Skip to main content

German Unification and the Federal Constitutional Court: A Retrospective View After Twenty Years

  • Chapter
German Unification

Part of the book series: Studies in European Culture and History ((SECH))

  • 122 Accesses

Abstract

From the time of its founding in 1871 until after World War I, the German Empire (Reich) extended from Alsace-Lorraine, west of the Rhine, all the way to the Russian border in the northeast. After each of the two world wars, however, Germany lost significant portions of this extensive territory. At the end of World War II, for example, the Postdam agreement recognized the transfer of large sections of eastern Germany into the “administration” of Poland and the Soviet Union—in part, to compensate Poland for territory that had been annexed by the Soviet Union. Moreover, Germany was completely occupied by the victorious allies, whose governments agreed to administer German territory in four separate zones.

For earlier writings of the author discussing themes considered in this chapter, see, for example, The Imperfect Union: Constitutional Structures of German Unification (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1997); “The Constitutional and Legal Framework of German Unification,” in Der Vereinigungsschock. Vergleichende Betrachtungen zehn Jahre danach, ed. Wolfgang Schluchter and Peter E. Quint (Weilerswist: Velbrück Wissenschaft, 2001), 19–38; “60 Years of the Basic Law and its Interpretation: An American Perspective,” Jahrbuch des Öffentlichen Rechts der Gegenwart 57 (2009), Iff. See also note 48, infra.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. M. Donald Hancock and Henry Krish, Politics in Germany (Washington: CQ Press, 2009), 130, 135. For 2009 election results, see “The German Election’s Biggest Winner,” Spiegel Online, September 27, 2009.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  2. Peter Barker, “The Party of Democratic Socialism as Political Voice of East Germany,” in United and Divided: Germany Since 1990, ed. Mike Dennis and Eva Kolinsky (New York: Berghahn Books, 2004), 55.

    Google Scholar 

  3. See, for example, Axel Wolz, Michael Kopsidis, and Klaus Reinsberg, “The Transformation of Agricultural Production Cooperatives in East Germany and Their Future,” Journal of Rural Cooperation 37 (2009), 5, 15–16.

    Google Scholar 

  4. See Hans C. Buechler and Judith-Maria Buechler, Contesting Agriculture: Cooperativism and Privatization in the New Eastern Germany (Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 2002), 305.

    Google Scholar 

  5. John Eidson and Gordon Milligan, “Cooperative Entrepreneurs? Collectivisation and Privatisation of Agriculture in Two East German Regions,” in The Postsocialist Agrarian Question: Property Relations and the Rural Condition, ed. Chris Hann et al. (Münster: LIT Verlag, 2003), 60.

    Google Scholar 

  6. See John Eidson, “Collectivization, Privatization, Dispossession: Changing Property Relations in an East German Village, 1945–2000,” Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology, Halle/Saale, Working Paper No. 27 (2001), 24.

    Google Scholar 

  7. For the use of this argument in German parliamentary debate, see Joyce Mushaben, Geoffrey Giles, and Sara Lennox, “Women, Men, and Unification: Gender Politics and the Abortion Struggle Since 1989,” in After Unity: Reconfiguring German Identities, ed. Konrad H. Jarausch (Providence: Berghahn, 1997), 156–57.

    Google Scholar 

  8. A similar argument was employed by opponents of the liberalization of abortion in France in the 1970s. See Simone Veil, Les hommes aussi s’en souviennent. Une loi pour l’Histoire (Paris: Stock, 2004), 71–73.

    Google Scholar 

  9. See, for example, Alan Cowell, “Obeying Pope, German Bishops End Role in Abortion System,” New York Times, January 28, 1998. The full story is recounted in Mary Anne Case, “Perfectionism and Fundamentalism in the Application of the German Abortion Laws,” in Constituting Equality: Gender Equality and Comparative Constitutional Law, ed. Susan H. Williams (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 93.

    Google Scholar 

  10. See, for example, Daniela Reitz and Gerd Richter, “Current Changes in German Abortion Law,” Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 19 (2010), 334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. For important decisions of the German courts in these cases, see, for example, 95 BVerfGE 96 (1996) (Constitutional Court); 39 BGHSt 1 (1992) (BGH: Federal Supreme Court). The European Court of Human Rights also found that convictions based on these arguments did not violate Article 7(1) of the European Convention of Human Rights, prohibiting retroactive criminal conviction. See Streletz, Kessler, and Krenz v. Germany, 2001-II Eur. Ct. H. R. 351. See also Baumgarten v. Germany, Communication No. 960/2000, UN Doc. CCPR/C/78/D/960/2000 (2003) (statement of UN Human Rights Committee finding that conviction of the chief of GDR border guards on similar arguments did not violate the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights). For the author’s views on the German cases, see, “The Border Guard Trials and the East German Past—Seven Arguments,” American Journal of Comparative Law 48 (2000), 54lff.; “Judging the Past: The Prosecution of East German Border Guards and the GDR Chain of Command,” Review of Politics 61 (1999), 303ff.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2011 Peter C. Caldwell and Robert R. Shandley

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Quint, P.E. (2011). German Unification and the Federal Constitutional Court: A Retrospective View After Twenty Years. In: Caldwell, P.C., Shandley, R.R. (eds) German Unification. Studies in European Culture and History. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230337954_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230337954_8

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-349-29884-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-230-33795-4

  • eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics