Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T01:33:52.088Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some Reflections on Article 25 of the Constitution of the German Federal Republic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2009

Béla Vitányi
Get access

Extract

The present article is intended to give a résumé of the international law questions arising in connection with Article 25 of the Constitution of the German Federal Republic of 23 May 1949, which reads as follows: “The general rules of public international law are an integral part of federal law. They shall take precedence over the laws and shall directly create rights and duties for the inhabitants of the federal territory”. First of all it must be recalled that the Weimar Constitution of 11 August 1919 included a similar provision. Article 4 provided: “The generally recognised rules of international law constitute a binding integral part of the legal system of the German Empire.”

Type
Notes and Shorter Articles
Information
Netherlands International Law Review , Volume 24 , Issue 3 , December 1977 , pp. 578 - 588
Copyright
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1977

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

1. For a representative explanation of the dualist theory, see Triepel, , “Les rapports entre le dioit interne et le droit international”. Rec. des cours, tome I, 1923, pp. 77–118, in particular pp. 79–84.Google Scholar

2. For the monist theory, see: “Scelle, “Règies générates du droit de la paix”. Rec. des cours, tome 46, 1933, in particular pp. 353–354 and 436–437Google Scholar; item: Kelsen, , Principles of International Law, 1952, pp. 424–447.Google Scholar

3. Kommentar zum Bonner Grundgesetz, Hamburg, 1950Google Scholar: Comment on Article 25.

4. Schmidt-Bleibtreu-Klein, , Kommentar zum Grundgesetz für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland. 2nd.ed., 1970, p. 371.Google Scholar

5. Cf. Third report on State responsibility, by ProfessorAgo, , Special Rapporteur. Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1971, Vol. II, part one, p. 425.Google Scholar

6. See inter alia: Erades, and Gould, , The Relation between International Law and Municipal Law in the Netherlands and in the United States, 1961Google Scholar; Seidl-Hohenveldern, , “Transformation or Adaptation of International Law into Municipal Law.” The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 1962, pp. 90Google Scholar et seq.; Wildhaber, , Treaty-Making Power and Constitution, 1971, 7Google Scholar. Von Mangoldt-Klein, , Das Bonner Grondgesetz, 1957Google Scholar. Comment on Article 25.

7. Meessen, , Staatsverträge zum internationalen Privatrecht Berichte der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Völkerrecht. Heft 16, pp. 69–70Google Scholar; Leibholz-Rinck, , Grundgesetz. Kommentar an Hand der Rechtsprechung des Bundesverfassungsgerichts. 5th ed. 1975, p. 570.Google Scholar

8. See: Marcoff, , “Les règies d'application indirecte en droit international”, R.G.D.I.P. 1976, p. 415.Google Scholar

9. Case of the Greco-Bulgarian, “Communities”. P.C.I.J. Series B, No 17, p. 32.Google Scholar

10. Treatment of Polish Nationals and other persons of Polish origin or speech in the Danzig territory, P.C.I.J. Series A/B, No 44, pp. 24–25.Google Scholar

11. Case of the Free zones of Upper Savoy and the District of Gex. P. C.I.J. Series A/B, No 46, p. 167Google Scholar. The same principle is also affirmed in the Lotus Case, P.C.I.J. Series A, No 10, p. 25Google Scholar, in the Advisory Opinions on the Exchange of Greek and Turkish Populations, P.C.I.J. Series B, No. 10, p. 20Google Scholar, and on the Jurisdiction of the Courts of Danzig. P.C.I.J. Series B, No 15, pp. 26–27.Google Scholar

12. Cf. Articles 1 and 3 of the Draft articles on State responsibility adopted by the V.N. International Law Commission.

13. Report of the International Law Commission to the General Assembly. Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1973, VoL II, p. 171Google Scholar et seq.

14. Mangoldt-Klein, Von, Das Bonner Grundgesetz, 1957Google Scholar, Comment on Article 25; According to Leibholz-Rinck, , “general rules of international law” must be understood as customary international law adopted by a great majority of States, completed by the generally recognised principles of law. Op.cit., p. 569.Google Scholar

15. See inter alia: Anzilotti, , Cours de droit international, French translation by Gidel, vol. I, 1929, pp. 116–119Google Scholar; Heydte, Baron von der, “Glossen zu einer Theorie der allgemeinen Rechtsgrundsätze”. Die Friedenswarte, 1933, p. 289Google Scholar et seq.; Habicht, , “Le pouvoir du juge international de statuer ‘ex aequo et bono’. Rec. des cours, tome 49, 1934, pp. 286–292 and 298Google Scholar; Basdevant, , “Les principes généraux de droit et le droit des gens.” Revue de droit international et de legislation comparée, 1935, pp. 670–673Google Scholar; Cheng, Bin, General Principles of Law as applied by International Courts and Tribunals, 1953, pp. 24, 376 and 390Google Scholar; Guggenheim, , “Landesrechtliche Begriffe im Völkerrecht.” Festschrift für Wehberg, 1956, p. 113Google Scholar; Lauterpacht, H., “Some Observations on the Prohibition of ‘non liquet’ and the Completeness of the Law.” Symbolae Verzijl, 1958, p. 205Google Scholar; SΦrensen, , “Principes de droit international public”. Rec. des cours, tome 101, pp. 18 and 23Google Scholar; Reuter, , “Principes de droit international public”. Rec. des cours, tome 103, 1961, pp. 466–468Google Scholar; Giraud, , “Le droit international public et la politique”. Rec. des cours, tome 110, 1963, pp. 593–594.Google Scholar

16. See inter alia: Verdross, , “Les principes généraux du droit dans la jurisprudence Internationale”. Rec. des cours, tome 52, 1935 pp. 204–205Google Scholar; Item: “Les principes généraux de droit international public”. Rec. d'études de droit international en hommage à Paul Guggenheim, 1968, pp. 524–525Google Scholar; Fur, Le, “Règles générales du droit de la paix.” Rec. des cours, tome 54, 1935, p. 205Google Scholar; de Visscher, Ch., Théories et réalités en droit international public, 2nd.ed., 1955, p. 441Google Scholar; Quadri, , “Cours général de droit international public”. Rec. des cours, tome 113, 1964, pp. 348–351Google Scholar; Favre, , Principes du droit des gens, 1974, pp. 275–276.Google Scholar

17. Judgments of the Federal Constitutional Court, vol. 15 No. 34, VoL 16 No. 33.

18. “Théorie du droit international public.” Rec. des cours, tome 84, 1953, pp. 127–128.Google Scholar

19. de Visscher, Ch., “La codification du droit international”, Rec. des cours, tome 6, 1925, p. 321Google Scholar; Verdross, , “Règles générales du droit international de la paix.” Rec. des cours, tome 30, 1929, p. 295Google Scholar; Fur, Le, op. cit., p. 198.Google Scholar

20. Op.cit., p. 40.

21. “Cours général de droit international public”, Rec. des cours, tome 136, 1972, p. 76.Google Scholar

22. I.C.J. Reports, 1950, pp. 277–278.Google Scholar

23. I.C.J. Reports, 1951, p. 131.Google Scholar

23a . I.C.J. Reports, 1969, p. 27.Google Scholar

24. “Le juge international et la règle générate”. R.G.D.I.P., 1976, p. 45.Google Scholar

25. Op.cit., p. 76.

26. Op.cit., in note 19, p. 375.

27. Op.cit., in note 19, p. 297.

28. “Décolonisation et succession aux traités”. R.G.D.I.P., 1970, p. 217.Google Scholar

29. “Multilateral Treaties as Evidence of Customary International Law”, 41 B.Y.I.L., 1965/1966, pp. 298–299.Google Scholar

30. Cf. Jenks, C.W., “Les instruments internationaux à caractère collectif”. Rec. des cours, tome 69, 1939, p. 481.Google Scholar

31. North Sea Continental Shelf Cases. I.C.J. Reports, 1969, p. 43.Google Scholar

32. Ibid., p. 44.

33. Judgments of the Federal Constitutional Court, vol. 15, No. 64.

34. Trb. 1973, No. 43; see on this Convention Belinfante 20 NILR, 1973, p. 297.Google Scholar

35. Judgments of the Federal Constitutional Court, vol. 15, Nos. 15, 25 and 43.

36. 35 Annuaire, 1929, Vol. II, pp. 307–311.Google Scholar

37. Trb. 1962, Nos. 101 and 159.

38. Judgments of the Federal Constitutional Court, vol. 6, No. 363, vol. 31, No. 178.

39. Jurisdiction of the Courts of Danzig (1929). P.C.I.J. Series B., No. 15, pp. 17–18.Google Scholar

40. Schmidt-Bleibtreu-Klein, , op.cit., p. 318.Google Scholar