Facts
The complainants [X.] and [Y.] filed an application for exemption against them with the President of the Court of the 8th Bern-Laupen District on 19 October 2005. An application for rejection was filed against the competent judge on 2 December 2005, which the Court of Appeal of the Canton of Bern, 2nd Civil Chamber, rejected on 18 January 2006. The Federal Court overturned this decision on 24 March 2006 on a constitutional complaint by [X.] and [Y.] .
In the further course of the proceedings, the abstention procedure was resumed and [X.] and [Y.] were asked to comment on the disputed document. However, they rejected the majority of the members of the 1st and 2nd Civil Chamber of the High Court on 28 May 2006 due to pre-judgment. The plenum of the High Court dismissed this application for rejection with a decision of 1 November 2006.
[X.] and [Y.] filed constitutional complaints against this decision and the decision on abstention of the Court of Appeal of 12 December 2006. They allege a violation of constitutional individual rights and request the annulment of the contested decisions.
Considerations
The Federal Court has combined the two constitutional complaints and treats them in one judgment. The complainants had also filed a complaint against the decision of the Court of Appeal of 12 December 2006 with the Grand Council of the Canton of Bern, but this remedy is not suitable for overturning the decision.
The complainants accuse the High Court of a formal denial of justice and a disregard of their right to be heard. However, the High Court has substantively dealt with the application for rejection by the complainants and made the decision on abstention without the rejected court clerks being invited to comment. The complainants, however, did not demonstrate in what way the omitted hearing of the court clerks would have been suitable for…