Can welfare sanctions and the right to a subsistence minimum coexist? The present article sheds light on this question by examining recent developments in German social assistance law and placing them in the broader international legal context. In November 2019, the German Constitutional Court declared a large portion of the applicable regime unconstitutional because it violated the basic right to a guaranteed subsistence minimum. The first part of the article examines this German basic right and the way its normative requirements are applied by the Constitutional Court to welfare sanctions. Two important points of reference which are discussed relate to the effectiveness of the measures and the availability of sanction mitigation instruments that safeguard the constitutionally guaranteed subsistence minimum. The second part of the article carries out a similar examination into the international human right to social assistance and the respective case law of the international supervisory bodies. A comparative legal analysis is carried out in the third part, which highlights the similarities between the German and the international legal approach to minimum social protection and welfare sanctions. The article concludes with the observation that welfare sanctions and the right to a subsistence minimum can only coexist under the condition that states respect the absolute nature of minimum social protection and reconcile the adopted measures with the primary objective of social assistance: reintegration and social inclusion.

中文翻译：

---

福利制裁和最低生活保障权：陷入困境的婚姻

福利制裁和最低生活保障权可以共存吗？本文通过研究德国社会援助法的最新发展并将其置于更广泛的国际法律背景中来阐明这个问题。2019 年 11 月，德国宪法法院宣布大部分适用制度违宪，因为它侵犯了最低生活保障的基本权利。文章的第一部分探讨了这项德国基本权利以及宪法法院将其规范要求应用于福利制裁的方式。讨论的两个重要参考点与措施的有效性和保障宪法保障最低生活水平的制裁缓解工具的可用性有关。文章的第二部分对国际社会援助人权和国际监督机构各自的判例法进行了类似的考察。第三部分进行了比较法律分析，强调了德国与国际法律方法在最低社会保护和福利制裁方面的相似之处。文章最后指出，福利制裁和最低生活保障权只能在国家尊重最低社会保护的绝对性质并将所采取的措施与社会援助的主要目标（重新融入社会和社会包容）相协调的情况下共存。