Unification Treaty Constitutionality Case
| Jurisdiction | Germany |
| Judgment Date | 23 April 1991 |
| Court | Federal Constitutional Court (Germany) |
| Date | 23 April 1991 |
(Herzog, Presiding; Henschel, Seidl, Grimm, Sllner, Dieterich, Khling, Seibert, Judges)
States Right of self-determination of peoples Exercise of right of self-determination by German people Reunification of Germany Whether constituting overriding constitutional requirement Whether taking priority over protection of property rights of individuals Federal Republic of Germany-German Democratic Republic Unification Treaty, 1990 Preamble to Basic Law of Federal Republic, 1949
State responsibility Taking of property Expropriation of property in East Germany during occupation by Soviet Union, 194549 Whether individuals affected entitled to restitution or compensation Extent of responsibility of Federal Republic of Germany Effect of German reunification Joint Declaration of two German States that expropriations now irreversible Incorporation of Declaration into Unification Treaty Article 41 of Treaty
Claims State control over private claims Extinction of claims by treaty Property expropriated by occupation authorities in East Germany, 194549 Agreement between two German States at time of German reunification to exclude restitution of expropriated property Whether violating property rights of individuals affected Relevance of fact that any claims brought under international law would have been unenforceable
State succession Germany Reunification Demise of German Democratic Republic with accession of its Lnder to Federal Republic of Germany Whether constituting State succession Respect for private rights Scope of responsibility of Federal Republic for property claims of individuals in former German Democratic Republic
Treaties Conclusion and operation Constitutional limitations Compatibility of treaty with Basic Law of Federal Republic of Germany Unification Treaty, 1990 Constitutional amendments necessary for achievement of German reunification Amendment excluding restitution of property expropriated during occupation of East Germany by Soviet Union, 194549 Whether compatible with basic constitutional principles of the rule of law and social justice Basic Law, Article 79(3) Inclusion of amendments in Unification Treaty Whether constituting an acceptable procedure under the Basic Law
Territory Occupation of foreign territory at end of war Occupation of East Germany by Soviet Union, 194549 Expropriation of property Legality Claims to restitution and compensation Whether Federal Republic becoming liable to satisfy such claims following German reunification Effects of changes of sovereignty Reunification of Germany Legal consequences Whether Federal Republic becoming liable for reparation of unlawful acts committed on territory of former Soviet zone by occupation authorities Basic Law of Federal Republic, Article 23(1)
States Continuity of States German reunification Demise of German Democratic Republic with accession of its Lnder to Federal Republic of Germany Whether Federal Republic responsible for measures taken by occupation authorities in East Germany and subsequently acquiesced to by German Democratic Republic Unification Treaty, Article 4(4) Whether German Democratic Republic always to be considered as foreign State in relation to Federal Republic
States Sovereignty and independence In foreign relations Power of courts to review executive action Decisions taken by Government of Federal Republic of Germany in negotiations leading to German reunification Whether subject to judicial review
Expropriation Compensation Property expropriated in East Germany during Soviet occupation, 194549 Measure of compensation required by Basic Law of Federal Republic of Germany Whether restitution required Whether full compensation equivalent to restitution required Criteria for determining appropriate level of compensation Relevance of overall financial obligations of the Federal Republic Relevance of fact that most property for which restitution being sought now publicly owned
Expropriation Extraterritorial effect Expropriation without compensation carried out by foreign State Recognition of effectiveness in forum State Limitation to property within expropriating State Territoriality principle Public policy exception Scope of exception
Damages Measure of damages Expropriation and interference with property Circumstances in which full compensation not required Property expropriated in East Germany during Soviet occupation, 194549 Compensation payable by Federal Republic of Germany following German reunification Whether level of compensation subject to executive discretion Relevance of overall financial commitments of Federal Republic following reunification
Relationship of international law and municipal law Recognition and enforcement of foreign laws Duty of recognition under international law Expropriatory legislation Territoriality principle Public policy exception Whether non-payment of compensation justifies non-recognition of legislation with regard to property within expropriating State
War and armed conflict Enforcement of the laws of war Compensation and reparations Equalization of the burdens of war by Federal Republic of Germany Extent of responsibilities of the Federal Republic Whether obligated to grant restitution of property expropriated in former East Germany Whether obligated to grant full compensation
Human rights Procedure for enforcement Fundamental rights under Basic Law of Federal Republic of Germany Property rights German reunification Agreement to exclude restitution of property expropriated during Soviet occupation of East Germany, 194549 Whether violating fundamental rights under the Basic Law
Relationship of international law and municipal law Treaties Federal Republic of Germany-German Democratic Republic Unification Treaty, 1990 Compatibility with Basic Law of Federal Republic The law of the Federal Republic of Germany
Summary: The facts:A number of persons lodged constitutional complaints against certain provisions of the Treaty of 31 August 1990 between the Federal Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic concerning the reunification of the two German States (Unification Treaty). In particular, they challenged a ruling contained in a Joint Declaration of the two German States on the Regulation of Open Property Issues of 15 June 1990, which formed an integral part of the Unification Treaty pursuant to Article 41(1), that expropriations carried out on the basis of sovereign occupation authority in the former Soviet Zone of Occupation (East Germany) between 1945 and 1949 were irreversible, so that restitution could no longer be sought by the individuals affected. The expropriations in question had affected about one third of all agricultural land in East Germany as well as some ten thousand industrial and commercial undertakings there.
The complainants alleged that the ruling at issue violated their fundamental rights under Articles 3, 14, 19, 20 and 79 of the Basic Law of the Federal Republic. They argued that the effect of the ruling was to destroy their legitimate claims and to incorporate into the legal system of the Federal Republic unjust and arbitrary communist land reforms involving expropriation without compensation, which could only become final if their fundamental rights were to be abandoned. Seventy per cent of all property expropriated remained publicly or co-operatively owned and, according to the complainants, could easily be returned to its original owners.
For its part, the Federal Government stressed that the inclusion of the ruling on expropriated property had been a precondition of both the Soviet Union and the German Democratic Republic for the successful conclusion of negotiations for German reunification. Bearing in mind that the achievement of reunification was enshrined as one of the tasks of the German people in the Preamble to the Basic Law, the Federal Government considered that the opportunity to achieve reunification might have been lost if this precondition had not been accepted.
Held:The constitutional complaints were rejected.
(1) The ruling at issue, providing for the irreversibility of expropriations, had been expressly declared to be compatible with the Constitution by Article 143(3) of the Basic Law, which was inserted into the Basic Law by Article 4(5) of the Unification Treaty. That ruling could therefore only violate basic constitutional rights if Article 143(3) was itself invalid, but this was not the case. The competence of the Federal Government to negotiate a treaty providing for German reunification, and to include therein those amendments to the Basic Law necessary for the achievement of unity, was derived from the constitutional obligation to work towards reunification. The procedure followed was therefore constitutionally acceptable (pp. 567).
(2) Just like any other constitutional amendment, Article 143(3) had to comply with the requirements of Article 79(3) of the Basic Law, which laid down that certain basic principles should not be affected by constitutional amendments. These principles included equality before the law, respect for the rule of law and social justice. Nevertheless Article 79(3) required only that these principles should not be undermined. It did not prevent the legislature from positively moulding those principles by amending the Constitution and thereby introducing modifications for objectively justifiable reasons (pp. 578).
(3) Disregarding, for the moment, possible claims under international law, the legal position of the complainants was not, in fact, altered by the ruling in question. Both the authorities in the Soviet zone and subsequently the authorities in the German Democratic Republic had regarded the expropriations as lawful and as having effectively and finally deprived the complainants of their property (p. 59).
(4) The Federal Republic could not be held responsible for the expropriations...
Um weiterzulesen
Jetzt Kostenlos StartenVollständigen Zugriff mit einer kostenlosen 7-Tage-Testversion freischalten
Verändern Sie Ihre juristische Recherche mit vLex
-
Vollständiger Zugriff auf die größte Sammlung von Common-Law-Rechtsprechung auf einer einzigen Plattform
-
Erstellen Sie KI-generierte Fallzusammenfassungen, die wichtige rechtliche Fragen sofort hervorheben
-
Erweiterte Suchfunktionen mit präzisen Filter- und Sortieroptionen
-
Umfassende juristische Inhalte mit Dokumenten aus über 100 Gerichtsbarkeiten
-
Vertraut von 2 Millionen Fachleuten, einschließlich führender internationaler Kanzleien
-
Greifen Sie auf KI-gestützte Recherche mit Vincent AI zu: Suchanfragen in natürlicher Sprache mit verifizierten Zitaten
Vollständigen Zugriff mit einer kostenlosen 7-Tage-Testversion freischalten
Verändern Sie Ihre juristische Recherche mit vLex
-
Vollständiger Zugriff auf die größte Sammlung von Common-Law-Rechtsprechung auf einer einzigen Plattform
-
Erstellen Sie KI-generierte Fallzusammenfassungen, die wichtige rechtliche Fragen sofort hervorheben
-
Erweiterte Suchfunktionen mit präzisen Filter- und Sortieroptionen
-
Umfassende juristische Inhalte mit Dokumenten aus über 100 Gerichtsbarkeiten
-
Vertraut von 2 Millionen Fachleuten, einschließlich führender internationaler Kanzleien
-
Greifen Sie auf KI-gestützte Recherche mit Vincent AI zu: Suchanfragen in natürlicher Sprache mit verifizierten Zitaten
Vollständigen Zugriff mit einer kostenlosen 7-Tage-Testversion freischalten
Verändern Sie Ihre juristische Recherche mit vLex
-
Vollständiger Zugriff auf die größte Sammlung von Common-Law-Rechtsprechung auf einer einzigen Plattform
-
Erstellen Sie KI-generierte Fallzusammenfassungen, die wichtige rechtliche Fragen sofort hervorheben
-
Erweiterte Suchfunktionen mit präzisen Filter- und Sortieroptionen
-
Umfassende juristische Inhalte mit Dokumenten aus über 100 Gerichtsbarkeiten
-
Vertraut von 2 Millionen Fachleuten, einschließlich führender internationaler Kanzleien
-
Greifen Sie auf KI-gestützte Recherche mit Vincent AI zu: Suchanfragen in natürlicher Sprache mit verifizierten Zitaten
Vollständigen Zugriff mit einer kostenlosen 7-Tage-Testversion freischalten
Verändern Sie Ihre juristische Recherche mit vLex
-
Vollständiger Zugriff auf die größte Sammlung von Common-Law-Rechtsprechung auf einer einzigen Plattform
-
Erstellen Sie KI-generierte Fallzusammenfassungen, die wichtige rechtliche Fragen sofort hervorheben
-
Erweiterte Suchfunktionen mit präzisen Filter- und Sortieroptionen
-
Umfassende juristische Inhalte mit Dokumenten aus über 100 Gerichtsbarkeiten
-
Vertraut von 2 Millionen Fachleuten, einschließlich führender internationaler Kanzleien
-
Greifen Sie auf KI-gestützte Recherche mit Vincent AI zu: Suchanfragen in natürlicher Sprache mit verifizierten Zitaten
Vollständigen Zugriff mit einer kostenlosen 7-Tage-Testversion freischalten
Verändern Sie Ihre juristische Recherche mit vLex
-
Vollständiger Zugriff auf die größte Sammlung von Common-Law-Rechtsprechung auf einer einzigen Plattform
-
Erstellen Sie KI-generierte Fallzusammenfassungen, die wichtige rechtliche Fragen sofort hervorheben
-
Erweiterte Suchfunktionen mit präzisen Filter- und Sortieroptionen
-
Umfassende juristische Inhalte mit Dokumenten aus über 100 Gerichtsbarkeiten
-
Vertraut von 2 Millionen Fachleuten, einschließlich führender internationaler Kanzleien
-
Greifen Sie auf KI-gestützte Recherche mit Vincent AI zu: Suchanfragen in natürlicher Sprache mit verifizierten Zitaten