east-germanys-human-rights-record-comments-on-the-report-of-the-government-of-the-german-democratic-republic-to-the-human-rights-committee-july-17-1984-30-pp

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
German Democratic Republic ◽  
Democratic Republic ◽  
The Government

Wilsonianism Redux: Inadvertent Publication of Secret Protocol, Hungarian-East German Agreement on Visa Requirements

1990 ◽  
Vol 84 (1) ◽  
pp. 281-283
Author(s):  
T. M. F.
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Federal Republic ◽  
German Democratic Republic ◽  
Democratic Republic ◽  
Federal Republic Of Germany ◽  
The Status ◽  
East German ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Government

This treaty between the (East) German Democratic Republic and Hungary concerning visa requirements was deposited with the United Nations in accordance with Article 102 of the UN Charter. When the Government of Hungary decided to permit East Germans visiting Hungary to emigrate to the Federal Republic of Germany (West), the authorities in Budapest informed the East German authorities that the treaty had become inoperative. Among the reasons cited was its inconsistency with the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, to which Hungary had acceded on March 14, 1989.

Streletz, Kesslerand Krenz v. Germany and K.-H W. v. Germany

2001 ◽  
Vol 95 (4) ◽  
pp. 904-910
Author(s):  
Bernard H. Oxman ◽  
Beate Rudolf
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
German Democratic Republic ◽  
Democratic Republic ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
European Court ◽  
Grand Chamber

Streletz, Kessler and Krenz V. Germany. App. Nos. 34044/96,35532/97, & 44801/98.49 ILM 811 (2001), available at <http://www.echr.coe.int/Eng/Judgments.htm>.K.-H. W. V. Germany. App. No. 37201/97. 49 ILM 773 (2001), available at <http://www.echr.coe.int/Eng/Judgments.htm>.European Court of Human Rights, Grand Chamber, March 22, 2001.In a landmark judgment, Streletz, Kesslerand Krenz v. Germany, die European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) unanimously held that criminal prosecution of the leaders of the German Democratic Republic (GDR) for ordering to kill individuals attempting to flee the GDR is compatible with the principle nullum crimen sine lege and consequently with the prohibition on retroactive criminal laws under the European Convention on Human Rights. In a second judgment, K.-H. W. v. Germany, with three of the seventeen judges dissenting, the Court affirmed this holding as applied to the criminal responsibility of a low-ranking soldier.

Rias Berlin and the June 17, 1953, Uprising in East Germany

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
German Democratic Republic ◽  
Democratic Republic ◽  
East Germany ◽  
Decisive Role ◽  
Radio Station ◽  
German Reunification ◽  
Political Actor ◽  
Complex Interplay ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Moment

This chapter examines the June 17, 1953 uprising in East Germany and the decisive role RIAS played in those turbulent events. RIAS's participation in the uprising is a testament to the complex interplay between the American radio station and the government of the German Democratic Republic. Throughout the revolt, RIAS was an influential political actor whose staff sought to shape the course of events in large part by trying to establish an explanatory narrative for the uprising. RIAS's commentators repeated a range of themes and ideas they hoped would explain the events, often as those events were unfolding. The ultimate expression of this approach was the declaration, in the moment, that the June 17 uprising was a popular cry for German reunification.

The German Democratic Republic and the State Churches, 1958–1989

1999 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 523-547
Author(s):  
GERHARD BESIER
Keyword(s):  
German Democratic Republic ◽  
Democratic Republic ◽  
Church And State ◽  
Past History ◽  
Central Committee ◽  
The State ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
Specific Responsibility ◽  
Church And Society ◽  
The Government

The role of Protestantism in the German Democratic Republic (the GDR) has been strongly disputed since the ‘turn’ and reunification of 1989/90. Many of the disagreements derive from different interpretations of the relationship between State, Church and Society in the GDR. This paper first describes the state institutions which formulated and executed church policies for the Communist Party of the GDR (the SED), and then surveys relations between Church and State, offering an explanation for actions and motivations on both sides. The thesis advanced is that the decisive phase of the transformation of a ‘bourgeois’ Church into a ‘Church within socialism’ took place between 1958 and 1978, and that the preceding and subsequent periods merely had the character of ‘past history’ and ‘epilogue’.A variety of institutions influenced Church–State policies in the GDR. First, at government level, there was until 1957 a department for ecclesiastical affairs controlled by the deputy prime minister ; after that date, there was an official secretary for church affairs, answerable to the chairman of the government (Ministerrat). At party level in the SED, there was a working group for church affairs which was part of the secretariat of the SED's central committee, answerable to the first secretary or the secretary-general of the central committee. The central committee office included a member with specific responsibility for church affairs, generally the second in line after the party chairman. In the Ministry for State Security (MfS), those involved were the head of the so-called ‘main department for social superstructure’, together with a representative of the minister or the minister himself, and the heads of administration in individual ‘Lands’ or districts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document