Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T01:59:56.476Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Efforts at Constitutional Comparison: The German-South African Experience (A Partial Review) - Obeng Mireku: Constitutional Review in Federalised Systems of Government – A Comparison of Germany and South Africa, Schriftenreihe Recht und Verfassung in Südafrika, Band 10. 171 pp. Baden-Baden: Nomos 2000. ISBN: 3-7890-5900-9; Price: € 61 - Jörg Fedtke: Die Rezeption von Verfassungsrecht – Südafrika 1993-1996, Schriftenreihe Recht und Verfassung in Südafrika, Band 6. Baden-Baden: Nomos 2000. 469 pp. ISBN: 3-7890-6678-8; Price: € 143.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

Hanri Mostert

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Legal Culture
Information
German Law Journal , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , 01 February 2003 , pp. 187 - 197
Copyright
Copyright © 2003 by German Law Journal GbR 

References

1 Venter, F. Constitutional Comparison (Juta/Kluwer Law International, 2000. ISBN 90-411-1510-2.)Google Scholar

2 Venter, F. Constitutional Comparison 19.Google Scholar

3 Reviewed in Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht (ZaöRV) 1999 (59/2), 601-603).Google Scholar

4 For a comprehensive list, see http://www.nomos.de [30-01-2003].Google Scholar

5 English translations of the German Basic Law are available online, inter alia at: http://www.jura.uni-sb.de/law/GG/gg0.html and http://www.iuscomp.org/gla/statutes/GG.htm [30-01-2003]. For a comprehensive list of links to Legal Resources, Statutes and Courts, go to http://www.germanlawjournal.com and click on “links” in the main bar. Additional suggestions to the list of links are always welcome and should be directed to .Google Scholar

6 These texts are available in English, and can be accessed online at: http://www.gov.za/structure/constitution.htm [30-01-2003].Google Scholar

7 Admittedly, this might be due to the date of publication, which from the Acknowledgements (p. 9) appears to have been some time after April 2000.Google Scholar

8 See, e.g., Vesper, K. “On the reform of the fiscal equalization scheme in Germany”, online at http://heaven.diw.de/english/projekte/docs/stt_finanzausgleich_brdbrg_summary_e.html); and see also Hanebeck, A. “Zurückhaltung und Maßstäbegesetz: Das Urteil des BVerfG zum Länderfinanzausgleich”, Kritische Justiz (KJ) 2000, 262ff.; Becker, J. “Forderung nach einem Maßstäbegesetz. Neue Maßstäbe in der Gleichheitsdogmatik?', Neue Juristische Wochenschrift (NJW) 2000, 3742ff.; Waldhoff, C. “Reformperspektiven der bundesstaatlichen Finanzverfassung im gestuften Verfahren”, Zeitschrift für Gesetzgebung (ZG) 2000, 193, 207ff.Google Scholar

9 See the decision of 11 November 1999 (BVerfG, 2 BvF 2/98 of 11.11.1999, available online at http://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/cgi-bin/link.pl?entscheidungen [30-01-2003]).Google Scholar

10 See the sources mentioned at note 8 above, and also, e.g. Lunze, S. / Zisky, S. “Federalism and financial power” online at http://www.lunze.de/studies/federalism.htm [30-01-2003]; Berthold, N., Drews, S. & Thode, E. “Die föderale Ordnung in Deutschland – Motor oder Bremse des wirtschaftlichen Wachstums?” Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftspolitik 2001, 113-140; and Von Hagen, J. / Hepp, J. “Regional Risksharing and Redistribution in the German Federation” 2000, online at http://www.zei.de/download/zei_wp/B00-15.pdf [30-01-2003].Google Scholar

11 See the canonical text by Bermann, B. “Taking Subsidiarity Seriously: Federalism in the European Community and the United States”, 94 Col. L. Rev. 331 (1994); for a comprehensive discussion of the subsidiarity principle in the light of recent federalism research, see the contributions in: Howse/Nicolaidis (eds.), The Federal Vision, 2002; cf. Phil Syrpis, “Legitimising European Governance: Taking Subsidiarity Seriously within the Open Method of Coordination”, European University Institute Working Paper in Law No. 10/2002, available at: http://PUB/law02-10.pdf.Google Scholar

12 On this distinction, see, e.g. Kroeze, I. “Doing Things with Values: The Role of Constitutional Values in Constitutional Interpretation” Stellenbosch Law Review (Stell LR) 2001, 265–276; and Kroeze, I. “Doing Things with Values: The case of Ubuntu” Stellenbosch Law Review (Stell LR) 2002, 252ff.Google Scholar

13 DVB Behuising (Pty) Ltd v North West Provincial Government and Others CCT 22/99 (available at http://www.law.wits.ac.za).Google Scholar

14 See pp. 203 ff. For the online text of the Interim Constitution, follow the link provided in note 3 above.Google Scholar

15 Op cit note 1 above.Google Scholar

16 Van Reenen, T. “Philosophical Underpinning of Modern Comparative Legal Methodology” Stellenbosch Law Review (Stell LR) 1996, 37–60 provides an excellent overview of this issue. Cf also Venter Constitutional Comparison (2000) 15 – 17. Note ought to be taken also of the now available, German translation of Rodolfo Sacco, Einführung in die Rechtsvergleichung, Baden-Baden: Nomos 2001, translated from the Italian by Jacob Joussen. (Original Title: Introduzione al diritto comparato). For recent reflections on the nature of Comparative Legal Science, see the contribution of one of the German doyens in this field: Hein Kötz, “Alte und neue Aufgaben der Rechtsvergleichung”, in: Juristenzeitung (JZ) 2002, 257–264. See also the wonderful essay on the Centennial Congress of Comparative Law, held in New Orleans 2000, by Michaels, R. “Im Westen nichts Neues?”, in: Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht (RabelsZ) 2002, 97–115.Google Scholar

17 Zweigert, K. / Kötz, H. (translated by Weir) Introduction to Comparative Law (1998) 2.Google Scholar

18 This definition renders obvious the close correlation between scientific system and scientific method, to which Van Reenen, T. “Philosophical Underpinning of Modern Comparative Legal Methodology” Stellenbosch Law Review (Stell LR) 1996, 39 refers.Google Scholar

19 De Cruz, P. Modern Approach to Comparative Law (1993) 3; Zweigert, K. / Kötz, H. (translated by Weir) Introduction to Comparative Law (1998) 6; Venter, F. Van der Walt A.J. et. al. (eds.) Regsnavorsing – Metode en Publikasie (1990) 71.Google Scholar