Individual questions of the institutional reforms of the representative-democratic parliamentary system, such as issues of electoral law, party law, and parliamentary law, are frequently discussed. But all these reflections - and this is the principal thesis of this article - must eventually remain without success, if they do not address the preceding basic problem concerning the democratically indispensable conditions of the mental constitution of the active citizen, the „civis“. There, a key role, consciously experienced like a paradox, falls upon the (...) renunciation of the claim to absolute truth of one’s own political convictions with regard to equally „relative-absolute“ claims for validity of others. On this base the psychological presuppositions of a modern pluralistic democracy are discussed, which thereupon are to be institutionalized: e. g. the capacity to compromise, the obligation of state neutrality in religious matters, the renunciation of hate speech, the rejection of „denial of reality“, and of allegedly „finalizing“ ideologies of history. (shrink)

Este artículo trata sobre la discusión en torno al conflicto entre la seguridad y la libertad, y, más concretamente, entre la prevención policial y los derechos de los ciudadanos. El autor va más allá de la mera afirmación de que entre esos dos polos existe una relación de tensión, e intenta fijar los elementos que en el Estado de Derecho son absolutamente irrenunciables si es que no se quiere abandonar este tipo de Estado. Analiza para ello, críticamente, la jurisprudencia del (...) Tribunal Constitucional Federal Alemán, con referencias al acervo normativo de la Unión Europea. Su conclusión es que la intervención del Estado en la esfera privada del ciudadano debe estar sujeta a límites infranqueables, también en lo que concierne al control preventivo de riesgos relacionados con el terrorismo. (shrink)

This paper analyses the change in the notion of fundamental and human rights in Germany and throughout the European Union during the process of European integration. This change, that can be summarized in the formula “from human rights to state tasks,” signifies the integration and partial amendment of the French Revolution's ideals (liberté, égalité, fraternité) with the new ideals of security, diversity and solidarity. These new ideals make it necessary for the state to play a positive role in devising, for (...) example, a policy of minority recognition and a long list of social rights. These rights are often translated into merely generic “norms on state objectives” and not directly binding law in force. This means that such rights increasingly become a political and legislative issue making it more difficult for the Courts to offer guarantees. (shrink)

Like Kant at his time, Jürgen Habermas wants to encourage the reader to use his „reasonable liberty“. There is no doubt, that the philosophical positions of Kant on the one hand and of Hegel on the other hand hold, until today, a key role in the development of the „discourse of modern age“. In order to oppose a short-circuited synthesis of both systems, which are obliged to the idea of liberty quite differently, this essay demonstrates the substantial differences regarding to (...) elementary concepts like peculiarity of the individual will, law and legislation, people and sovereignty of the people. That both philosophers differ in their interest of questioning becomes quite clear regarding to the citizen/state relation. While Hegel tries to describe the reality of the state as a „moral universe“ and therefore as „reality of reason“, Kant is interested in knowing about the potential state togetherness of individuals which have experienced in them the „radical evil“. The differences concerning the estimation of the „subjective“ individual will in its relationship to the „objective“ will of „generality“, concerning also the (Rousseauian) concept of contract and the citizens as „co-legislators“ are culminating in the relationship between „law“ and „morality“. Whereas Kant (wrongly) ignores ethos and history, Hegel is lacking the concept of „intersubjective communication“ (so Habermas states). From both insufficiencies conclusions are resulting which are important for coping with the actual difficulties with „inclusion“ and „integration“. (shrink)