danzmann(at)stiftungzukunftberlin.eu
Phone: +49 (0)30 26 39 229-11
Referenda in Berlin
Like many other federal states in Germany, Berlin has considerably extended the opportunities for direct democratic participation. The Berlin State Constitution was amended in October 2006 to lower the obstacles to petitions for a referendum and the holding of referenda. Since then numerous referendum action groups have been launched and their presence has become a feature of politics in Berlin. The first referenda to be held were those on the future of Tempelhof Airport and whether ethics as a subject for 13 to 16-year-old school students should be replaced by ethics/religious education as an (optional) compulsory subject.
The referenda in Berlin drew the attention of the public at large to this instrument of direct democracy. In the light of its mission as a non-profit-making, non-partisan foundation, Stiftung Zukunft Berlin aims to make the opportunities offered by referenda more readily understandable, whilst at the same time addressing the political and legal issues involved and drafting proposals for improvements.
Referendums are a special form ov civic participation. - Volker Hassemer
Improving the current regulations and practice
The present legislation revealed weaknesses when put to the test. Thought therefore needs to be given to how the current regulations and practice in Berlin can be improved. After all, inconsistencies in the interplay between representative and direct democracy not only diminish the status of referenda. They also entail the risk of frustration among the initiators of referenda who organize their activities in the expectation of effective democratic participation.
Stiftung Zukunft Berlin has worked together with experts to draw up recommendations on how to improve the current regulations on referenda and their implementation in Berlin.
Ensuring greater transparency
The present financial transparency regulations governing referenda do not go far enough; they fall short of the regulations that apply to political parties, for example. Petitions for a referendum in Berlin should therefore be covered by regulations comparable to those concerning the obligation of political parties to disclose revenue received from donations.
Referenda are a civil society instrument
Referenda are intended as a corrective to the strong position held by political parties and as an additional channel for the exercise of influence. As a matter of principle, therefore, political parties should show restraint with respect to referenda.
Referenda should be legally binding
It is difficult to communicate to the public at large that the Berlin Senate is not duty bound to respect the outcome of a referendum and, indeed, can take a different decision. Referenda should therefore be given the status of legally binding decisions.
There should be no rash amendment of popular decisions
Referenda merit restraint on the part of the parliament. This is not guaranteed in the present regulations. There are various ways of reinforcing the binding effect of referenda. One example that might be followed is the Hamburg model, which prescribes a new referendum if the outcome of a previous referendum is annulled.
Referenda and elections
If a petition for a referendum proves successful just a few months before an election is to be held, the referendum should take place on the day of the election. This could save additional costs arising from a separate ballot and increase participation in the referendum.
Partial reimbursement of costs for the initiators of referenda
The forming of political opinions as part of a petition for a referendum or the holding of a referendum entails costs for which the initiators - often small civic action groups - are currently fully liable. A limited reimbursement of the costs incurred by the initiators of petitions for a referendum / referenda along the lines of the reimbursement of the election campaign costs of political parties appears sensible.