Modeling the German Legal Latitude Principles

  • Stephan Neumann
  • Anna Kahlert
  • Maria Henning
  • Philipp Richter
  • Hugo Jonker
  • Melanie Volkamer
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8075)

Abstract

Postal voting was established in Germany in 1956. Based on the legal latitude of the national legislator, the Federal Constitutional Court confirmed the constitutionality of postal voting several times. In contrast, the constitutionality of electronic voting machines, which were used for federal elections from 2002 to 2005, was rejected as the possibility to control the essential steps in the election was not provided to all citizens. These two cases emphasize that the legal system allows to limit realization of election principles to the advantage of other election principles, but that there are limits. In order to introduce new voting systems, in particular Internet voting systems, it is essential to have guidelines on what is and what is not acceptable. This work provides such guidelines. It identifies the principles of the legal latitude in the German constitution, and captures this latitude in a model. This model enables a review of the constitutionality of new voting systems.

References

  1. 1.
    Forsa survey: Jeder zweite würde online wählen (2013), http://www.microsoft.com/germany/newsroom/pressemitteilung.mspx?id=533684 (accessed May 31, 2013)
  2. 2.
    Dreier, H.: Grundgesetz-Kommentar. Morlok Siebeck Verlag (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Federal Constitutional Court. Decisions of the Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfGE) referred to in this workGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hesse, K.: Grundzüge des Verfassungsrechts der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, §2, Rn. 72. C.F. Müller (1995)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Maunz, T., Dürig, G.: Grundgesetz-Kommentare (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Richter, P.: Wahlen im Internet rechtsgemäß gestalten. Nomos (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schreiber, W.: Bundeswahlgesetz-Kommentar. Carl Heymanns (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mangoldt, H.V.: Kommentar zum Grundgesetz (Art. 38 GG, Rn. 157). Franz Vahlen (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    von Münch, I., Kunig, P.: Grundgesetz-Kommentar. C.H. Beck (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephan Neumann
    • 1
  • Anna Kahlert
    • 2
  • Maria Henning
    • 2
  • Philipp Richter
    • 2
  • Hugo Jonker
    • 3
  • Melanie Volkamer
    • 1
  1. 1.CASED / Technical University DarmstadtDarmstadtGermany
  2. 2.University of KasselKasselGermany
  3. 3.University of LuxembourgLuxembourgLuxembourg

Personalised recommendations