Právněhistorické studie / Legal History Studies (Charles University journal; below referred to as PHS or Journal) is a scientific journal listed in the international prestigious database SCOPUS. The journal is published by Charles University in Prague under the guarantee of the Department of Legal History of the Faculty of Law of Charles University. It is published by the Karolinum Press. The journal focuses on the field of legal history and related topics.
Issue 1 of the Journal was published by the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences Publishing in June 1955. The Journal was initially published by the Cabinet of Legal History of the Czechoslovak Academy of Science (CSAV), later by the Institute of State and Law (CSAV) and then by the Institute of Legal History of the Faculty of Law of Charles University.
PHS is issued three times a year in April, August, and December and it presents original scientific works/papers as well as reviews, annotations and news from the scientific field of legal history. It also introduces annotated texts of a legal history nature. PHS accepts manuscripts from domestic as well as foreign authors. Manuscripts submitted by foreign authors are published in original language, namely in English, Slovak, German, French, Italian or Polish.
PHS (ISSN 0079-4929) is registered in the Czech national ISSN centre (supervised by the State Technical Library). The Journal is registered by the Ministry of Culture of the Czech Republic according to Act No. 46/2000 Sb., on Rights and Liabilities for the Publishing of Periodicals and Change of Some Acts (Press Act), and it is allocated with registration number of periodical press MK E 18813.
PHS is an open journal and ensures open access to scientific data (Open Access). The entire content is released as open to the public on the web pages of the journal.
The journal is archived in Portico.
PRÁVNĚHISTORICKÉ STUDIE, Vol 54 No 2 (2024), 25–39
Artikel 48 der Weimarer Verfassung: Hugo Preuß und Carl Schmitt im Streit über den „Diktaturartikel“
[Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution: The Debate between Hugo Preuß and Carl Schmitt on the “Dictatorship Clause”]
Yasuhiro Endo
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14712/2464689X.2024.13
published online: 24. 09. 2024
abstract
The abuse of Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution during the late presidency of Hindenburg has been criticized in many previous studies as one of the key factors of the collapse of the Weimar Republic that led to the establishment of the Third Reich, resulting from the lack of understanding of the parliamentary democracy. Whereas those criticisms have arisen primarily from the analysis of the consequences, this paper analyzes the issue of the executed presidential emergency powers with an integrative approach by comparing the arguments by Preuß, the drafter of Article 48, and Schmitt, taking into account the perspectives of members of the constitutional assembly as well as their contemporaneous intellectuals. While Preuß and Schmitt may appear generally contrastive in their beliefs and theories, some implicit logical agreements are observed, such as those on their interpretations of the relation between the first and the second sentences in Article 48, paragraph 2, and their thoughts regarding the handling of the law of the Reich that should be in Article 48, paragraph 5. With the findings of their commonalities and others in their theories, this paper attempts to contribute to refining the current systems of law and democracy for emergency situations in various contexts.
keywords: Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution; Hugo Preuss; Carl Schmitt; state of emergency; constitutional dictatorship
references (13)
1. ENDO, Y. Der Verlauf der Debatte über Artikel 48 der Weimarer Verfassung in der verfassunggebenden Deutschen Nationalversammlung (1). Matsuyama University Review, 2018, Vol. 30, No. 5-1, pp. 92-95.
2. IWAMA, A. Der Begriff der Verfassungsdurchbrechung. Tokyo: SCHOGAKUSYA, 2002.
3. KAISER, A-B. Die Verantwortung der Staatsrechtslehre in Krisenzeiten - Art. 48 WRV im Spiegel der Staatsrechtslehrertagung und des Deutschen Juristentages 1924. In: SCHRÖDER, U. J. - UNGERN-STERNBERG, A. (eds.). Zur Aktualität der Weimarer Staatsrechtslehre. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011.
4. KOGA, K. Carl Schumitt und seine Zeit. Tokyo: MISUZUSCHOBOU, 2019.
5. MATSUMOTO, A. The process of the formation of the theory of democracy in Carl Schmitt (3). The Hokkaido Law Review, 2018, Vol. 69, No. 2, S. 229-230.
6. MEHRING, R. Carl Schmitt. Aufstieg und Fall. München: C. H. Beck, 2009.
7. NEUMANN, A. Preußen zwischen Hegemonie und "Preußenschlag": Hugo Preuß in der staatsrechtlichen Föderalismusdebatte. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2019. CrossRef
8. PREUSS, H. Die Bedeutung des Artikels 48 der Reichsverfassung. In: PREUSS, H. Gesammelte Schriften, Bd. 4: Politik und Verfassung in der Weimarer Republik. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008.
9. PREUSS, H. Reichsverfassungsmäßige Diktatur. In: PREUSS, H. Gesammelte Schriften, Bd. 4: Politik und Verfassung in der Weimarer Republik. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008.
10. SCHMITT-DOROTIĆ, C. Die Diktatur: Von den Anfängen des modernen Souveränitätsgedankens bis zum proletarischen Klassenkampf. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1921.
11. SCHMITT, C. Die Diktatur des Reichspräsidenten nach Artikel 48 der Weimarer Verfassung. Veröffentlichungen der Vereinigung der Deutschen Staatsrechtslehrer Heft 1: Der deutsche Föderalismus. Die Diktatur des Reichspräsidenten, 1924.
12. SCHMITT, C. Der Schatten Gottes. Introspektionen, Tagebücher und Briefe 1921 bis 1924. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 2014.
13. Verhandlungen der verfassungsgebenden Deutschen Nationalversammlung, Stenographische Berichte, Berlin 1920.
Artikel 48 der Weimarer Verfassung: Hugo Preuß und Carl Schmitt im Streit über den „Diktaturartikel“ is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
240 x 170 mm
periodicity: 3 x per year
print price: 250 czk
ISSN: 0079-4929
E-ISSN: 2464-689X
