The status of members of the State Parliament

The elected "members of State Parliament" bear a very great responsibility towards the population of the state. They have to continuously explain the procedures and results of political actions to the public to allow citizens to understand why political decisions are taken and whether these decisions are in line with their interests or not.

To enable them to discharge this responsibility, members of the State Parliament enjoy special legal status; like every legal relationship, that of member of parliament also involves rights and obligations.

Under the constitution, the members of the State Parliament represent all of the people, not just their own electors. They are not bound by orders and instructions and are answerable only to their own conscience; in other words, they have a "free mandate". Not being bound by instructions means in this case that no-one can demand that a member of the State Parliament act in a particular political way in a given situation. It should be borne in mind, though, that as members of a particular party, members of parliament have in principle already given themselves their own "instructions" before the election, namely in the form of the party manifesto on the basis of which the electors ultimately cast their votes. The point is that a party manifesto represents certain political intentions which then have to be translated into specific political actions as the "orders" from the electors after winning an election.

Upon accepting election, members of the State Parliament acquire protected privileges and participatory rights, though with corresponding obligations, which are laid down in the Parliament Act and the State Parliament rules of procedure. One of the special rights of members of the State Parliament is their entitlement to, as the constitution expressly states, "appropriate remuneration to ensure their independence" (per diem allowances).

According to the Federal Constitutional Court’s 1975 "emoluments ruling", the remuneration received by members of parliament during their time in office must provide them with a sufficient basis for living and also recognise the importance of the office, taking into account the associated responsibility and burden and the due status. The underlying image is that of a parliamentarian who is the bearer of a free mandate and representative of all of the people, in other words a member of parliament who is sufficiently remunerated to make him immune to the enticements of extra-parliamentary influences.

Without "per diem allowances", only those with private means or large incomes could take on a mandate, with the result that less well-off sections of the population - who after all form the majority - would not be represented in parliament.

To resolve the issue of the "appropriateness" of members’ emoluments, since 1983 the Lower Saxony State Parliament has relied on the controlling expertise of a neutral committee ("per diem committee"). The subsequent decision by parliament thus has as objective a basis as possible.

The members of the committee, who are drawn from all walks of public life, are appointed by the President of the State Parliament in consultation with the presiding committee. This method guarantees that a broad spectrum of expert capabilities will be drawn on. Prior to parliament taking a decision, the committee’s report is published as a State Parliament document to allow general public discussion beforehand. This ensures the decision process is as transparent as possible.