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.

Some eight decades ago on 24 June 1932, Thailand embarked on a journey towards democratic transformation when the People's Party, an elite group of civil servants, princes, army officers and young intellectuals, who were well educated in Europe and fully infused with the concept of Western democracy, staged a bloodless coup d'etat, demanding a change of government from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy. Determined to avoid any bloodshed, His Majesty King Prajadhipok (Rama VII) agreed to abolish absolute monarchy and the transfer of power to the constitution-based system of government by signing a temporary constitution on 27 June 1932. This constitution marked the arrival of Thailand's modern political constitutionalism - the idea that government can and should be legally limited in its powers. Since then, Thailand has been subject to 18 military coups followed by the promulgation of new and/or revised 18 constitutions and numerous changes of government. The turbulent history of Thailand's constitutionalism suggests that there is a need for major constitutional reform - one where the Constitution is reviewed to ensure adherence to the Rule of Law and democracy.

Das vorliegende Rechtsgutachten soll die Frage beantworten, inwie-wiet aus dem Grundgesetz eine Pflicht abgeleitet werden kann, dass der Bund und/ oder die anderen Bundesländer der Freie Hansestadt Bremen bei der Übderwindung der besonderen Haushaltnotlage finanzielle Hilfe leisten müssen und ob eine solche Hilfeleistungs-pflicht mit Erfolg vor dem Bundesverfassungsgericht durchgesetzt werden kann.

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.

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 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.

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.