Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-hgkh8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-29T02:10:28.340Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - Transitional Justice in the German Democratic Republic and in Unified Germany

from PART III - LATIN AMERICA, POST COMMUNISM, AND SOUTH AFRICA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 December 2009

Claus Offe
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Humboldt University
Ulrike Poppe
Affiliation:
Contemporary History Studies, Evangelische Akademie
Jon Elster
Affiliation:
Columbia University, New York
Get access

Summary

New political regimes are never created on a tabula rasa. Hence any new regime must establish some relationship to the actors and subjects of its predecessor regime. Also, it must establish reasons supporting the nature of this retrospective relationship. The retrospective relationship must be justifiable in terms of the new regime. Whereas new authoritarian regimes may be able to repress and destroy the traces and memories of the predecessor regime, this option is precluded in new democracies. The latter must deal, in order to secure their viability and credibility of their principles in the future, with past injustices through means and procedures that are consistent with presently valid standards of justice, such as the rule of law and equality before the law. This threefold temporal reference to the past, the present, and the future is constitutive of the problems of transition justice in new democracies. This chapter is about the way this backward-looking practices evolved in unified Germany with regard to the past of the now defunct state of the German Democratic Republic (GDR) and the dominant actors of this state, as well as its victims.

We deal here with “policies,” that is, initiatives taken and strategies chosen or sponsored by state actors (governments, the judiciary, and special agencies constituted by law), not the numerous exclusively civic actions in which conflicts are carried out among family members, by social and political movements, within occupational groups, or by the media. Policies of transition justice can focus on perpetrators and on victims.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Borneman, John, Settling Accounts: Violence, Justice, and Accountability in Postsocialist Europe, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandenburger, Maren, “Stasi-Unterlagen-Gesetz und Rechtsstaat,” Kritische Justiz 28 (1995), No. 3, 351–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bundestag, Deutscher, ed., Materialien der Enquête-Kommission “Aufarbeitung von Geschichte und Folgen der SED-Diktatur in Deutschland,”Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlag und Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, 1995, 18 Bde.Google Scholar
Elster, Jon, “Coming to terms with the past: A framework for the study of justice in the transition to democracy,” Archives Européennes de Sociologie 39 (1998), No. 1, 7–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gauck, Joachim, Die Stasi-Akten. Das unheimliche Erbe der DDR, Reinbek bei Hamburg: Rowohlt, 1992.Google Scholar
Isensee, Josef, ed., Vergangenheitsbewältigung durch Recht: Drei Abhandlungen zu einem deutschen Problem, Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1992.Google Scholar
Klaus Günther, “Der strafrechtliche Schuldbegriff als Gegenstand einer Politik der Erinnerung in der Demokratie,” in Smith, Gary and Margalit, Avishai, eds., Amnestie oder die Politik der Erinnerung in der Demokratie, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1997, 48–89.Google Scholar
Günther Jakobs, “Vergangenheitsbewältigung durch Strafrecht? Zur Leistungsfähigkeit des Strafrechts nach einem politischem Umbruch,” in Isensee, Josef, ed., Vergangenheitsbewältigung durch Recht: Drei Abhandlungen zu einem deutschen Problem, Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1992.Google Scholar
Lampe, Ernst-Joachim, ed., Die deutsche Wiedervereinigung. Band III: Die Verfolgung von Regierungskriminalität der DDR nach der Wiedervereinigung, Köln, Berlin: Carl Heymanns Verlag KG, 1993.Google Scholar
Lübbe, Herrmann, “Der Nationalsozialismus im deutschen Nachkriegsbewußtsein,” Historische Zeitschrift 236 (1998), No. 1, 579–599.Google Scholar
Lüdersen, Klaus, Der Staat geht unter – das Unrecht bleibt? Regierungskriminalität in der ehemaligen DDR, Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, 1992.Google Scholar
Marxen, Klaus and Werle, Gerhard, Die Strafrechtliche Aufarbeitung von DDR-Unrecht, Berlin: de Gruyter, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Misztal, Barbara, “How not to deal with the past: Lustration in Poland,” Archives Européennes de Sociologie 40 (1999), No. 1, 31–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Offe, Claus, Varieties of Transition, Oxford: Polity Press, 1996.Google Scholar
Pampel, Bert, “Was bedeutet ‘Aufarbeitung der Vergangenheit’?Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, B1–2, January 6, 1995, 27–38.Google Scholar
Richter, Michael, Die Staatssicherheit im letzten Jahr der DDR, Weimar: Boehlau, 1996.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Tina, The Haunted Land. Facing Europe's Ghosts after Communism, New York: Vintage, 1995.Google Scholar
Sa'adah, Anne, Germany's Second Chance: Trust, Justice, and Democratization, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
Schaal, Gary and Wöll, Andreas, eds., Vergangenheitsbewältigung, Baden-Baden: Nomos, 1997.Google Scholar
Schönherr, Albrecht, ed., Ein Volk am Pranger? Die Deutschen auf der Suche nach einer neuen politischen Kultur, Berlin: Aufbau, 1992.Google Scholar
Schwartz, Herman, “Lustration in Eastern Europe,” Parker School Journal of East European Law 1 (1994), No. 2, 141–172.Google Scholar
Smith, Gary and Margalit, Avishai, Amnestie oder Die Politik der Erinnerung, Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, 1997.Google Scholar
Stark, Christian, Berg, Wilfried, and Pieroth, Bodo, eds., Der Rechtsstaat und die Aufarbeitung der vor-rechtsstaatlichen Vergangenheit, Berlin: de Gruyter, 1992.Google Scholar
Tucker, Aviezer, “Paranoids may be persecuted: post-totalitarian retroactive justice,” Archives Européennes de Sociologie 40 (1999), No. 1, 56–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Unverhau, Dagmar, ed., Lustration, Aktenöffnung, demokratischer Umbruch in Polen, Tschechien, der Slowakei und Ungarn, Münster: Lit Verlag, 1999.Google Scholar
Wassermann, Rudolf, “Zur Aufarbeitung des SED-Unrechts,” Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, B4, January 22, 1993, 3–12.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×