Die "Commerce-Clause" der australischen Bundesverfassung - Der Binnenmarkt in Australien
The Legislative and Executive Branch versus the Federal Constitutional Court and the Judiciary - Conflict or Cooperation?
The German Constitutional Court took up its work in 1951, almost two years after the constitution came into effect. The reason for this was that the Court needed a procedural code and could not operate merely on the provisions contained in the Basic Law, which had come into effect on 23 May 1949. That procedural code, spelling out the requirements and rules for the several procedures available at this court and the rules pertaining to the judges and the organization of the court, came into effect in 1951. The 'BVerfG' is actually more than one court. It consists of 16 judges who are organized in two separate panels ('senates') of eight judges each. The two senates are two separate decision making bodies of the court, each with specific tasks that are allocated to them. The full plenary of 16 judges is responsible mainly for organizing the work of the Court and becomes judicially relevant only when conflicts between the two senates in the treatment of a question of constitutional law arise. Underneath the two senates, the court is organized in chambers of three judges, that deal with the admissibility of constitutional complaints, a specific procedure provided for individuals to bring matters to the Court. The sheer number of constitutional complaints brought to the Court has resulted in the necessity to institute this 'pre-screening' procedure to reduce the number of cases to be decided on the merits to a manageable level.
Introduction to German Constitutional Law and the Doctrine of Basic Rights
When on 23 May 1949, the Basic Law of the new Federal Republic of Germany was solemnly promulgated the new country still lay largely in ruins. The ruins were not only of bricks and mortar. Perhaps more importantly there was the complete moral devastation the country had experienced between 1933 and 1945. How was it possible that a proud nation, the home of countless thinkers, scientists and artists, a country with one of the most educated general population at the time became one of the most barbaric nations the world ever had to endure? Many explanations have been brought forward but the definitive answer remains elusive. To create a governmental order that safeguards future generations from unrestrained rampages of evil was the primary goal of the 61 fathers and four mothers of the Basic Law. Much if not all that happens and has happened in Germany, from subsequent constitutional reforms to the terror years of the Red Army Faction, from Germany's reunification in 1990 to Germany's participation in the development of the European Union, from the federal structure of Germany to the special role of its Constitutional Court can only be understood against the historical background of the annihilation brought onto others and self between 1933 and 1945. The Basic Law is the child of this catastrophe.
60 Years German Basic Law: The German Constitution and its Court - Landmark Decisions of the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany in the Area of Fundamental Rights
The core principle of the German Basic Law - the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Germany since 1949 - is the Rule of Law or the broader concept of the 'Rechtsstaat'. The protection of fundamental rights is one important cornerstone of this principle. As the guardian of the Constitution, the Federal Constitutional Court has shaped these rights through interpretation by a large body of case law. Taking note of the growing interest among scholars not only in continental Europe but more so in the Common Law world, an extensive English translation of that jurisprudence is very timely.
Preface to 'The German Constitution Turns 60: Basic Law and Commonwealth Constitution, German and Australian Perspectives'
On 23 May 2009, the German Constitution, the 'Grundgesetz', turned 60. Not very old compared to Australia's Commonwealth Constitution or even the US-Constitution. It is perhaps an irony of history that old countries have young constitutions and young countries old ones. By any measure, 60 years of 'Grundgesetz' has been and continues to be a success story. From post war reconstruction, through the terror years of the seventies to the reunification of Germany after the demise of Communism in Eastern Europe, the 'Grundgesetz' has weathered all challenges and found deep acceptance in the German populace at large. The constitutional systems of Germany and Australia bear many differences but also some similarities. Fundamental rights and their protection figure prominently in the German 'Grundgesetz' but not so much in the Australian constitutional context. Both countries are federations to name the most prominent similarity.
The Federal Element of the German Republic: Issues and Developments
The entity that today forms the Federal Republic of Germany has historically always been a federation. That is to say that present day Germany's federal structure is not a result of recent history. Rather, Germany has evolved over the centuries from a collection of smaller and larger dispersed monarchical entities into a nation of now 16 states ('Länder'), of which three are city states, and the other 13 are states comprising of many municipalities and the surrounding territory. Some of today's 16 'Länder' are, however, rather artificial constructs put together by the victorious powers after World War II. Other states incorporate historical entities, such as Bavaria, which has existed as a kingdom for many centuries, or the city-states ('Stadtstaaten'), such as Bremen and Hamburg, who owe their status as a 'Land' largely to history, when these cities belonged to the medieval trading block of the 'Hanse'.
Laufen als fundamentaler Bestandteil des Golfsports? Behindertendiskriminierung und Golf – Die Entscheidung des Supreme Court der Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika im Fall PGA-Tour, Inc., v. Casey Martin v. 29. Mai 2001: [Is Walking a Fundamental Part of Golf? The Decision of the US Supreme Court in PGA-Tour v. Martin]
Das höchste Gericht der Vereinigten Staarcn hat in dieser Entscheidung festgestellt, dass dem Profigolier Casey Martin Zugang zur amerikanischen professionellen Golftour zu gewähren ist, ohwohl dieser aufgrund einer Behinderung nicht in der Lage ist, den parcours laufend zu bewältigen, sondern auf die Benutzung eines Golfwagens angewiesen ist. Die Benutzung eines Golfwagcns ist nach den Regeln der amerikanischen Profitour jedoch verboten. Die Folge des Urteils ist, dass ein gehbehinderter Teilnehmer der Protitour einen Anspruch auf Nurzung eines Golfwagens hat, auch wenn die Benutzung dieses Hilfsmittels den nicht behinderten Wettbewerbern verboten ist.
The German Constitution Turns 60: Basic Law and Commonwealth Constitution, German and Australian Perspectives
The anniversary of the 'Grundgesetz' on 23 May 2009 was sufficient cause to assemble in Canberra at the ANU constitutional scholars from both countries to address some core issues from a German and Australian perspective respectively. This book contains the written versions of the presentations in the order in which they were presented.