for the EU and the Constitution also made a statement in the Federal Council on the current situation in the crisis between Russia and Ukraine.

Of the 29 Commissions of Enquiry established in the Second Republic to date, several have also dealt with issues relating to security, such as the Commission of Enquiry on the review of Austrian arms exports abroad (1977), the procurement of fighter aircraft (Eurofighter) (2006-2007) and concerning political influence on the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution and Counterterrorism (BVT Investigation Committee) (2018-2019).

The following committees of the National Council are particularly important in the area of internal and external security:

• Committee for Internal Affairs: This Committee deals with all matters relating to internal security – e.g. the police, the Registration Act or the Weapons Act, but also immigration and asylum legislation, the Residence and Settlement Act, etc.
• Standing Subcommittee of the Committee on Internal Affairs: The task of this Committee is to review all measures for the protection of constitutional institutions (e.g. administration, courts, legislation, etc.) and their ability to act (see also the technical dossier (in German) on the control of the activities of intelligence services). In order to protect security interests, the meetings of this Committee are secret in accordance with Section 37a(4) GOG-NR (in German).
• Justice Committee: This Committee deals, among other things, with reforms in the field of justice, e.g. in the areas of courts, criminal law and the penal system.
• National Defence Committee: This Committee deals with matters relating to the Austrian Armed Forces.
• Standing Subcommittee of the National Defence Committee: Its main task is to review intelligence measures to ensure military national defence. The meetings of this Committee are also secret Section 37a(4) GOG-NR (in German).
• Main Committee: The Main Committee is a particularly important committee (see the relevant technical dossier (in German)). Special provisions are contained for it in the the Federal Constitutional Law, the Rules of Procedure of the National Council (GOG-NR)(in German) and the Federal Constitutional Law on Cooperation and Solidarity in the Deployment of Units and Individuals Abroad (KSE-BVG). The Main Committee can comment on projects within the framework of the European Union, including matters relating to the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). The Federal Government or Federal Ministers must reach agreement with the Main Committee on certain matters, including the participation of army personnel in UN, EU or OSCE missions. It was not until the end of November 2023 that the continuation of more than a dozen deployments was approved, e.g. missions in Cyprus (UN peacekeeping force), Libya (EU mission), Lebanon (UN interim force) and Ukraine (EU mission). However, agreement must also be reached on some regulations for which this is provided for by law. For example, the Federal Government's Displaced Persons Regulation, which grants displaced persons from Ukraine a temporary right of residence in Austria, was enacted in agreement with the Main Committee. The Main Committee must also be involved in the appointment of certain bodies – for example, it submits a comprehensive proposal for the election of the Members of the Parliamentary Federal Army Commission in accordance with the 2001 2001 Defence Act (in German).
• Budget Committee: The budgets of the Austrian Armed Forces are always the subject of heated debate, especially when procurements (e.g. of helicopters) are pending or properties (barracks) are to be sold.

In addition to all these possibilities, there are also a number of reports that Members of the Federal Government are required to submit to the National Council and the Federal Council at regular intervals due to legal obligations or resolutions. Such reports cover topics such as the following:

• Federal Government report on internal security in Austria (security report) – annually
• Report by the Federal Minister of Justice on the comprehensive report on the use of special Investigating measures (to combat organised crime) – annually
• Reports by the Federal Minister of Defence on the annual reports of the Parliamentary Armed Forces Commission for Complaints and statements by the Federal Minister of Defence.

The reports are prepared by the federal ministries and then discussed in the relevant committees of both the National Council and the Federal Council – in the Federal Council also in plenary session. They are publicly accessible and can also be downloaded (in German) in full from the Parliament's website.

The Court of Audit and the Ombudsman's Office are two bodies of the National Council that are authorised to monitor certain areas. They submit reports on their activities: the Court of Audit to the National Council, and the Ombudsman's Office to both the National Council and the Federal Council.

While the Ombudsman's Office monitors the administration in the exercise of its obligations with regard to possible abuses or human rights violations, the Court of Audit is active in all economic matters. It can also be commissioned to carry out an audit by the National Council or, in special cases, by 20 Members of Parliament.

The audits may also concern issues relevant to security policy, such as "Procurement and use of drones in the Austrian Armed Forces" (Bund 2020/1 (in German) ), "Assistance and support services provided by the Austrian Armed Forces for border management" (Bund 2020/38) (in German)), "Task fulfilment and operational readiness of Engineer Battalion 3" (Bund 2021/39 (in German)) or "Operational readiness of the militia" (Bund 2022/39).

The Parliamentary Armed Forces Commission is established as an autonomous and independent review body under the Federal Minister of Defence. It consists of three chairpersons who alternate in office and six other Members. The chairpersons must be Members of Parliament and are elected by the National Council in accordance with a constitutional provision (Section 4 (9) of the Defence Act); the other Members are appointed by the political parties in proportion to their number of seats in the Main Committee of the National Council.

The term of office is six years. The current term began on 1 January 2021.

The Commission deals with complaints concerning deficiencies and abuses in the military service sector that personally affect the complainants, in particular injustices suffered or infringements of official powers. The work of the Complaints Commission is presented in regular reports to the National Council.

All links are in German:

• Austrian security policy – Federal Chancellery of Austria
• Security policy – BMEIA, Austrian Foreign Ministry
• Austrian Armed Forces – Security policy
• BMI Strategies

There are various models for appointing judges to the highest courts at the national and European levels. Parliaments, heads of state, governments and the courts themselves, as well as experts, are involved in different ways.

In the interests of the separation of powers and in accordance with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the independence of the courts must be guaranteed.

However, courts also represent one of the branches of government. The greater their scope of jurisdiction and the more powerful their decisions, the more likely the question of democratic legitimacy will arise. Qualification requirements for judges and procedural rules for appointments are particularly important in this tense relationship.

Parliamentary participation rights are provided for in Austria for the appointment of three courts with broad jurisdiction and influence. These are: the Austrian Constitutional Court, the European Court of Justice (EU) and the European Court of Human Rights (Council of Europe).

The Constitutional Court exercises a wide range of different powers. These are all laid down in the Constitution. These include reviewing laws and regulations, reviewing the findings of administrative courts, ruling on certain disputes over jurisdiction and resolving disputes over financial equalisation. The Constitutional Court is also responsible for monitoring elections and exercising legal control over the highest state authorities (see www.vfgh.gv.at ).

The Constitutional Court consists of a President, a Vice-President, twelve other Members and six substitute Members.

Members of the Constitutional Court must have completed a degree in law and have at least ten years of professional legal experience. The persons proposed by the Federal Government must also be judges, administrative officials or professors of law (Art. 147 (2) and (3) Federal Constitutional Law – B-VG). These regulations date back to the 1929 amendment to the B-VG.

Vacancies must be advertised for general application. Since 1998, the election by simple majority in the National Council has usually been preceded by a hearing of the candidates in a specially-formed committee and a debate in the National Council session. In the Federal Council, the hearing takes place within the framework of an enquiry.

The President and Vice-President, as well as half of the Members and substitute Members, are appointed by the Federal President on the recommendation of the Federal Government. Three Members each are elected by the National Council and the Federal Council and proposed to the Federal President for appointment. The National Council has this right for two additional substitute Members and the Federal Council for one substitute Member.

Since its establishment in 1952, the task of the Court of Justice of the European Union has been to ensure "the maintenance of the law in the interpretation and application" of the Treaties. This task includes reviewing the legality of the actions of the institutions of the European Union, ensuring that Member States comply with their obligations under the Treaties, and interpreting Union law at the request of national courts.

It is the judicial body of the European Union and, in cooperation with the courts of the Member States, ensures the uniform application and interpretation of Union law (see https://curia.europa.eu).

The Federal Government must first inform the National Council and the Federal President of its proposed candidate for Membership of the ECJ or the General Court of the European Union (GCEU). The final proposal must then be approved by the Main Committee of the National Council.

In accordance with Article 255 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU, this proposal is reviewed by a committee of experts. The committee also hears the candidates. On the basis of its opinion, the governments of the Member States decide unanimously on the appointment. In the case of the ECJ, the candidate must be a "person who offers guarantees of independence" and, in Austria, must fulfil "the conditions required for the highest judicial offices".

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) was established in Strasbourg in 1959 by the member States of the Council of Europe to ensure compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights. The ECHR rules on complaints from individuals, groups of individuals and states relating to violations of the rights recognised in the ECHR. The judgments are binding on the states concerned.

The judges at the ECHR are elected by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) – whose Members are elected by the parliaments of the contracting states – from lists of three candidates submitted by the contracting states. They must be "of high moral character and either meet the requirements for the exercise of high judicial office or be jurists of recognised standing" (Articles 21 and 22 of the ECHR). The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe and PACE have specified the requirements and procedural rules in a series of resolutions (see https://www.coe.int/en/web/portal/gerichtshof-fur-menschenrechte).

There are also guidelines for a fair and transparent selection process for the contracting states. Among other things, the list of three candidates must include at least one man and one woman. There are no specific Austrian standards for drawing up the list of three candidates. The PACE Preparatory Electoral Committee conducts a hearing with the candidates, among other things.