Let's stick together? Explaining boundaries to territorial policy variation:the case of Germany's prisons legislation

This article offers an initial impact assessment regarding the introduction of new legislative responsibilities at the Land level in a case study of prisons policy (Strafvollzug). Combining an analysis of new legislation produced across the 16 Länder since the responsibility for prisons policy was transferred to the Land level, and insights into the mechanics of policy development obtained through a series of interviews with senior politicians and officials, this article finds that the desire among Länder to legislative independently has varied, with substantial backing for co-ordination in the development of new legislation. This has helped to confound expectations of a ‘competition of harshness’ which many expected to result from decentralisation. However, even before the 2006 reforms, there were substantial variations between the Länder when it came to implementing prisons policy, so consideration of the sub-national level in this area remains essential.

Justice and prisons policy

The field of justice policy is, of course, a critical one for state activity – indeed, arguably it is the most important field of activity, as the state exercises its ability to develop and enforce its rules, including by depriving individuals of their liberty. Notwithstanding this, scholarship in the field was, for many years, dominated by experts coming from different perspectives of legal studies, rather than political science. Nowadays, that has shifted somewhat, as interest in the activity of constitutional courts in political systems has grown, inspired, for instance, by the work of Martin Shapiro, Alec Stone Sweet, R. Daniel Kelemen and many others (e. g. Shapiro 1988; Shapiro and Stone 1994; Stone Sweet 2000; Shapiro and Stone Sweet 2002; Kelemen 2006).