“Is the monarchy coming back?” This is what the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung asked on its first page in 1953, with a view to the “human shock” millions of Germans faced when they saw the “sacred act of consecration” of the coronation of Elizabeth II 35 years after the end of the Hohenzollern rule According to this, in polls in “parts of Germany”, at least one third was in favor of the return of the monarchy.

After all, none other than Winston Churchill had stated that National Socialism would hardly have come to power in Germany "if it had also taken up the fight against traditional attachment to the ancestral dynasties".

Reinhard Muller

Responsible editor for "current affairs" and FAZ objection, responsible for "state and law".

  • Follow I follow

The Basic Law, which was already in force at the time, of course sets limits to such attachment, which was not only widespread in the tabloid media.

Germany is a "Federal Republic" - and the republican principle falls under the so-called eternity guarantee.

A monarchy may therefore not be introduced under this constitution.

In no form.

Prohibited is an incumbent head of state for life by virtue of succession.

Of course, the republic also stands on older foundations and carries with it dynastic remains.

In 2004, the Federal Constitutional Court found it necessary to state: "The marriage and family traditions of aristocratic families no longer have any significance for the appointment of the head of state." It was about the succession of the former Crown Prince Wilhelm of Prussia, the eldest son of the last German Emperor.

In 1938, the Crown Prince signed an inheritance contract with his second eldest son Louis Ferdinand in the presence of the Emperor.

Wilhelm II renounced his rights to the household assets in favor of the crown prince.

In the contract of inheritance, his son Louis Ferdinand was named the sole heir.

heir could not be

who “does not come from a marriage that conforms to the principles of the old house constitution of the Brandenburg-Prussian house .

.

."

Self-proclaimed countess is not allowed to call herself that

Louis Ferdinand had made his grandson Georg Friedrich the sole heir, the son of his third eldest son, who died in a military exercise in 1977.

The passed-over eldest son, who had declared a waiver in 1961, went all the way to the Federal Constitutional Court.

And that saw the fundamental right to freedom of marriage violated.

It is true that the testator is not forced to treat his descendants equally.

However, the Federal Court of Justice failed to examine whether "unreasonable pressure" had been exerted.

With the entry into force of the Weimar Imperial Constitution in 1919, the House Laws had become “irrelevant from the point of view of constitutional law”.

To be on the safe side, Karlsruhe also stated that the Basic Law stands in the way of reintroducing the monarchy in Germany.

Today, the dispute between Georg Friedrich, who, like his grandfather, never renounced his claim to the throne, and the federal and state governments over expropriated assets is not only of concern to historians.

Ultimately, courts will decide.

Here, too, the republican principle is tried against old privileges.

On the other hand, the Federal Court of Justice ruled in around 2018, when it came to the recognition of the name of a self-proclaimed countess legally acquired in other EU countries, that the nobility designations that had become meaningless continued to be of particular importance in broad sections of the population.

The state should not contribute to individuals trying to “give the appearance of a social or societal position that is superior to other citizens” by changing their name.

After lengthy considerations, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung came to the conclusion in 1953: "Nevertheless, it seems better to us that all well-intentioned people direct their efforts now and in the future to reconciling authority and freedom in the only form of government that has remained to us. "