¹ Grundgesetz für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland [Grundgesetz] [GG] [Basic Law], May 23, 1949, Bundesgesetzblatt, Teil I [BGBl.I] at 1, art. 1 § 1.

² Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, 5752-1992, SH No. 1391 p. 150, § 1A.

³ Verfassung des deutschen Reiches (also known as Paulskirchenverfassung), Mar. 28, 1849, Reichsgesetzblatt [RGBl.] 101. For an English translation, see Hucko, Elmar M., The Democratic Tradition: Four German Constitutions 77 et seq. (1987)Google Scholar.

⁴ Quoted in 3(1) Stern, Klaus, Das Staatsrecht der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 15 et seq. with references (1988)Google Scholar. Translation of German texts by Michael Sachs.

⁵ Quoted in Kühne, Jörg-Detlef, Die Reichsverfassung der Paulskirche 348 with references (1998)Google Scholar.

⁶ Verfassung des deutschen Reiches (also known as Weimarer Verfassung), Aug. 11, 1919, RGBl. 1383, available at http://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php. For an English translation, see Hucko, supra note 3, at 148 et seq. The Empire's Constitution (Reichsverfassung) of 1871 did not address basic rights at all; hence, human dignity was also not mentioned.

⁷ The provision added the obligation “to ensure the economic liberty of the individual [one might add: only] within these limits.” It remained an open question as to how far this stipulation was able to invalidate legislation not complying with the idea of economic justice. See Anschütz, Gerhard, Die Verfassung des deutschen Reiches art. 151, note 1 (14th ed. 1933) (reprint 1968)Google Scholar; contra Lehmann, Heinrich, Artikel 151, Absatz 1. Ordnung des Wirtschaftslebens, in 3 Die Grundrechte und Grundpflichten der Reichsverfassung 125 et seq. (Nipperdey, Hans Carl ed., 1930) (reprint 1975)Google Scholar.

⁸ See supra note 6.

⁹ U.N. Charter preamble.

¹⁰ The constitutions of the states included in the Soviet Occupied Zone relied only on the 1919 model. See Verfassung des Landes Thüringen [Constitution of the State of Thüringen], Dec. 20, 1946, art. 56 § 1; Verfassung der Provinz Sachsen-Anhalt [Constitution of the Province of Sachsen-Anhalt], Jan. 10, 1947, art. 72; Verfassung des Landes Mecklenburg [Constitution of the State of Mecklenburg], Mar. 12, 1947, art. 73; Verfassung des Landes Sachsen [Constitution of the State of Sachsen], Mar. 15, 1947, art. 71 § 1. Only the equivalent guarantee in Verfassung für die Mark Brandenburg [Constitution of the Mark Brandenburg], Feb. 6, 1947, art. 49 § 1, did not mention human dignity at all.

¹¹ Verfassung für Württemberg-Baden [Constitution of Württemberg-Baden], Nov. 30, 1946.

¹² Verfassung für Rheinland Pfalz [Constitution of Rheinland-Pfalz], May 24, 1947.

¹³ Verfassung des Freistaates Bayern [Constitution Of the free State of Bavaria], Dec. 8, 1946.

¹⁴ Landesverfassung der Freien Hansestadt Bremen [Constitution of the Free Hanse City of Bremen], Oct. 21, 1947.

¹⁵ Cf. Neumann, Heinzgeorg, Verfassung der Freien Hansestadt Bremen art. 5, marginal note 2 (1996)Google Scholar.

¹⁶ Verfassung des Saarlandes [Constitution of Saarlandes], dec. 15, 1947, art. 1.

¹⁷ In Hessen, article 27 of the Constitution declares: “The social and economic order rests upon the recognition of the dignity and personality of man” (“der Würde und der Persönlichkeit des Menschen”). See Verfassung des Landes Hessen [Constitution of the State of Hessen], Dec. 1, 1946. Article 30 adds: “Working conditions have to be such that health, dignity, family life, and the cultural needs of the working people are secured.” In Rheinland-Pfalz, article 55 of the Constitution, supra note 12, also demands working conditions that secure, among other things, the dignity of working people. The previously known guarantee of decent working conditions can also be found in article 52 of the Bremen Constitution, supra note 14. In article 47 of the Saarland Constitution, supra note 16, the dignity of working people is mentioned among the demands for working conditions.

¹⁸ In Bavaria, article 131(2) of the Constitution, supra note 13, declares one of the primary goals of education to be “respect for religious beliefs and for human dignity.” In Bremen, article 26(1) of the Constitution, supra note 14, mentions “respect for the dignity of every human being” among the region's educational goals.

¹⁹ See Verfassungsausschuss der Ministerpräsidenten-Konferenz der westlichen Besatzungszonen. Bericht über den Verfassungskonvent auf Herrenchiemsee vom 10. bis 23. August 1948, in Der Parlementarische Rat 1948–1949. Akten und Protokolle, Bd. 2: Der Verfassungskonvent auf Herrenchiemsee art. 1, sentence 2 (Bucher, P. ed., 1981)Google Scholar.

²⁰ Article 1(1) of the Basic Law states: “Human dignity is inviolable. To respect and protect it is the obligation of all state authorities.”

²¹ The Declaration of Independence states, inter alia, that Israel “will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture; it will safeguard the Holy Places of all religions; and it will be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.”

²² See, e.g., HCJ 73/53 Kol Ha'am Co. Ltd. v. Minister of the Interior 7 PD 871 [1953], translation available at http://elyonl.court.gov.il/files_eng/53/730/000/Z01/53000730.z01.pdf.

²³ See, e.g., HCJ 153/83 Levi, Alan and Yaheli Amit v. Southern District Police Commander 38(2) PD 393 [1984], translation available at http://elyonl.court.gov.il/files_eng/83/530/001/Z01/83001530.z01.pdfGoogle Scholar.

²⁴ See, e.g., HCJ 153/87 Leah Shakdiel v. Minister of Religious Affairs 42(2) PD 221 [1988], translation available at http://elyonl.court.gov.il/files_eng/87/530/001/Z01/87001530.z01.pdf.

²⁵ See, e.g., HCJ 262/62 Yisrael Peretz v. Kfar Shmaryahu 15 PD 2101 [1962].

²⁶ See, e.g., CA 4531/91 Nasser v. Registrar of Associations 48(3) PD 294 [1994].

²⁷ See, e.g., HCJ 1/49 Solomon Shlomo Bejerano v. Minister of Police 2 PD 80 [1949].

²⁸ HCJ 355/79 Katalan v. Prison Services 34(3) PD 294 [1980].

²⁹ Id. para. 5 of the decision of Justice Barak.

³⁰ Id. in the decision of Justice Cohn.

³¹ See, e.g., CA 264/65 Yisrael Artzi v. Attorney-General 20(1) PD 225, 232 [1966]; CA 354/64 Katib v. Attorney General 20(2) PD 136, 139 [1966].

³² The Knesset is also empowered to act as a regular parliament, that is, it has legislative powers. See Basic Law: The Knesset, 5718-1958, SH No. 244 p. 69.

³³ See Barak, Aharon, The Constitutional Revolution: Protected Human Rights, 1 Law & Gov't 9 (1992) (in Hebrew)Google Scholar; Deutch, Miguel, Protection of Obligatory Rights as “Property” within the Framework of the “Constitutional Revolution” in Israel, 15 Tel Aviv U. Studies in Law 147, 148–49 (2000)Google Scholar.

³⁴ The Constitution of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern prohibits any amendment to the constitution to contradict human dignity. See Verfassung des Landes Mecklenburg-Vorpommern [Constitution of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern], May 23, 1993, art. 56 § 3. The eternal guarantee of the principles of laid down in article 1 of the Basic Law was phrased without special regard for human dignity.

³⁵ Grundgesetz art. 79 § 3. It is therefore considered to be “eternally guaranteed.” See 109 Entscheidungen des Bundesverfassungsgerichts [BVerfGE] [Decisions of the Federal Constitutional Court] 279 (310)Google Scholar.

³⁶ Dreier, Horst, in Grundgesetz-Kommentar art. 1, marginal note 43 (Dreier, Horst ed., 2d ed. 2004)Google Scholar (“special normative rank”); Kunig, Philip, in Grundgesetz-Kommentar art. 1, marginal note 4 et seq. (von Münch, Ingo & Kunig, Philip eds., 5th ed. 2000)Google Scholar; Jarass, Hans D., in Grundgesetz für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland art. 1, marginal note 2 (Jarass, Hans D. & Pieroth, Bodo eds., 10th ed. 2009)Google Scholar (“most important value”); Zippelius, Reinhold, in Bonner Kommentar zum Grundgesetz art. 1, marginal note 21 (Dolzer, Rudolf, Vogel, Klaus & Graßhof, Karin eds., 1995)Google Scholar (“the rank corresponds to the position on the top of the constitution”); Herdegen, Matthias, in Grundgesetz-Kommentar art. 1 § 1, marginal note 5 (Maunz, Theodor et al. eds., 2009)Google Scholar (“increased valence”).

³⁷ Cf. 5 BVerfGE 85 (204), 6 BVerfGE 32 (41), 45 BVerfGE 187 (227), 109 BVerfGE 279 (311), and 115 BVerfGE 118 (152): “highest constitutional value”; 93 BVerfGE 266 (293) and 107 BVerfGE 275 (284): absolute limit, no balancing with other basic laws.

³⁸ In this context, see Glaeser, Walter Schmitt, Folter als Mittel staatlicher Schutzpflicht, in Staat im Wort, Festschrift für Josef Isensee 507 et seq. (Depenheuer, Otto et al. eds., 2007)Google Scholar; Poscher, Ralf, Menschenwürde im Staatsnotstand, in Menschenwürde in der Säkulären Verfassungsordnung 215 et seq. (Bahr, Petra & Heinig, Hans M. eds., 2006)Google Scholar. For an overview, see Höfling, Wolfram, in Grundgesetz-Kommentar art. 1, marginal note 20 with further references in notes 78-81 (Sachs, Michael ed., 5th ed. 2009)Google Scholar. Against the prevailing opinion and for an exceptional right to torture, see Brugger, Winfried, Darf der Staat ausnahmsweise foltern?, 35 Der Staat 67 et seq. (1996)Google Scholar; and Brugger, Winfried, Menschenwürde, Menschenrechte, Grundrechte 23 et seq. (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For Herdegen, the dimension of the respect for human dignity granted depends on the behavior of the person in question (e.g., respect for the life and human dignity of others), but he still considers torture to be categorically forbidden even if used to save lives endangered by the person to be tortured. See Herdegen, supra note 36, art. 1 § 1, marginal note 46 et seq.

³⁹ See, e.g., HCJ 769/02 Public Committee Against Torture in Israel v. The Government of Israel, Tak-Al 2006 (4) 3958, translation available at http://elyonl.court.gov.il/Files_ENG/02/690/007/a34/02007690.a34.pdf, and see statement of Chief Justice Barak at para. 64; and HCJ 3799/02 Adalah v. GOC Central Commander IDF, Tak-A1 2005 (4) 49, translation available at http://elyonl.court.gov.il/files_eng/02/990/037/A32/02037990.a32.pdf, statement of Deputy Chief Justice Cheshin at paras. 1 & 7.

⁴⁰ 115 BVerfGE 118 (139). In this context, compare the articles of Lepsius, Oliver, Schenke, Wolf-Rüdiger, and Herzog, Felix in Mit Recht für Menschenwürde und Verfassungsstaat, Festgabe für Burkhard Hirsch (Roggan, Fredrik ed., 2006)Google Scholar.

⁴¹ At para. 128 of the judgment. An English translation of the judgment is available at http://www.bverfg.de/entscheidungen/rs200602151_1bvr035705en.html.

⁴² Id. para. 138.

⁴³ Id. para. 139.

⁴⁴ Id. para. 148.

⁴⁵ Id. para. 133.

⁴⁶ Bundesgerichtshof [BGH] [Federal Court of Justice] July 6, 1995, Neue Juristische Wochenschrift [NJW] 2492–93, 1995Google Scholar.

⁴⁷ 102 BVerfGE 347 (358 et seq.).

⁴⁸ 149 Entscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshofes in Zivilsachen [BGHZ] [Decisions of the Federal Court of Justice in Civil Matters] 247.

⁴⁹ 107 BVerfGE 275 (280 et seq.).

⁵⁰ Apart from specific rights guaranteed by the Constitution, like the inviolability of the home (art. 13) and the different secrets of communication (art. 10), a broad personality right is generally deduced from article 2(1), taken together with article 1(1), and subject to limitations based on the limitation clause in article 2(1), which demands conformity with the principle of proportionality. For a recent possible conflict with the freedom of artistic expression, see 119 BVerfGE 1 (23 et seq.). The latest special case involving a general personality right deduced from the articles mentioned concerns the so-called right of confidentiality and integrity of information technology systems. See 120 BVerfGE 2 (74 et seq.).

⁵¹ 75 BVerfGE 369 (379 et seq.).

⁵² 109 BVerfGE 279 (310 et seq.).

⁵³ See supra note 35.

⁵⁴ Bundesverfassungsgericht (Kammer) [BVerfG (Kammer)] [Federal Constitutional Court (Chamber)] NJW 1580, 2006. For a critical view of this, see Höfling, supra note 38, art. 1, marginal note 12, n. 40.

⁵⁵ See Dan Meridor, , Principles of the Basic Law: Legislation Bill, 1 Law & Gov't 387, 389–90 (1993) (in Hebrew)Google Scholar.

⁵⁶ This authority was used by the Knesset only once, in the case of the Frozen Meat Importation Law, 5754-1994, SH No. 1456 p. 104. See Barak, Aharon, The Constitutional Revolution: Bat Mitzva, in Zamir Book on Law, Government and Society 227, 271 (Dotan, Yoav & Bendor, Ariel eds., 2005) (in Hebrew)Google Scholar.

⁵⁷ For a different opinion, see Rubinstein, Amnon & Medina, Barak, The Constitutional Law of the State of Israel 953 (6th ed. 2005)Google Scholar (in Hebrew) (who suggest adding, by interpretation, a “limitation clause” to section 39(d) of the Basic Law: The Government, 5728-1968, SH No. 540 p. 226, to allow violation of human dignity for an appropriate purpose and for a period that is necessary).

⁵⁸ For an overview, see Höfling, supra note 38, art. 1, marginal note 5 et seq. with further references. For the dogmatic classification of article 1(1) of the Basic Law, see Edzard Schmidt-Jortzig, Zum Streit um die korrekte dogmatische Einordnung und Anwendung von Artikel 1 Abs. 1 Grundgesetz, in Staat im Wort, supra note 38, at 491 et seq.

⁵⁹ Dürig, , in Grundgesetz-Kommentar art. 1 (1953), marginal note 4 et seq. (Maunz, Theodor et al. eds., 2009)Google Scholar; Dreier, supra note 36, art. 1, marginal note 127 et seq.: “basic principle, not basic right.”

⁶⁰ Explicitly: 15 BVerfGE 283 (286); 28 BVerfGE 151 (163); 28 BVerfGE 243 (263); and 61 BVerfGE 126, 137; implicitly: 1 BVerfGE 332 (333, 343, 348); 12 BVerfGE 113 (122 et seq.); 13 BVerfGE 132 (152); 27 BVerfGE 1 (5 et seq.); 45 BVerfGE 187 (227 et seq.); 52 BVerfGE 256 (261); 65 BVerfGE 1 (3, 41); 71 BVerfGE 183 (190, 201); 75 BVerfGE 369 (380).

⁶¹ HCJ 366/03 Commitment to Peace and Social Justice Society v. Minister of Finance 60(3) PD 464 [2005].

⁶² Barak, Aharon, Purposive Interpretation in Law 449–50 (2003) (in Hebrew)Google Scholar.

⁶³ Cohn, Haim H., On the Meaning of Human Dignity, 13 Isr. Y.B. Hum. Rts. 226 (1983)Google Scholar; Barak, Aharon, The Judge in a Democracy 85 (2006)Google Scholar.

⁶⁴ Barak, Aharon, Interpretation in Law: Constitutional Interpretation 309–10 (1994) (in Hebrew)Google Scholar.

⁶⁵ See Sachs, Michael, in Grundgesetz-Kommentar art. 1, marginal note 27 et seq. (Sachs, Michael ed., 5th ed. 2009)Google Scholar.

⁶⁶ 93 BVerfGE 266 (293): the “root of all basic rights.” See Dürig, supra note 59, art. 1, marginal notes 81, 85; Dreier, Horst, Bedeutung und systematische Stellung der Menschenwürde im deutschen Grundgesetz, in Menschenwürde als Rechtsbegriff 33, 37 et seq. (Seelmann, Kurt ed., 2004)Google Scholar. For the Swiss point of view, see also Schefer, Markus, Die Kerngehalte von Grundrechten 5 et seq. (2001)Google Scholar.

⁶⁷ An example of this construction might be the eavesdropping decision (30 BVerfGE 1 et seq.), dealing with the newly created possibility to listen in on telephone conversations without later informing the individuals concerned.

⁶⁸ On the new, severely reduced article 16a on the right to asylum, see 94 BVerfGE 49 (103); on the introduction of possibilities to spy on people in their own homes, see the discussion of article 13 in 109 BVerfGE 279 (311).

⁶⁹ Hence, life-long imprisonment without any possibility of release, although not specifically forbidden by the Constitution, is considered to be incompatible with human dignity and therefore unconstitutional. See 45 BVerfGE 187 (228 et seq.); 117 BVerfGE 71 (95). More generally, the guilt principle (nulle poena sine culpa) is deduced from article 1(1). See 123 BVerfGE 267 (413) with references.

⁷⁰ See Grundgesetz art. 19 § 2.

⁷¹ HCJ 4676/94 Meatrael Ltd. v. The Knesset 50(5) PD 15 [1996].

⁷² HCJ 3872/93 Meatrael Ltd. v. The Prime Minister and Minister of Religions 47(5) PD 485, 505 [1993].

⁷³ On the different approaches—value theories from different theological [imago dei] or philosophical [Kant] starting points, the theory of human dignity brought about by one's own efforts (i.e., the theory of “solidarity between fellow men” (mitmenschlich))—see 4(1) Stern, Klaus, Das Staatsrecht der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 22 (2006)Google Scholar; Höfling, supra note 38, art. 1, marginal note 13; both with further references.

⁷⁴ Papier, Hans-Jürgen, Die Würde des Menschen ist unantastbar, in Die Ordnung der Freiheit, Festschrift für Christian Starck. zum siebzigsten Geburtstag 371 (375 et seq.) (Grote, Rainer et al. eds., 2007)Google Scholar (with a classification of the decisions of the Constitutional Court); Höfling, supra note 38, art. 1, marginal note 20; Podlech, Adalbert, in Kommentar zum Grundgesetz für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland art. 1, marginal note 44 et seq. (Denninger, Erhard et al. eds., 2001)Google Scholar; Jarass, supra note 36, art. 1, marginal note 11; Dreier, supra note 36, art. 1, marginal note 139.

⁷⁵ See von Mangoldt, Hermann, Schriftlicher Bericht zum Entwurf des Grundgesetzes, Anlage zum Stenographischen Bericht der 9. Sitzung des Parlamentarischen Rates, May 6, 1949, p. 6Google Scholar; Sontheimer, Kurt, Principles of Human Dignity in the Federal Republic, in Germany and Its Basic Law: Past, Present and Future 213, 214 (Kirchhof, Paul & Kommers, Donald P. eds., 1993)Google Scholar.

⁷⁶ Dürig, supra note 59, art. 1, marginal note 28.

⁷⁷ 27 BVerfGE 1 (6); 28 BVerfGE 386 (391); 50 BVerfGE 166 (175); 117 BVerfGE 71 (89); 122 BVerfGE 248 (271). Without using the term object, some decisions demand, that a human being must never be treated as a mere means to social ends, but always also as an end in itself. See 116 BVerfGE 69 (85 et seq.); Höfling, supra note 38, art. 1, marginal note 15 et seq.; Enders, Christoph, in Berliner Kommentar zum Grundgesetz art. 1, marginal note 38 et seq. (Friauf, Karl Heinrich & Höfling, Wolfram eds., 2005)Google Scholar.

⁷⁸ 115 BVerfGE 118 (153) with reference to 27 BVerfGE 1 (6); 45 BVerfGE 187 (228); 96 BVerfGE 375 (399).

⁷⁹ 30 BVerfGE 1 (25 et seq.); 109 BVerfGE 279 (312).

⁸⁰ 115 BVerfGE 118 (153).

⁸¹ Id. with reference to 30 BVerfGE 1 (25); 109 BVerfGE 279 (311).

⁸² Höfling, supra note 38, art. 1, marginal note 19; see also Stern, supra note 4, at 23 et seq. (who mentions, in addition, the prohibition of the excessive application of force by the public authorities, and thus focuses on the prohibited state action rather than on the infringed human interest).

⁸³ 123 BVerfGE 267 (341).

⁸⁴ 115 BVerfGE 118 (161). For an English translation, see http://www.bverfg.de/entscheidungen/rs20060215_1bvr035705en.html, at marginal note 139. The double use of gender, not corresponding to the German version, has been eliminated.

⁸⁵ Divrei HaKnesset [DK] [Knesset Proceedings] (1992) 1532.

⁸⁶ For this approach, see HCJ 6427/02 Movement for Quality Government in Israel v. The Knesset (May 11, 2006), Nevo Legal Database (by subscription); HCJ 4128/02 Adam Teva v'Din (Isr. Union for Environmental Defense) v. Prime Minister of Israel 58(3) PD 503, 518 [2004].

⁸⁷ See the decisions mentioned in the previous note.

⁸⁸ See Barak, supra note 64, at 413-14; Karp, Yehudit, Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty—Biography of Power Struggles, 1 Law & Gov't 323, 338–40 (1993) (in Hebrew)Google Scholar.

⁸⁹ PPA 4463/94 Avi Chanaya Golan v. Prisons Service 50(4) PD 136, 153 [1996].

⁹⁰ HCJ 453/94 Israel Women's Network v. Government of Israel 48(5) PD 501, 536 [1994]. See, e.g., the Movement for Quality Government in Israel case, supra note 86 (“Human dignity is not all that is good and beautiful in life. Human dignity is not human rights at all. We must differentiate between human dignity as a general aim that underlies all rights and human dignity as a constitutional right. Human dignity was not [meant] to make other human rights superfluous.”).

⁹¹ HCJ 4541/94 Alice Miller v. Minister of Defense 49(4) PD 94, 133-34 ]1995].

⁹² Golan case, supra note 89, at 186-88.

⁹³ See HCJ 7052/03 Adalah v. Minister of Interior (2006), translation available at http://elyonl.court.gov.il/files_eng/03/520/070/a47/03070520.a47.pdf. See also Movement for Quality Government in Israel case, supra note 86. See also HCJ 466/07 Galon v. Attorney General (Jan. 11, 2012), opinions of Justices Dorit Beinisch, Eliezer Rivlin, Edmond Levy, Asher Grunis, Edna Arbel, Salim Joubran, Esther Hayut, Hanan Melcer and Neal Hendel, and compare to the opinions of Justices Miriam Naor and Elyakim Rubinstein, whereby the constitutional right to dignity does not include a constitutional right to realize family life in Israel.

⁹⁴ Movement for Quality Government in Israel case, supra note 86, para. 40 of Chief Justice Barak's decision.

⁹⁵ Commitment to Peace and Social Justice Society case, supra note 61.

⁹⁶ Movement for Quality Government in Israel case, supra note 86.

⁹⁷ HCJ 2605/05 Academic Center of Law and Business, Human Rights Division v. Minister of Finance (Nov. 19, 2009), Nevo Legal Database (by subscription).

⁹⁸ Justice Edmond E. Levy, in a minority opinion, was ready to agree that the privatization of prisons violates human dignity. Yet, in his opinion, the limitation clause does not offer a stable foothold when the issue relates to theoretical assumptions. According to Justice Levy, the conceptual and emotional process embodied in the decision regarding the privatization of a prison should be left open to public debate.

⁹⁹ Adam Teva v'Din case, supra note 86, at 518-19.

¹⁰⁰ Commitment to Peace and Social Justice Society case, supra note 61, para. 15 of Chief Justice Barak's decision.

¹⁰¹ For instance, the right to a secret ballot is not subject to waiver, because such a waiver would make it impossible to guarantee effective protection of the freedom of elections.

¹⁰² 115 BVerfGE 118 (157). For an English translation, see supra note 41.

¹⁰³ 64 Entscheidungen des Bundesverwaltungsgerichts [BVerfGE] [Decisions of the Federal Administrative Court] 274 (278 et seq.); 84 BVerfGE 314 (317 et seq.).

¹⁰⁴ Verwaltungsgericht Neustadt [VG Neustadt] [Administrative Trial Court of Neustadt], May 21, 1992, Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht [NVwZ] 98, 1993.

¹⁰⁵ 115 BVerfGE 189 (198 et seq.). Due to the tendency of such entertainment to belittle the violence against human beings and treat it as socially acceptable.

¹⁰⁶ Left undecided by BVerfG (Kammer), Apr. 7, 1998, NJW 1938, 1998 & Strafverteidiger Forum [StraFO] 16, 1998. Considered as unconstitutional by 17 BVerfGE 342 (346); 5 Entscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshofes in Strafsachen [BGHSt] [Decisions of the Federal Court of Justice in Criminal Matters] 332 (335 et seq.); BVerfG (Vorprüfungsausschuss), Aug. 18, 1981, NJW 375, 1982 (concerning article 2(1) in conjunction with article 1(1) of the Basic Law).

¹⁰⁷ HCJ 7357/95 Berki Petta Humphries Ltd v. State of Israel 50(2) PD 769 [1996].

¹⁰⁸ Id. 780-82.

¹⁰⁹ HCJ 2481/93 Dayan v. Wilk 48(2) PD 456 [1994].

¹¹⁰ It should be noted that, according to one of the approaches that was not accepted, the right to human to dignity does not extend to aspects of the freedom of expression that are based on public and social rationales but only to aspects that express the dignity of the individual person. See, e.g., Golan case, supra note 89, at 188 (opinion of Justice Dalia Dorner).

¹¹¹ 30 BVerfGE 173 (193 et seq.).

¹¹² On the introduction of human dignity into the discussion on abortion, cf. Höfling, supra note 38, art. 1, marginal note 58 et seq. with further references.

¹¹³ Werner Heun, Humangenetik und Menschenwürde, in Menschenwürde in der säkularen Verfassungsordnung, supra note 38, at 197 et seq.; Meiser, Christian, Biopatentierung und Menschenwürde (2005)Google Scholar; Höfling, supra note 38, art. 1, marginal note 23 et seq.

¹¹⁴ CA 9486/00 Virg v. Carmiel Religious Council 57(1) PD 565, 570 [2002] (opinion of Justice Eliezer Rivlin).

¹¹⁵ See HCJ 6126/94 Senesh v. Broadcasting Authority 53(3) PD 817 [1999]; Prohibition of Defamation Statute, 5725-1965, 19 LSI 254 (1964-1965).

¹¹⁶ HCJ 4638/07 Alaksa Almubarak Co. Ltd. v. Israel Electric Company (Oct. 29, 2007), Nevo Legal Database (by subscription).

¹¹⁷ 1 BVerfGE 97 (104).

¹¹⁸ On the obligation to only protect basic laws (Schutzpflichten), see Sachs, Michael, in Grundgesetz-Kommentar art. 1, marginal note 35 et seq. (Sachs, Michael ed., 5th ed. 2009)Google Scholar.

¹¹⁹ 39 BVerfGE 1 (41 et seq.).

¹²⁰ The corporal punishment of children is prohibited by Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch [BGB] [Civil Code], Aug. 18, 1896, Reichsgesetzblatt [RGBl.] 195, as amended, § 1631, para. 2.

¹²¹ On the question of the immediate horizontal application (“unmittelbare Drittwirkung”) of article 1(1), see Stern, supra note 4, at 29 et seq.

¹²² See supra note 117.

¹²³ Höfling, supra note 38, art. 1, marginal notes 31 et seq., 48; Sontheimer, supra note 75, at 215 et seq. On the minimum existence criterion as a limit on taxation, see 120 BVerfGE 125 (154 et seq.) with further references. For a recent statement of the state's objective of securing the individual's existence (in general), see 123 BVerfGE 267 (363). For a more recent and extensive statement, see BVerfG, Feb. 9, 2010, NJW 505 (507 et seq.), 2010.

¹²⁴ See Commitment to Peace and Social Justice Society case, supra note 61, para. 15 of the decision of Chief Justice Aharon Barak.

¹²⁵ Id. para. 22.

¹²⁶ On the complex requirements of “political persecution,” see Pagenkopf, Martin, in Grundgesetz-Kommentar art. 16a, marginal note 15 et seq. (Sachs, Michael ed., 5th ed. 2009)Google Scholar.

¹²⁷ 54 BVerfGE 341 (357); 76 BVerfGE 143 (158); 81 BVerfGE 142 (151); 80 BVerwGE 321 (324); 87 BVerwGE 141 (145). On the right to asylum in cases relating to the ban on marriages violating human dignity, see 90 BVerwGE 127 (132 et seq.).

¹²⁸ See, e.g., 75 BVerfGE 1 (16); 81 BVerfGE 142 (155 et seq.); BVerfG (Kammer), Apr. 3, 1992, NVwZ 660 (660 et seq.), 1992; BVerfG (Kammer), May 31, 1994, NJW, 2883, 1994; 67 BVerfGE 184 (194); 78 BVerfGE 243 (249). Against infringements, see Oberverwaltungsgericht Rheinland-Pfalz [OVG Rheinland-Pfalz] [Higher Administrative Court of Rheinland-Pfalz], May 15, 2002, NVwZ, insert No. 1/9, p. 100 et seq. (2002) with annotation by Sachs, in 2003 JuS 88 (the case of an Afghan girl born and raised in Germany but forced to wear a body-length veil upon her return to her country).

¹²⁹ No special mention of human dignity is made in Verfassung der Freien und Hansestadt Hamburg [Constitution of Hamburg], June 6, 1952, Verfassung des Landes Schleswig-Holstein [Constitution of Schleswig-Holstein], Dec. 13. 1949, revised June 13, 1990, or Niedersächsische Verfassung [Constitution of Niedersachsen], May 19, 1993, which simply incorporates the basic rights of the Basic Law in toto.

¹³⁰ Those are to be found in Verfassung von Berlin [Constitution of Berlin], Nov. 23, 1995, art. 6; Verfassung des Landes Brandenburg [Constitution of Brandenburg], Aug. 20, 1992, art. 7 § 1; Verfassung des Freistaates Sachsen [Constitution of Sachsen], May 27, 1992, art. 14 § 1; Verfassung des Landes Sachsen-Anhalt [Constitution of Sachsenanhalt], July 16, 1992, art. 4 § 1; Verfassung des Freistaats Thüringen [Constitution of Thüringen], Oct. 25, 1993, art. 1 § 1. Furthermore, while mentioning a Herrenchiemsee proposal not included in the Basic Law, article 5(2) of the Constitution of Mecklenburg- Vorpommern, supra note 34, states “that the state is there for the people” (leaving out: “and not the human beings for the state”), while also stressing that it refers to the human dignity of all people residing in or just visiting the state. In addition, article 100 of the Bavarian Constitution, supra note 13, has been revised along the lines of the Basic Law. In article 7(1) of the Brandenburg Constitution, the provision is extended by the notion that human dignity is the basis of a community founded on solidarity. There are also similar references within preambles. In addition to those mentioned earlier (see note 11 et seq.), they can be found in Verfassung des Landes Baden-Württemberg [Constitution of Baden-Württemberg], NOV. 11, 1953, and in the Constitutions of Brandenburg, supra, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, supra note 34, Sachsen-Anhalt, supra, and Thüringen, supra.

¹³¹ Other than those mentioned above, connections between educational goals and human dignity are found in the Constitution of Brandenburg, supra note 130, art. 28, Verfassung für das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen [Constitution of Nordrhein-Westfalen], June 28, 1950, art. 7 § 1; and the Constitution of Thüringen, supra note 130, art. 22 § 1.

¹³² Brandenburg Constitution, supra note 130, art. 19 § 3. Article 111a of the Bavarian Constitution, supra note 13, also speaks of the media's duty to respect human dignity among other values.

¹³³ Article 10 of the Sachsen-Anhalt Constitution, supra note 130, declares in wording borrowed from article 5(3) of the Basic Law that this freedom does not derive from respect for human dignity.

¹³⁴ Brandenburg Constitution, supra note 130, art. 31 § 2.

¹³⁵ Thüringen Constitution, supra note 130, art. 39 § 2.

¹³⁶ Brandenburg Constitution, supra note 130, art. 7 § 2.

¹³⁷ Golan case, supra note 89; see also supra note 94.

¹³⁸ See Barak, Aharon, Protected Human Rights: Scope and Limitations, 1 Law & Gov't 253 (1993) (in Hebrew)Google Scholar.

¹³⁹ Article 7 of the Sachsen-Anhalt Constitution, supra note 130, declares that the state recognizes the right of every human being to an existence in compliance with standards of human dignity, including the classic social rights to work, adequate living quarters, adequate standards of living, social security, and education as a state goal.

¹⁴⁰ See Thüringen Constitution, supra note 130, art. 1 § 1; Brandenburg Constitution, supra note 130, art. 8 § 1 (but combined within one article with the rights to life and bodily integrity).

¹⁴¹ See Brandenburg Constitution, supra note 130, art. 27 § 1; Nordrhein-Westfalen Constitution, supra note 131, art. 6 § 1.

¹⁴² Sachsen Constitution, supra note 130, art. 14 § 2. Interestingly, during the Constitution's framing, some of the proposals raised held human dignity to be founded on the (natural) rights of a human being. See 1 Jahrbuch des Öffentlichen Rechts 48 et seq. (1951)Google Scholar.

¹⁴³ Sachsen Constitution, supra note 130, art. 117.

¹⁴⁴ One exception is the Nordrhein-Westfalen Constitution, supra note 131, art. 25 § 2, which declares May 1 as a “[holi]day for the acknowledgement of freedom and peace … and human dignity” (among other values).

¹⁴⁵ Brandenburg Constitution, supra note 130, art. 54 § 1.