The restoration of the Lander in the former GDR in 1990 and the unification of Berlin called for a round of constitution drafting in the east that resulted in considerable discussion and controversy within the attentive public and, especially, among legal scholars in all of Germany. Controversy focused on two general issues: direct democracy and certain constitutional provisions such as social rights and state goals. Direct democracy is nothing new for the Lander, since most West German Land constitutions provided for referenda long before the Wall collapsed. But the three-step process adopted in the east, and in particular the relatively low signature requirements for initiatives and petitions, both of which were in fact first introduced by Schleswig-Holstein in 1990, did not meet with universal approval. Even more controversial were certain provisions in the Land constititions, for example, Brandenburg, that probably violate the Basic Law, and a number of unenforceable social rights and state goals that raise questions about feasibility and false expectations. This leaves us with questions about just how different from their western counterparts the constitutions in the new Lander really are and whether, given the relatively weak position of the Lander in the policy-making process in the German federal system and the EU, their constitutional provisions matter that much.
Tijdschrift beschrijving