Secrecy, National Security and the Vindication of Constitutional Law
Show Less

Secrecy, National Security and the Vindication of Constitutional Law

Edited by David Cole, Federico Fabbrini and Arianna Vedaschi

Virtually every nation has had to confront tensions between the rule-of-law demands for transparency and accountability and the need for confidentiality with respect to terrorism and national security. This book provides a global and comparative overview of the implications of governmental secrecy in a variety of contexts. Expert contributors from around the world discuss the dilemmas posed by the necessity for – and evils of – secrecy, and assess constitutional mechanisms for checking the abuse of secrecy by national and international institutions in the field of counter-terrorism.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 4: Secrecy vs. openness: counterterrorism and the role of the German Federal Constitutional Court

Mindia Vashakmadze


Germany is no newcomer to counterterrorism. In fact, it has struggled with terrorists since the early 1970s. But 9/11 tested Germany’s approach to counterterrorism in a special way. The fact that a number of Islamist terrorists had spent considerable time within Germany planning their attacks was a harrowing discovery for the authorities. It was therefore not surprising that the German state reacted swiftly to 9/11. In 2002, the legislature adopted two counter-terrorism packages that extended the competences of the security and intelligence agencies. Notions of openness and transparency underlie much of German constitutional-legal practice (though not explicitly mentioned in the Basic Law). These themes are especially relevant with respect to counter- terrorism – an area in which the tensions between openness and secrecy are extensive. Transparency, among others, implies clarity of legal regulation and democratic accountability of decision-making. The German Parliament (Bundestag) has the power to legislate in areas relating to the exercise of fundamental rights. This power is exclusive to the legislature, which means that the executive may not regulate such matters by way of delegation. Moreover, Parliament exercises oversight over the actions of the executive. However, the power of parliamentary oversight is not limitless, especially in the area of counterterrorism. The German Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) resolves disputes that arise between branches of the Federal Government. It also deals with constitutional complaints and examines the constitutionality of laws. Although the FCC has not declared the extension of the powers of the intelligence and security agencies unconstitutional, it has handed down a considerable number of judgments concerning security legislation.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.