LEGISLATED COMMEMORATION
The new Saxony Assembly Act
by Antifa Recherche Team Dresden ART
In the past, the conservative
government in Saxony has attempted to transpose the controversial
totalitarianism theory into practical policy and valid law. The
publicly financed Hannah Arendt Institute for the Research on
Totalitarianism, which has researched the “twofold dictatorship
experience of East Germany” since 1993, and the 2003 Saxon Memorials
Act, which forced an undiscriminating commemoration of “victims of
tyranny,” are examples. The fact that NS victims organizations refused
to work with the foundation committees was of little to no interest to
the ruling governmental parties. Instead, the Saxony law formed the
basis for the Federal Memorials bill. With the Assembly Act, first
passed in January 2010 and again in 2012, the CDU/FDP coalition in
Saxony succeeded in passing legislation that exudes the spirit of
totalitarian doctrine. This legislation not only codified the equation
of National Socialism and Communism, but also attempted to regulate the
memory of politics discourse and to restrict the exercise of basic
political civil rights.
Passing the bill before the Nazi
demonstrations on February 13th proved to be a successful maneuver. The
bill was acclaimed, first and foremost, as an effective measure against
the annual Nazi demonstrations in Dresden. That the legislation was
intended to suppress not only Nazi demonstrations but also the expected
counter-demonstrations was already clear from the 2009 coalition
agreement between the governing CDU and FDP: “We will use all measures
allowed by public assembly and demonstration laws, and we will revise
these laws before February 13th 2010, in order to impose boundaries on
extremists in Saxony.”1
Tying this legislation so closely to the 13th of February and the Nazi
demonstration made it difficult to argue against the bill. On the one
hand, the bill purported to reestablish the much-loved Dresden
tradition of “silent commemoration.” On the other, those who argued
against the bill faced the accusation of playing into the Nazis’ hands.2
Significantly, the
law has never been applied to a February 13th demonstration.
The development of the Saxony Assembly Act
The federalism reform of 2006 granted
the Länder new legislative authorities. Among other things, it allowed
the Länder to define assembly laws independently. Saxony, like Bavaria,
had ambitions. The CDU/SPD government coalition of the fourth
legislative session introduced a bill shortly before February 13th 2008
which would place stipulations on or prohibit demonstrations if they
were to take place at a location or on a day that commemorated “the
victims of the National Socialist tyranny or the victims of war or the
resistance to the National Socialist tyranny,” and if it were to be
expected “that the event would violate the dignity of those whose fates
were bound to this location or day.”3 Places of commemoration listed
were the
synagogues in Dresden and Görlitz, the memorial locations of the former
synagogues in Leipzig and Chemnitz, the grounds of former concentration
camps, memorials belonging to the Saxony Memorial Foundation, war
cemeteries, the Monument to the Battle of the Nations in Leipzig and
the Frauenkirche in Dresden – and the historical city center of Dresden
on February 13th and 14th. Days of commemoration were dates related to
National Socialism: the 27th and 30th of January, the 8th of May, the
20th of July, the 1st of September, the 9th of November, and also the
National Day of Remembrance. A revision to include “victims of
Communist tyranny” was denied on the grounds of a lack of relevant
demonstrations. However, the bill was not considered before a new state
parliament was elected in 2009. The new CDU/FDP coalition government
proposed a new draft in October. The coalition saw the previously
denied revision as necessary and expanded the stipulations to include
the “Communist tyranny.” Of the commemorative locations and days listed
in the previous CDU/SPD coalition draft, only the Monument to the
Battle of the Nations, the Frauenkirche with the surrounding Neumarkt,
and the Dresden city center on the 13th and 14th of February, albeit
over a considerably larger area, remained in the new draft. An
unusually short period of time passed between the introduction of the
bill and the passing of the new Saxony Assembly Act on the 20th of
January 2010. The government was determined to announce the ratified
law before the 65th anniversary commemoration of the bombing of
Dresden, although in the end it was not necessary to use it on that
occasion. The rush had consequences: the Greens, the SPD and the Left
Party submitted an appeal. On April 19th 2011 the Constitutional Court
of Saxony declared the Assembly Act null and void on formal grounds.4 Three
months later
the ruling parties resubmitted the bill – now formally correct but with
identical content. The Saxony parliament passed the new draft of the
bill on January 25th 2012.5
The Saxony Assembly Act
The Saxony Assembly Act is nearly identical to the Federal Assembly
Act. Section 15, however, which concerns the grounds for intervention
by authorities in the fundamental right of freedom of assembly, was
changed substantially. Section 15, paragraph 2 states:
“An assembly or a demonstration can be expressly prohibited or be made
subject to stipulations if:
1. The assembly or the demonstration takes place at
a location of
exceptional historical significance, which commemorates a) Persons who
were victims of inhumane treatment under the National Socialist or
Communist tyrannies, b) persons who resisted the National Socialist or
Communist tyrannies, or c) the victims of war and
2. According to precise, demonstrable circumstances
evident at the
time of issue of the injunction it can be adduced that the dignity of
such persons as denoted in Number 1 will be violated. This is in
particular the case if the assembly or the demonstration a) denies or
trivializes the tyranny of the National Socialist regime, the crimes
committed by it or its responsibility for the Second World War, or
places the blame on others, b) portrays institutions or representatives
of the National Socialist or Communist tyrannies as commendable or
honorable, or c) speaks out against the reconciliation or dialogue
between peoples.
The Monument to the Battle of the Nations in Leipzig, the Frauenkirche
including the Neumarkt in Dresden and, in addition, on the 13th and
14th of February the northern Altstadt and the southern interior
Neustadt in Dresden are locations as specified in Sentence 1 Number 1.
Their boundaries are defined in the addendum to this act.”
6
Interventions in politics of memory
In 2005 Saxony amended the passage in the Federal Assembly Act that
prohibited or placed stipulations on assemblies “if 1. The assembly or
demonstration takes place at a location that is a memorial of
historically exceptional, trans-regional significance, commemorating
the victims of inhumane treatment under the tyrannical and despotic
regime of the National Socialists.”
7 Corresponding to the
parallelizing
discourse of “two dictatorships,” the restrictions were broadened to
include those locations commemorating the “Communist tyranny.”
Undefined locations commemorating “victims of war” were also added.
Every specificity regarding National Socialism in the legislative text
was made to disappear behind a curtain of equalization and
universalizing rhetoric. With these two points, Saxony intentionally
ventured into uncharted judicial terrain and went beyond the hitherto
existing rulings of the Federal Constitutional Court, for example their
prohibition of the Rudolf Hess memorial demonstration in Wunsiedel
according to Section 130, paragraph 4 of the German Penal Code.
8 In this
ruling, the
court emphasized the sui generis nature of the National Socialist
crimes, and that in this and only this context, exemptions for laws
limiting the freedom of expression are justified. The CDU/FDP
coalition, however, were not swayed by this ruling, and referred to the
preamble of the Constitution of Saxony, in which it is stated: “In
consideration of the woeful history of National Socialist and Communist
tyranny […] the people of the Free State of Saxony, thanks to the
peaceful revolution of October 1989, have given themselves this
constitution.”
9
The
equal ranking of National Socialism and Communism was systematically
codified by law, totalitarianism theory became potent realpolitik.
The attempt to justify the choice of locations of “historically
exceptional significance” impinged directly on politics of memory
discourses, and strove to establish a specific interpretation. All and
sundry Dresden myths were dredged up in order to do so: the destruction
of Dresden shortly before the end of the war, and the large amount of
refugees in the city, which drastically increased the number of victims.
10 The
Frauenkirche
became the the “strongest symbol of civilian victims of the war,”
11 and
Dresden as a
whole represented “the epitome of the hardships and injuries of war in
the public awareness and practiced commemoration of the citizens of the
Free State [of Saxony] and beyond.”
12 This version was the
officially
sanctioned interpretation – and was to be enforced by the state
monopoly on power, if necessary. The government’s justification for
including the Monument to the Battle of the Nations in the Act was
nothing short of an acrobatics routine: The explanatory memorandum
speaks of commemorating “the bloodiest battle in the history of the
world before the First World War,” and that the Monument is an
architectural reminder of the atmosphere of “national pathos and the
heroization of death in battle on the eve of the First World War.”
13 At
the same
time, the speaker of the CDU-faction called the Monument an
“admonishment against war” and claimed: “I know many people from
Leipzig who have told me: For us it’s a reminder that no one should
ever again lose their lives in a war such as that started by the
National Socialists.”
14
The fact that entire districts of Dresden could be declared
demonstration-free zones on the 13th and 14th of February if “the
dignity of persons”, in accordance with the law, was seen as impaired
was blatantly justified with the need to recognize the Dresden
tradition of “silent commemoration” as the only legitimate
demonstration on these dates. Carsten Biesok, legal policy spokesperson
for the FDP faction stated: “Commemorating the victims of the Second
World War silently and peacefully on the 13th of February is a matter
of exercising basic rights. With our Assembly Act we are reinstituting
this freedom.”
15
Home Secretary Markus Ulbig added: “At these locations we do not want
to allow any demonstrations that deride the victims or make a dignified
commemoration – especially for the citizens of Dresden – impossible.”
16
State Intervention
The locations listed in the Act are exemplary; it is left to the
discretion of the administrative authorities in Saxony to name further
locations of historical significance. This discretion and the authority
to determine when and how the “dignity of persons” is violated gives
the offices of public order, which are in fact administrative
institutions and not institutions of political opinion-making, the
power of political interpretation, while making the debate about these
questions an administrative act, withdrawn from the public. At this
point, the goal of the Saxony Assembly Act becomes clear, if it had not
been so before. It goes beyond historicopolitical aspects. It is
intended to place limits on the public sphere as a place of political
debate. The Act assumes the interpretive authority over what may or may
not be said in public. This legal regulation of the sayable shows a
“submission of the political to the statebased via the juridical, the
exercise of a capacity to strip politics of its initiative through
which the state precedes and legitimizes itself.”
17 The
practical
consequence of the Assembly Act is the banning of unwanted opinions
from the public sphere, and thus the successive limitation of the
freedoms of assembly and expression. The new Saxony Assembly Act is
thus an expression of an anti-participatory and tendentially
authoritarian understanding of politics, which places the power to
interpret and to act solely in the hands of the state and its
institutions.
Citation Antifa
Recherche Team Dresden: Legislated Commemoration - The new Saxony
Assembly Act, in: Abolish Commemoration – A Critique of the Discourse
to the Bombing of Dresden in 1945, online at
http://www.abolishcommemoration.org/ART2.html [accessed dd.mm.yyyy].
translated by Amy Lee
up
<<<
previous
article
next article
>>>