Assembly - The Parliament building of the Future in a pacified Middle East. An imaginary Journey

Assem bly

Diploma

EN

Copy 06 Year 2019 Pages 266

Diploma

EN

Copy 06 Year 2019 Pages 264

Abstract This thesis discusses three elementary topics of the architectural and political present, which do not share a common ground at first glance. These topics are on one hand, the current crisis of the democracy of the west, on the other hand one of the longest ongoing conflicts of modern times taking place in the Middle East, and last but not least, an architectural building type, which tries to express its monumental relevance on a global scale. The focal question of this work is how the building type Parliament can be reinvented to suit the requirements of the present political circumstances. This work can also be understood as a criticism of current parliament buildings.

Looking at the current situation of the democracies of the west, one can observe a call for reform across borders.

Various suggestions to implement changes in the constitutions have surged from all parties and governments.

One of them is the reformed model of a state democracy based on a lottery for its citizens, which will form the theoretical basis of this thesis. It results in the development of a new typology that reacts properly to the spatial needs in the legislative process of the model “Multi Body Sortition.” Playground for this imaginary journey is the utopia of a Middle East at peace. A region like Israel and Palestine, whose peoples have suffered from conflict and war for such a long time, can be fertile soil for radical change. The conflict offers a chance for a renewal of the model of a democratic society in this context. This work creates a utopia and discusses the corresponding building type to represent the legislature in a state that probably won’t ever exist in this form.

Diplomarbeit

Assem bly The Parliament building of the Future in a pacified Middle East An imaginary Journey

MASTER THESIS to achieve the university degree of Diplom-Ingenieur Master’s degree programme: Architecture under the supervision of Ao.Univ.Prof. Dipl.-Ing. Dr.techn. Christian Kühn E 253, Institut für Architektur und Entwerfen, E 253/1, Abteilung für Gebäudelehre und Entwerfen submitted to the Technical University Vienna Faculty of Architecture and Spatial Planning

by Wolfgang Fischer | 01328518 Vienna, November 2019

Preface The Parliament as a building type contributes worldwide to national self-representation and self-perception through its symbolic effect. It is almost a matter of course that parliament buildings present themselves with a very strong monumentality, to be expressed by size, staging and architectural style. Politics, and particularly democracy, is changing. At present, these changes are most noticeable in western countries, due to growing mistrust towards politicians, the increasing popularity of populist parties, a general disenchantment with politics or the phenomenon of so-called „Wutbürger".

The dismissive character of a monument, and especially a monument of national identity, might be part of the problem. For instead of transparency or closeness to the people, it is rather motifs such as pathos and reverence that can be attributed to these monuments.

There are attempts to give parliaments an architectural interpretation of their basic democratic ideas. The question is, however, whether it is sufficient, for example, to grant a limited number of visitors access to a glass dome?

This work attempts to question the current situation architecturally and propose an alternative approach. The Middle East is testing ground for this thought experiment.

There is hardly any other place in the world where politics manifests itself more in buildings than in Israel, Gaza or the West Bank.

However, an area shaped by instability, destruction and conflict-ridden buildings can also be an ideal environment for imagination and vision. The current situation in the region is clouding optimism about the future. The likelihood of a lasting status quo is very high given the conditions set by both sides. Understandably, there is a lack of idealism in the debate about the future of Israel and Palestine. Yet belief in the ideal only becomes possible by fading out realism. Rather, it is about a visionary idea, a utopia that probably will never come true. This work is based on a game of thought and the demand for more idealism. It is about understanding the conflict in the Middle East as a chance and conceiving new forms of democracy and its structural formulations for a state after apartheid, whatever the name of this state may be. It should be a search for other types of society. Models that are different from anything we have seen before.

12 Angry Men

CRISIS CRITISISM CHANCE

The current situation in the region is clouding optimism about the future. The likelihood of a lasting status quo is very high, given the conditions set by both sides. Understandably, there is a lack of idealism in the debate Politics, and particularly democracy, changing. present, these changes are most western about the future of Israel and Palestine.isYet belief inAtthe ideal only becomes possible by noticeable fading out in realism. countries, due tounderstanding growing mistrust the East increasing popularity populist parties, a general This work is about thetowards conflictpoliticians, in the Middle as a chance andof conceiving new forms of disenchantment with politics or the phenomenon so-called „Wutbürger”. democracy and its structural formulations for a state of after apartheid, whatever the name of this state may be.

It should be a search for other types of society. Models that are different from anything we have seen before.

Global financial crisis

82%

Democracy

Strong Leader

5.44

55,7%

2006

2010

2014

2018

World Values Survey, Having Democracy, Having a strong Leader (positiv)

Global Average of 167 Countries, 10=most democratic

Source: www.worldvaluessurvey.org

Source: The Economist Intellegence Unit

The dismissive character of a monument, and especially a monument of national identity, might be part of the problem. For instead of transparency or inclusion of the people, it is rather motives such as pathos and reverence that can be attributed to parliament buildings today.

neM yrgnA 21

SISIRC nretsew ni elbaeciton tsom era segnahc eseht ,tneserp tA .gnignahc si ,ycarcomed ylralucitrap dna ,scitiloP lareneg a ,seitrap tsilupop fo ytiralupop gnisaercni eht ,snaicitilop sdrawot tsurtsim gniworg ot eud ,seirtnuoc .”regrübtuW„ dellac-os fo nonemonehp eht ro scitilop htiw tnemtnahcnesid

sisirc laicnanif labolG

%28

44.5

ycarcomeD

%7,55

8102

4102

0102

redaeL gnortS

6002

citarcomed tsom=01 ,seirtnuoC 761 fo egarevA labolG

)vitisop( redaeL gnorts a gnivaH ,ycarcomeD gnivaH ,yevruS seulaV dlroW

tinU ecnegelletnI tsimonocE ehT :ecruoS

gro.yevrusseulavdlrow.www :ecruoS

CRITISISM CHANCE

The current situation in the region is clouding optimism about the future. The likelihood of a lasting status quo is very high, given the conditions set by both sides. Understandably, there is a lack of idealism in the debate about the future of Israel and Palestine. Yet belief in the ideal only becomes possible by fading out realism.

This work is about understanding the conflict in the Middle East as a chance and conceiving new forms of democracy and its structural formulations for a state after apartheid, whatever the name of this state may be.

It should be a search for other types of society. Models that are different from anything we have seen before.

The dismissive character of a monument, and especially a monument of national identity, might be part of the problem. For instead of transparency or inclusion of the people, it is rather motives such as pathos and reverence that can be attributed to parliament buildings today.

neM yrgnA 21

SISIRC MSISITIRC nretsew ni elbaeciton tsom era segnahc eseht ,tneserp tA .gnignahc si ,ycarcomed ylralucitrap dna ,scitiloP lareneg a ,seitrap tsilupop fo ytiralupop gnisaercni eht ,snaicitilop sdrawot tsurtsim gniworg ot eud ,seirtnuoc .”regrübtuW„ dellac-os fo nonemonehp eht ro scitilop htiw tnemtnahcnesid

sisirc laicnanif labolG

%28

44.5

ycarcomeD

%7,55

8102

4102

0102

redaeL gnortS

6002

citarcomed tsom=01 ,seirtnuoC 761 fo egarevA labolG

)vitisop( redaeL gnorts a gnivaH ,ycarcomeD gnivaH ,yevruS seulaV dlroW

tinU ecnegelletnI tsimonocE ehT :ecruoS

gro.yevrusseulavdlrow.www :ecruoS

fo trap eb thgim ,ytitnedi lanoitan fo tnemunom a yllaicepse dna ,tnemunom a fo retcarahc evissimsid ehT dna sohtap sa hcus sevitom rehtar si ti ,elpoep eht fo noisulcni ro ycnerapsnart fo daetsni roF .melborp eht .yadot sgnidliub tnemailrap ot detubirtta eb nac taht ecnerever

CHANCE

The current situation in the region is clouding optimism about the future. The likelihood of a lasting status quo is very high, given the conditions set by both sides. Understandably, there is a lack of idealism in the debate about the future of Israel and Palestine. Yet belief in the ideal only becomes possible by fading out realism.

This work is about understanding the conflict in the Middle East as a chance and conceiving new forms of democracy and its structural formulations for a state after apartheid, whatever the name of this state may be.

It should be a search for other types of society. Models that are different from anything we have seen before.

neM yrgnA 21

SISIRC MSISITIRC ECNAHC

ouq sutats gnitsal a fo doohilekil ehT .erutuf eht tuoba msimitpo gniduolc si noiger eht ni noitautis tnerruc ehT etabed eht ni msilaedi fo kcal a si ereht ,ylbadnatsrednU .sedis htob yb tes snoitidnoc eht nevig ,hgih yrev si nr.m etssielawernti ueolbganeicdia tof nybtseolm naohccebesyelnhot ,ltaneedsieerhpttnAi .fgeniliegbnatehYc .sein,yitcsaerlcao traep nfae,shctittiulooPba bisesroapsseegm Pmdenda ylelraarlsuIcfio rudtu lafroense af,sweeitnragpntisviileucpnoopcfodnytaireaclunpaohpc gansisaatesracEnieeld hd t i,M snaeihctitn iloi p un rtisdinmatgsnriewdonrug toutoebuad s,si ekirrotnwusoichT mgro tcsildfnraow c oethttsg bt,u „ tdrealplaacr-eotsfafoetnaotnseamroofnsenhopiteahlutm rorosfcliatirlu otpch sided .eb yam etats siht fo eman eht re.”vreetgarhüw dW ieh utritw s sttniedm natnyachacrcnoem .erofeb nees evah ew gnihtyna morf tnereffid era taht sledoM .yteicos fo sepyt rehto rof hcraes a eb dluohs tI

sisirc laicnanif labolG

%28

44.5

ycarcomeD

%7,55

8102

4102

0102

redaeL gnortS

6002

citarcomed tsom=01 ,seirtnuoC 761 fo egarevA labolG

)vitisop( redaeL gnorts a gnivaH ,ycarcomeD gnivaH ,yevruS seulaV dlroW

tinU ecnegelletnI tsimonocE ehT :ecruoS

gro.yevrusseulavdlrow.www :ecruoS

fo trap eb thgim ,ytitnedi lanoitan fo tnemunom a yllaicepse dna ,tnemunom a fo retcarahc evissimsid ehT dna sohtap sa hcus sevitom rehtar si ti ,elpoep eht fo noisulcni ro ycnerapsnart fo daetsni roF .melborp eht .yadot sgnidliub tnemailrap ot detubirtta eb nac taht ecnerever

1 Preface 2

Parliaments - Situation p.9

2.1 Definition 2.2

Democracy - Role models in antiquity

2.3

The origin of a democratic society The Republican System

Political Architecture - Evolution

Emergence of democratic places Develoment of political architecture in Europe since the Middle Ages

2.4 Parliamentary representation Concept of representation

Self-promotion of democracy Relationship architecture - politics - building National strategies

2.5 Plenum Type

Geometry and Interpretation

2.6

Parliament building - A data evaluation

2.7

Political Representation in Israel & Palestine

Pre-state political representation of the Yishuv The Knesset - Conflict as a leitmotif Palestinian National Council - Parliament in Exile Palestinian Legislative Council

2.8 Résumé

3

Israel | Palestine - Photographic Essay

4

Assembly -

p.105

4.1 Situation

Peace Process

The only democracy in the Middle East Four Solutions

4.2 Scenario

New Land

New Democracy

4.3 Design

Leitmotif Manifest Location Concept Archive Square Assembly Construction Materiality

5

Appendix Field Trip

p.249

New Earth References Bibliography Onlinesources Figures Quotes

p.73

Parliaments Definition Democracy - Role Models in antiquity Political Architecture - Historic Evolution Parliamentary representation Plenum Parliament buildings Political representation in Israel | Palestine Résumé

2

2.1

Definition Searching for the definition of a "Parliament." you will find answers at the official website of the Austrian Parliament: "The parliament is the central place of every democracy. The interests of as many citizens as possible should be represented here."1 The term "Parliament" refers both to the political institution and to the physical place intended for this institution - a building. The "central place" accordingly refers not only to the physical - the architecture of a parliament building — but equally in a metaphysical sense to the center of a representative democracy. In the parliamentary system, a parliament is the legislative body, i.e., the organization in which laws are passed.2 Etymology The origin of the term “parliament" can be found in France and is "borrowed" from the French verb "parler, paroler" which means "to speak." The "parlement" referred to the conversation or assembly of high nobles who were consulted by the monarch on important decisions in the 11th century. In Middle High German, the term "parlemunt" first appeared in the second half of the 13th century and originated from the Latin term, "parlementum," which meant a "solemn meeting, assembly" or also a "negotiation."3 Today, the term "parliament" refers to both types of elected bodies: the Parliament and the House of Representatives.

3

Institution The central element of a democracy as we know it today is the parliament.

Although the parliament is the representative body elected and legitimized by the people in representative democratic states, there are also parliaments in non-democratic states. A parliamentary system describes a system in which the government of a nation is dependent on the trust of the parliament. In a system of cooperation and control, every state power acts in interaction with the parliament. The parliament, which usually consists of all parties involved in the political process and determined by elections, is divided into government and opposition.

A percentage barrier determines the entry of parties into parliaments and thus their participation in the legislative process in a state.3 Being the body of the legislature, laws are discussed and passed in parliament. Depending on the system of the respective state, the members of a parliament are either directly elected or sent by parties, depending on the number of mandates they hold. In today's legislative process, decisions are hardly ever taken in the plenary chambers, but mostly in smaller groups, the parliamentary committees or parliamentary group meetings. Today, therefore, a distinction is made between speaking and working parliaments.

4

Building Parliament buildings refer to the physical place where political decisions literally take shape. The architecture of parliaments and, above all, the plenary chamber, is not only an expression of a country's political culture, it also shapes it. A parliamentary room is a place where different positions on the concept of a society can be juxtaposed and confronted. The parliament has become the most important political space in society for the collective exchange of ideas. Regardless of the political system, a parliament can be recognized in each of the 193 UN member states.4 Although society, political processes and communication have changed considerably, the building typology of the parliament has experienced little innovation since its establishment. In the 19th century, the plenary chamber was the central place of decision-making. Since then, however, this has been redistributed to different places. Conference rooms of transnational organizations, economic councils or meeting rooms of parliamentary committees are today the places where decisions are taken. Parliaments have responded to the increasing complexity of politics by adding more and more meeting rooms to their building complexes.5 Depending on the political system, a parliament building accommodates the meeting places of the chambers. In Austria, where a bicameral system prevails, these are the two chambers of the National Council and the Federal Council.6

5

2.2

Democracy Role models in antiquity Before the building typology parliament can be discussed further, the next chapter will briefly deal with the topic of democracy and its origins in antiquity. Although parliaments today also exist in non-democratic states and were established as consultative institutions in monarchies, the origin of the parliament as a public assembly is rooted in the history of democracy.

Democracy, which is derived from the Greek words "demos" (the people or citizenship) and "kratein" (power, force, rule), is the form of government in which the people govern themselves. Today, a democratic state is measured by a variety of criteria, such as separation of powers, freedom of the press and opinions, respect for human rights and the possibility of participation of all citizens in politics and society.1 The role models of today's western democracies can be found in antiquity. Although the social, technological and cultural conditions can hardly be compared with today, it was two advanced civilizations that shaped our current understanding of democracy over 2000 years ago.

„We inherit our ideas from the Greeks, but our practices from the romans..“ Kenneth Minoque, Historian

21

6

2.2.1 The origin of a democratic society The origins of democratic society can be found 2,500 years ago in Athens, where the first organized civilization, based on the political ideal of equality of its citizens, freedom and respect for law and justice, was born. These ideas formed the political thinking of the West and a modern conception of a society as a group of individuals with rights. With the emergence of the Polis, or city-states during the 8th century B.C., a new form of urban life emerged in ancient Greece.2 However, the establishment of this new form of government in classical Greece and the dissolution of tyrants, kings and aristocrats, took several centuries and was only gradually implemented.

This gradual reform was made possible by economic prosperity, social stability and the power of the Polis.3 Almost our entire political vocabulary has its roots in the Polis, which functioned as an independent community within a defined territory. Taking part in political activities was part of the central definition of Greek citizenship.

However, the qualification for citizenship was very strictly limited. In Athens, only those who were male, adult and of strict Athenian descent belonged to the "demos." This system excluded all women, slaves and consuls from the legislature. The Greeks were the first to establish a society based on citizenship.4 The direct democracy applied in Athens, though, was only possible in the "small" society of city-states. With larger peoples and thus the society of a state, it would have been necessary to install political representatives.5 A separation of powers, as we presuppose it today in democracies, did not exist in ancient Greece. Legislative, governmental, controlling and judicial powers were exercised exclusively by the Attic citizens themselves.6 Another major difference to our electorally representative democracy of today was the method of selecting decision-makers.

The lottery determined which citizens were appointed to hold office. Besides women and slaves, metoks (residents without civic status in the political sense) were also excluded from the possibility to participate.7 The central institution of Athenian democracy was the People's Assembly — Ekklesia. It met 40 times a year to pass laws, fill offices, judge posts and review the administration of power. The political freedom of the citizens of Athens was also expressed in the freedom of speech — Isegoria. Every participant of the Ekklesia had the right to share his opinion and assessment. Another fundamental principle was Isonomia, the equality of all citizens before the law.8 In Perikles' time, the number of participants necessary for a quorum was 6000 citizens. Two other important bodies in the Athenian political system were the Council of 500 — the Boulé, and the People's Courts — the Dicasteries. For one year, the Council of 500 was able to decide the agenda for the People's Assembly. A rotation system prevented multiple participation and was intended to make the accumulation of power more difficult and enable participation for all. Kleist's Isonomia reformed the prevailing social structure towards a new Demen and Phylene order. This reorganization of the clans and tribes in Athenian society was intended to ensure a political mix of the different origins. From each of the now ten Phylenes, 50 members were sent to the Council of 500.9 However, direct democracy was soon no longer seen as unproblematic. Criticism came from Aristotle, among others, who saw direct democracy as an ochlocracy or mob rule.10 His views were based on his experiences in Athenian democracy, which in his time, was very different from the original ideals of the 5th century B.C. Military conflicts were everyday life and politics were mostly violent and corrupt.

Cities at that time were characterized by the rule of kings. Later, the city-states were dominated by clan and tribal hierarchies. With the expansion of kingdoms and nation states, this type of democracy became unmanageable.

Due to increasing populations in a growing national territory, popular assemblies had become impossible. The decision of the Ekklesia in 411 and 404 B.C., showed the self-destructive potential of this kind of democracy. In times of war, power was temporarily transferred to a few men who changed their rule in the direction of an oligarch. The paradox of democracy had become visible: a people that is free to decide its own future is also free to decide to abolish its own rule. The Greek philosopher, Plato, concluded that in the end, the people are not able to deal responsibly with their own rule. A problem that should again occupy modern democracies in the 20th century.11 The city-states of ancient Greece lost their dominant role after the death of Alexander the Great. The next social experiment in the history of democracy was to take place in Rome.12

7

Prytanie

50 council members for 36 days each (ruling tenth of the council)

Council of the 500 Boulé

People's Court Dicasteries

Military

Areopag / Adelsrat nur Blutsgericht

9 Archons

(selected from 1st and 2nd class)

determined by lot Supreme Command

voting

10 Strategists

People' s Assembly 1. Class

Rider

Large landowners, Merchants

2. Class

Hoplites

Farmers, Merchants, Craftsmen

3. Class

Lightly armed

4. Class

Sailors

Farmers and small Tradesmen Wage workers, Small Farmers, all other citizens

Athenian people

divided into 139 demen and 10 phylene

Metoks, slaves, women without political rights

Fig 001 | Organs of Athenian democracy

Magistrate

Intermediate King

appoints

Dictator unrestricted state power

Consuls

appoints

Praetorians Censors

Senate

300 - 600 Members

Kurul. Ädilen confirmed by Lex curiata

Quästoren

Colonel

Tribunes of the people Tribute Committees

Centuriat Committees

4 urban and 17 / 31 rural tribus

Pleb. Adilen

5 classes and 193 hundreds

Committees of the Curia Plebeian class meeting

3 Tribus 30 Curiae

Roman people

Fig 002 | Organs of the Roman Republic

8

2.2.2 The republican system The origin of republican thinking is to be found in Roman antiquity and the Republic of Rome, which had far more influence on the political ideas of the following centuries than Athens' Polis democracy.13 The reason for this may certainly also be the territorial expansion of the Roman Empire and the accompanying spread of political ideologies up to about 130 BC. However, Rome was not ruled democratically, but by an oligarchy. Patricians (lat. patres: fathers; the landowning native nobility) and Plebeians (lat. plebs: people; citizens who had become wealthy), controlled Rome's political actions through a balanced system of clienteles and patronage. The decisive center of power was the Senate, where the most important official affairs were decided. As in Greek antiquity, Rome had a popular assembly, although it had no direct decision-making and control rights. Rather, the Assembly was the place where the policies represented by the so-called nobility, that is, the ruling oligarchs, were presented to the people.14 The Greek historian, Polybios, saw an explanation for the success of the Roman system above all others in its "elastic" constitution. Limiting and controlling the power of individuals, while ensuring cooperation between various social forces, especially between Patricians, Plebeians and the political powers, led to a political stability that did not exist in ancient Greece. The combination of aristocratic, democratic and monarchical elements, resulted in a mixed constitution, which was not only attested by Polybios. Aristotle, too, previously considered a combination of different constitutional forms to be reasonable. The monarchical element in the form of the consulate, the aristocratic element, the senate and the democratic element of the popular assembly form a balanced system of interplay and mutual control of the institutions. More than 18 centuries later, this political system of mutual interplay between the various political bodies was to become a model for the design of modern democracies, based on the separation and control of powers.15 As already mentioned, the People's Assembly, the democratic element of ancient Rome, is not comparable in function and meaning to that of Greek antiquity. Four popular assemblies were structured according to regional, partly family and military principles. While there was hardly any right of decision and control, the main task of the People's Assembly was to determine the magistrates by election.16 The most important part of the Roman Republic was the aristocratic element of the Senate. The members of the Senate were neither elected, nor were they citizens of Rome determined by many others. The execution of a magistrate was only possible after a member had resigned from the previous political office.17 The Consulate, as a monarchical element in the republican system, was determined by election and constituted the highest civil and military office. Two consuls were elected annually by the Roman people. From 367 B.C. onwards, one of the two consuls also had to be elected from among the Plebeians. At the beginning of the imperial period, the office increasingly lost its importance.18 Law, order and the common good, were the principles of Rome's political order. The Roman philosopher, Marcus Tullius Cicero (106 - 43 BC), in his work "De re publika," which he wrote at a time of the decline of the Roman Empire, laid down the principles of the republican form of government: "It is therefore the commonwealth that is the matter of the people (res publica res populi), but a people is not every gathering of people that has been gathered together in some way, but the gathering of a crowd united in the recognition of the right (iuris consensu) and the common good (utilitatis communione).”19 This also meant that citizens had to be involved in the formulation of the laws, but not all citizens were equally capable of direct and immediate participation.20

9

2.3

Political Architecture Evolution At least 2,500 years ago, people already gathered to participate in and help shape democratic processes. The framework conditions created for its use as a place for debate and discussion have always been understood as a physical expression of democratic ideals. The basic democratic understanding, which involves the people as co-determiners of political decisions indirectly or directly in political events, resulted in an architecture of metaphors. Even today, parliament buildings still serve as permanent reminders of nations and their basic ideals. Architectural visions in the service of democratic ideals have produced a diverse selection of buildings since their creation. To varying degrees, political processes are influenced by the buildings in which they take place and, conversely, parliament buildings reflect the political situation to a certain extent. Rather, they are a stage for political debate, which has changed considerably over time.1

„We shape our buildings and afterwards our buildings shape us“ Winston Churchill opened the debate on the rebuilding of the House of Commons in October 19432

10

2.3.1 Origin of democratic places

Ancient Greece Since ancient Greece, the politics of the Western world have been dominated by the ideal of a universal society based on democratic principles. Classical democracy has not only influenced our constitutions and institutions, it has also shaped and formed the design and architectural language of parliament buildings to this day. The concept of citizenship, which formed the basis for the Greek city-states, Polis, also provided for the urgency of meeting places. In ancient Greece, citizenship meant direct participation in public affairs and the legislative and judicial functions contained therein. Political power, previously held by individuals, was now understood as the property of all citizens. They were now all entitled to speak at an assembly and to participate in the decision through elections.3 The equality of all citizens before the law, "isonomia," enabled the Athenians to overcome tyranny and autocracy and to shift political power to the center. This meant moving power from the closed sphere of the royal palace to the public sphere, the Agora. Decisions that had previously been made in secret were suddenly subject to public debate, in a public place. One of the earliest places of these popular assemblies — Ekklesia of the Athenians — was the Pnyx, a hill west of the Acropolis.4 The sheer size of the "demos" and thus of the Ekklesia, was in itself a reason why politics in Athens had to be conducted in public, that is., in an outdoor space. The Athenians came together on a semicircular plateau west of the Acropolis. In the 5th century BC, the Pnyx was defined by a semicircular retaining wall. The theater-like structure allowed several thousand seats.

In the center of the semicircle was a cubic rock, which served as a lectern. The raised rock tribune —bema — had an area of about 3.5 square meters and a height of 1.5 meters. In Athens, thousands of citizens took part in the meeting, which took place approximately every 9 days. According to the "American School of Classical Studies" in Athens, which has been researching Greek antiquity since the end of the 19th century, the average number of participants was about 6000 people. The maximum capacity for the Pnyx was 13,500 people.5 The Athenian "police" made sure that the citizens fulfilled their duty to participate in the popular assembly by patrolling the streets. They drove the people up the Pnyx with a red-coloured rope. Anyone who was discovered outside the assembly and had red-coloured markings on their clothes or hands, was punished.6 In front of the Pnyx, the Agora, a large public square surrounded by sacred buildings, magistrates court and administrative buildings, was already used for meetings. The Agora was the center of public life in Athens as it was used for various purposes, such as holding markets, religious processions, military exercises, theatre performances or executions. Although more and more democratic buildings were gradually built around the Agora, the meetings were held in public.

Demarcation stones around the Agora testify to a clear geographical boundary of the place.7 While for Aristotle a castle or palace is a building for the monarchy or oligarchy, the Agora was the ideal place for democracy.8 The first Agora was located immediately north of the Acropolis, the Areopagus and the Pnyx. The first building for Attic democracy was the Pyrtaneion, the meeting house for the Prytan Council. Its construction was attributed to the legendary city founder, Theseus. The location cannot be clearly determined today, but it is assumed to be in close proximity to the Agora. Receptions and banquets were held in the Pyrtaneion. It was also the site of the State Archives and the meetings of the Blood Court.9 After the Greeks lost their dominant role to the Romans after the death of Alexander the Great, the form and location of the political assembly continued to develop.

11

Ancient Rome Like the Greeks, the Romans held an assembly of men based on a hierarchical system. The oldest and most permanent element in the Roman constitution was the Senate or Council of Elders. Originally, the members of the Senate were patriarchs of influential family tribes. The legendary origin of the Roman Senate goes back to the time of Romulus, who chose 100 of his subjects as advisory body for his regency. By 509 BC, the council already consisted of 300 members. Senators retained their appointment only as long as they enjoyed the trust of the regents. Senators were easily recognizable in public by their clothing. Senate meetings were held regularly in the Curia, the senate building west of the Forum Romanum. In 80 BC, the original Senate building which had to be rebuilt several times anyway, was replaced by the Curia Iulia. With a height of 21 metres and a façade of fired bricks clad with marble and stucco, the Curia Iulia was a very visible building in ancient Rome. The senators sat opposite each other on steps in rows of chairs. The oldest sat at the very front near the speaker, while the youngest sat in the back seats.10 During the time of Augustus, the Senate had nearly 1,000 members, which meant that the youngest members had to be on the top step. During assemblies, doors were left open so that young future senators could at least passively participate in the assembly. The Senate's extensive power included, for example, control over foreign policy, the power to sanction state acts and to have police checks carried out in Rome. Traditionally, this institution also had the power to act as the representative of the kings when they were absent and to assist in the legislative process. The abolition of the monarchical system did not change the importance of the Senate as a consultative body. During the last two centuries of the Roman Republic, the Senate developed into an independent, automatically appointed body. The Forum Romanum functioned as the center of political but also economic, religious and cultural life, similar to the Agora of Greek antiquity, as a place for various functions. Public speeches, executions and other political events took place on the main square, which measured approximately 250m x 170m.11

12

Scandinavia The architectural heritage of the Greek and Roman civilizations is still perceptible in the western world today.

Temples of the Greek world and the sacred, civil and military buildings of Rome have probably had the greatest influence on the architectural language since the Renaissance. Due to the dominance of classical architecture, alternative precedents for democratic institutions are hardly known. While Athens represents one of the architectural motifs of democratic institutions worldwide, Scandinavia offers a striking alternative. The Icelandic Vikings founded one of the earliest democratic societies in the western world on the basis of an assembly, the Althing, which met annually from around 930 AD. Conflicts between tribal leaders and the lack of regulations led to the constitution of Ulfiot, which set the framework for a remarkable society, with a "Thing" as the most important national institution. The Viking Islands established a central location for the entire island, with a spokesman leading the moderation and communication between the tribes. Every summer, the Althing took place under the open sky in Pingvollr on the Oxara, a river in southwest Iceland. The heart of the meeting was a small grass hill, on which a speaker was seated in the middle. Around the grass hill, a tent city of various actors was built during the Althing, which lasted several days. In addition to those taking part in the political events, traders and craftsmen came to the meeting. The Althing thus became the main social event. The Thing, the assembly of the free peoples, became the leitmotif of many Germanic tribes. Although there were gatherings of this kind throughout Scandinavia, the Icelandic Althing was unique in its form. Without a single ruler or monarch, this assembly united an entire island in one legal system.12

United Kingdom When Nordic Vikings settled on the Isle of Man, they established the concept of open-air assemblies. The first evidence of an assembly similar to the Icelandic Althing, the Tynwald, is found in 1228. Similar to the Icelandic Althing, the site is oriented around a round, stepped grass hill, on which the assembly met and laws were passed.

Surrounded by grassy areas, the hill is connected by a path to a courthouse and a place of worship. For over two centuries, it has been customary to erect a canopy over the top four circular steps during the annual meeting.

The roots of the British Parliament are not clearly identifiable. Traces lead to the Icelandic Althing, but can be attributed even more to the Anglo-Saxon Witenagemot, a council of spiritual and secular leaders. With the conquest of Great Britain by the Anglo-Saxons, their laws and customs were also imported. In the course of time, the "Meeting of the Wise Men" took place with very varying numbers of participants. The monarch determined who should be appointed to the council. During the reign of King Edgar, the Witenagemot became the official legislative assembly, or parliament, of the extended state with the king as its head. The parliament consisted of the king, his sons and other relatives, bishops, abbots, councilors from smaller counties and provinces, ministers and members of the court. With the approval of the Parliament, the King enacted laws, granted land, appointed bishops and counts, and fulfilled other governmental duties. The Witenagemot seems to have had no fixed place in the course of its history. The general assembly took place wherever the king and his court were. In the later years of its existence, the assembly met at least three times a year, typically at Easter, Pentecost and Christmas.

After the conquest of the Normans, the name of these assemblies fell into oblivion. However, despite a change in terminology, the legacy of this prototype of democratic assemblies remains visible today.13

13

Fig 003 | Model of Pnyx

14

Fig 004 | Curia Iulia

15

2.3.2 Development of Political Architecture in Europe since the Middle Ages

Middle Ages Following the example of late antiquity, a close connection between politics and the Christian religion prevailed in Europe in the Middle Ages. One example of this is "Charlemagne's Throne," which was erected in Aachen Cathedral in 790 A.D. by order of Emperor Charlemagne. In the time of medieval Christianization, religious sites became places for political acts, which received their legitimation from the altar and the relics stored in it. Religious representatives, like the chaplains of the Frankish kings, became political actors, for example, as notaries of the chancellery, which is also the origin of the English word for scribe/ clerk. The fact that the church buildings were inevitably public places is a misconception, because religious sites could also be adapted to castle chapels, monasteries or noble private chapels. Castles were less to be understood as palaces, but rather as public places that were open to all, except in times of war. In the Arab world, however, non-public palaces were already to be found in the Middle Ages, with the palace gate marking the intersection between the people and the ruler. Here, communication between ruler and ruled took place. Petitions could be presented; justice could be pronounced or access to higher authorities could be granted. Names of later palaces, like the Ottoman Top-Kapi in Constantinople or the Ali Qapu in Isfahan were variations of the Western "High Gate." 14

16

Renaissance In the Renaissance, in contrast to the indiscretion of the Middle Ages, political acts were again carried out in secret. The urban bourgeoisie attained more power with increasing prosperity and gradually withdrew to new types of city palaces. At the core of these "palaces" was the "Kontor" in which the political and economic affairs of the family were carried out. The power was now in private offices and no longer in public places. The introversion of the palazzo is expressed in its architecture. The secretive nature of the palazzo can be seen in the example of the Medici house in Florence. The originally open arcade to the main front was closed and barred in the 16th century. With the closing to the outside, another very important characteristic of the palazzi is brought to life: the façade and its representative role in public. The splendor of the house was to reflect and express the dignity of the owner. The ever-increasing withdrawal of political actors and thus political action from the light of the public sphere, became evident in the example of the Palazzo Ducale in Urbino. The Duke of Urbino, Frederico da Montefeltro, had his princely residence built in the middle of the 15th century. The actual center of the estate is not the throne room, but an intimate study, the "studiolo." From here, the Principe could act undisturbed by the public and the court. The commercial office and the humanist studio are thus the forerunners of classical arcane politics in absolutism: the ruler makes his political decisions with a few assistants or even alone in the "cabinet," a small room in his palace that is not generally accessible.

The modern arcane model attempts to conceal its general disinterest in political perception, by an increased expenditure on representation.15

Baroque The architectural style of Baroque, initiated by the Roman Catholic Church, proved to be particularly suitable for political buildings. Louis XIV understood best how to make the architectural style of the Baroque the specialty of the French monarchy. As an important framework for public life, architecture became a tool of the state. State architecture in France was divided into three areas: the royal castles, the naval bases and the architecture of the capital Paris. Similar to the Renaissance, the palace was also considered the center of political activity in the Baroque period.

The baroque palace represented a new type. With the palace in Versailles, which can be described as the prototype of a baroque palace, the previously cherished reticence towards the public was at least partially abandoned. The better classes of society were granted access to parks and representation rooms.16

17

Between classicism and historicism With the rise of classicism in the 18th century, a style began to develop that exerted a very significant influence on today's parliamentary architecture.

The upheaval was triggered by profound technical, economic and social changes that made the late baroque model of representation obsolete. A new architectural expression was demanded. The Age of Enlightenment, like the preceding period, made use of the resources of antiquity. While the Baroque period focused on the decorative aspects of Hellenism, Classicism tried to express itself in clear forms. As a model for the new architectural style, a parliament was to be built in the "New Rome" — Washington, which was based on the Roman Capitol. Parallel to Classicism, the style of "architecture parlante" developed, at least in theory, with the aim of allowing its function to be recognized in the ground plan, decor and form as "speaking architecture." However, this architectural style could not prevail against classicism, mainly due to cost concerns. In France, a kind of printed sample catalogue developed, especially for state and municipal buildings, which was published between 1802 and 1809 by Jean Nicolas Durand, teacher of architecture at the Napoleonic École Polytechnique in Paris. During the 19th century, however, there was a resistance to the attempt to unify the style of classicism worldwide. The call for a national style was particularly loud in Germany during the Late Enlightenment. Johann W. von Goethe testifies to this in his essay "von deutscher Baukunst" from 1773, in which he praised the Gothic as a typically German style. This view has since been disproved by art history. In the middle of the 19th century, the Bavarian king also tried once again to create a uniform Bavarian architectural style, but this also failed. Towards the end of the 19th century, the search for a uniformed architectural style was completely abandoned in order to make use of all epochs in historicism. Neo-Romanesque schools, neoGothic churches, neo-renaissance and neo-baroque town halls, whereby the styles here are and building functions could be interchanged in any way.17

18

Political architecture in the 20th century Without an examination of National Socialism, it is probably not possible to deal with the topic of politics and architecture in the 20th century. The opinion, still popular today, that the Third Reich would have produced only monumental and brutal neo-classical architecture, and that "new building" could only survive in exile, is now considered to have been refuted.

The comprehensible impression is reinforced by typical Nazi architecture such as the Reichs Party Rally Grounds in Nuremberg, the Gauforum in Weimar or the Olympic Stadium in Berlin. However, historian Barbara Miller Lane, has identified four basic positions within official Nazi architecture: neo-Romanesque, neo-Classical, vernacular architecture and modernism. Despite a claim by the National Socialists to replace "new building" with a uniformed "national-socialist" style, the rivalries between the various movements nevertheless allowed almost any style, including that of the oppressed architects. Architectural historian, Werner Durth, also confirmed this thesis and noted an interesting continuity in German architecture, from the period before the First World War, to the beginnings of the Federal Republic. The characteristic feature of totalitarian systems and the architecture that produces them, is the attempt to create buildings for the public in addition to traditionally representative palace architecture. However, these are hardly democratic places, but rather places for parades or the spreading of propaganda. This can also be seen in the forum or the stadium, where real po-

litical communication is replaced by a one-way sound system for large crowds of people. A building of the Italian fascism, under the aspect of the communication, takes a special role. The "Casa del Fascio" served in the city of Como as party headquarters of the PNF. In the immediate vicinity of a baroque church, the building is clearly subordinate in its dimensions. The oversized forum in front of it, the "Piazza del Impero" and the radically cubist architecture, however, attract particular attention. The conference rooms inside the building are made of glass. A glazed inner courtyard with surrounding galleries is also intended to convey the impression of transparency and openness.

The entrance area, however, is the most interesting communicative area. A whole battery of glass doors opens the building to the public at the push of a button. It seems that the architect Giuseppe Teragni was aware of the communicative deficit of the political system that commissioned the project. Interestingly, it is precisely the leitmotif of transparency in parliament buildings that plays such a key role today. With regard to the Casa del Fascio, it is to be noted that the palace as an architect no longer needs walls and columns, and vice versa, transparency as a leitmotif for parliament buildings is no universal remedy.18

Fig 005 | Casia del Fascio in Como 19

2.4

Parlamentary representation 2.4.1 Concept of representation In antiquity, the term " repraesentare" had meanings such as "to put into practice" or "to assemble" in addition to "to visualize" or "to illustrate."1 In late Roman legal terminology, "representatio" refers to the representation of the empire on one hand, but also to the representation of a third party in court.

Until today, the term representation has been extended and describes characteristics such as "handsome, outwardly or splendid" in everyday language.2 Representation, by definition, makes something visible that exists but is not visible itself. It is therefore a tool in the form of symbols, signs or terms that is supposed to represent something else. In the case of the parliament building, as an architectural representation of the representative political system, democracy as we know it today, should be embodied.3

20

2.4.2 Self-presentation of democracy Part of the necessities of a state is to legitimize its existence to its citizens. Its goals and the implementation of its objectives are subject to constant scrutiny by the members of that state who have to ensure that these objectives are meaningful and fulfilled. Accordingly, it can be regarded as a basic need of every state to present itself as meaningful, trustworthy and successful. The German journalist and architecture critic, Heinrich Wefing, addresses the issue of self-representation of democracies in his dissertation, "Parliamentary Architecture." According to Wefing, the phrase "self-presentation of the state" cannot be fixed exactly in terminological sense.

It is therefore only described with open meaning. In general, this term means the "presentation of an image of one's own self" with the aim of "steering and controlling" the perception of this image, generally in a positive way.4 In addition to the presentation of a state to the outside world, through information and official public relations work, the "aesthetic staging" of its perceptible appearance, which is characterized by elements such as flags and emblems, political ceremonies and, last but not least, public buildings, is also part of this concept.5 The primary goal of this self-representation, with the addressee citizen, is to objectify existence and unity. The attempt is made to provide the elusive and complex overall structure of the state with a visible shell that makes countless organs and parts of organs appear as a unified imprint. The citizen is to be helped to perceive the state as a whole and for all citizens, despite seemingly unrelated official activities. The value of this state, which is to be conveyed, should make clear that it is important to include every citizen in the life of the state and to form a basic consensus. However, whether this offer of identification and integration is taken up, is left to the free decision of the citizen.6 2.4.3 Relationship between architecture - politics - building The Parliament building, together with other institutional buildings, is regarded as a medium of communication for the state, both internally and externally. In view of the symbolic effect of buildings and their “referential character," Wefing suggests considering state architecture similar to state symbols as integration factors.7 For this purpose, he draws on the observations of the German jurist Rudolf Smend on the theory of integration: "Architecture contains references to all three types of integration, which Smend presents separately: Buildings design the space in which leading figures of the state appear, they represent the framework or the destination of demonstrative events and against the background of the buildings the state symbols appear which decorate the buildings or mark them as state." 8 Both history and the territory, that is, the national territory, are among the decisive factors for integration. These two aspects are clearly related to architecture. Historical events inevitably have a geographical framework, a place of historical action. In most cases, this place is a building. The historical significance of such places is evident in the familiarity of prominent examples such as the Wartburg in Eisenach or the Hall of Mirrors in Versailles.9 It is not uncommon for places steeped in history to be marked by buildings such as monuments. Like, for example, the Monument to the Battle of the Nations in Leipzig, buildings approach state symbols in their significance and perception. The abstract and invisible state is given a shape or an appealing perception."

21

According to Wefing, state architecture can thus be described as an integration factor: "State building is part of the multi-layered communication process of state self-representation, which constitutes meaning."

However, the integrative effect of architecture only unfolds if it represents the values and principles that particularly shape and legitimise the state. In his treatise, Heinrich Wefing points to a further spatial and linguistic connection between politics and architecture. The founding of a new Polis often meant two things. Besides the establishment of a visible building complex, the architecture of a city, it was also necessary to create a less visible order for the coexistence of the citizens. From the relationship between these two aspects, the original assumption can be derived that a city or a state is the reflection of its order. The connection between visible structure and political desirable order becomes very clear in view of the ideal city utopias of the 1960s. Thus, architecture or urban layout often becomes a symbolic representation of the desired or predominant politics of a state.10 A further reciprocal linguistic relationship between politics and architecture will be made clear in the following. A building, in general, has first and foremost the task of fulfilling a pragmatic purpose, to make the appropriate space available for a use. In the case of representative buildings, on the other hand, their task goes beyond this primary function. This architecture represents and stands for something higher than itself. It "appeals to sensations, arouses emotions and stands for meaning," according to Wefing.11 Architecture, however, is also exposed to technical, economic, historical, cultural, ecological and sociological influences as a final product of various disciplines. External architectural impulses are processed in a building by means of various methods, not only in the planning and execution phases. The process of building, which requires the cooperation of the most diverse actors, represents a political act through these social actions. These "primary references" between architecture and politics, as Wefing calls them, can be supplemented with secondary references in the form of symbolic links. Pictorialised terms such as "Hohes Haus" for the parliament or "common house of Europe" show once again how closely architecture and politics are linked by language.12 Architecture as the manifestation of a political act, always includes references to a political endeavor in terms of content.

"This parliament building claims more than the architectural implementation of parliamentary functions.

It wants to express a certain understanding of democracy itself.“ President of the Bundestag Rita Süssmuth, at the opening of the new plenary area of the German Bundestag in Bonn on October 30, 1992 13

"I need something big, something very big that shows what we have already achieved" Nicolae Ceausescu 14

If architecture also has a representative meaning that goes beyond its functional purpose, buildings become messages or linguistic means. Political statements of buildings can be decoded by their plastic and pictorial decoration. Flags, statues and frescoes tell stories and allow insights into the self-image of the building owner.

In addition to the details or the façade, however, the building itself can also be an expression of greater significance. The simplest and most common type of this expression is the simple size of a building. It is therefore not surprising that particularly power-conscious rulers try to express their "greatness" by means of their buildings.

The Ceausescu Palace of Parliament in Bucharest, which has not yet been completed, is the second largest administrative building in the world and shows the quantitative demands that are and were made on representative architecture.

22

The association of architecture and politics with form and meaning can be proven in many examples. Within a historical-cultural context, certain architectural elements trigger interpretations. In this context, the dome, as the highest level in the hierarchy of architectural dignity, stands for a century-old symbol of sovereignty and power, while the town hall tower dominating the city is to be seen as an expression of bourgeois republican selfconfidence.15 Representative buildings, especially in the context of parliament buildings, stand for particularly prominent buildings that bring ideal values to life through architecture and in the course of time themselves become a symbol of these values.16 The significance of the symbolic nature of architecture becomes particularly clear when this symbol is endangered or there is only the fear that it is in danger of being disregarded, destroyed or not treated with dignity. The committed debate on the veiling of the Reichstag planned by the artist couple, Christo and Jeanne Claude, which only succeeded in 1995 after more than 20 years of planning, shows the enormous importance of a state symbol. The decision was fiercely debated in the German Bundestag, then still in Bonn. The opponents of this project pointed out with conviction what an inviolable character such a symbol must have for the self-conception of the state. The then CDU/CSU parliamentary party leader, Wolfgang Schäuble, a fierce opponent of the artwork, expressed his concerns in a speech before the Bundestag: “We must remember that the state community is not only held together by a system of perfected legal norms or a system of perfected social services, but that this community is held together above all by institutions in which the basic norms are expressed – and that we must keep these institutions stable, that we must keep them capable of integration if this community is to have a good future. And this also has to do with the buildings that house these institutions. Their image is imprinted on people, and so they embody these institutions, represent them to the outside world, so that they can represent them credibly, even if we should not experiment with their external appearance … A building like the Reichstag is also a political symbol. In such symbols, like a burning glass, the historical experiences of a people are bundled. They are resting poles, axes around which the coexistence and opposition of political forces has revolved for decades. In this respect, they unite a people even in the conflict of interests, goals and convictions. In such symbols, the inner unity of a people is embodied."17

Fig 006 - The veiled wealth day of the artist Christo and Jean Claude

23

2.4.4 National strategies In contrast to buildings for the executive or the judiciary, which typologically either follow the palace or appear in purely functional buildings, a different requirement applies to national legislative buildings: a building that is intended to unite political communication and all the meanings of the concept of representation.

Hardly any other type of architecture thus makes such high demands on architectural representation as the Parliament building. Using the example of famous parliaments in Budapest or London, the striking external effect seems undisputed. But with a closer analysis, the problem of parliament buildings becomes clearer. A clear type of parliament can hardly be identified.18 The German political scientist Klaus von Beyme states with regard to today's parliament buildings, that the first buildings of this type were built in the 19th century. This was at a time when the representative system was neither democratized nor parliamentarised. According to von Beyme, when the history of parliament buildings is mentioned, it should be formulated as a history of the adaptation of democratic parliaments to a pre-democratic building fabric.19 A precedent of parliament buildings is represented, for example, by the Ständehäuser. Especially in Austria, some Ständehäuser have been directly transformed into a modern representative parliamentary system. The provincial parliaments in Kärten, Styria and Upper Austria, for example, used the old country houses in their respective capitals.

The history of the Linzer Landhaus is an example of this. Built in the late 16th century, the Renaissance castle was built by the estates of the Land ob der Enns to protect their rights against the rulers. In the course of the territorial reorganization of the early 19th century, the houses were taken by the monarchical sovereign. When constitutions and parliaments were introduced in the German states after 1815, these buildings were adapted as parliament buildings.20 Famous examples of parliamentary architecture in Washington D.C. or London, today shape the ideas of parliamentary architecture. But here too, no "new" building type was developed, but rather styles and ideals of the past were taken up. The Palace of Westminster, which houses the British Parliament, with its historicizing architecture also points to its concrete roots in medieval estates. The "modern" Parliament of the United States of America, which was built for this purpose, claims to be a symbol for a "new world" and is stylistically oriented towards the Roman Capitol.21 Although in comparison of all UN member states, only 20 parliaments were built in the period before 1914, the stylistic consensus in the planning of parliaments seems to be classicism. Only a few parliament buildings of classical modernism or with the attempt to find autochthonous forms of expression bear witness to the fact that classicism is still today, almost without competition, considered to be the best suited for the symbolic power of a national identity. 22 The Austrian Parliament, built between 1874 and 1884 on Vienna's Ringstrasse, is considered one of the most imposing parliament buildings in the German-speaking world. The Ringstraße itself was the actual reason to build the parliament at this place, as with the demolition of the former fortification glacis, mainly monumental buildings should be originated. But first, two different locations at the Ringstraße were supposed to be realized for the lower and the manor house. In a competition for the two buildings, Theophil Hansen designed the House of Representatives in the "Roman Renaissance" style and the Manor House as a higher institution in the "Greek style" and reacted to the significance of the two buildings with a hierarchical differentiation of style.23 The separation of the two was later rejected and Hansen was commissioned to plan a parliament for the Manor House and the House of Representatives together. It was not only in terms of style that he oriented himself to his previous design for the manor house. The floor plan typology was also to be applied in the "new" draft for the Austrian Parliament. Hansen invented a generic Ringstrasse building type, which at the same time represented a monumental system of order. A three-dimensional modular grid system, which could be divided into cubic sub-volumes according to requirements.24 Theophil Hansen was thus able to carry out the (re)planning for the considerably larger parliament building, based on the previously

24

designed manor house, without much effort. With this system, Hansen drew on the design method that had already been developed at the beginning of the 19th century by the French architect, Jean Nicolas Louis Durand, for the rapid training of military engineers at the École Polytechnique in Paris. The design of almost any type of building should be able to be developed quickly using this method. Starting from main and secondary axes, only columns and walls are placed. The buildings are finalized with a decoration of mainly, in this time modern, classicistic decorative elements.25 The choice of historicism based on the Greek temple as a stylistic device for the Austrian Parliament should not, however, be interpreted as a reference to the "cradle of democracy" of ancient Greece. Hansen was rather convinced that the Greek style was the only one in which subjectivity was excluded. A style, therefore, which, due to its perfection, should remain above all other styles to come.26 A competition for the general refurbishment of the Austrian Parliament, with the redesign of the plenary hall, was launched in 2014. The architectural firm Jabornegg & Pálffy, the winner of the competition, designed a light glass roof for the upper end of the plenary area, thus opening up the assembly rooms to natural light. A circumferential glazed gallery provides space for the press.

The demolition of the suspended ceiling and thus the opening to the top, is reminiscent of the measures that have already been carried out in the Reichstag in Berlin. The Berlin Reichstag, completed by Paul Wallot in 1894 and designed in the neo-Renaissance style, is a building that is still controversially discussed in Germany today. After the reunification of Germany, the parliament decided to move back into the building on the Spree, which had been empty for decades. The author and architecture critic, Werner Strodthoff, accused the Reichstag of "nouveau riche posturing" and described it as a "columnar pathos" and "untoward colossus" more than an inviting parliament building.27 The parliament building renovated by Norman Foster after the reunification of Germany, was intended to overcome the deficits in transparency and openness. However, the final result of the renovation has little in common with Foster's original ideas. The architects' first idea was to place the monumental Reichstag on a stone podium and roof it with a canopy of steel columns and glass panes. This was intended to open up the surroundings to the public, to create a monument to parliamentary democracy and to take away the colossal attitude of the building.28 Above all, the idea of turning the roof of the Reichstag into a publicly accessible viewing terrace appealed to the Council of Elders, who recommended the design for execution. However, the then Minister of Construction, Oscar Schneider, convinced his colleagues in the CDU/CSU parliamentary group to have the design reviewed once again to see whether a solution with a dome alternating with Foster's original design would be possible. The architects, who were not convinced by a dome, presented their first versions with a 68 million German Mark higher cost estimate, in the hope that the builders would abandon the dome due to budget constraints. As is well known, this strategy did not work out. In the end, the British architect and his team had designed 27 different versions of the dome, until finally the current version was realized.29 The Reichstag, which was rebuilt and inaugurated in 1999, now presents itself once again in the unspoilt monumentality of the original Wallot building. Although the symbolic accessibility of the glass dome above the parliament is intended to show that the people are above the parliament in democracy, it does not mean that the building is really close to the people. Advance registrations and long queues in front of the building, which for security reasons now take place at security gates far away from the building, indicate a different picture.30 In contrast to this is the former parliament of the Federal Republic of Germany in Bonn. The building, designed by Günter Behnisch, stands out above all for its transparency, openness and lightness. Characteristics which, like the choice of a circular plenary hall type, were chosen on the basis of democratic ideals. However, the architecture, "without extravagances," also brought the building the criticism of insufficient representation.31 It seems that the attributes of state representation and democratic ideals are difficult to reconcile.

25

Fig 007 | © Thomaz Farkas | Construção de Brasilia

26

An attempt to do so was made in Brasilia, the artificially created planned capital of Brazil. The parliament building, designed by Oscar Niemeyer and completed in 1960, is regarded as a flagship of modern representative architecture. Its unique location in the cityscape shows its uniqueness. At the apex of a triangle formed by the President's office and the Supreme Court, the Parliament plays the most prominent role. At the end of a road axis lined with ministries, the building thus forms the end of the city center. The building complex itself is divided into three components. A high-rise tower block forms the office wing for the Members of Parliament. The low-rise building in front is characterized by a bowl-shaped roof construction above the House of Representatives on one side and a dome as the upper end for the Senate on the other. With an accessible roof construction, the parliament was given the opportunity to be entered by visitors at any time, even in times of the military dictatorship.32 The people as sovereign over the parliament is a motif that was later also to be used in the Berlin Reichstag.

Another iconic parliament building is the building of the National Parliament of Bangladesh in Dakka, designed

by Louis I. Kahn. The architect's design tried to combine western and eastern traditions as well as forms and materials. The location of the building complex at an artificial lake, is based on Bengali tradition regarding the importance of the element water. Extensive squares and stairways surround the citadel-like monument. On the east side, there are cylindrical structures that function as apartments. Kahn’s central design philosophy was to optimize the use of space while being representative of Bengali culture. The overall external effect of the building is influenced by huge openings in basic geometric shapes. The construction of the parliament building, for which the foundation stone was laid in 1961, was interrupted by the Bangladesh war and could therefore only be completed in 1982. Louis Kahn did not live to see the completion of the building. Today, the building is considered not least because of its construction history as a symbol of Bangladesh’s independence and as a successful modern interpretation of the local Mogul architecture.33 An example of more recent representative architecture that carries the motif of public accessibility is the Australian Parliament building in Canberra. Opened in 1988, this comparatively recent example of national parliament architecture is located on a very prominent site in the capital. Capitol Hill is surrounded by a ring-shaped street and forms a topographical opposite to Central Hill in the center of Canberra. The concept is to create a meeting place between the two chambers of parliament, the government and the people in one building. The parliament, here as a buried structure, is practically fully accessible, similar to Brasilia. The monumental dimensions, which make the building the fifth largest parliament building in the world, can only be seen from the air.

An oversized steel construction for the Australian flag on the roof of the parliament becomes the only truly representative element.34 The question of how a building deliberately planned for political purposes should affect its environment is linked to the consideration of whether this question is at all relevant to the functioning of the political system.35 However, an architecturally attractive and at the same time functionally successful parliament building is by no means a guarantee for a functioning democracy. Numerous examples, such as the provincial parliament of the Indian state of Punjab in Chandigarh, repeatedly shaken by religious conflicts, the Parliament Island of civil war-torn Sri Lanka, or the previously mentioned parliament of Bangladesh in Dakka, suggest that parliament buildings hardly play a role in political stability. Whereby the predicate: “functionally successful” has no claim to general validity. The historian and publicist, Michael S. Cullen, completely rejects a representative image of parliament buildings and points out that great parliaments have met in the "most impossible places."36 The representative parliamentary architecture in Budapest could also not guarantee parliamentary representation for decades. The people judge a parliament not by its architecture, but by the quality of its debates, the clarity of its arguments or the transparency of its decisions.37 Cullen compares the importance of architectural planning of parliaments with that of libraries or airports.38 Nevertheless, as a unique building in the state structure, it can be argued that the parliament should be given a special status compared to other state buildings.39

27

2.5

Plenum fraction or the opposition. The seating arrangement is fully oriented towards the Speaker of the Parliament and the debating speaker and thus follows the classical parliamentary principle. There are many different variations and variants of this basic form. For example, a form extended in a straight line from the center to a horseshoe shape or a much flatter curved arrangement. The example of the German Bundestag, in which the rows for the Federal Government and the Bundesrat are reserved for the Presidium on the right and the Bundesrat on the left, shows another aspect.

The alignment is achieved by juxtaposing the government and the deputies, no longer just the speaker in the hall. A spatial frontal position of the seats of the deputies and those of the government conveys a memorable image of "opposite and against each other."3

When comparing the plenary hall types of all UN member states, there are only five different arrangements which will be compared below. Although each country believes that its parliament is a unique expression of national identity, the homogeneity of these five typologies testifies to a systematic lack of innovation.1

Semi-circular arrangement | French type With the French Revolution, this seating arrangement, which finds its origins in the amphitheatre of classical antiquity, celebrated its breakthrough on the political stage. The plenary hall in the Palais Bourbon, which was to house the French parliament from 1798 onwards, is regarded as the model for the semicircular seating arrangements of today's plenary halls and can be found in almost a third of the parliaments of all UN member states. The so-called French type is therefore the most widespread type worldwide. A total of 654 seats for the French delegates are distributed in the central assembly room. The benches in the first row are usually reserved for members of the government and representatives of committees.

The ascending rows of seats ensure visibility from all seats. The focus is on the speaker's desk in the center of the semicircular arrangement. Behind the speaker's desk is the President of the Parliament who chairs the session in the hall.2 In the classic French type, alignment of the plenary is largely prevented. All members of the French Parliament sit in equal seats regardless of whether they belong to the government

28

Opposing Benches | British type One type that probably most impressively depicts the confrontation and the counterpart, is the British type.

It is characterized by two rows of benches facing each other, which were originally intended for government and opposition.

Apart from the British House of Commons, this type can be found above all in the parliaments of the Commonwealth countries. Like the House of Lords, the British House of Commons is located in the Palace of Westminster. Both chambers orientate themselves in their seating arrangement to that of the Roman Senate in ancient times. Rising benches face each other frontally and the political camps sit in direct confrontation with each other. A wide central aisle opens between them, at the end of which the "speaker" sits in a raised position. In front of the rows of benches on both sides is a red line, the so-called "Bianca Line."

The distance between both lines is two sword lengths.

In British sessions, the Speaker of the House plays a similar role to the President of the Bundestag in Germany or the President of the National Council in Austria. In front of the desk of the table is the "Table of the House" on which the ceremonial mace is placed. The shape of today's plenary hall is due to the fact that it was built as a chapel in Westminster Palace. The former altar of the chapel is now the Speaker's chair.

The original choir stalls, formerly intended for the clergy, served as seating for the members for almost 300 years. The relative narrowness of the Lower House is due to its original sacred use. After its destruction by

German aerial bombs in 1941, the House of Commons voted to rebuild it according to original plans with a few technical improvements. There are only 437 seats for 630 members of parliament, of which only 346 are in the benches. For well-attended sessions, such as important votes, it is therefore necessary to use gallery seats, standing places or steps.4 Despite the narrow space in the House of Commons, a spatial change or even enlargement after the destruction was not approved.

Winston Churchill, a strong advocate of reconstruction in the traditional form, argued with the expected emptiness in a supposedly larger hall in most debates.

Likewise, in important decisions about density and crush, the sense of urgency should be conveyed. The debate culture in the British "House of Commons" requires a limited room size. Every MP speaks from his or her seat, spontaneous interjections and dialogues between government and opposition, as is customary in the House of Commons, would not be possible in a larger room. There are no fixed seats, nor is there a speaker’s podium. Only the "front benches" are reserved for the government and opposition leaders.5

29

Arrangement in the form of a horseshoe The previously mentioned deviation from the French type in the form of a horseshoe-shaped seating arrangement in the plenary hall, applies in about a quarter of the parliaments of all UN member states. To be more precise, it is a hybrid between the British and French layouts. The seats opposite each other bend at one end to form a semicircle. This type is mainly found in Commonwealth countries like Australia or Malaysia but also in Spain or in a modified form with straight segments, in Israel. Louis Kahn chose to use this shape in his famous proposal for the parliament in Dhaka.

Classroom type The classroom type focuses on one speaker frontally.

Seats in rows are arranged in a slightly ascending order. The classroom type is usually found in countries that are more likely to be found in the lower third of the democracy ranking.9 The traditional classroom layout from the time of industrialization serves as a model here. With straight or slightly curved benches, the representatives sit opposite the government or the ruler. The symbolism that stands for this arrangement can easily be compared to that of a classroom with frontal teaching. Here too, it is usually less about real voting or two-way communication and more about a one-way transfer of information and propaganda.

Obedience and agreement are required, as in the Chinese Parliament. It is not surprising that mainly authoritarian regimes rely on this type. However, one of the most famous examples of contemporary parliament architecture with a plenary hall of this layout, is the parliament in Brasilia by Oskar Niemeyer. The choice of this type seems to be related to Niemeyer's affinity to communism.

Circular arrangement The circular seating arrangement is the most recent of the five known types. This may be one of the reasons there are only eleven parliaments in the world in which this form of plenary chamber has been implemented.6 In a circular arrangement, usually about 3/4 of the circle takes the place of the members of parliament, with the remaining section reserved for the presidium and government. To ensure better audibility and visibility, the rows of seats are arranged in ascending order. The geometric center of the circle usually remains empty and the speaker's desk is located in front of the president, as in the French type.

The plenary hall of the German Bundestag in Bonn, which was designed by Behnisch and inaugurated in 1992, was also given a circular seating arrangement.

For the German Parliament, however, the circular seating arrangement had only a short period of use, since in the Reichstag building, which was renovated

by Norman Foster, a semicircular arrangement again followed. The extensive discussions about the Bundestag in Bonn before the planning, reflected the enormous importance of the shape of the conference hall for the political self-image.7 Proponents of the circular seating arrangement for the plenary hall of the Federal Republic of Germany were convinced of its positive effect on the culture of debate. Sitting in a circle as a symbol of togetherness and the density required for a good debating culture were considered to be leitmotifs.8

30

31

2.5.2 Geometry & Interpretation

radius of the circle-arc segment must be larger than for a full circle. The resulting space thus has comparatively less density and less concentration.

The different types of plenary halls and their seating arrangements are based on simple geometries.

The shape of the layout is always attributed a symbolism and meaning in the political context. Apart from criteria such as audibility and visibility, which have to be solved not only architecturally but also technically, there is a superordinate level of self-image and representation within the parliament. In the following, the symbolism of the underlying original geometries will be examined in an abstract way. Back rows are neglected and considered as individual lines. There are only two elements; speaker and audience. Point and line (= many points).

Parallel with circle-arc-segment The classic horseshoe shape is, as already mentioned, a hybrid between opposite rows of benches and the connecting semicircular segment. The characteristics of the based geometric models mix and/or add up. The advantages of the confrontation as well as the connecting end of the curved line and the resulting increased focus on a center point or, in this case, a center line, apply. In contrast to the parallel shape, the space is more introverted and, in comparison to an arc, denser and more concentrated.

Circle The circle can be understood as a line returning to itself on which all points are at the same distance from the center. As the simplest and at the same time most perfect geometric figure, the circle is subject to simple laws that are limited to the center and radius.

In this simplicity and equality lies the symbolic power of the circle as a sign of naturalness, harmony, emancipation and isonomy.11 In relation to the space a circle spans, a certain introversion cannot be denied. The line of the circle, which always bends towards the center, points in the end to itself. Accordingly, a general concentration towards the center, but also a certain seclusion and rejection character is given. With reference to the already mentioned Germanic thing, the thesis is taught that the circle is the most natural form of assembly. Historical references like the King's Round Table Artus or early Christian representations of the holy Communion, confirm this assumption.12

Parallels As two lines of the same direction, parallels are meant to never meet. However, the slightest deviation of one of the two lines in their alignment would invalidate this state. The space spanned between these lines is a space of the opposite. Two lines are equally opposed and generate a field of tension and confrontation. Proponents of this layout believe that in the context of assembly, ideal conditions for a healthy culture of debate are created. The crucial element is the distance, which is kept as small as possible to promote or even provoke a dialogue between two sides. The parallelism also creates two open ends, whose question of function is usually answered with entrance and moderation.

Semicircle The characteristics of the arc are naturally very similar to those of the circle. However, one of the most obvious differences is the opening which introduces a new component unknown to the circle. The missing segment of the circle, "lost" by cutting, generates a question that must be answered. Is there a counterpart opposite the curved line or does the open space remain empty, so that the curved line concentrates only on its geometric center? An opposite creates a space of confrontation and thus an ambivalent space of a "together" and of "opposite." In order to be able to guarantee a certain number of points (seats) with a fixed distance on the semicircle line, the required

Line The one-dimensionality of the line naturally prevents a room from being spanned. With regard to the layout of the plenary hall, an element has to be considered that could be neglected in the analysis of the other typologies concerning space; the speaker, which is a fixed point opposite the line. Only the consideration of this point allows an_ The parallelism also creates two open ends, whose question of function is usually answered with entrance and moderation.

32

33

Fig 007.1 | Deutscher Bundestag Bonn - Plenarsaal Layout

34

Fig 007.2 | Plenarsaal, Deutscher Bundestag - Bonn

35

2.6

Parliament buildings Data analysis

35%

3%

7% XL: > 500.000m3

XS: <5000m3

S: 5000m - 50.000m 3

3

7% L: 300.000m3 - 500.000m3

48%

M: 50.000m3 - 300.000m3

Fig 008 - Volume of Parlamentbuilding - Percentage

36

FRAUENANTEIL PARLAMENT 70% Volumen Parlamentsbau 2.500.000

60%

50%

2.000.000

40% 1.500.000

30%

1.000.000 20%

500.000 10%

0% 2

4

6

8

0

10

2

4

6

8

10

DEMOKRATIE-INDEX

DEMOKRATIE-INDEX

Fig 009 - Korrelation: Volume of Parlamentbuilding - Democracy Index

Fig 010 - Korrelation: Women in Parlament - Democracy Index

Considering parliamentary buildings of authoritarian regimes such as the Parliament in Bucharest, which was to become the largest administrative building in the world, one could conclude that a low democracy index is an indication of the size of parliamentary buildings. Trying to relate the size of the parliament and the volume of the building with the democracy index of the respective country, however, no clear correlation can be found. This may also be due to the fact that comparatively small countries with authoritarian regimes, especially in Africa, are in the lower third of the democracy index ratings. It should be noted that the four largest parliament buildings are in North Korea, Myanmar, China and Romania. On the other hand, the graph comparing all the parliaments studied in terms of the proportion of women in parliament and the democracy index, shows a tendency that is not surprising. The more women are represented in a parliament, the higher the democracy index was found.

Historical events such as the end of World War II or the collapse of the USSR can be read in the time graph showing the years of construction of the parliaments.

Anzahl Bauten 30

21

17

20

10

26

25

9

7

16

12

2

19

23 14

1

0 Baujahr

- 1800

1800 - 1900

1910

1920

1930

1940

1950

1960

Fig 011 - Parlamente | Baujahr

37

1970

1980

1990

2000

2010

9.87 Norway

9.58 Iceland

9.39 Sweden

9.26 New Zealand

9.22 Denmark

9.03 Switzerland

9.15 Canada

9.14 Finland

9.09 Australia

8.89 Netherlands

8.81 Luxembourg

9.15 Ireland

8.68 Germany

8.29 Austria

8.21 Malta

8.53 United Kingdom

8.08 Spain

8.22 Mauritius

8.38 Urugay

7.96 United States

7.71 Italy

8.00 South Korea

8.07 Costa Rica

7.99 Japan

7.69 Czech Republic

7.78 Belgium

7.80 France

7.81 Botswana

7.97 Estonia

7.97 Chile

7.88 Cape Verde

7.84 Portugal

7.79 Israel

7.23 India

7.50 Slovenia

7.24 South Africa

7.50 Lithuania

7.59 Cyprus

7.29 Greece

7.02 Jamaica

7.38 Latvia

7.10 Slovakia

7.19 East Timor

7.05 Panama

7.03 Bulgaria

7.16 Trinidad and Tobago

6.76 Poland

6.39 Indonesia

7.02 Argentina

6.97 Brazil

6.57 Croatia

6.63 Ghana

6.63 Hungary

6.71 Philippines

6.98 Suriname

6.41 Tunisia

6.41 Serbia

6.38 Romania

6.54 Dominican Republic

5.96 El Salvador

6.96 Colombia

6.50 Mongolia

6.64 Lesotho

6.60 Peru

6.19 Mexico

6.88 Malaysia

6.19 Sri Lanka

5.85 Moldova

6.24 Paraguay

6.25 Namibia

5.61 Zambia

6.38 Singapore

6.15 Senegal

6.67 Guyana

6.03 Papua New Guinea

5.87 Macedonia

5.74 Montenegro

5.60 Guatemala

5.98 Albania

5.50 Georgia

6.27 Ecuador

5.63 Honduras

5.70 Bolivia

5.57 Bangladesh

5.74 Benin

5.41 Mali

5.69 Ukraine

5.85 Fiji

5.41 Tanzania

5.49 Malawi

5.11 Kenya

5.11 Kyrgyzstan

3.63 Nicaragua

5.20 Uganda

4.37 Turkey

4.63 Thailand

3.16 Venezuela

5.35 Liberia

5.30 Bhutan

4.63 Lebanon

5.22 Madagascar

4.98 Bosnia Herzegoniva

5.18 Nepal

4.75 Burkina Faso

4.99 Morocco

4.44 Nigeria

3.85 Mozambique

4.66 Sierra Leone

4.17 Pakistan

3.59 Cambodia

3.83 Myanmar

4.06 Iraq

4.79 Armenia

3.82 Mauritania

3.50 Algeria

4.91 Haiti

3.93 Jordan

3.85 Kuwait

3.76 Niger

3.35 Ethopia

3.61 Gabon

3.71 Comoros

3.28 Cameroon

3.13 Belarus

3.08 Vietnam

3.00 Cuba

3.10 Togo

3.62 Angola

4.15 Côte d‘Ivoire

2.94 Russia

3.36 Egypt

3.19 Qatar

3.32 China

3.14 Guinea

3.03 Swaziland

3.35 Rwanda

2.94 Kazakhstan

3.16 Zimbabwe

3.04 Oman

4.31 Gambia

3.31 Congo, Democratic Republic of the

2.87 Djibouti

2.71 Bahrain

2.97 Afghanistan

2.75 United Arab Emirates

2.65 Azerbaijan

2.33 Burundi

2.37 Eritrea

2.15 Sudan

2.19 Libya

1.95 Yemen

2.37 Laos

2.45 Iran

1.49 Congo, Republi of the

1.93 Tajikistan

2.01 Uzbekistan

1.98 Guinea- Bissau

1.93 Saudi Arabia

1.72 Turkmenistan

1.92 Equatorial Guinea

1.52 Central African Republic

1.61 Chad

1.43 Syria

1.08 North Korea

Andorra

Antigua and Barbuda

Bahamas

Barbados

Belize

Brunei

Monaco

Nauru

Palau

Fig 012 - Plenarsaaltypus - Sortierung nach Demokratieindex Dominica

Grenada

Kiribati

Liechtenstein

Maldives

38

Marshall Islands

Micronesia

27% Classroom (CR)

31%

Semicircle (SC)

26%

Horseshoe (HS)

5%

Circle (CI)

10%

British (BR)

Fig 013 - Type of plenary hall - Percentage

The analysis of the collected data shows that the French type is the most common type of plenary halls in comparison to all national parliament buildings of the 193 UN member states.

If the Democracy Index, established by the magazine, "The Economist," is put into context with the layout of the plenary hall, it becomes clear that the classroom type is used in the least democratic countries. The type showing the highest average of democracy index is the British type with opposite rows of benches. The circular type scores comparatively poorly. However, this hall layout is represented only ten times in the compared parliament buildings. Among them, Jordan, Sudan and Uzbekistan with below-average low democracy indexes.

DEMOKRATIE-INDEX 0

2

4

6

6,74 6,32 5,86

BR HS SC

4,47 4,44

CI CR

Fig 014 - Korrelation: Type of Plenary Hall - Demovracy Index

39

8

10

Andorra

United Arab Emirates

Afghanistan

Antigua and Barbuda

Albania

Argentina

Angola

Armenia

Austria

Australia

Azerbaijan

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Barbados

Bangladesh

Belgium

Burkina Faso

Bulgaria

Bahrain

Burundi

Benin

Brunei

Bolivia

Brazil

Bahamas

Bhutan

Botswana

Belarus

Belize

Canada

Democratic Republic of Congo

Central African Republic

Congo

Switzerland

Côte d'Ivoire

Chile

Cameroon

China

Colombia

Costa rica

Cuba

Cap Verde

Cyprus

Czech Republic

Germany

Djibouti

Denmark

Dominica

Dominican Republic

Algeria

Ecuador

Fig 015 - Nationale Parlamentsbauwerke - Teil 1

Estonia

Egypt

Eritrea

Spain

Ethiopia

Finland

Fiji

Federated States of Micronesia

France

Gabon

United Kingdom

Grenada

Georgia

Ghana

Gambia

Guinea

Equatorial Guinea

Greece

Guatemala

Guinea Bissau

Honduras

Guyana

Croatia

Haiti

Hungary

Indonesia

Ireland

Israel

India

Iraq

Iran

Iceland

Italy

Jamaica

Jordan

Japan

Kenya

Kyrgystan

Cambodia

Kiribati

Comoros

Saint Kitts and Nevis

North Korea

Korea

Kuweit

Saint Lucia

Lebanon

Laos

Kazakhstan

Liechtenstein

Lithuania

Luxembourg

Sri Lanka

Liberia

Lesotho

Monaco

Latvia

Lybia

Morocco

Moldavia

Macedonia

Montenegro

Madagascar

Marshall Islands

Mali

Myanmar

Mongolia

Mauritania

Malta

Mauritius

Malaysia

Maldives

Malawi

Mexico

Mozambique

Netherlands

Nigeria

Namibia

Niger

Nicaragua

Oman

Norway

Nepal

Nauru

New Zealand

Panama

Peru

Papua New Guinea

Philippines

Pakistan

Poland

Palestine

Portugal

Palau

Paraguay

Qatar

Romania

Serbia

Russia

Rwanda

Fig 016 - Nationale Parlamentsbauwerke - Teil 1

Saudi Arabia

Solomon Islands

Seychelles

Sudan

Sweden

San Marino

Singapore

Slovenia

Slovakia

Sierra Leone

Senegal

Somalia

Surimane

South Sudan

Sao Tome and Principe

El Salvador

Syria

Swaziland

Chad

Togo

Thailand

Tajikistan

East Timor

Turkmenistan

Tunisia

Tonga

Turkey

Trinidad und Tobago

Tuvalu

Taiwan

Uganda

Tanzania

Ukraine

United States of America

Uruguay

Uzbekistan

Venezuela

Vietnam

Vanuatu

Samoa

Kosovo

South Africa

Zambia

Zimbabwe

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines

Yemen

Par l ament s baut en Vgl .

Kühn, C. andK. Br andl ( 201 4) .

Pl enum pl acesofpowercat al ogueAus t r i anPav i l i on, LaBi ennal edi Venez i a201 4.

Bas el , Bi r khäus er .

Count r y

Popul at i on ( MI O. )

LandAr ea ( km² )

Bui l t ( decades )

Ty peofPl enar yHal l ( BR/ SC/ HS/ CI / CR)

Vol ume

Si z e ( XS/ S/ M/ L/ XL)

MP

Womeni nPar l i ament ( i nPr oz ent )

179.000 12.500 91.200 15.700 237.900 15.500 218.000 260.200 1.092.700 549.800 397.500 7.300 15.500 630.400 205.000 212.100 60.500 7.600 104.100 92.600 72.000 205.000 21.900 326.700 196.500 40.800 11.500 24.200 188.700 56.900 417.800 88.300 86.000 77.900 221.600 1.611.000 121.700 41.400 155.600 56.700 78.900 80.700 467.500 31.500 50.500 374.700 300.000 27.000 3.600 152.900 59.700 93.200 26.900 138.100 4.500 34.700 114.500 6.200 24.700 27.600 195.600 160.100 152.400 34.100 273.600 334.100 28.000 153.900 4.800 11.800 143.100 18.500 17.900 35.200

M S M S M S M M XL XL L S S XL M M M S M M M M S L M S S S M M L M M M M XL M S M M M M L S M L L S XS M M M S M XS S M S S S M M M S M L S M XS S M S S S

249 140 462 28 220 19 257 131 150 183 122 38 40 297 30 110 150 32 83 47 130 42 62 513 33 240 127 105 132 180 338 72 105 188 120 2.959 166 33 136 57 251 151 612 56 200 492 179 55 32 183 65 137 596 84 100 150 101 547 14 50 200 577 120 53 150 631 275 300 15 158 114 102 69 92

27,7% 20,0% 31,6% 50,0% 36,8% 10,5% 36,6% 10,7% 26,0% 32,2% 15,6% 13,2% 10,0% 6,4% 16,7% 27,3% 41,3% 3,1% 8,4% 8,5% 25,4% 21,4% 9,5% 8,6% 0,0% 24,6% 18,9% 30,5% 20,3% 31,1% 26,0% 20,8% 12,4% 14,9% 15,8% 23,6% 19,9% 3,0% 7,4% 33,3% 9,2% 15,2% 48,9% 12,5% 20,0% 8,9% 37,4% 12,7% 21,9% 20,8% 38,5% 41,6% 14,9% 32,1% 24,0% 22,0% 23,8% 38,8% 0,0% 16,0% 41,5% 26,2% 14,2% 9,4% 11,3% 36,5% 10,9% 19,7% 33,3% 13,9% 21,9% 13,7% 30,4% 0,0%

Ty pol ogy

Afghanistan 29.824.536 Albania 3.162.083 Algeria 39.666.519 Andorra 78.360 Angola 20.820.525 Antigua and Barbuda 89.069 Argentinia 41.086.927 Armenia 2.969.081 Australia 22.683.600 Austria 8.462.446 Azerbaijan 9.297.507 Bahamas 388.019 Bahrain 1.317.827 Bangladesh 154.695.368 Barbados 283.221 Belarus 9.495.826 Belgium 11.142.157 Belize 359.287 Benin 10.050.702 Bhutan 774.830 Bolivia 10.496.285 Bosnia and Herzogovina 3.833.916 Botswana 2.262.485 Brazil 198.656.019 Brunei 412.238 Bulgaria 7.304.632 Burkina Faso 16.460.141 Burundi 9.849.569 Cambodia 15.577.899 Cameroon 23.344.179 Candada 35.939.927 Cap Verde 520.502 Central African Republic 4.900.274 Chad 14.037.472 Chile 17.948.141 China 1.376.048.943 Colombia 48.228.704 Comoros 788.414 Congo 4.620.330 Costa Rica 4.807.850 Côte d'Ivoire 22.701.556 Croatia 4.240.317 Cuba 11.389.562 Cyprus 1.165.300 Czech Republic 10.543.186 Democratic Republic of Congo 77.266.814 Denmark 5.669.081 Djibouti 887.861 Dominica 72.680 Dominican Republic 10.528.391 East Timor 1.184.765 Ecuador 16.144.363 Egypt 91.508.084 El Salvador 6.126.583 Equatorial Guinea 845.060 Eritrea 5.227.791 Estonia 1.312.558 Ethiopia 99.390.750 Federated States of Micronesia 104.460 Fiji 892.145 Finland 5.503.457 France 64.395.345 Gabon 1.725.292 Gambia 1.990.924 Georgia 3.999.812 Germany 80.688.545 Ghana 27.409.893 Greece 10.954.617 Grenada 106.825 Guatemala 16.342.897 Guinea 12.608.590 Guinea Bissau 1.844.325 Guyana 767.085 Haiti 10.711.067

652.230 27.400 2.381.740 470 1.246.700 440 2.736.690 28.480 7.682.300 82.409 82.658 10.010 760 130.170 430 202.910 30.280 22.810 112.760 38.394 1.083.300 51.000 566.730 8.459.420 5.270 108.560 273.600 25.680 176.520 472.710 9.093.510 4.030 622.980 1.259.200 743.532 9.327.490 1.109.500 1.861 341.500 51.060 318.000 5.960 106.440 9.240 77.240 267.050 42.430 23.180 750 48.320 14.870 248.360 995.450 20.720 28.050 101.000 42.390 100.000 3.170 18.270 303.890 547.660 257.670 10.120 69.490 348.570 227.540 128.900 340 107.160 245.720 28.120 196.850 27.560

1950 1950 1580 1980 1900 1950 1980 1880 2000 1810 1970 1980 1870 1930 1780 1970 2000 1950 1920 1980 1960 1960 2000 1880 1960 1980 2000 1960 1920 1980 1960 2010 1990 1950 1920 1970 1980 1950 1960 1910 1920 2000 1720 1970 1920 2010 1990 1950 2000 1950 1920 1970 1960 1990 1850 1930 1980 1990 1930 1720 1990 2010 2010 1990 1960 1840 1700 1930 44 1960 2000 1830 -

CR CR SC SC SC BR SC SC HS SC CR BR SC HS BR SC SC BR CR HS CR CR CR CR HS CR SC CR CR HS BR CR CR CR SC CR SC CR CR HS HS SC CR HS SC CR HS CR BR CR SC SC HS SC SC CR CR CI HS SC SC SC HS SC SC HS SC BR HS SC CR HS CR

Si z e S/ M/ L/ XL)

M S M S M S M M XL XL L S S XL M M M S M M M M S L M S S S M M L M M M M XL M S M M M M L S M L L S XS M M M S M XS S M S S S M M M S M L S M XS S M S S S

Sheet1

MP

Womeni nPar l i ament ( i nPr oz ent )

Popul at i on Perl egi s l at or

Co2Emi s s i on ( kt )

249 140 462 28 220 19 257 131 150 183 122 38 40 297 30 110 150 32 83 47 130 42 62 513 33 240 127 105 132 180 338 72 105 188 120 2.959 166 33 136 57 251 151 612 56 200 492 179 55 32 183 65 137 596 84 100 150 101 547 14 50 200 577 120 53 150 631 275 300 15 158 114 102 69 92

27,7% 20,0% 31,6% 50,0% 36,8% 10,5% 36,6% 10,7% 26,0% 32,2% 15,6% 13,2% 10,0% 6,4% 16,7% 27,3% 41,3% 3,1% 8,4% 8,5% 25,4% 21,4% 9,5% 8,6% 0,0% 24,6% 18,9% 30,5% 20,3% 31,1% 26,0% 20,8% 12,4% 14,9% 15,8% 23,6% 19,9% 3,0% 7,4% 33,3% 9,2% 15,2% 48,9% 12,5% 20,0% 8,9% 37,4% 12,7% 21,9% 20,8% 38,5% 41,6% 14,9% 32,1% 24,0% 22,0% 23,8% 38,8% 0,0% 16,0% 41,5% 26,2% 14,2% 9,4% 11,3% 36,5% 10,9% 19,7% 33,3% 13,9% 21,9% 13,7% 30,4% 0,0%

119.777 22.586 85.858 2.799 94.638 4.687 159.871 22.664 151.224 46.242 76.209 10.211 32.945 520.859 9.440 86.326 74.281 11.228 121.092 16.486 80.740 91.283 35.912 387.423 12.492 30.435 129.607 93.805 126.650 129.690 106.331 7.229 46.669 74.667 149.568 465.039 290.534 23.893 33.973 84.348 90.444 28.082 18.610 20.809 52.716 157.046 31.671 16.143 2.271 57.532 18.227 117.841 153.537 72.936 8.451 37.852 12.996 181.702 7.461 17.843 27.517 111.604 14.377 37.565 26.665 127.874 99.672 36.515 7.122 103.436 110.602 18.082 11.117 116.425

8.236 4.283 141.473 517 30.418 513 180.512 4.221 373.081 66.897 45.731 4.232 24.202 56.153 1.504 67.737 108.947 422 5.189 1.442 15.456 31.126 5.695 419.754 9.160 44.679 1.683 308 4.760 9.179 565.992 104 737 1.274 78.626 10.540.750 74.054 144 5.068 7.641 7.326 20.677 30.242 7.237 111.655 3.984 40.030 1.442 166 23.442 361 43.027 225.112 7.161 2.096 672 19.440 8.858 128 1.345 54.793 323.744 5.027 259 6.537 767.146 14.070 71.062 477 11.953 2.039 322 2.758 2.288

CO2Emi s s i ons ( met r i ct onspercapi t a)

0,3 1,4 3,5 6,6 1,6 5,9 4,5 1,4 16,9 8,0 5,1 11,1 19,3 0,4 5,4 7,3 10 1,4 0,5 1,9 1,5 8,1 2,8 2,2 22,9 5,9 0,1 0,03 0,3 0,4 15,9 0,2 0,2 0,1 4,4 7,6 1,5 0,2 1,1 1,5 0,4 4,8 2,7 6,3 10,4 0,1 7,1 1,6 2,3 2,2 0,3 2,7 2,7 1,1 2,7 0,1 15,1 0,1 1,2 1,5 10,1 5 2,9 0,1 1,5 9,3 0,5 6,4 4,5 0,8 45 0,2 0,2 3,4 0,2

GDP ( $perCapi t a)

HDI HumanDev el opmentI ndex

DI Democr acyI ndex

DI Rat i o

1.531 9.403 14.193 37.200 6.006 19.640 18.200 8.417 44.598 43.661 10.125 23.491 24.591 1.851 26.488 18.185 39.752 7.937 1.557 7.816 5.196 9.393 16.099 11.716 52.482 16.044 1.488 551 3.263 2.972 44.057 6.520 594 2.182 22.346 13.206 13.357 1.429 6.277 14.918 3.258 21.210 10.200 30.873 30.407 746 44.916 3.270 10.877 13.262 2.227 11.372 10.530 8.351 34.739 1.200 26.946 1.500 3.331 8.792 39.981 38.847 19.430 1.700 7.582 45.802 4.082 25.877 12.425 7.454 1.221 1.386 7.200 1.732

0,37 0,75 0,74 0,85 0,51 0,76 0,81 0,73 0,94 0,89 0,73 0,79 0,80 0,51 0,82 0,80 0,90 0,70 0,44 0,61 0,68 0,74 0,70 0,73 0,86 0,78 0,34 0,35 0,56 0,51 0,91 0,65 0,35 0,39 0,83 0,73 0,72 0,50 0,59 0,77 0,46 0,82 0,77 0,85 0,87 0,43 0,92 0,47 0,72 0,71 0,60 0,73 0,69 0,67 0,59 0,39 0,86 0,44 0,64 0,73 0,88 0,89 0,68 0,44 0,75 0,92 0,58 0,87 0,75 0,63 0,41 0,42 0,64 0,48

2,48 5,67 3,95 3,35 6,84 4,09 9,22 8,62 3,15 2,53 5,86 3,62 8,05 6,00 4,93 5,84 5,11 7,87 7,12 6,72 3,52 3,60 4,27 3,66 9,08 7,81 1,57 1,50 7,84 3,14 6,62 3,71 2,91 7,96 3,31 6,93 3,52 7,53 7,94 2,11 9,11 2,90 6,67 7,24 5,87 3,18 6,64 1,77 2,37 7,85 3,83 5,49 9,03 7,92 3,76 2,97 5,88 8,64 6,86 7,45 5,92 3,14 1,93 6,05 3,94

5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55

Djibouti 887.861 23.180 2010 CR 27.000 S Dominica 72.680 750 1990 BR 3.600 XS Dominican Republic 10.528.391 48.320 1950 CR 152.900 M East Timor 1.184.765 14.870 2000 SC 59.700 M Ecuador 16.144.363 248.360 1950 SC 93.200 M Egypt 91.508.084 995.450 1920 HS 26.900 S El Salvador 6.126.583 20.720 1970 SC 138.100 M Equatorial Guinea 845.060 28.050 1960 SC 4.500 XS Eritrea 5.227.791 101.000 1990 34.700 S Estonia 1.312.558 42.390 1850 CR 114.500 M Vgl .

Kühn, C. an dK. Br andl ( 201 4) .

Pl enum pl a cesofpowercat a l ogueAus t r i an Pav i l i on, LaBi ennal edi Venez i a201 4.

Ba s el , Bi r khäus er .

Ethiopia 99.390.750 100.000 1930 CR 6.200 S Federated States of Micronesia 104.460 3.170 1980 CI 24.700 S Fiji 892.145 18.270 1990 HS 27.600 S Finland 5.503.457 303.890 1930 SC 195.600 M France 64.395.345 547.660 1720 SC 160.100 M Gabon 1.725.292 257.670 1990 SC 152.400 M P o p u l a t i o n L a n d A r e a B u i l t T y p e o f P l e n a r y H a l l S i z e Count r y Vol ume Gambia 1.990.924 10.120 2010 HS 34.100 S L/ ( MI O. ) ( km² ) ( d ecades ) ( BR/ SC/ HS/ CI / CR) ( XS/ S/ M/ XL) Georgia 3.999.812 69.490 2010 SC 273.600 M Ty pol ogy Germany 80.688.545 348.570 1990 SC 334.100 L Ghana 27.409.893 227.540 1960 HS 28.000 S Afghanistan 29.824.536 652.230 CR 179.000 M Greece 10.954.617 128.900 1840 SC 153.900 M Albania 3.162.083 27.400 1950 CR 12.500 S Grenada 106.825 340 1700 BR 4.800 XS Algeria 39.666.519 2.381.740 1950 SC 91.200 M Guatemala 16.342.897 107.160 1930 HS 11.800 S Andorra 78.360 470 1580 SC 15.700 S Guinea 12.608.590 245.720 1960 SC 143.100 M Angola 20.820.525 1.246.700 SC 237.900 M Guinea Bissau 1.844.325 28.120 2000 CR 18.500 S AntiguaGuyana and Barbuda 89.069 440 1980 BR 15.500 S 767.085 196.850 1830 HS 17.900 S Argentinia 41.086.927 2.736.690 1900 SC 218.000 M Haiti 10.711.067 27.560 CR 35.200 S Armenia 2.969.081 28.480 1950 SC 260.200 M Honduras 8.075.060 111.890 1950 CR 22.900 S Australia 22.683.600 7.682.300 1980 HS 1.092.700 XL Hungary 9.855.023 90.530 1900 HS 492.200 L Austria 8.462.446 82.409 1880 SC 549.800 XL Iceland 329.425 100.250 2000 HS 11.400 S Azerbaijan 9.297.507 82.658 2000 CR 397.500 L India 1.311.050.527 2.973.190 1920 HS 513.600 XL Bahamas 388.019 10.010 1810 BR 7.300 S Indonesia 257.563.815 1.811.570 1960 CR 168.800 M Bahrain 1.317.827 760 1970 SC 15.500 S Iran 79.109.282 1.628.550 2000 SC 369.400 L Bangladesh 154.695.368 130.170 1980 HS 630.400 XL Iraq 36.423.395 434.320 1980 SC 189.100 M Barbados 283.221 430 1870 BR 205.000 M Ireland 4.688.465 68.890 1740 HS 41.700 S Belarus 9.495.826 202.910 1930 SC 212.100 M Israel 8.064.036 21.640 1960 HS 209.500 M Belgium 11.142.157 30.280 1780 SC 60.500 M Italy 59.797.685 294.140 1690 HS 205.400 M Belize 359.287 22.810 1970 BR 7.600 S Jamaica 2.793.335 10.830 1960 BR 7.200 S Benin 10.050.702 112.760 2000 CR 104.100 M Japan 126.573.481 364.500 1930 SC 644.800 XL Bhutan 774.830 38.394 1950 HS 92.600 M Jordan 7.594.547 88.780 1990 CI 47.000 S Bolivia 10.496.285 1.083.300 1920 CR 72.000 M Kazakhastan 17.625.226 2.699.700 2000 HS 636.000 XL Bosnia and Herzogovina 3.833.916 51.000 1980 CR 205.000 M Kenya 46.050.302 569.140 1960 HS 57.100 M Botswana 2.262.485 566.730 1960 CR 21.900 S Kiribati 112.423 810 2000 HS 13.900 S Brazil 198.656.019 8.459.420 1960 CR 326.700 L Korea 50.293.439 97.100 1970 SC 561.300 XL Brunei 412.238 5.270 2000 HS 196.500 M Kosovo 1.823.149 10.887 1960 CR 47.600 S Bulgaria 7.304.632 108.560 1880 CR 40.800 S Kuwait 3.892.115 17.820 1990 SC 253.300 M Burkina Faso 16.460.141 273.600 1960 SC 11.500 S Kyrgystan 5.939.962 191.800 1970 CR 94.800 M Burundi 9.849.569 25.680 1980 CR 24.200 S Laos 6.802.023 230.800 1990 CR 23.200 S Cambodia 15.577.899 176.520 2000 CR 188.700 M Latvia 1.970.503 62.200 1860 HS 38.600 S Cameroon 23.344.179 472.710 1960 HS 56.900 M Lebanon 5.850.743 10.230 1930 SC 26.400 S Candada 35.939.927 9.093.510 1920 BR 417.800 L Lesotho 2.135.022 30.360 2010 CI 48.900 S Cap Verde 520.502 4.030 1980 CR 88.300 M Liberia 4.503.438 96.320 1950 CR 45.700 S Central African Republic 4.900.274 622.980 1960 CR 86.000 M Libya 6.278.438 1.759.540 2010 HS 252.200 M Chad 14.037.472 1.259.200 2010 CR 77.900 M Liechtenstein 37.531 160 2000 CI 14.700 S Chile 17.948.141 743.532 1990 SC 221.600 M Lithuania 2.878.405 62.674 2000 SC 128.300 M China 1.376.048.943 9.327.490 1950 CR 1.611.000 XL Luxembourg 567.110 2.590 1860 HS 8.500 S Colombia 48.228.704 1.109.500 1920 SC 121.700 M Macedonia 2.078.453 25.220 1930 CR 76.600 M Comoros 788.414 1.861 1970 CR 41.400 S Madagascar 24.235.390 581.540 1960 CR 20.400 S Congo 4.620.330 341.500 1980 CR 155.600 M Malawi 17.215.232 94.280 2000 HS 244.400 M Costa Rica 4.807.850 51.060 1950 HS 56.700 M Malaysia 30.331.007 328.550 1960 HS 175.200 M Côte d'Ivoire 22.701.556 318.000 1960 HS 78.900 M Maldives 363.657 300 2010 CR 27.000 S Croatia 4.240.317 5.960 1910 SC 80.700 M Mali 17.599.694 1.220.190 1960 CR 42.900 S Cuba 11.389.562 106.440 1920 CR 467.500 L Malta 418.670 320 2010 BR 20.800 S Cyprus 1.165.300 9.240 2000 HS 31.500 S Marshall Islands 52.993 180 1990 SC 37.000 S Czech Republic 10.543.186 77.240 1720 SC 50.500 M Mauritania 4.067.564 1.030.700 1960 CR 26.500 S Democratic Republic of Congo 77.266.814 267.050 1970 CR 374.700 L Mauritius 1.273.212 2.030 1970 HS 69.200 M Denmark 5.669.081 42.430 1920 HS 300.000 L Mexico 127.017.224 1.943.950 1980 SC 763.500 XL Djibouti 887.861 23.180 2010 CR 27.000 S Moldavia 4.068.897 32.854 1970 SC 72.600 M Dominica 72.680 750 1990 BR 3.600 XS Monaco 37.731 2 2010 SC 20.400 S Dominican Republic 10.528.391 48.320 1950 CR 152.900 M Mongolia 2.959.134 1.553.560 2000 HS 252.400 M East Timor 1.184.765 14.870 2000 SC 59.700 M Montenegro 625.781 13.450 1950 SC 16.600 S Ecuador 16.144.363 248.360 1950 SC 93.200 M Morocco 34.377.511 446.300 1930 SC 43.600 S Egypt 91.508.084 995.450 1920 HS 26.900 S Mozambique 27.977.863 786.380 1990 HS 16.500 S El Salvador 6.126.583 20.720 1970 SC 138.100 M Myanmar 53.897.154 653.290 2010 CR 1.516.100 XL Equatorial Guinea 845.060 28.050 1960 SC 4.500 XS Namibia 2.458.830 823.290 1910 BR 60.100 M Eritrea 5.227.791 101.000 1990 34.700 S Nauru 10.222 21 1990 HS 200 XS Estonia 1.312.558 42.390 1850 CR 114.500 M Nepal 28.513.700 143.350 1990 CR 134.700 M Ethiopia 99.390.750 100.000 1930 CR 6.200 S 33.730 1990 SC 160.700 M Federated Netherlands States of Micronesia 16.924.929 104.460 3.170 1980 CI 24.700 S New Zealand 4.528.526 263.310 1980 HS 170.500 M Fiji 892.145 18.270 1990 HS 27.600 S Nicaragua 6.082.032 120.340 2000 SC 215.300 M Finland 5.503.457 303.890 1930 SC 195.600 M Niger 19.899.120 1.266.700 1950 CR 18.900 S France 64.395.345 547.660 1720 SC 160.100 M Nigeria 182.201.962 910.770 2000 SC 90.600 M Gabon 1.725.292 257.670 1990 SC 152.400 M North Korea 25.155.317 120.410 1980 CR 1.452.300 XL Gambia 1.990.924 10.120 2010 HS 34.100 S Norway 5.210.967 304.250 1860 HS 78.500 M Georgia 3.999.812 69.490 2010 SC 273.600 M Oman 4.490.541 309.500 2010 BR 779.900 XL Germany 80.688.545 348.570 1990 SC 334.100 L Pakistan 188.924.874 770.880 1980 CR 220.000 M Ghana 27.409.893 227.540 1960 HS 28.000 S Palau 21.291 460 2000 HS 76.900 M Greece 10.954.617 128.900 1840 SC 153.900 M Palestine 4.668.466 6.020 1970 SC 8.400 S Grenada 106.825 340 1700 BR 4.800 XS Panama 3.929.141 74.340 2010 SC 61.500 M Guatemala 16.342.897 107.160 1930 HS 11.800 S 46 PapuaGuinea New Guina 7.619.321 452.860 1980 HS 169.200 M 12.608.590 245.720 1960 SC 143.100 M Paraguay 6.639.123 397.300 2000 SC 106.200 M Guinea Bissau 1.844.325 28.120 2000 CR 18.500 S Peru 31.376.670 1.280.000 1930 HS 47.500 S Guyana 767.085 196.850 1830 HS 17.900 S Philippines 100.699.395 298.170 1970 CR 289.900 M Haiti 10.711.067 27.560 CR 35.200 S

Par l ament s baut en

55 32 183 65 137 596 84 100 150 101 547 14 50 200 577 120 MP 53 150 631 275 249 300 140 15 462 158 28 114 220 102 19 69 257 92 131 128 150 198 183 63 122 543 38 555 40 290 297 328 30 166 110 120 150 630 32 63 83 475 47 150 130 107 42 350 62 46 513 300 33 120 240 65 127 120 105 132 132 100 180 128 338 120 72 73 105 188 188 25 120 141 2.959 60 166 123 33 151 136 192 57 222 251 85 151 147 612 70 56 33 200 147 492 69 179 498 55 101 32 24 183 76 65 81 137 395 596 250 84 433 100 104 150 19 101 599 547 150 14 121 50 92 200 113 577 360 120 687 53 169 150 84 631 340 275 16 300 132 15 71 158 111 114 80 102 130 69 290 92

12,7% 21,9% 20,8% 38,5% 41,6% 14,9% 32,1% 24,0% 22,0% 23,8% 38,8% 0,0% 16,0% 41,5% 26,2% 14,2% Womeni nPar l i ament ( i n9,4% Pr oz ent ) 11,3% 36,5% 10,9% 27,7% 19,7% 20,0% 33,3% 31,6% 13,9% 50,0% 21,9% 36,8% 13,7% 10,5% 30,4% 36,6% 0,0% 10,7% 25,8% 26,0% 10,1% 32,2% 41,3% 15,6% 12,0% 13,2% 17,1% 10,0% 3,1% 6,4% 26,5% 16,7% 16,3% 27,3% 26,7% 41,3% 31,0% 3,1% 12,7% 8,4% 9,5% 8,5% 12,0% 25,4% 26,2% 21,4% 19,7% 9,5% 6,5% 8,6% 16,3% 0,0% 33,3% 24,6% 1,5% 18,9% 19,2% 30,5% 25,0% 20,3% 18,0% 31,1% 3,1% 26,0% 25,0% 20,8% 11,0% 12,4% 16,0% 14,9% 20,0% 15,8% 23,4% 23,6% 28,3% 19,9% 33,3% 3,0% 20,5% 7,4% 16,7% 33,3% 10,4% 9,2% 5,9% 15,2% 8,8% 48,9% 12,9% 12,5% 9,1% 20,0% 25,2% 8,9% 11,6% 37,4% 42,4% 12,7% 21,8% 21,9% 20,8% 20,8% 14,5% 38,5% 17,3% 41,6% 17,0% 14,9% 39,6% 32,1% 9,9% 24,0% 41,3% 22,0% 5,3% 23,8% 29,5% 38,8% 37,3% 0,0% 31,4% 16,0% 41,3% 41,5% 13,3% 26,2% 5,6% 14,2% 16,3% 9,4% 39,6% 11,3% 1,2% 36,5% 20,6% 10,9% 0,0% 19,7% 12,9% 33,3% 18,3% 13,9% 2,7% 21,9% 15,0% 13,7% 22,3% 30,4% 27,2% 0,0%

S XS M M M S M XS S M S S S M M M Si z e S L/ S/ M/ XL) M L S M M S XS M S S M M S S S M S M S XL L XL S L XL S M S L XL M M S M M M M S S M XL M S M XL M M S S L XL M S S M S M S S M S M S L S M S M M M S M M XL S M M S S M M M M M S M S L S S S M S L M L XL S M XS S M M M S M S S S M XL XS M S XS M M S M S M S M M S M M M XL S M M XL L M S M M S XS M S M M M S S S M S

55 32 183 65 137 596 84 100 150 101 547 14 50 200 577 120 MP 53 150 631 275 249 300 140 15 462 158 28 114 220 102 19 69 257 92 131 128 150 198 183 63 122 543 38 555 40 290 297 328 30 166 110 120 150 630 32 63 83 475 47 150 130 107 42 350 62 46 513 300 33 120 240 65 127 120 105 132 132 100 180 128 338 120 72 73 105 188 188 25 120 141 2.959 60 166 123 33 151 136 192 57 222 251 85 151 147 612 70 56 33 200 147 492 69 179 498 55 101 32 24 183 76 65 81 137 395 596 250 84 433 100 104 150 19 101 599 547 150 14 121 50 92 200 113 577 360 120 687 53 169 150 84 631 340 275 16 300 132 15 71 158 111 114 80 102 130 69 290 92

12,7% 21,9% 20,8% 38,5% 41,6% 14,9% 32,1% 24,0% 22,0% 23,8% 38,8% 0,0% 16,0% 41,5% 26,2% 14,2% Womeni nPar l i ament ( i n9,4% Pr oz ent ) 11,3% 36,5% 10,9% 27,7% 19,7% 20,0% 33,3% 31,6% 13,9% 50,0% 21,9% 36,8% 13,7% 10,5% 30,4% 36,6% 0,0% 10,7% 25,8% 26,0% 10,1% 32,2% 41,3% 15,6% 12,0% 13,2% 17,1% 10,0% 3,1% 6,4% 26,5% 16,7% 16,3% 27,3% 26,7% 41,3% 31,0% 3,1% 12,7% 8,4% 9,5% 8,5% 12,0% 25,4% 26,2% 21,4% 19,7% 9,5% 6,5% 8,6% 16,3% 0,0% 33,3% 24,6% 1,5% 18,9% 19,2% 30,5% 25,0% 20,3% 18,0% 31,1% 3,1% 26,0% 25,0% 20,8% 11,0% 12,4% 16,0% 14,9% 20,0% 15,8% 23,4% 23,6% 28,3% 19,9% 33,3% 3,0% 20,5% 7,4% 16,7% 33,3% 10,4% 9,2% 5,9% 15,2% 8,8% 48,9% 12,9% 12,5% 9,1% 20,0% 25,2% 8,9% 11,6% 37,4% 42,4% 12,7% 21,8% 21,9% 20,8% 20,8% 14,5% 38,5% 17,3% 41,6% 17,0% 14,9% 39,6% 32,1% 9,9% 24,0% 41,3% 22,0% 5,3% 23,8% 29,5% 38,8% 37,3% 0,0% 31,4% 16,0% 41,3% 41,5% 13,3% 26,2% 5,6% 14,2% 16,3% 9,4% 39,6% 11,3% 1,2% 36,5% 20,6% 10,9% 0,0% 19,7% 12,9% 33,3% 18,3% 13,9% 2,7% 21,9% 15,0% 13,7% 22,3% 30,4% 27,2% 0,0%

16.143 1.442 2.271 166 57.532 23.442 18.227 361 117.841 43.027 Sheet1 153.537 225.112 72.936 7.161 8.451 2.096 37.852 672 12.996 19.440 181.702 8.858 7.461 128 17.843 1.345 27.517 54.793 111.604 323.744 14.377 5.027 Popul at i on Co2Emi s s i on 37.565 259 Pe rl egi s l at or ( kt ) 26.665 6.537 127.874 767.146 99.672 14.070 119.777 8.236 36.515 71.062 22.586 4.283 7.122 477 85.858 141.473 103.436 11.953 2.799 517 110.602 2.039 94.638 30.418 18.082 322 4.687 513 11.117 2.758 159.871 180.512 116.425 2.288 22.664 4.221 63.086 8.447 151.224 373.081 49.773 43.735 46.242 66.897 5.229 3.849 76.209 45.731 2.414.458 2.341.897 10.211 4.232 464.079 452.977 32.945 24.202 272.791 618.197 520.859 56.153 111.047 139.287 9.440 1.504 28.244 34.639 86.326 67.737 67.200 64.795 74.281 108.947 94.917 337.648 11.228 422 44.339 8.298 121.092 5.189 266.470 1.278.922 16.486 1.442 50.630 22.296 80.740 15.456 164.722 236.248 91.283 31.126 131.572 14.084 35.912 5.695 2.444 42 387.423 419.754 167.645 610.066 12.492 9.160 15.193 6.450 30.435 44.679 59.879 98.559 129.607 1.683 49.500 7.370 93.805 308 51.530 3.374 126.650 4.760 19.705 7.531 129.690 9.179 45.709 21.108 106.331 565.992 17.792 323 7.229 104 61.691 808 46.669 737 33.396 50.604 74.667 1.274 1.501 51 149.568 78.626 20.414 12.349 465.039 10.540.750 9.452 10.378 290.534 74.054 16.898 9.491 23.893 144 160.499 3.015 33.973 5.068 89.663 1.775 84.348 7.641 136.626 227.482 90.444 7.326 4.278 972 28.082 20.677 119.726 1.639 18.610 30.242 5.981 2.413 20.809 7.237 1.606 103 52.716 111.655 27.671 2.468 157.046 3.984 18.452 3.270 31.671 40.030 255.055 456.270 16.143 1.442 40.286 7.765 2.271 166 1.572 57.532 23.442 38.936 14.696 18.227 361 7.726 2.571 117.841 43.027 87.032 60.653 153.537 225.112 111.911 4.382 72.936 7.161 124.474 9.129 8.451 2.096 23.643 3.560 37.852 672 538 1 12.996 19.440 47.602 6.503 181.702 8.858 112.833 158.106 7.461 128 37.426 34.106 17.843 1.345 66.109 4.991 27.517 54.793 176.098 2.053 111.604 323.744 506.117 93.872 14.377 5.027 36.616 59.859 37.565 259 30.834 44.376 26.665 6.537 52.830 74.288 127.874 767.146 555.661 158.112 99.672 14.070 1.331 33 36.515 71.062 35.367 2.248 7.122 477 55.340 10.230 103.436 11.953 68.643 7.118 110.602 2.039 82.989 5.526 18.082 322 241.359 51.959 11.117 2.758 347.239 96.940 116.425 2.288

1,6 2,3 2,2 0,3 2,7 2,7 1,1 2,7 0,1 15,1 0,1 1,2 1,5 10,1 5 2,9 CO2Emi s s i ons 0,1 ( met r i ct o nspercapi t a) 1,5 9,3 0,5 0,3 6,4 1,4 4,5 3,5 0,8 6,6 0,2 1,6 0,2 5,9 3,4 4,5 0,2 1,4 1 16,9 4,4 8,0 11,6 5,1 1,8 11,1 1,8 19,3 7,9 0,4 4 5,4 7,4 7,3 8,3 10 5,5 1,4 3 0,5 10,1 1,9 3 1,5 14,2 8,1 0,3 2,8 0,4 2,2 12,3 22,9 1,6 5,9 28,3 0,1 1,3 0,03 0,5 0,3 3,7 0,4 4,2 15,9 0,2 0,2 0,2 0,2 8,1 0,1 1,4 4,4 4,1 7,6 19,3 1,5 4,5 0,2 0,1 1,1 0,1 1,5 7,5 0,4 2,8 4,8 0,1 2,7 5,6 6,3 2 10,4 0,6 0,1 2,6 7,1 3,7 1,6 2,2 2,3 2,2 5,1 0,3 4,1 2,7 1,8 2,7 0,2 1,1 0,2 2,7 1,5 0,1 0,1 15,1 0,2 0,1 9,4 1,2 7,5 1,5 0,8 10,1 0,1 5 0,5 2,9 2,4 0,1 8,7 1,5 18,9 9,3 0,9 0,5 1,6 6,4 0,5 4,5 2,6 0,8 47 0,9 0,2 0,8 0,2 1,7 3,4 1 0,2

3.270 10.877 13.262 2.227 11.372 10.530 8.351 34.739 1.200 26.946 1.500 3.331 8.792 39.981 38.847 19.430 GDP 1.700 ( $p erCapi t a) 7.582 45.802 4.082 1.531 25.877 9.403 12.425 14.193 7.454 37.200 1.221 6.006 1.386 19.640 7.200 18.200 1.732 8.417 4.909 44.598 24.721 43.661 43.304 10.125 5.701 23.491 10.517 24.591 17.303 1.851 15.057 26.488 48.755 18.185 33.230 39.752 34.706 7.937 8.875 1.557 36.426 7.816 12.050 5.196 24.228 9.393 2.954 16.099 1.809 11.716 34.356 52.482 9.114 16.044 73.246 1.488 3.322 551 5.321 3.263 22.873 2.972 17.462 44.057 2.638 6.520 841 594 15.597 2.182 89.400 22.346 26.742 13.206 97.662 13.357 13.142 1.429 1.439 6.277 822 14.918 25.639 3.258 12.530 21.210 1.599 10.200 34.700 30.873 3.803 30.407 3.912 746 18.585 44.916 17.108 3.270 4.983 10.877 78.700 13.262 11.946 2.227 14.338 11.372 7.491 10.530 1.129 8.351 1.600 34.739 9.956 1.200 14.800 26.946 2.374 1.500 47.663 3.331 36.390 8.792 4.918 39.981 938 38.847 5.911 19.430 1.800 1.700 64.856 7.582 38.631 45.802 4.811 4.082 14.757 25.877 4.509 12.425 20.895 7.454 2.855 1.221 8.911 1.386 11.989 7.200 6.969 1.732

0,47 0,72 0,71 0,60 0,73 0,69 0,67 0,59 0,39 0,86 0,44 0,64 0,73 0,88 0,89 0,68 HDI 0,44 HumanDe v el opmentI ndex 0,75 0,92 0,58 0,37 0,87 0,75 0,75 0,74 0,63 0,85 0,41 0,51 0,42 0,76 0,64 0,81 0,48 0,73 0,61 0,94 0,83 0,89 0,90 0,73 0,61 0,79 0,68 0,80 0,77 0,51 0,65 0,82 0,92 0,80 0,89 0,90 0,87 0,70 0,72 0,44 0,89 0,61 0,75 0,68 0,79 0,74 0,55 0,70 0,59 0,73 0,90 0,86 / 0,78 0,82 0,34 0,65 0,35 0,57 0,56 0,82 0,51 0,77 0,91 0,50 0,65 0,43 0,35 0,72 0,39 0,91 0,83 0,84 0,73 0,89 0,72 0,75 0,50 0,51 0,59 0,44 0,77 0,78 0,46 0,71 0,82 0,42 0,77 0,84 0,85 / 0,87 0,51 0,43 0,78 0,92 0,76 0,47 0,69 0,72 0,71 0,73 0,60 0,80 0,73 0,63 0,69 0,42 0,67 0,54 0,59 0,63 0,39 / 0,86 0,55 0,44 0,92 0,64 0,91 0,73 0,63 0,88 0,35 0,89 0,51 0,68 / 0,44 0,94 0,75 0,79 0,92 0,54 0,58 0,78 0,87 0,68 0,75 0,78 0,63 0,50 0,41 0,68 0,42 0,73 0,64 0,67 0,48

2,90 6,67 7,24 5,87 3,18 6,64 1,77 2,37 7,85 3,83 5,49 9,03 7,92 3,76 DI 2,97 Demo cr acyI ndex 5,88 8,64 6,86 2,48 7,45 5,67 3,95 5,92 3,14 3,35 1,93 6,05 6,84 3,94 4,09 5,84 9,22 6,84 8,62 9,58 3,15 7,74 7,03 2,53 2,16 5,86 4,08 8,85 3,62 7,77 8,05 7,98 7,39 6,00 7,96 4,93 3,86 5,84 3,06 5,11 5,33 7,87 7,12 7,97 6,72 3,85 3,52 5,33 3,60 2,21 4,27 7,37 3,66 4,86 9,08 6,59 7,81 4,95 1,57 2,25 1,50 7,84 7,54 3,14 8,88 6,62 6,02 3,71 4,85 2,91 5,55 7,96 6,43 3,31 6,93 5,70 3,52 8,39 7,53 7,94 3,96 2,11 8,28 9,11 6,55 2,90 6,35 6,67 6,62 7,24 6,01 5,87 4,66 3,18 4,60 6,64 4,14 1,77 6,31 2,37 7,85 4,77 3,83 8,92 9,26 5,49 5,26 9,03 3,85 7,92 4,62 3,76 1,08 2,97 9,93 5,88 3,04 8,64 4,40 6,86 7,45 4,57 7,19 5,92 6,03 3,14 6,33 1,93 6,58 6,05 6,84 3,94

5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 DI 5,55 Rat i o 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55

Mexico

127.017.224

1.943.950

1980

SC

763.500

XL

Moldavia 4.068.897 32.854 1970 SC 72.600 M Monaco 37.731 2 2010 SC 20.400 S Mongolia 2.959.134 1.553.560 2000 HS 252.400 M Montenegro 625.781 13.450 1950 SC 16.600 S Morocco 34.377.511 446.300 1930 SC 43.600 S Mozambique 27.977.863 786.380 1990 HS 16.500 S Myanmar 53.897.154 653.290 2010 CR 1.516.100 XL Namibia 2.458.830 823.290 1910 BR 60.100 M 10.222 21 1990 HS 200 XS Vgl .

Kühn, C. andNauru K. Br andl ( 201 4) .

Pl enum pl ac esofpowercat al og ueAus t r i an Pav i l i on, LaBi ennal edi Venez i a201 4.

Bas e l , Bi r khäus er .

Nepal 28.513.700 143.350 1990 CR 134.700 M Netherlands 16.924.929 33.730 1990 SC 160.700 M New Zealand 4.528.526 263.310 1980 HS 170.500 M Nicaragua 6.082.032 120.340 2000 SC 215.300 M Niger 19.899.120 1.266.700 1950 CR 18.900 S Nigeria 182.201.962 910.770 2000 SC 90.600 M P o p u l a t i o n L a n d A r e a B u i l t T y p e o f P l e n a r y H a l l S i z e Coun t r y Vol ume North Korea 25.155.317 120.410 1980 CR 1.452.300 XL ( MI O. ) ( km² ) ( d ecades ) ( BR/ SC/ HS/ CI / CR) ( XS/ S/ M/ L/ XL) Norway 5.210.967 304.250 1860 HS 78.500 M T y p o l o g y Oman 4.490.541 309.500 2010 BR 779.900 XL Pakistan 188.924.874 770.880 1980 CR 220.000 M Afghanistan 29.824.536 652.230 CR 179.000 Palau 21.291 460 2000 HS 76.900 M Albania 3.162.083 27.400 1950 CR 12.500 Palestine 4.668.466 6.020 1970 SC 8.400 S Algeria 39.666.519 2.381.740 1950 91.200 Panama 3.929.141 74.340 2010 SC 61.500 M Andorra 78.360 470 1580 SC 15.700 S Papua New Guina 7.619.321 452.860 1980 HS 169.200 M Angola 20.820.525 1.246.700 237.900 Paraguay 6.639.123 397.300 2000 SC 106.200 M Antigua Peru and Barbuda 89.069 440 1980 BR 15.500 31.376.670 1.280.000 1930 HS 47.500 S Argentinia 41.086.927 2.736.690 1900 SC 218.000 Philippines 100.699.395 298.170 1970 CR 289.900 M Armenia 2.969.081 28.480 SC 260.200 Poland 38.611.794 304.150 1950 HS 212.900 M Australia 22.683.600 7.682.300 1980 HS 1.092.700 XL Portugal 10.349.803 91.470 1990 235.900 M Austria 8.462.446 82.409 1880 SC 549.800 XL Qatar 2.235.355 11.610 1980 CR 233.900 M Azerbaijan 9.297.507 82.658 2000 397.500 L Romania 19.511.324 230.160 1990 CR 2.293.600 XL Bahamas 388.019 10.010 1810 BR 7.300 S Russia 143.456.918 16.376.870 1930 CR 373.500 L Bahrain 1.317.827 760 1970 SC 15.500 S Rwanda 11.609.666 24.670 1960 CR 68.600 M 154.695.368 130.170 HS 630.400 XL Saint Bangladesh Kitts and Nevis 55.572 260 1980 BR 10.500 S Barbados 283.221 430 1870 BR 205.000 M Saint Lucia 184.999 610 1980 CI 9.400 S 202.910 1930 212.100 M Saint VincentBelarus and the Grenadines 9.495.826 109.462 390 1980 SC 4.400 XS Belgium 11.142.157 30.280 1780 SC 60.500 M Samoa 193.228 2.830 1970 CI 10.000 S Belize 359.287 22.810 1970 BR 7.600 San Marino 31.781 60 1890 CR 16.500 S 10.050.702 112.760 2000 104.100 São Tomé Benin and Príncipe 190.344 960 1970 CR 77.100 M Bhutan 774.830 38.394 1950 HS 92.600 M Saudi Arabia 31.540.372 2.149.690 1990 SC 391.300 L Bolivia 10.496.285 1.083.300 1920 CR 72.000 M Senegal 15.129.273 192.530 1950 SC 55.400 Bosnia and Herzogovina 3.833.916 51.000 1980 CR 205.000 M Serbia 8.850.975 87.460 1930 SC 106.500 M Botswana 2.262.485 566.730 1960 CR 21.900 S Seychelles 96.471 460 1990 BR 15.300 S Brazil 198.656.019 8.459.420 1960 CR 326.700 L Sierra Leone 6.453.184 71.620 1960 SC 71.620 S Brunei 412.238 5.270 2000 HS 196.500 M Singapore 5.603.740 700 1990 BR 115.400 M Bulgaria 7.304.632 108.560 1880 CR 40.800 S Slovakia 5.426.258 48.088 1990 SC 87.500 M Burkina Faso 16.460.141 273.600 1960 SC 11.500 S Slovenia 2.067.526 20.140 1950 CI 48.700 S Burundi 9.849.569 25.680 1980 CR 24.200 S Solomon Islands 583.591 27.990 1990 CI 28.000 S Cambodia 15.577.899 176.520 2000 CR 188.700 M Somalia 10.787.104 627.340 2010 CR 49.000 S Cameroon 23.344.179 472.710 1960 HS 56.900 M South Africa 54.490.406 1.213.090 1920 HS 151.700 M Candada 35.939.927 9.093.510 1920 BR 417.800 L South Sudan 12.339.812 644.329 2000 SC 48.300 S Cap Verde 520.502 4.030 1980 CR 88.300 M Spain 46.121.699 498.800 1990 HS 130.900 M Central Sri African Republic 4.900.274 622.980 1960 CR 86.000 M Lanka 20.715.010 62.710 1980 BR 255.800 M Chad 14.037.472 1.259.200 2010 CR 77.900 M Sudan 40.234.882 2.376.000 1960 CI 108.400 M Chile 17.948.141 743.532 1990 SC 221.600 M Suriname 542.975 156.000 1950 BR 11.800 S China 1.376.048.943 9.327.490 1950 CR 1.611.000 XL Swasiland 1.286.970 17.200 1990 HS 18.400 S Colombia 48.228.704 1.109.500 1920 SC 121.700 M Sweden 9.779.426 410.340 1900 SC 256.800 M Comoros 788.414 1.861 1970 CR 41.400 S Switzerland 8.298.663 40.000 1900 SC 199.300 M Congo 4.620.330 341.500 1980 CR 155.600 M Syria 18.502.413 183.630 1950 HS 21.300 S Costa Rica 4.807.850 51.060 1950 HS 56.700 M Taiwan 23.415.126 36.193 1960 CR 96.000 M Côte d'Ivoire 22.701.556 318.000 1960 HS 78.900 M Tajikistan 8.481.855 139.960 1940 CR 72.000 M Croatia 4.240.317 5.960 1910 SC 80.700 M Tanzania 53.470.420 885.800 2000 HS 55.200 M Cuba 11.389.562 106.440 1920 CR 467.500 L Thailand 67.959.359 510.890 1970 CR 57.100 M Cyprus 1.165.300 9.240 2000 HS 31.500 S Togo 7.304.578 54.390 1970 CR 81.300 M CzechTonga Republic 10.543.186 77.240 1720 SC 50.500 M 106.170 720 1990 HS 500 XS Democratic Republic of Congo 77.266.814 267.050 1970 CR 374.700 L Trinidad and Tobago 1.360.088 5.130 1900 BR 47.600 S Denmark 5.669.081 42.430 1920 HS 300.000 L Tunisia 11.253.554 155.360 1900 HS 62.300 M Djibouti 887.861 23.180 2010 CR 27.000 S Turkey 78.665.830 769.630 1960 SC 343.100 L Dominica 72.680 750 1990 BR 3.600 XS Turkmenistan 5.373.502 469.930 2000 CR 98.900 M Dominican Republic 10.528.391 48.320 1950 CR 152.900 M Tuvalu 9.916 30 2000 HS 23.300 S East Timor 1.184.765 14.870 2000 SC 59.700 M Uganda 39.032.383 199.810 1960 BR 75.900 M Ecuador 16.144.363 248.360 1950 SC 93.200 M Ukraine 44.823.765 579.320 1930 SC 77.900 M EgyptEmirates 91.508.084 995.450 1920 HS 26.900 S United Arab 9.205.651 83.600 1970 SC 137.500 M El Salvador 6.126.583 20.720 1970 SC 138.100 M United Kingdom 64.715.810 241.930 1870 BR 350.000 L Equatorial Guinea 845.060 28.050 1960 SC 4.500 XS United States of America 321.773.631 9.147.420 1830 SC 590.800 XL Eritrea 5.227.791 101.000 1990 34.700 S Urugay 3.431.555 175.020 1920 SC 180.000 M Estonia 1.312.558 42.390 1850 CR 114.500 M Uzbekistan 29.893.488 425.400 1990 CI 188.000 M Ethiopia 99.390.750 100.000 1930 CR 6.200 S Vanuatu 264.652 12.190 1990 HS 30.600 S Federated States of Micronesia 104.460 3.170 1980 CI 24.700 S Venezuela 31.108.083 882.050 1870 SC 45.100 S Fiji 892.145 18.270 1990 HS 27.600 S Vietnam 93.447.601 310.070 2010 CR 263.300 M Finland 5.503.457 303.890 1930 SC 195.600 M Yemen 26.832.215 527.970 SC 280.300 M France 64.395.345 547.660 1720 SC 160.100 M Zambia 16.211.767 743.390 1960 HS 40.600 S Gabon 1.725.292 257.670 1990 SC 152.400 M Zimbabwe 15.602.751 386.850 1890 HS 55.800 M Gambia 1.990.924 10.120 2010 HS 34.100 S Georgia 3.999.812 69.490 2010 SC 273.600 M Germany 80.688.545 348.570 1990 SC 334.100 L Ghana 27.409.893 227.540 1960 HS 28.000 S Greece 10.954.617 128.900 1840 SC 153.900 M Grenada 106.825 340 1700 BR 4.800 XS Guatemala 16.342.897 107.160 1930 HS 11.800 S 48 Guinea 12.608.590 245.720 1960 SC 143.100 M Guinea Bissau 1.844.325 28.120 2000 CR 18.500 S Guyana 767.085 196.850 1830 HS 17.900 S Haiti 10.711.067 27.560 CR 35.200 S

Par l ament s baut en

498

42,4%

101 24 76 81 395 250 433 104 19 599 150 121 92 113 360 MP 687 169 84 340 249 16 140 132 462 71 28 111 220 80 19 130 257 290 131 460 150 230 183 35 122 401 38 405 40 80 297 15 30 18 110 23 150 49 32 60 83 55 47 151 130 150 42 250 62 32 513 121 33 92 240 150 127 90 105 50 132 275 180 400 338 332 72 350 105 225 188 426 120 51 2.959 65 166 349 33 200 136 250 57 113 251 63 151 372 612 197 56 91 200 26 492 42 179 217 55 550 32 124 183 15 65 386 137 422 596 40 84 650 100 434 150 99 101 150 547 52 14 167 50 498 200 301 577 158 120 270 53 150 631 275 300 15 158 114 102 69 92

21,8% 20,8% 14,5% 17,3% 17,0% 39,6% 9,9% 41,3% 5,3% 29,5% 37,3% 31,4% 41,3% 13,3% 5,6% Womeni nPar l i ament 16,3% ( i n Pr oz ent ) 39,6% 1,2% 20,6% 27,7% 0,0% 20,0% 12,9% 31,6% 18,3% 50,0% 2,7% 36,8% 15,0% 10,5% 22,3% 36,6% 27,2% 10,7% 27,4% 26,0% 34,8% 32,2% 0,0% 15,6% 13,7% 13,2% 13,6% 10,0% 63,8% 6,4% 13,3% 16,7% 27,3% 13,0% 41,3% 6,1% 3,1% 16,7% 8,4% 18,2% 8,5% 19,9% 25,4% 42,7% 21,4% 34,0% 9,5% 43,8% 8,6% 12,4% 0,0% 23,9% 24,6% 18,7% 18,9% 36,7% 30,5% 2,0% 20,3% 13,8% 31,1% 42,0% 26,0% 26,5% 20,8% 40,0% 12,4% 5,8% 14,9% 30,5% 15,8% 25,5% 23,6% 6,2% 19,9% 43,6% 3,0% 32,0% 7,4% 12,4% 33,3% 32,7% 9,2% 19,0% 15,2% 36,6% 48,9% 6,1% 12,5% 17,6% 20,0% 0,0% 8,9% 31,0% 37,4% 31,3% 12,7% 14,9% 21,9% 25,8% 20,8% 6,7% 38,5% 35,0% 41,6% 12,1% 14,9% 17,5% 32,1% 29,4% 24,0% 19,4% 22,0% 16,2% 23,8% 16,0% 38,8% 0,0% 0,0% 14,4% 16,0% 24,3% 41,5% 0,0% 26,2% 12,7% 14,2% 31,5% 9,4% 11,3% 36,5% 10,9% 19,7% 33,3% 13,9% 21,9% 13,7% 30,4% 0,0%

XL

M S M S S S XL M XS M M M M S M Si z e XL S/ M/ L/ XL) M XL M M S M S M M S M M XL M XL M L XL S L S M XL S M S M XS M S S M M L M M M S S L S M M S M S S S S M S M M L S M M M M M M M S XL S M M S M M S M M M M M M L M S M M XS L S L M S L XS M M S M M M M S M M L XS XL S M M M S S S S S M M M M S M M S M L S M XS S M S S S

498

42,4%

101 24 76 81 395 250 433 104 19 599 150 121 92 113 360 MP 687 169 84 340 249 16 140 132 462 71 28 111 220 80 19 130 257 290 131 460 150 230 183 35 122 401 38 405 40 80 297 15 30 18 110 23 150 49 32 60 83 55 47 151 130 150 42 250 62 32 513 121 33 92 240 150 127 90 105 50 132 275 180 400 338 332 72 350 105 225 188 426 120 51 2.959 65 166 349 33 200 136 250 57 113 251 63 151 372 612 197 56 91 200 26 492 42 179 217 55 550 32 124 183 15 65 386 137 422 596 40 84 650 100 434 150 99 101 150 547 52 14 167 50 498 200 301 577 158 120 270 53 150 631 275 300 15 158 114 102 69 92

21,8% 20,8% 14,5% 17,3% 17,0% 39,6% 9,9% 41,3% 5,3% 29,5% 37,3% 31,4% 41,3% 13,3% 5,6% Womeni nPar l i ament 16,3% ( i n Pr oz ent ) 39,6% 1,2% 20,6% 27,7% 0,0% 20,0% 12,9% 31,6% 18,3% 50,0% 2,7% 36,8% 15,0% 10,5% 22,3% 36,6% 27,2% 10,7% 27,4% 26,0% 34,8% 32,2% 0,0% 15,6% 13,7% 13,2% 13,6% 10,0% 63,8% 6,4% 13,3% 16,7% 27,3% 13,0% 41,3% 6,1% 3,1% 16,7% 8,4% 18,2% 8,5% 19,9% 25,4% 42,7% 21,4% 34,0% 9,5% 43,8% 8,6% 12,4% 0,0% 23,9% 24,6% 18,7% 18,9% 36,7% 30,5% 2,0% 20,3% 13,8% 31,1% 42,0% 26,0% 26,5% 20,8% 40,0% 12,4% 5,8% 14,9% 30,5% 15,8% 25,5% 23,6% 6,2% 19,9% 43,6% 3,0% 32,0% 7,4% 12,4% 33,3% 32,7% 9,2% 19,0% 15,2% 36,6% 48,9% 6,1% 12,5% 17,6% 20,0% 0,0% 8,9% 31,0% 37,4% 31,3% 12,7% 14,9% 21,9% 25,8% 20,8% 6,7% 38,5% 35,0% 41,6% 12,1% 14,9% 17,5% 32,1% 29,4% 24,0% 19,4% 22,0% 16,2% 23,8% 16,0% 38,8% 0,0% 0,0% 14,4% 16,0% 24,3% 41,5% 0,0% 26,2% 12,7% 14,2% 31,5% 9,4% 11,3% 36,5% 10,9% 19,7% 33,3% 13,9% 21,9% 13,7% 30,4% 0,0%

255.055

456.270

40.286 7.765 1.572 38.936 14.696 7.726 2.571 Sheet1 87.032 60.653 111.911 4.382 124.474 9.129 23.643 3.560 538 1 47.602 6.503 112.833 158.106 37.426 34.106 66.109 4.991 176.098 2.053 506.117 93.872 Popul at i on Co2Emi s s i on 36.616 59.859 Pe rl egi s l at or ( kt ) 30.834 44.376 52.830 74.288 555.661 158.112 119.777 8.236 1.331 33 22.586 4.283 35.367 2.248 85.858 141.473 55.340 10.230 2.799 517 68.643 7.118 94.638 30.418 82.989 5.526 4.687 513 241.359 51.959 159.871 180.512 347.239 96.940 22.664 4.221 83.939 298.131 151.224 373.081 44.999 48.255 46.242 66.897 63.867 88.751 76.209 45.731 48.657 78.289 10.211 4.232 318.793 1.766.427 32.945 24.202 145.121 1.342 520.859 56.153 3.705 174 9.440 1.504 10.278 551 86.326 67.737 4.759 311 74.281 108.947 3.943 135 11.228 422 530 121.092 5.189 3.461 60 16.486 1.442 208.877 494.822 80.740 15.456 100.862 8.189 91.283 31.126 35.404 59.250 35.912 5.695 3.015 544 387.423 419.754 53.332 1.268 12.492 9.160 60.910 47.786 30.435 44.679 36.175 34.685 129.607 1.683 22.973 16.673 93.805 308 11.672 276 126.650 4.760 39.226 1.278 129.690 9.179 136.226 392.719 106.331 565.992 37.168 7.229 104 131.776 241.637 46.669 737 92.067 16.648 74.667 1.274 94.448 17.267 149.568 78.626 10.647 2.162 465.039 10.540.750 19.800 659 290.534 74.054 28.021 44.314 23.893 144 41.493 40.229 33.973 5.068 74.010 52.681 84.348 7.641 207.214 276.675 90.444 7.326 134.633 3.647 28.082 20.677 143.738 9.084 18.610 30.242 344.971 271.978 20.809 7.237 80.270 2.134 52.716 111.655 4.083 204 157.046 3.984 32.383 34.017 31.671 40.030 51.860 24.278 16.143 1.442 143.029 353.194 2.271 166 43.335 70.561 57.532 23.442 661 1 18.227 361 101.120 4.892 117.841 43.027 106.217 249.065 153.537 225.112 230.141 167.596 72.936 7.161 99.563 415.421 8.451 2.096 741.414 5.334.530 37.852 672 34.662 8.114 12.996 19.440 199.290 122.621 181.702 8.858 5.089 111 7.461 128 186.276 195.213 17.843 1.345 187.646 190.222 27.517 54.793 89.441 22.553 111.604 323.744 102.606 3.367 14.377 5.027 57.788 13.135 37.565 259 26.665 6.537 127.874 767.146 99.672 14.070 36.515 71.062 7.122 477 103.436 11.953 110.602 Page 1 2.039 18.082 322 11.117 2.758 116.425 2.288

3,7

17.108

0,76

6,55

5,55

2,2

4.983 78.700 11.946 14.338 7.491 1.129 1.600 9.956 14.800 2.374 47.663 36.390 4.918 938 5.911 GDP 1.800 ( $p erCapi t a) 64.856 38.631 4.811 1.531 14.757 9.403 4.509 14.193 20.895 37.200 2.855 6.006 8.911 19.640 11.989 18.200 6.969 8.417 24.744 44.598 29.393 43.661 140.649 10.125 19.401 23.491 25.636 24.591 1.661 1.851 23.239 26.488 10.733 18.185 10.727 39.752 5.789 7.937 62.000 1.557 3.176 7.816 51.924 5.196 2.333 9.393 12.660 16.099 26.386 11.716 1.966 52.482 82.763 16.044 27.711 1.488 29.963 551 2.130 3.263 400 2.972 13.046 44.057 2.019 6.520 33.211 594 10.733 2.182 4.069 22.346 16.638 13.206 8.292 13.357 45.183 1.429 57.235 6.277 5.100 14.918 47.500 3.258 2.691 21.210 2.538 10.200 15.735 30.873 1.429 30.407 5.211 746 31.967 44.916 11.436 3.270 19.199 10.877 15.474 13.262 3.765 2.227 1.771 11.372 8.665 10.530 41.397 8.351 39.762 34.739 54.629 1.200 20.884 26.946 5.573 1.500 3.031 3.331 16.100 8.792 5.629 39.981 2.800 38.847 3.904 19.430 1.792 1.700

0,69 0,73 0,80 0,63 0,42 0,54 0,63 / 0,55 0,92 0,91 0,63 0,35 0,51 HDI /opmentI HumanDev el ndex 0,94 0,79 0,54 0,37 0,78 0,75 0,68 0,74 0,78 0,85 0,50 0,51 0,68 0,76 0,73 0,81 0,67 0,73 0,84 0,94 0,83 0,89 0,85 0,73 0,79 0,79 0,80 0,80 0,48 0,51 0,75 0,82 0,73 0,80 0,72 0,90 0,70 0,70 / 0,44 0,56 0,61 0,84 0,68 0,47 0,74 0,77 0,70 0,77 0,73 0,41 0,86 0,91 0,78 0,84 0,34 0,88 0,35 0,51 0,56 0,51 0,67 0,91 0,47 0,65 0,88 0,35 0,76 0,39 0,48 0,83 0,71 0,73 0,53 0,72 0,91 0,50 0,93 0,59 0,59 0,77 / 0,46 0,62 0,82 0,52 0,77 0,73 0,85 0,48 0,87 0,72 0,43 0,77 0,92 0,72 0,47 0,76 0,72 0,69 0,71 0,60 0,48 0,73 0,75 0,69 0,82 0,67 0,91 0,59 0,92 0,39 0,79 0,86 0,68 0,44 0,59 0,64 0,76 0,73 0,67 0,88 0,50 0,89 0,59 0,68 0,51 0,44

6,35 6,62 6,01 4,66 4,60 4,14 6,31 4,77 8,92 9,26 5,26 3,85 4,62 DI 1,08 Demo cr acyI ndex 9,93 3,04 4,40 2,48 5,67 4,57 3,95 7,19 6,03 3,35 6,33 6,58 6,84 4,09 7,09 9,22 7,79 8,62 3,18 3,15 6,68 3,31 2,53 3,07 5,86 3,62 8,05 6,00 4,93 1,93 5,84 6,08 5,11 6,71 7,87 7,12 4,55 6,14 6,72 7,29 3,52 7,57 3,60 4,27 3,66 7,56 9,08 7,81 8,30 1,57 6,42 1,50 2,37 7,84 6,77 3,14 3,09 6,62 9,45 3,71 9,09 2,91 1,43 7,96 7,83 3,31 1,95 6,93 5,58 3,52 5,09 7,53 3,41 7,94 2,11 7,10 9,11 6,72 2,90 5,12 1,83 6,67 7,24 5,22 5,87 5,70 3,18 2,58 6,64 8,31 1,77 8,05 2,37 8,17 7,85 1,95 3,83 5,00 5,49 3,53 9,03 2,24 7,92 6,28 3,76 3,05 2,97

5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 DI 5,55 Rat i o 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55

7.582 45.802 4.082 25.877 12.425 7.454 1.221 1.386 7.200 1.732

0,75 0,92 0,58 0,87 0,75 0,63 0,41 0,42 0,64 0,48

5,88 8,64 6,86 7,45 5,92 3,14 1,93 6,05 3,94

5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55 5,55

5,1 4,1 1,8 0,2 0,2 1,5 0,1 0,2 9,4 7,5 0,8 0,1 0,5 CO2Emi s s i ons 2,4 ( met r i ct o nspercapi t a) 8,7 18,9 0,9 0,3 1,6 1,4 0,5 3,5 2,6 6,6 0,9 1,6 0,8 5,9 1,7 4,5 1 1,4 7,8 16,9 4,5 8,0 39,1 5,1 3,6 11,1 12,4 19,3 0,1 0,4 3,2 5,4 3 7,3 2,8 10 0,7 1,4 0,5 0,3 1,9 16,8 1,5 0,6 8,1 5,9 2,8 5,8 2,2 0,2 22,9 8,7 5,9 6,4 0,1 8 0,03 0,5 0,3 0,1 0,4 7,4 15,9 0,2 5,1 0,2 0,8 0,1 0,4 4,4 4 7,6 0,5 1,5 4,6 0,2 4,9 1,1 2,4 1,5 11,8 0,4 0,4 4,8 0,2 2,7 4 6,3 0,3 10,4 1,9 0,1 25,3 7,1 2,2 1,6 4,7 2,3 13,3 2,2 0,1 0,3 0,1 2,7 5,5 2,7 19,9 1,1 6,5 2,7 16,5 0,1 2,4 15,1 4,2 0,1 0,4 1,2 6,3 1,5 2,1 10,1 0,9 5 0,2 2,9 0,9 0,1 1,5 9,3 0,5 6,4 4,5 0,8 49 0,2 0,2 3,4 0,2

2.7

Political Representation in Israel & Palestine 2.7.1 Pre-State Jewish representation in Palestine Yishuv referred to the Jewish community residing in Palestine before the founding of the State of Israel. The establishment of an official representation of the Zionist World Organization, founded by Theodor Herzl, marked the beginning of Jewish political representation in Palestine. The so-called "Palestine Office" in Tel-Aviv-Jaffa was responsible for the management of immigration, land acquisition, as well as its cultivation and settlement.1 The 16th Zionist Congress held in Zurich in 1929, led to the founding of the Jewish Agency, which is still active today and is considered the predecessor government of the State of Israel. The Jewish Agency served as a point of contact for the British Mandate administration and was responsible for the regulation of internal Jewish affairs in Palestine, such as health care, education, and culture.2 From 1935, the president of the Jewish Agency was David Ben Gurion, who later announced the modern state of Israel with the proclamation of Israel's declaration of independence on 14th May 1948 and became its first prime minister. Before the official establishment of the institution — Jewish Agency — a building was planned for institutions such as the Jewish National Fund or the Palestine Foundation Fund. The architectural competition held in 1927 was won by the Odessa-born architect, Yohanan Ratner. The first Yishuv public building in Jerusalem is a cubist structure with an oval courtyard opening towards the street. The entrance is marked by pillars placed in front of the building.3 Stylistically, the building is somewhere between Western modernism and local architectural tradition. Erich Mendelsohn, the later architect of the residence of the president of the Zionist World Organization Chaim Weizmann, called this style an East-West synthesis, to which he attributed both aesthetic and political implications. While a Semitic regional context was still addressed in the aforementioned state buildings, after the founding of the State of Israel, other parameters were to play a role in the formulation of national identity and its state buildings. The integration and recognition of Israel in the global context seemed to have been the primary motivation in the design of the Knesset. A universal and global vocabulary of forms was preferred over references to regionality or tradition.4

50

Fig 017 - Jewish Agency Tel Aviv

51

2.7.2 The Knesset - Conflict as a leitmotif IIn December 1949, David Ben Gurion officially declared West Jerusalem the capital of Israel, in defiance of UN resolutions that wanted to place the holy city under international control. However, the decision to move the government to Jerusalem was made long before that. A master plan by Arieh Sharon, dated April 1949, proves the government's plans to establish its political center in Givat Ram, in West Jerusalem. Givat Ram, which translates as "High Hill," forms a geographical "counterpart" to the Temple Mount and, before the founding of the state of Israel, belonged in part to the now depopulated village of Sheikh Badr and to the domain of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate in Jerusalem. Sharon's plans for the elevated plateau, on which the most important political and cultural institutions were to be built, were approved by the members of the government in November 1949. The decision and the official announcement were followed by a competition of limited participants in 1950, based on Sharon's master plan. The office partnership around Al Mansfeld and Munio Weinraub from Haifa, emerged as the winner of this competition. Their design for the government district included all the buildings necessary to accommodate the instances of power separation. In addition to the parliament, several office buildings for members of parliament, the office of the Prime Minister and the President of the Republic, and various ministerial buildings, the Supreme Court of Justice was to be located in the quarter in an open, loose block and linear distribution of buildings. The parliament building and the House of Representatives play a prominent role in the ensemble, in terms of height and location. A decision by the planners that symbolizes the democratic self-image of the young state of Israel. Two parade grounds provide for an axial alignment of the quarter.5 The master plan of Mansfeld and Weinraub was one of the first modernist designs to deal with government buildings. The famous designs of Dhaka, Chandigarh or Brasilia by Louis Kahn, Le Corbusier and Oscar Niemeyer were created in the 1950s and 1960s. The two architects, Mansfeld and Weinraub, who were both trained in Germany and France, could therefore hardly refer to references to new parliamentary buildings. Only the 1927 competition for the League of Nations Palace in Geneva and probably the most discussed contribution by Le Corbusier and Hannes Meyer were known. The latter had been known since 1927 as master architect at the Bauhaus Dessau, where Munia Weinraub also began his studies. However, the design for the main building of the successor organization to the League of Nations, the United Nations in New York, may have been more of an inspiration than the unfinished designs for the League of Nations Palace in Geneva. The extraordinary decision of the United Nations to call on several renowned architects to jointly design a building complex instead of an architectural competition for the new main building on the East River, led to a collaboration of Max Abramowitz (USA), Oscar Niemeyer (Brazil), Le Corbusier (France), Nikolai Bassov (Russia) and six other international architects.6 Each of the architects presented at least one design on the basis of which the common framework of the construction task was determined. The idea of collaboration was more idealistic than realistic and led to an even more competitive atmosphere than a competition itself. The final design was roughly Le Corbusier's original draft with modifications by Oscar Niemeyer.7 Just a few weeks before the competition for the new Israeli government district in West Jerusalem, the foundation stone was laid for the building complex in New York. It is likely that the events surrounding the UN were observed with great interest by the new UN member state Israel. Israel's recognition and admission to the UN in May 1949 completed the "process of becoming a state."8 The trapezoid-shaped parliament building and the adjacent 10-story high-rise building, which was intended for the offices of the members of parliament, is strongly reminiscent of the final design for the UN headquarters in New York and can be interpreted as a "lateral gesture of reference to the UN."9

52

However, the first draft plan was never implemented. Above all, the state budget to be organized and the important areas to be financed, such as the military and housing for immigrants, led to a temporary postponement of the decision on the young state's representative buildings. Several modifications to the political system further complicated the situation, since final decisions on the form and organization of government were considered essential to the requirements for the buildings.

After six years, the plans were to be continued on the "High Hill." The invitation to tender for the competition for a new Knesset building was issued in June 1956, still based on the master plan drawn up by Weinraub and Mansfeld. In the meantime, the Knesset met at various locations. Hotels, theaters, and cinemas were chosen for the meetings until they were housed in a newly constructed office and commercial building on King George Street in Tel Aviv. It was to be 16 years before the Knesset was able to move from the Froumin House, which had been conceived as a provisional solution, to the new parliament building in Jerusalem.

However, the nationally announced competition was viewed critically by the Israeli architectural scene, as the financing of the project was unclear at the time of the invitation to tender. As a result, many architectural firms decided against participating in the competition, in order to avoid a possible "design for a drawer." It was only a few days before the competition was announced that the financing of the parliament building was turned around. On July 24, 1957, it became known that the will of the previously deceased British politician and philanthropist, James A. de Rothschild, provided a donation of 1.25 million pounds sterling for the construction of the Knesset building. The enormous importance of this project was further illustrated by Rothschild's personal formulations in the will.10 "Let the new Knesset building become a symbol, in the eyes of all men, of the permanence of the State of Israel. [...] by the grace of the Almighty. The new chapter in the history of our people, which began with the creation of the State, will be glorious and enduring.” 1 The quick and unanimous decision for a first place in the competition is probably due to the determination of the jury after these words. Joseph Klarwein, a German architect with East Jewish roots who practiced independently in Haifa after emigrating, emerged as the clear winner with his design. The jury protocol named Klarwein's design as the only one that did justice to the complexity of the task. "The building well expresses its special aim, through its placing in a high place with suitable proportions, by the planning of a well-organized approach [...], and because of the noble appearance of the body of the building from all sides. It meets the requirements of the competition, gives simple solutions to various problems [...] the use of classical touches in the architectural composition bestows on the building an inspiring quality.”12 Josef Klarwein's winning design envisioned a wide and flat building with an inner courtyard. The inner courtyard was to be divided in the middle by an adjusted trapezoidal structure for the plenary area. A row of pillars as high as the façade was to form a ring hall around the wide cuboid.

In her contribution to a book on parliamentary representation edited by Anna Minta and Bernd Nicolai, the professor of architectural history of modernism at the ETH Zurich, author Ita Heinze-Greenberg describes the project as follows: "The vocabulary of forms, which is unmistakably based on the classical tradition, is subjected to the greatest possible reduction and abstraction. This evokes a modernity that ties in with antiquity, as it could not better symbolize the Zionist project of creating the New Israel on old earth.”13

53

The last will of the patron, James A. De Rothschild, to create a "symbol of continuity" seemed to have been successfully achieved by Josef Klarwein's design. The jury was chaired by Uriel (Otto) Schiller, who was trained by Peter Behrens at the ETH Zurich and the Academy of Fine Arts Vienna. Before emigrating to Palestine, the young architect, Schiller, worked with Paul Bonatz and Clemens Holzmeister. The design by Joseph Klarwein probably reminded Uriel Schiller of that neo-classicism with reduced detailing. The German embassy in St. Petersburg is to be mentioned as a reference project.

The prizewinner himself enjoyed his training in Germany, at the Technical University in Munich and in Hans Peolzig's master studio at the Prussian Academy in Berlin. After his studies, he worked first as a staff member and later as office manager for Fritz Höger in Hamburg, and had meanwhile become a Lutheran Protestant and naturalized citizen of Hamburg.14 After the National Socialists seized power in 1933 and Klarwein was subsequently dismissed, the architect emigrated to Palestine and set up his own business in Haifa. The "Dagon" grain silo at the harbor in Haifa and the headquarters for the Jewish National Fund were designed by Jospeh Klarwein. The design for the new Knesset building occupies a special place in Klarwein's portfolio in terms of style. His work up to the time of the Knesset competition was stylistically more of a modernist style of objectivity.15 While the master plan of Mansfeld and Weinraub seven years earlier proposed separating and disclosing the individual work areas of the parliamentarians, Klarwein's design aimed to accommodate all areas in a monumentally large structure that would symbolize unity to the outside world. Apparently, it was precisely this gesture that prompted the jury to prefer Klarwein's design to the other entries. Shortly after the winning project was published, there was a massive press campaign against the jury's decision and thus against Klarwein's design. The still moderate voices called the design "boring", "not Israeli" or "not modern". The much more severe criticism was directed at the style, which was described as "fascist-occupied neoclassical". When looking at the model, Arieh Sharon felt reminded of a "big house in Munich, where you cannot find the entrance behind the many columns" and meant the "Haus der Kunst" in Munich, which was commissioned by Hitler.16 The motivation for the sometimes aggressive criticism from the Israeli architectural scene, may have been the disappointment of some architects who did not participate due to the above-mentioned skepticism about financing. The Israeli news magazine haOlam haZeh published an article on the topic entitled "the scandal surrounding the Knesset building," which not only described Klarwein's architecture as undemocratic, but also questioned the integrity of the jury. Klarwein himself commented on the accusations and tried to refute the points of criticism. To the accusation of fascist-occupied neo-classicalism, Klarwein referred to his own biography. He tried to refute the concerns that the perimeter of the pillar walk was un-Israeli, by referring to the colonnades surrounding the Herodian Temple. He countered the link between classical forms and dictatorial regimes by referring to the Greek temple as the cradle of democracy. Klarwein did not comment on the accusations of a lack of proximity to citizens and transparency. While the new UN headquarters served as a reference in the draft of the master plan, Klarwein's design inevitably reminded us of the decision in favor of the predecessor institution, the League of Nations Palace in Geneva, which was built in the neo-classical style. The decision 30 years earlier had triggered similar discussions, and in the competition for the Knesset, traditionalists and modernists were once again in conflict. At that time, the decision was also made in favor of a design from the traditionalist camp, only that in the following 30 years since the competition, modernism has prevailed, as was evident not least at the UN headquarters.17 As a result of the constant criticism of the draft, the Israeli government invited a team of experts to develop an independent report on Klarwein's draft. Among those invited were the Deputy Director of the UN planning team led by LeCorbusier, US architect May Abramowitz, President of the Royal Academy of British Architects Sir Howard Morley Robertson and archaeologist Leo Arie Meir. The result was surprisingly positive and confirmed

54

the jury's decision as legitimate.

On the recommendation and suggestion of this panel of experts, Klarwein traveled abroad in mid-1958 to study referential projects. During his absence of several months, excavation work had already begun on the construction site, but it did not correspond to his original design idea. Under the eyes of the planning commission of the Knesset, the design was modified and significantly altered in terms of size and symmetry. Afraid of losing the contract altogether, Klarwein agreed to collaborate with Shimon Powsner, who was 25 years younger. Later, Dov Karmi and his son Ram Karmi joined the team of architects responsible for the project. This was followed by months of disputes over the final implementation. As a result, the building became more compact and lost its symmetry. Another significant change was the terraced, stepped offices for the members of parliament, which Dov Karmi had proposed.

After the death of Dov Karmi and a dispute between his son, Ram Karmi, and Klarwein that led to a professional separation, Klarwein was again the sole architect on the "High Hill."18 With the subsequent commissioning of the Romanian interior designer Dora Gad, who had been trained at the Technical University in Vienna, however, there were renewed disputes on the construction site.

After ten years of construction, the parliament building was finally inaugurated. In addition to positive and appreciative remarks about the result, critical voices were once again lined up that found the building to be stylistically inconsistent. The criticism was certainly appropriate with regard to the chaotic history of this project. Instead of Klarwein's original gesture of demonstrating unity, critics saw the building as a symbol of chaos and conflictladen decision-making. For the Israeli author, Susan Hattis Rolef, however, it is precisely this symbolism that is a sign of "Israel-ness."

“It is not the leaders who influenced the shape of the building, but the wars among the architects. The compromises were frequently attained through the mediation of foreign architects and officials. The process, at the end of which the Knesset building was built as it was built, was extremely Israeli.”19 Rolef sees in "dissent" and "conflict," significant characteristics of Israeli society and precisely for this reason, suitable motifs for its architectural representation.

55

Fig 018.1 - Knesset - Competition Design

56

Fig 018.2 - 3d Model of Knesset - today

57

2.7.3 Palestinian National Council Parliament in Exile The Palestinian National Council (PNC) is the legislative body of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), founded in 1964 on the initiative of the Arab League. The main task of the PNC is to determine the Executive Committee, which consists of 18 members.

The committee, under the current chairmanship of Mahmoud Abbas, directs the activities of the PLO and adopts the budget. Since 1996, 669 deputies have been represented in the National Council, which sees itself as the representative of all Palestinians.20 The Palestinian National Council is equivalent to the parliament and thus the political representation of all Palestinians living in the West Bank, Gaza and exile.

Furthermore, the National Council determined the political direction and program of the PLO.

A realistic census for the proportional distribution of seats in Parliament was equally difficult to organize.

Before the occupation of the West Bank in 1967, the first PNC was held in Jerusalem on May 24, 1964. Participants were representatives of Palestinian groups from Jordan, the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Syria, Lebanon, Kuwait, Iraq, Egypt, Libya and Algeria. After the occupation, further meetings were held in Cairo, Damascus, Algiers, Amman.

After the Oslo Accord in 1995, the PNC was held four more times: 1996 and 1998 in Gaza, where former US President Bill Clinton participated. And in 2009 and 2018 in Ramallah, but with a greatly reduced number of representatives. The changing locations of the meetings mark the geopolitical transformations of the region, the history of the Palestinian resistance and the dispersion and dissolution of its organizational centers. These stable and sometimes controversial assemblies in exile, survived due to the fact of not having a permanent location. With a fixed location, they would have been more accessible to Israeli politics and an easy target for attacks.23

Until 1991, the assemblies took place almost every two years at different locations. At the first meeting in Jerusalem on May 28, 1964, the 422 delegates adopted the National Charta.

This was intended to formulate the first foundations of Palestinian identity and gave the PLO a provisional organizational framework.21 The Parliament in Exile, as the Palestinian National Council was called, was a form of political representation exercised during the years of exclusion of the PLO as a parliamentary assembly for a dispersed and extraterritorial policy, a policy in conflict, without any possibility of physically assembling in Palestine.22

58

May 29,1964

First Palestinian National Council (PNC) held in Jerusalem Creation of Palestinian Liberation Organization PLO Palestinian National Charta Nov 13, 1974

Yasser Arafat adresses the UN General Assembly April 20-26, 1987

June 1-9, 1974

18th PNC session in Algiers Reunification within PLO

12th session of PNC Idea for national authority Oct 14, 1974

First Palestinian parliamentary Elections Yasser Arafat elected as President of PA

Sept 13 1993

UNGA recognize the PLO as representative of the Palestinian People

Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat sign the Declaration of Principles on interim self government at the White House in Washington

Jan 13-17,1964

First Arab League Summit Announcement of Palestinian entity

Jan 20, 1996

1983

Sept 28, 1995

Open Conflict within PLO

Interim Agreement on the West Bank and Gaza Strip (Oslo II) PA in Area A and Area B in the West Bank

Feb 14,1969

Sept 9+10, 1993

Nov, 2008

Fifth Palestinian National Council (PNC) PLO recognizes the rigth of Israel to exist in Cairo and is recognized in return by Israel as June 6, 1982 Yasser Arafat becomes 3rd Chairman of PLO Israel invades Lebanon and besieges Beirut the representative of the Palestinian people

PLO Central Committee elects Mahmoud Abbas as President of the State of Palestine Nov 29, 2012

May 4, 1994 1971 Sept 30, 1982

Arafat and 87 PLO Leaders leave Beirut

Sept,1970

Arab League Summit declares PLO is the sole legitimate representative of the palestinian people

28.05.1964 - 01.06.1964 31.05.1965 - 04.06.1965 20.05.1966 - 24.05.1966 10.07.1968 - 17.07.1968 01.02.1969 - 04.02.1969 01.09.1969 - 06.09.1969 30.05.1970 - 04.06.1970 27.08.1970 28.02.1971 07.07.1971 - 13.07.1971 06.04.1972 - 10.04.1972 01.01.1973 - 12.01.1973 01.06.1974 - 08.06.1974 12.03.1977 - 22.03.1977 15.01.1979 - 22.01.1979 April 1981 14.02.1983 - 22.02.1983 22.11.1984 - 29.11.1984 20.04.1987 - 25.04.1987 14.11.1988 - 18.11.1988 23.09.1991 - 28.09.1991 21.04.1996 - 24.04.1996 Dec. 1998 26.08.2009 - 27.08.2009 30.04.2018 - 03.05.2018

Dec 13, 1988

1

2

3

4

5 6 7E89

PNC session in Gaza Attendance of President Clinton

1990

10 11

JERUSALEM CAIRO AMMAN GAZA CAIRO CAIRO

12

13

14

PLO and Hamas sign pact for reconciliation and new unity government

Dec, 1998

Arafat adresses UN General Assembly in Geneva

1970 Jerusalem Cairo Gaza Cairo Cairo Cairo Amman Amman Cairo Cairo Cairo Cairo Cairo Cairo Damaskus Damaskus Algier Amman Algier Algier Algier Gaza Gaza Ramallah Ramallah

April 23, 2014

Nov 12- 15, 1988

Oct 26-29, 1974

1950

July 7, , 1998

UNGA Resolution extends Palestine’s UN status participation in UNGA debates without vote 19th PNC session in Algiers Proclamation of the State of Palestine Implicitily recognizes Israel’s right to exist

Clashes between PLO and the Jordanian Army

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 E 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 E 23

The UNGA votes to admit Palestine as “non member observer state”

The Gaza Jericho Agreement (Oslo I) Establishment of Palestinian Authority in Gaza and Jericho

PLO new headquarters in Beirut, Libanon

15

DAMASKUS

16

17

18

19

AMMAN ALGIER ALGIER

20

2010

21

22

GAZA

E

23

RAMALLAH

RAMALLAH

16 18 19 20

14 15

E 1.

Fig 019 - Timeline PNC

59

2 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13

3 21 22

7 E 17

Fig 020 - Palestinian Legislative Council, Abu Dis

60

2.7.4 Palestinian Legislative Council Construction of a ruin ditions not to allow Palestinian institutional buildings in Jerusalem. The impression should be created that the building of the Palestinian Legislative Council is located in Abu Dis. In reality, the planners moved half of the building over the city boundaries of Jerusalem.

Their design of the building beyond the line was intended to define the Palestinians' claim to Jerusalem as their capital. Today, the building is both a construction site and a ruin, destroyed neither by military action nor by natural decay, but by the failure of a peace process. Three years after the Oslo agreements, the outbreak of the Second Intifada led to the construction of the wall. The construction work on the parliament stopped with the beginning of the construction of the wall. The building was to remain outside the concrete borders of Jerusalem. The Palestinian Legislative Council is to date the last experiment for a built parliamentary democracy in Palestine. 23 Today, the Palestinian Legislative Council, which has 132 members, meets in Ramallah. A second building of the PLC was destroyed in a bombing raid during Operation Cast Lead, the military offensive of the Israeli Armed Forces that was conducted against Gaza from December 2008 to January 2009. The building in Ramallah was also a repeated target of Israeli attacks. In 2002, the headquarters in West Bank were heavily damaged.24

On September 13, 1993, the Declaration of Principles was signed. It provided for the formation of a Palestinian interim government for a period of five years and paved the way for independent political institutions and structures in Palestine. While the Palestinian National Council sees itself as the parliament of all Palestinians and the State of Palestine, the Palestinian Legislative Council is the parliament of the inhabitants of the Palestinian territories from which it is elected.

In the euphoria of the peace process and the Oslo Agreement in 1995, the Palestinian leadership commissioned the construction of a parliament building.

The location of the building for the Palestinian Legislative Council was desired to be as close as possible to the al-Aqsa Mosque, which made its placement in East Jerusalem, the desired capital of a possible state of Palestine, indispensable. However, Israel still insisted on not allowing any Palestinian institutions in Jerusalem, which led to the construction site being moved beyond the city boundaries. The village of Abu Dis, closest to the Old City in the east, was to be designated for the government building, and its elevated location offered a view of the Temple Mount and thus at least a visual proximity to the al-Aqsa Mosque.

The Palestinians positioned the building as close as possible to the old city and thus on the border to the long-desired capital of Palestine, Al Quds. A subversive act was intended to circumvent the Israelis' con-

61

Jerusalem Line

Jerusalem

The

Sepa

ratio

n Ba

rrier

Fig 021 - Palestinian Legislative Council, Abu Dis - Plan

62

Abu Dis

Jerusalem Line

63

64

2.8

Résumé To the question asked at the beginning, "What is a parliament?" I would like to add the question: "What should a parliament be like? Historically, we can observe that the place for political decisions has moved from the public sphere of the Greek Pnyx or Agora to the secret of the built space. Although this casing is gradually becoming more permeable, a true integration of the public sphere is hardly taking place. Architecture acts not only as a shell and hiding place for political events, but also as a symbol of ideal values. Today, however, the public plays at most a spectator role. Democracy, as we know it today, is gradually showing its flaws. The question of how and whether democracy can be reformed should be immediately followed or even presented by the question of the architectural framework. Perhaps architecture is part of the problem? Democracy is architecturally difficult to grasp. Many attempts to do so have ended up in overloaded pathos or in seeking refuge in pre-democratic building fabric as if we did not have enough self-confidence for an independent typology. The author, Christian Lankes, puts it this way: "We still seem to find ourselves in a dilemma between democracy and architecture. Democracy is not reflected in architecture but finds space. Dignities are obsolete. The dignity of democracy lies in its essence, in its ability to rationally resolve conflicts, not in the pathos of architectural gestures."1

65

Israel | Palestine Photographic Essay Texture Elements Propaganda Blindness Layers Separation Culture Realities Occupation Identities Displacement Partition Complexity Stops Vision Solution

68

Fabric

Fig 022 - Texture

69

Fig 029 - Fire

Fig 031 - Earth

70

Elements

Fig 030 - Wind

Fig 032 - Water

71

Propaganda

72

73

Blindness

Fig 028 - Peres Center for Peace and Innovation

74

Peres Center for Peace & Innovation, Tel Aviv in Jaffa Instead of daring to look inland, the building's generous glazing faces west towards the sea.

75

76

Layers

77

Separation

"Sperranlage" bei Bil'in westlich von Ramallah Manchmal fast unscheinbar teilt die sogenannte "Separation Wall" das Land in zwei Einheiten

Fig 023 -78Ein Land

79

Fig 024 - Markt in Hebron

80

Fig 025 - Markt in Jerusalem

Culture

81

Fig 026 - Tunnelroad

Realities

82

Fig 027 - Hope - Hebron

83

Fig 037 - Colonies

84

Occupation

85

Fig 035 - The Palestinian Museum

Identities

86

Fig 036 - Yad Vashem

87

88

Displacement

89

Fig 041 - Barriers

Partition

90

91

92

Complexity

93

Fig 033 - Al-Shuhada Street

Stop

94

Fig 034 - Mitzpe Ramon

95

Fig 038 - Tower 1

Fig 039 - Tower 2

96

Vision

97

Fig 040 - Hebron- Towers

Solution?

98

Fig 043 - Solution?

99

Fig 043 - Solution.

Solution.

100

101

Assembly Situation Scenario Leitmotifs Manifest Design Construction Materiality

104

4.1

Situation

Fig 044 - wire 105

4.1.1

Peaceprocess On November 29, 2012, a large majority of the 193 UN member states voted for recognition of Palestine as an observing non-member. With 136 votes, Palestine received 70.5% approval. Since this vote, access to the International Court of Justice (IGH) and the International Criminal Court (ICC) and other sub-organizations of the UN has been guaranteed. While many people want to regard this as the birth of an independent state of Palestine in a two-state solution to the Middle East conflict, there are those who speak of a disturbance of the peace process. The most recent UN resolution on the “Peaceful Settlement of the question of Palestine” of November 30, 2017, was passed with 151 votes. It contains "two states. Israel and Palestine, side by side within secure and recognized borders" and a "just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem in accordance with UN Resolution 194." The Two-States solution means "two states for two ethnic groups." The desired state of Palestine, west of the Jordan River, should exist alongside the state of Israel but this “solution” would also accept the borders after the 6 days war in 1967 and the territorial separation of Gaza and the West Bank. The two-state solution is the version of a solution to the conflict that has been under discussion for years. Starting with the Madrid conference in 1991, followed by Oslo I in 1993, the Gaza-Jericho Agreement in 1994, Oslo II in 1995, the failed Camp David II meeting in 2000 and the continuation in Taba in 2001. In 2002 the Arab League launched the Arab Peace Initiative. From the Sharon Plan of 2004, Ehud Olmert developed the 2006 Convergence Plan. The last, also unsuccessful attempt was the Israeli-Palestinian Peace Talks 2013–2014. The Israeli ruling party under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has made it unmistakably clear several times that there should never be a Palestinian state. A resolution on the expansion of Israeli settlements without restrictions and the expansion of Israel's sovereignty to the West Bank was approved by the ruling party's central committee on New Year's Eve 2017. An amendment to this law, passed afterwards, made the future division of Jerusalem more difficult.

Peace negotiations were thus made even more difficult. The course was also set to establish a legal system for around 430,000 Israeli settlers, while the Palestinians living in the West Bank should continue to live under military rule. Human rights defenders worldwide criticize the government's course towards a reality of an apartheid state.

The Israelis seem to have recognized the favor of the hour, to take advantage of the foreign policy situation with Donald Trump as US President. The latter has already recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and has had the US embassy relocated from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.1

106

Fig 045 UN -Vote

107

4.1.2

The only Democracy in the middle east Israeli rule of law under threat Benjamin Netanyahu proudly calls Israel the "only democracy in the Middle East."2 However, the latest political developments show how healthy the democratic state of the country really is. The political ethos and declared goal of Israel's founding generation was to create a "democratic" and a "Jewish" state. Today, on the other hand, a picture of the incompatibility of these two attributes is emerging. In addition to the visibly undemocratic situation in the occupied territories with an ongoing settlement program, it is currently above all the domestic political developments in the heartland of Israel that should be of concern to the democrats. In the aggressively conducted 2019 election campaign, the incumbent prime minister, Minister Netanyahu expressed his political stance as follows: "Israel is not the state of all its citizens. Thanks to the new nation-state law we have passed, Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people alone.”3 Since elections in September 2019, the country's 1.3 million Israeli Arabs have been represented by only 12 of the 120 members of the 22nd Knesset, and they almost stand for the remnants of the liberal-democratic state. An increasingly conservative trend in the formation of a government is discernible.

The ethnocentric understanding of democracy that Netanyahu's party Likud represents is similar to the positions of some democracies in the European Union, such as Italy or Hungary. Due to the worldwide noticeable right-wing national shift, values of liberal democracy are losing importance. "Left-wing" parties, such as the labor party of state founder, David Ben-Gurion, currently play hardly any role in the political process, while unfair mobilization strategies allow right-wing populist and racist currents to grow stronger. Benjamin Netanyahu faces charges in three cases of bribery, fraud and embezzlement. He is suspected of having granted legal privileges to the telecommunications giant Bezeq as Minister of Communications. In exchange, the group's media "Walla" is said to have provided positive reporting. Netanyahu is also suspected of having accepted expensive gifts from billionaires and in return offered to weaken his competitor, Arnon Moses, a publisher critical of the government.

In addition, negative coverage of political rivals is said to have been ordered. Netanyahu's followers react leniently to his manipulative handling of the media and accusations of embezzlement. Despite the domestic political crisis surrounding Netanyahu's corruption scandal, his Likud Party was re-elected in September 2019 with 25.1 % of the vote. Although the formation of a government is again proving difficult due to a lack of partners willing to form a coalition, it is astonishing that the accusations do not play any role in the electoral decisions of about one-fifth of voters.4

108

Fig 046 li: israelische Siedlungen in der West Bank, re: palästinensische Gebiete

In an article published on April 24, 2019, Shimon Stein, Israeli ambassador to Germany until 2007, and Israeli professor and historian, Moshe Zimmermann, understand Israeli voters' understanding of democracy as a kind of "reality show" in which viewers can also vote on the verdict of possible criminal offences. Supporters of Netanyahu understand election successes as acquittal of all charges. The majority has obviously decided against the corruption accusations or consider embezzlement and bribery to be peccadilloes. The same developments can be observed in other countries with right-wing national governments such as Poland or Hungary. The program of right-wing populists is uniform: The institutions of liberal democracy are to be fought as "instruments of oppression of the old elites. Despite 40 years in power, Netanyahu's Likud still sees itself as the party of the outcasts and the victim of a conspiracy led by left-wing powers.5 The high election result of Benjamin Netanyahu gives reason to fears of a progressive dismantling of liberal values in Israel and the prospect of a peaceful solution to the Middle East conflict. During the election campaign, Netanyahu promised his supporters the annexation of parts of the West Bank. A process that has been underway for 50 years, but never has been communicated so openly by a government. This would mean the official end of the two-state solution, to which he last committed himself in 2016 with the words: "My government will adhere to the agreed goal of two states for two peoples."6

109

4.1.2

Four Solutions Possible solutions to the conflict have been discussed for years. Four scenarios have emerged over the decades of conflict.

Resettlement In February 2016, a meeting was held in the Jordanian port city of Aqaba between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, King Abdullah of Jordan and former US Secretary of State John Kerry. They discussed the possible resettlement of Palestinians living in the occupied territories to the northern Sinai. The news channel Al-Jazeera reported that this plan had been in existence for some time. Already in 2004 there was the proposal to cede 60,000 square kilometers of the northern Sinai to Palestinians. Another variant of this proposal was presented in 2017 by Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump. According to this proposal, Egypt would gain control of the Gaza Strip, the West Bank would be in control of Israel and Palestinians living there would be offered Israeli citizenship. Different reactions were heard from Egypt. President al-Sisi had already announced that he would not give up any customs duties on Egyptian soil. In April 2017, during a visit of al-Sisi in Washington, he called the resettlement proposal the plan of the century. The resettlement proposal is the latest in a series of offers to bring the longest lasting conflict to an end.7

The two-state solution The most prominent proposal for a two-state solution is also the most discussed one, and the one to which the European Union is committed. The proposal was first discussed in the so-called Peel Commission, which was set up by the British Mandate in 1937. The sobering conclusion the commission also came to was: "There is an insurmountable conflict between the two peoples living in close proximity. Their national hopes were not compatible with each other and so the country had to be divided into two states. The plan received a new impetus at the beginning of the new millennium. However, as skepticism grew on both sides and the Israeli settlement program was not stopped, the second Intifada occurred, which resulted in numerous deaths and was supposed to end the peace process indefinitely. The current government's shift to the right has further complicated the situation. Resentment and doubts about a two-state solution also increased among the Palestinian population.

Given the urban sprawl in the West Bank, a clear demarcation of borders has become impossible anyway.8 The difficulties in implementing this "solution" lie in four elementary issues of the conflict, as Max Fisher of the

110

New York Times explains very graphically in the print edition of December 30, 2016.

Borders, refugees, Jerusalem, and security are the points on which there is the least agreement.

Already, Israel's settlement project, which splits up the regions governed by the Palestinian Authority into a fragmented territory, has been a cause for concern. It is highly unlikely that settlements will be evacuated and around 391,000 settlers will be withdrawn. The possibility of the return of Palestinian refugees since the War of Independence in 1948 and the Six-Day War in 1967 is one of the central questions in finding a solution. The number of refugees and their descendants, amounts to about 5 million. Both sides claim Jerusalem as their capital. The relocation of the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem by U.S. President Donald Trump, further complicated the basis for negotiations. For Israelis, the issue of security is of fundamental importance. "Surrounded by enemies," the Israeli people do not feel unjust. It is not only the conflict with the Palestinians that causes concern among the Israeli population. The civil war in Syria with an uncertain outcome, an unstable system in Lebanon, and the continuing threat posed by Iran also play a major role in the Israelis' need to defend themselves and in the security policy significance of a military presence in the West Bank.9

The One-State Solution The concept of a one-state solution envisions the creation of a single democratic and secular state with a population of equal rights in a single country between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River, within the borders of today's Israel, Gaza and the West Bank. This solution was already discussed during the British Mandate in the 1920s for a possible peaceful coexistence between Jews, Christians and Arabs. A well-known early representative of the idea of a bi-national state was the Austrian-Israeli philosopher, Martin Buber. In 1947, even before the founding of Israel, he criticized the idea of a Jewish national state in a hostile environment and termed it "national suicide." The one-state solution as an alternative to the two-state solution plays hardly any role in the peace process today and finds little support among the Israeli population. Israelis and Palestinians would live in one state with equal rights. Since many Israelis are in favor of abolishing Israel as a Jewish state, they see the basic idea of the Zionist movement to explicitly establish a state for Jews in Palestine endangered.

Due to demographic developments, the one-state solution would also mean that Jews would once again be a minority. Arab nationalists and supporters of pan-Arabism have also traditionally rejected this solution. According to a survey conducted by the Hebrew University in 2013, 63 percent of Israelis and 69 percent of Palestinians do not agree with a bi-national state.10 A Confederation Another proposal is the proposal of a confederate Federal Republic of Jordan-Palestine. According to this proposal, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip would form a federal state. Conceivable and desirable in this train would also be an expansion in the direction of a confederation of states "Palestine-Jordan-Israel." This would also correspond to the demographic realities. Currently 22% Israelis live in the West Bank, while around 23% Palestinians live in Israel.11 A confederation as an extended confederation of states, was also addressed by Hannah Arendt even before the founding of the state of Israel. For Hannah Arendt, there was also a significant difference between a "national Jewish home" and a Jewish nation state. Her vision also included the inclusion of surrounding Middle Eastern states in a larger federal structure.12

111

4.2

Scenario

112

IA VALENC

TUNIS

ANTA

MARSEILLE

LYA

BARCELONA

RO

ME

BENGHAZI

PORT SAID

IR M

IZ

HASNA

ATH

ALGIER

ENS

ARISH

ISTANBUL

RAFAH AL QOSIMAH KHAN YUNIS NITZANA

GAZA SA‘AD ASHKELON ASHDOD

TEL AVIV - YAFO BE‘ER SHEVA

MIZPE RAMON

SEDE BOQER

QIRYAT GAT RAMLA

HERZLIYA NETANYA VE NIC

E

HAIFA DIMONA

TULKARM

HEBRON

AKKO

RAMALLAH BETLEHEM

NABLUS

JERUSALEM SHILO

AFULA

TYRE IN RS ME

NAZARETH

TUBAS

JERICHO

SIDON

TRIPOLI

JENIN

SEDOM

BEIRUT

TIBERIAS

BET SHE‘AN

METULA

SHOBAK AT-TAFILAH

BYBLOS

KERAK MADABA

AS-SALT

HAMAT

AJLOUN

N

IRBID

JERASH

TRIPOLI

KARAK NOUH

AMMAN JASIM

SASA

BSHARRI

DARAA

AZ-ZARQA

AL-MAFRAG

IZRA

DAMASCUS DUMA

113

Fig 047 - Satellit

4.2.1

New Land Two people, one State A coherent geo-political unity can be recognized in Palestine at least 3000 years before Christ. This is how it is portrayed in both Palestinian and Zionist historiography. For 1,500 years, the Canaanite area stretched from the Jordan Valley to the Mediterranean and from the mountains of Lebanon to the Sinai Desert before being successively used by the Philistines, the Israelites, the Phoenicians, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, the Persians, the Macedonians, the Romans, the Arabs, the Crusaders, the Ayyubids, the Mameluks, up to the Ottoman Empire. Except at the beginning, the region remained largely unchanged in cultural, religious and ethnic terms in the Roman period and the early Arab period.1 Only the British occupation and later the Zionists took up one of the periods mentioned above to justify their seizure of power and to substantiate it historically. The one-state solution includes various concepts and interpretations that differ fundamentally. These interpretations range from a unitary state, through a federal state, to a loose Arab-Israeli confederation. A bi-national solution, such as that used in Bosnia-Herzegovina, would guarantee Jews and Palestinians their legal and ethnic identity, while offices would be divided between the two population groups in a proportional system. One concept that opposes this solution is the principle: One Person - One Vote, as it was introduced in South Africa after the end of apartheid. With the latter, however, a demographic race for the majority in this state would be expected. Israeli conservatives favor a Zionist unitary state in which Palestinians and other minorities such as Druze or Bedouin are only granted minority rights.

The idea of ​​a Jewish-Arab state in Palestine was born in the 1920s. The organization Brit Shalom ("Peace League"), founded by Martin Buber, Robert Weltsch and Judah Magnes, campaigned for a bi-national state in which the same rights should apply to both peoples. Socialist and pacifist Zionist groups such as Hashomer Hatzair, Mapam, Ichud or the League for Jewish-Arab Rapprochement, later adopted the concept of the binational state. The Vienna-born religious philosopher Martin Buber was one of the earliest representatives of this idea. He recognized the impending conflict with the Arabs living in Palestine and predicted it as protracted and bitter. Instead of the "short-sightedness" of national self-interest, Buber advocated a "greater realism" based on the politics of dialogue.2

114

Fig 048 Hannah Arendt

Fig 049 Martin Buber

Before Israel was founded, many Jewish intellectuals were convinced that a state could be formed on a partnership basis. Hannah Arendt also had this vision and even spoke of a larger federal structure that could include other countries in the Middle East: “The real goal of the Jews in Palestine is to build a Jewish home. This goal must never be sacrificed to the pseudosovereignty of a Jewish state.”3 Hannah Arendt was increasingly critical of Zionism, but also noted the need for a Jewish retreat due to the inevitable anti-Semitism. After the idea of a ​​ unified democratic state in Palestine did not find a majority in the UN General Assembly and the division into a Jewish and an Arab part of Palestine prevailed, the inner-Jewish resistance to the concept of a Jewish state also largely disappeared.

The establishment of Israel in May 1948 and the subsequent war with neighboring Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq and Egypt made the concept of a bi-national solution out of the question. To date, this idea has received little popularity. Although facts were created with the Israeli settlements in the West Bank and made a two-state solution hardly feasible, this is the only solution that is being discussed at the political level.

The basic idea for the initial scenario of this draft relates to the concept of a new state. A state whose name is still to be defined and whose detailed formulation and constitution would go beyond the scope of this work.

Whether in the end it is a bi-national state with the current borders of Israel, Gaza and the West Bank or a larger federation of states in the Middle East, as mentioned by Hannah Arendt, remains open to the vision of this work.

The concept of a pluralistic democratic society with equal rights for all is the one part of this starting scenario.

115

A

VALENCIA

PORT SAI

HASNA

NEKHEL

ARISH

RAFAH

EL THAMAD

AL QOSIMAH

KHAN YUNIS

NITZANA

GAZA

BE‘ER SHEVA

MIZPE RAMON

SEDE BOQER

EILAT

SA‘AD ASHKELON

QIRYAT GAT

LOTAN DIMONA

QABA

HEBRON

BETLEHEM

J

SEDOM

AL MDAYREJ

SHOBAK AT-TAFILAH KERAK

MA

MA‘AN

DO YOU MISS ANYTHING? 116

AN TA LY

ATHE NS

BARCELON

RO ME

TUNI S

ASHDOD

TEL AVIV - YAFO

RAMLA

HERZLIYA

NETANYA

TULKARM

RAMALLAH

JERUSALEM

ADABA

IER ALG

ZI GHA BEN

R

MI

IZ

HAIFA AKKO

NABLUS

SHILO

AFULA

TYRE

NAZARETH

JENIN TUBAS

JERICHO

SIDON

TIBERIAS

BET SHE‘AN

AS-SALT

AMMAN

BEIRUT

METULA

AJLOUN

IRBID

JERASH

KARAK NO

JASIM

SASA

DARAA

AZ-ZARQA

IZRA

AL-MAFRAG

DAMASCUS DUMA

117

4.2.2

New Democracy "Multibody Sortition" as possible solution Even with the imagination of a one-state solution, the question remains how to define the political system of a "new" state in the Middle East. Given the decades-long conflict between Palestinians and Israelis, with casualties on both sides and unresolved land claims, it is difficult to imagine a just future with a conventional political system. Citizens' trust in politicians and in the old political order with parties as representatives and a fair system based on elections, seems very unlikely. At the same time, there is a high risk that populist tendencies will gain strength in this context. After all, populist parties understand best how to further fuel existing fears and mistrust among citizens and use them for their own agenda. The role of the media and their independence must also be questioned critically, especially in the context of Israel and Palestine. With the development of the democracies of the West, the conventional democratic system seems to have lost its function as a role model.

Democracies in the west as role models? The development of western democracies shows the weaknesses and problems of the electoral representative system as we know it today. In view of the current situation, experts speak of a crisis of democracy. If one wants to evaluate the state and functioning of a democracy, two criteria in particular are considered; efficiency and legitimacy. While efficiency deals with the capacity to act, i.e., the question of how quickly a government can implement solutions, legitimacy describes the acceptance of these solutions and the authority of the government among the population. As a rule, the two criteria are inversely proportional to each other. The more undemocratic a form of government is, the more efficient a political system is. In extreme cases, one person decides which law is passed on the same day. However, lasting legitimacy is rarely given in dictatorships. The reverse extreme case would mean that all citizens have to participate in every decision. This would have a negative effect on the government's power to act and decide. A balanced system of legitimacy and efficiency is thus the goal of a healthy democracy. Today, however, we must face an extraordinary problem. Western democracies are simultaneously facing a crisis of legitimacy and efficiency.4 The legitimacy crisis can be identified by three developments in recent years. The first and most conspicuous indication of a crisis of legitimacy of governments in the West, are the voter participation figures for recent years.

A steady decline testifies to a lack of interest among citizens in actively participating in political events. However, the ever-increasing voter migration also illustrates the precarious situation. Not only fewer voters come to the

118

polls, but the voting is also more erratic than 20 years ago. The phenomenon of the so-called protest voter with no clear attitude or loyalty to a party, expresses the displeasure and distrust of citizens towards politics. The third clear symptom of a legitimacy crisis is the declining number of party members. On average in the EU today, only 4.65% of eligible voters are members of a party. However, it should be noted that the "new" democracies, Spain, Portugal and Greece, which only became democratic in the 1970s, still show an upward trend in party membership. It seems that fewer and fewer people can identify themselves with the political actors in the system.5 The most important question is whether a parliament can still be representative at all, in the face of the points mentioned above. As mentioned above, not only legitimacy is in question- the second major problem of today's democracies is the so-called efficiency crisis. It seems increasingly difficult to form governments and coalitions today. Coalition negotiations, which are taking longer and longer, show how difficult it is to form a government.

This has been demonstrated above all by the situation after elections in Spain, Italy, Greece and the Netherlands.

In Belgium it even took a year and a half to form a new government after the 2010 elections.

But not only the formation of a government takes a long time, also governing itself and the implementation of decisions and laws today is much more difficult than 20 years ago. Infrastructure projects like the new train station in Stuttgart or the planned international airport in Nantes, show the situation very clearly. Governments in Europe are dependent on dozens of local and supranational actors. Today, such ventures are no longer prestige projects as they would have been years ago, but rather an "administrative nightmare."6

An alternative model At this point I would like to continue the imaginary journey to a pacified Middle East and introduce another element to this vision. By introducing one of the common models of democracy known in the West, a balanced political system in the Middle East seems difficult to imagine. However, conclusions resulting from the crisis of Western democracies could lead to a reformed model of democracy which might play a role in the scenario of a pacified Middle East. One possible solution is the introduction of a deliberative democracy. In the following, a system based on lottery instead of elections will be presented. In 2013, the US-American political scientist and former member of the House of Representatives of Vermont, Terril G. Bouricius published an article with the title: "Democracy Through Multi-Body Sortition: Athenian Lessons for the Modern Day." The goal of this democratic enterprise is to learn from the mistakes and advantages of Attic democracy and to involve the general population in the political process rather than just those who are interested in it. The basic idea of allowing all citizens to participate in the political process was given in ancient Greece by drawing lots. It was crucial that citizen participation was not only applied to the People's Assembly but also to the Council of 500, who set the agenda and could revoke the law before the People's Court by drawing lots. In this way a system of checks and balances was created that fulfilled three important objectives: 1. Ensuring good representation of citizens by the legislative bodies 2. Resistance to corruption and concentration of political power 3. Opportunity to participate in the political process.7

119

Apart from the great advantage of the lottery procedure: to generate the best and fairest cross-section of the population, the first question to be asked is whether the general population is sufficiently motivated to participate today. The previously mentioned decreasing voter turnout suggests that the willingness to participate in political organization is rather low. Since in this scenario, however, a new foundation of a state is at the beginning and it is about the building of a society after the conflict, it can be assumed that there is a general willingness to participate. This is also shown by the still increasing number of party members in the "new" democracies of the EU: Portugal, Spain and Greece.8 And even in the old democracies of the West it has been shown what citizen participation can lead to. Bouricius argues in his study that most citizens would easily participate for a certain period of time, with adequate compensation especially in a process in which they believed that their contribution mattered. He compares the situation of jurors in the United States who, according to surveys, first complain about the reputation of state duty, but then leave the service with a heightened sense of citizenship.9

The system described by Bouricius also attempts to offer different levels of willingness to devote personal time to self-management. In this system, the majority of the participants would only use a very limited amount of time, for example not more than one week.

Not only the difference in size between city-states of ancient Greece and today's state territories with their populations raises questions, in this context, Bouricius formulates 5 dilemmas that a lottery procedure raises.

The main issue is to find the ideal size, duration, selection and consultation methodology in a system. The goal is to find a large representative sample in a lottery, so that decisions can be made more easily in smaller groups.

A quick rotation would promote participation, but longer mandates also lead to more solid work. Everyone who wants to, should have the opportunity to contribute to the political process, but as we see in today's democracies, this would lead to an overrepresentation of highly educated citizens. The consultation of citizens among themselves is to be promoted, which can also lead to group thinking. The committee drawn by lot should be given as much power as possible. However, there is also the danger that some individuals may gain too much weight in the group process. In Bouricius' proposal, various committees are used, each with unique characteristics, such as selection method and term of office.

120

Democracy Through Multi-Body Sortition: Athenian Lessons for the Modern Day Terrill G. Bouricius

5 DILLEMMAS

Lottery Procedure large representative sample

More efficiency in smaller groups

Fast Rotation more participation / combating susceptibility to corruption

Longer mandates lead to more solid results

Voluntary Participation Possibility for everyone to participate in the political process

Overrepresentation of certain interests

Exchange of opinions Promotion of discussion and consultation among citizens

Group thinking, too easy consensus building

Power to the Lottery Power of decision in a commission chosen by lot

Overweighting of single individuals / arbitrary results

Fig 050 - 5 Dillemmas of a Lottery System Journal of Public Deliberation Volume 9 | Issue 1 -Article 11

121

Development of issues Submission of legislative proposals

Program and issue finding for legislative purposes.

Evaluation of current problems and need for action

150 - 400 Citizens Selected by lottery among voluntary participants

12 per panel Voluntary interested parties / interest groups

1. Agenda Council (agenda and petitions) A body selected by lot, called the Agenda Council, would have the responsibility of setting the agenda of the political decision-making bodies - but not for the development of legislative proposals, nor for voting on them. The Athenian system did not completely isolate the agenda from the development of proposals, as the Council of the 500 could play a role in both. The assignment of meta-legislative tasks to a body separate from the normal legislative process follows the long-standing principle of "checks and balances" or separation of powers. This body could be selected using a twotiered lottery system of the willing. Such a two-tier lottery system was also used in Athens, where a group of 6,000 citizens over 30 years of age were elected for a one-year term of office for the courts of the People's Courts and the legislative bodies.The Agenda Council and its staff would identify problems that require attention, rather than simply reacting to pressure from the media or special interest groups. For example, the United States now faces a little-discussed but undeniable infrastructure deficit (transportation, water systems, etc.) that is likely to be ignored by elected representatives because there is no benefit in addressing the problem. The goal is to determine the agenda rationally and not according to electoral imperatives. But petitions from the population, with a hurdle to be determined, should also be able to influence the agenda. The Agenda Council is to be determined by drawing lots among applicants. 10

2. Interest panels (preparation of legislative proposals) Once an agenda is set, volunteers are encouraged to organize themselves into interest groups to draft proposals for legislation. To facilitate active participation, these groups should not exceed 12 members. The interest groups would submit legislative proposals, but are not authorized to adopt them. In Athens, selected citizens (ho boulomenos) could propose laws or regulations, but these generally had to go through several self-selected and assigned bodies (the Assembly, the Council of 500 and the People's Court) before they were finally adopted. The number of interest groups may vary according to the subject matter and should remain unlimited. The Athenian principle of Isegoria (freedom of speech) should be applied here in a derived form. In order to prevent possible influence, the individuals should not be able to speak directly to the decision-making body at the end of the process, in contrast to Athens. The final decision on a law is made by the Policy Jury. Since the aim of the Interest Panel is to make proposals that meet with approval, it is to be assumed that extreme positions are rarely elaborated. The organization of meetings and discussions in the Interest Panels can vary greatly and therefore does not necessarily require a formal framework.11

122

In-depth research on topics Expert Hearings Drafting of legal texts

Voting on legislative proposals

150 members are assigned to the respective departments in working groups Selection by lot among all adult citizens

400 citizens selected by lot in the plenum

4. Policy Jury (Voting on Laws) Due to the risk of group dynamics or an extremely polarizing proposal, final decisions are made by a separate committee.

Each Policy Jury would vote on a law in the same way as the People's Assembly of Athens.13 For representativeness, it is important that the lottery is held among the entire adult population. Participants will therefore be decently compensated for their participation.

The Policy Jury listens to the various legislative proposals drafted by the Review Panel and an objective presentation of arguments for and against, and then votes on them in a secret ballot. There is no more discussion, there is no party discipline, no peer pressure, no tactical voting behavior, no political haggling and no friendly service. In order to avoid that charismatic speakers influence the vote, the legislative proposals are presented by neutral members of the 6th body of this system, the Oversight Council. Since a good cross-section of the entire society is represented, the decisions of the Policy Jury are validated by law. It cannot be ruled out that critical decisions may be made on the basis of ethnic origin and personal history, especially in the Middle East. A regulatory algorithm in the drawing of lots could prevent a possible accidental overrepresentation. In order to express the meaning and weight of one's own voice, it is advisable that members, similar to the Athenian Heliatic Oath, promise to vote impartially, in the interest of peaceful coexistence and in accordance with conscience and reason. Short terms of service in combination with compensation payments and some symbolic status fees can achieve an appropriate level of participation and thus a descriptive representativeness. The Policy Jury should have a minimum of 400 members in order to obtain a representative sample.14 In times of multimedia networking via the Internet, an even larger Policy Jury would be conceivable.

However, the importance of the decision speaks for a smaller group. It is important to avoid decisions being taken lightly, e.g. on smartphones. A dignified architectural framework should symbolize the scope of the political decision.

3. Review Panels (review of legislative proposals) For each field of expertise there would be a respective Review Panel. The "Council of 500" (Boule) is the closest analogy to Athenian democracy. Unlike the Boulé in Athens, the Review Panels can neither initiate a law nor vote on it in the end. The Review Panels perform most of the functions of a traditional legislative body, except for the initiation and final adoption of laws. The aim is to develop a deeper understanding in a defined area. In traditional legislation, only a small number of members of a parliament normally have the right to deal intensively with an issue. According to the survey, few parliamentarians, those who vote on it at the end, have read and understood a proposed law completely. Voting on laws is often not based on personal expertise, but on party political decisions in the parliamentary groups or vote trading. The concept of Review Panels tries to eliminate this kind of voting decisions. The input from the Interest Panels is reviewed in the Review Panels by organizing hearings, inviting experts or panel discussions. In a further step, the drafting of the legal texts is initiated. Review Panels can also set targets or criteria for final legislative texts and refer draft texts back to the Interest Panel for revision. The selection of members would work in the same way as the Agenda Council - a "lottery of the willing" whereby resorts may not be selected by themselves to avoid possible bias.

The Review Panels would be adequately compensated and provided with meals, childcare and a pleasant working environment. The third body in this system would be full-time, with a staggered term of three years. In this way, new members of the Review Panel can be introduced to a field of expertise 12

123

Development and further development of processes

Monitoring and control of the compliance with the established rules

50 Persons selected by lot among volunteer applicants

20 people selected by lot of volunteer applicants

5. Rules Council (determination of the rules of procedure) A Rules Council, similar in form to the Agenda Council, would establish rules and procedures for all other bodies and councils, such as the lottery procedure itself, quorum requirements, means of obtaining expert opinions, procedures for advice, remuneration and terms, etc.

The members would have limited terms of office. It should be in their natural interest to ensure the fairest and best functioning of all bodies.

It may be appropriate to limit the possibility of participation to those who have previously served on another body.

On the one hand, this provides an additional offer to those who want to continue to engage in politics; on the other hand, it ensures that members have already dealt with the system in detail and a basic understanding of how it works.

With the Rules Council as the 5th body in this system, there is the possibility of changing the legislative process in the future. A self-learning system that can react flexibly to possible political and social changes.15

6. Oversight Council (enforcement of rules) The last body, determined by lot, deals exclusively with compliance to the rules laid down by the Rules Council. In addition to evaluating the general performance of the staff, they would decide, for example, on complaints or on biased or unfair presentations of the staff. As mentioned above, the Oversight Council's responsibilities also include, as neutral government officials, presenting draft legislation from the Review Panel to the Policy Jury. As metalegislative bodies, the Rules Council and the Oversight Council act as authors and guardians of the rules of this system.16 Members of the Oversight Council were to serve a limited term of 3 years, with 1/3 of the officials being replaced each year. As with the Agenda Council, Review Panel and Rules Council, a draw will be held among voluntary applicants.17

124

Democracy Through Multi-Body Sortition: Athenian Lessons for the Modern Day Terrill G. Bouricius

1

2

3

4

5

6

Agenda Council

Interests Panels

Review Panels

Policy Jury

Rules Council

Oversight Council

Program and issue finding for legislative purposes.

Evaluation of current problems and need for action

Development of issues Submission of legislative proposals

In-depth research on topics Expert Hearings Drafting of legal texts

Voting on legislative proposals

Development and further development of processes

Monitoring and control of the compliance with the established rules

WORKING GROUP-RELATED COMMITTEES

MEETING AND VOTE

ADMINISTRATION

ADMINISTRATION

COMMITTEE AND SUBCOMMITTEES

WORKING GROUPS SMALL / LARGE LOBBIES

Democracy Through Multi-Body Sortition: Athenian Lessons for the Modern Day Terrill G. Bouricius

1

2

Agenda Council

Interests Panels

3

4

Review Panels

Policy Jury

LEGISLATION

5 6 PROCESS DEVELOPMENT AND CONTROL

Rules Council

Oversight Council

Journal of Public Deliberation Volume 9 | Issue 1 -Article 11

150 - 400 Citizens Selected by lottery among voluntary participants

12 per panel Voluntary interested parties / interest groups

150 members are assigned to the respective departments in working groups Selection by lot among all adult citizens

400 citizens selected by lot in the plenum

50 Persons selected by lot among volunteer applicants

20 people selected by lot of volunteer applicants

Full time Rotation every three years (1/3 per year)

participation for an unlimited time

Full time Rotation every three years (1/3 per year)

1 - 2 days Every time a law must be adopted

Full time Rotation every three years (1/3 per year)

Full time Rotation every three years (1/3 per year)

Single and Group Working Units

Council meeting

Group Discussions

Single Workspaces

Working Groups

Lecture

Panel Discussion

Talk

General Assembly

Einzelarbeitsplätze

Groupdiscussions

Fig 051 - Multibody Sortition - Terminology by Terril.G. Bouricius

125

Administration

Singel Working Units

Group Discussions

Administration Singel Working Units

Democracy Through M Athenian Lessons Terrill Interest

2. Interests Panels Development of issues Submission of legislative proposals

Organi lectur fr

~ 250 MP

150 MP

12 MP x N N = Interestpanels, Lobbys

Legislation

Agenda

Proposal

Petition

<400 MP

400 MP

1. Agenda Council

Program and issue finding for legislative purposes.

Evaluation of current problems and need for action

126

4. Policy Jury

Anonymous voting and passing of law

Multi-Body Sortition: s for the Modern Day G. Bouricius

3. Review Panels

ization of expert hearings, res etc. based on the input rom the interest panels

5. Rules Council

Review and modification of procedural rules

P

50 MP

20 MP

Controlling

6. Oversight Council

Monitors compliance with the current rules

127

4.3

Design

128

129

4.3.1

Motifs

130

Fragments

Transformation

Structure

Transparency

Borders

131

CALEDONIA OCEANUS GERMANICUS

HIBERNIA

BRITANNIA

SARMATIA GERMANIA BELGICA

OCEANUS ATLANTICUS

GALLIA

RAETIA

DACIA

NORICUM

PONTUS EUXINUS BLACK SEA

PANNONIA

AQUITANIA

PARTHIAN EMPIRE

THRACIA

ITALIA

HISPANIA

ARMENI A

MOESIA

ILLYRICUM DALMATIA

ASSYRIA

CAPPADOCIA

MACEDONIA

CORSICA

CILICIA ASIA

MESOPOTANIA

SARDINIA

LUSITANIA

GALATIA

BAETICA

SYRIA

SICILIA CYPRUS JUDEA

GREAT SEA WESTERN SEA

MAURETANIA

ARABIA CYRENE

AFRICA

AEGYPTUS

LEBANON

40.150 to Canada

Rural Refugees

U

Urban Refugees Acre R: 29.500 U: 8.500

5.700 to Canada

SYRIA

Safad

EUROPE

411.730 to USA 97.800 to USA

Tiberias

Haifa

R: 41.500 U: 75.000

Nazareth

R: 22.000 U: 6.000

R: 9.500

el l sra ae oI Isr to 4t .94 3.000 22

R: 38.000 U: 10.500

Refugee Routes

85

R

Baysan Jenin

R: 10.000 U: 5.500

R: 4.500 U: 500

To Beirut

a

Ar

ge

Ar to

o 76 .93 7

.49 0t

27

nt in

nt in

a

y Ur ug ua to 10 .95 0

ralia

R: 27.000 U: 28.000

R:5.000 U: 9.500

Hebron

Gaza

R: 22.000

Beersheba

R: 500 U: 6.500 + Bedouin

EGYPT

Sweden

Canada

15.000 - 18.000

~20.000

Great Britain

Denmark

few thousands

16.000 - 20.000

Germany ~30.000

Irak USA

50.000

Other Arabic States

Kuweit

~5.500

38.000

150.00 - 200.000

Libya 24.000

Other Gulf States

Egypt

105.000

50.000 - 80.000

Saudi Arabia 275.000

South America few thousands

Fig 052 - Jewish and Palestinian Diaspora

132

to Aust

Jerusalem

ge

23

Ur ug ua

TRANSJORDAN

il az

Br

10 .95 7

Ramallah

R: 57.000 U: 35.000

5 .67

to

7.000

al-Ramla

Br

to

to

35

.4 31

Jaffa

y

il az

Nablus R: 44.000 U: 69.000

15.580 to South Afr ica 8.810 to Sou th Africa

Tulkarm R: 10.500 U: 1.000

Fragments Common Identities Migration as characteristic, consequence and origin of the Middle East conflict is a phenomenon that unites all ethnic groups of the region.

With growing anti-Semitism at the beginning of the 20th century, the Zionist project strengthened and a increasing flight and mass migration to Palestine took place.

After the end of the Second World War, Jews all over the world considered themselves survivors and saw their very existence threatened. The Holocaust (Shoah, heb.: catastrophe) made a refuge for Jews an existential condition.

The riots in Palestine in the 1940s led to the first Israeli war of independence, which resulted in the displacement of Arabs to the West Bank (Nakba, arab: catastrophe), to Gaza and the surrounding Arab states.

Both Jews and Arabs have always based their actions on their suffering and forced migration, which made both sections of the population a fragmented people's structure. Fragments, as a unifying characteristic of both folk myths, can be a strong motif for a society that has accepted and overcome the past.

133

Fig 053 - Cedric Price: The Fun Palace, interior perspective

“The more durable a building is to be, the more it must be flexible and changeable. Only the truly changeable, adaptable constructions do not age. They always remain new because they are constantly rejuvenating.”

Frei Otto

134

Transformation Future-ready The option for change, that is given in the proposed political system with the Rules Council should also be made possible spatially. A transformative process in the political system as well as in the building is promoted by the construction and a predefined modularity. The spatial merges with the concept of function.

Based on the concepts of the Japanese metabolists from the 1960s and their demand for an adaptable architecture that evolves away from the statically immutable towards an architecture that is adapted to needs, the concept provides to create the framework conditions for the greatest possible flexibility and simple transformation , Ambassadors of this architectural understanding, such as Constant Nieuwenhuys, Yona Friedmann, Cedric Price or Archigram, are inspiration for the idea of this design.

135

Structure A Metaphor for Permanence

A system of horizontal and vertical elements that are mutually supportive and ensure stability as a whole can be seen as a metaphor for a political system. Only the interaction of all individual components creates the resilience, which, in contrast to solid components, becomes visible and comprehensible. A structure also stands for honesty and transparency of its static function and is flexible for change.

136

137

Fig 054 - Nest we Grow / Kengo Kuma & Associates

138

Fig 055 - Motive aus Licht und Glas.

Transparency Building Trust Transparency as a leitmotif of democratic buildings is well used and quite obvious, but still essential when it comes to being accessible to the public, even if this happens only visually. Transparency creates trust in the function that is not hidden behind closed facades.

139

Borders Impermanence of Barriers The topic of openness, not only visual but rather in the experience and accessibility of a building, is one of the most elementary attributes of democratic buildings. Barriers dominate the physical but also the psychological reality of the Middle East conflict. Access to territories or information is largely controlled and restrictive. History has shown that borders and barriers in the spectrum of time lose their meaning and consequence. For the legislative structure in this scenario, barriers need to be avoided and (spatial) boundaries to be dissolved.

140

Fig 056 - Border Dynamics

141

4.3.2

Manifesto

142

INSTRUMENT - NOT MONUMENT "DECENTRALIZATION" - FRAGMENTS AS A MOTIF FOR COLLECTIVE IDENTITY THE PUBLIC AS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE ASSEMBLY PARTICIPATION AS MOTIF FOR A DEMOCRATIC BUILDING FLEXIBILITY AND ADAPTATION AS A MOTIF FOR PERMANENT TRANSFORMATION DISSOLVE BORDERS AND BARRIERS COLLECTIVE REAPPRAISAL AS THE FOUNDATION OF A STABLE DEMOCRACY

143

4.3.3

Location Jerusalem is considered to be one of the key issues in the Israel-Palestine conflict. Both peoples claim the holy city as the political center of their state. This fact and the history of Jerusalem make this place the ideal starting point for this thought experiment.

The “Damascus Triangle” north of the old town was part of a broad buffer zone between Jordan and Israel after the First War of Independence. As a neutral ground, it is still considered the border between East and West Jerusalem. A place that, given its neutrality, cannot be historically claimed for either side. The topography found allows a generous view of the historic old city of Jerusalem and is equally visible in the city structure.

144

Fig 057 - Jerusalem Satelite

145

146

1949ARMISTICE ARMISTICELINE LINE 1949

OLDCITY CITY OLD OFJERUSALEM JERUSALEM OF

147

148

149

A

4

3 2

F1

C

1 6

5

B

150

A

6 5

1 2

3

B

4

3

2 1

5

1 Bus stop 2 parking 3 Tram stop 4 Highway 60 5 parking 6 Damascus Gate A Viewpoint 1 B Viewpoint 2 C Viewpoint Panorama 151

C

Fig 058 - Damascus Triangle

152

153

WEST JERUSALEM

E IN

EL

IC IST RM

A 49 19

1 FORMER BUFFER-ZONE

2

OLD CITY WALL

DAMA

OLD CITY

154

3

E IN

EL

C TI

IS RM

A 49 19

2 EAST-JERUSALEM

ASCUS GATE

Urban Planning Intervention 1 2 3

Tunnel extension Highway 60 Merge Bus station Relocate Tram stop

155

4.3.4

Concept The concept of the Assembly is divided into three conceptual spheres. The levels of information, reality and imaginary stand for three Tempora: Past, Present and Future which are spatially translated into the following three elements ARCHIVE The foundation for a peaceful solution lies in a joint analysis of history. The archive as an active instance for consensus building with regard to the prevailing narratives forms the level of the past and the information. The underground building complex is accessible to the public via a cut in the terrain and contains a hybrid of archive and educational facility.

PLACE The second level and level of the present, in other words the "reality" or the "now", is the public square. In addition to a place for social exchange, it provides space for trade, culture and public discourse. The square forms the mediating level between archive and Assembly. It is both access level and buffer zone for both institutions.

The structure of the Assembly floating above the square can be reached via an elevation. In the topography of the square, the artificial hill forms an antipole to the incision in the terrain. A sharp edge is created by cutting off the modifications of the terrain. The disturbance of the otherwise homogeneous topography is to be understood as a reference to border lines.

ASSEMBLY The Assembly building above the square represents the future and the imaginary. A place where decisions are made and where future is shaped. The concrete form of the structure and the space it creates, as well as its existence on the site, is not sealed. The concept aims to enable and provoke a process of migration and transformation in the building.

156

ASSEMBLY

SPACE OF NEW BEGINNING TEMPORARY / TRANSFORMATIVE / TRANSIENT

IMAGINARY

FUTURE

MARKET | CULTURE | PUBLIC

INTERACTION BETWEEN PERSONAL AND COLLECTIVE IDENTITIES PRESENT

REALITY

ARCHIVE OF THE CONFLICT

FOUNDATION FOR A CONSENSUS

INFORMATION

CONSTANT / STATIC / RESISTANT

ASSEMBLY

DECENTRALIZED LOCATION OF THE LEGISLATIVE, TRANSFORMATIVE SPACE FOR TRANSFORMATIVE POLITICS NOMADISM AS AN IDENTITY-CREATING FEATURE OF ONE REFORMED UNDERSTANDING OF DEMOCRACY

PAST

FUTURE

MARKET | CULTURE | PUBLICITY THE PLACE AS A CATALYST OF PUBLIC LIFE AND EXCHANGE MARKET AND TRADE AS A CULTURAL IDENTITY

PRESENT

ARCHIVE OF THE CONFLICT

THE ARCHIVE AS A CENTRAL FOUNDATION / ORIGIN OF A PEACEFUL SOLUTION PARTICIPATION AND ACCESS TO THE ARCHIVE AND TO THE CONSTITUTION AND ITS INTERPRETATION AS A STANDARD FOR EFFECTIVE DEMOCRACY

PAST

157

MODIFICATION OF TOPOGRAPHY

ARCHIVE OF THE CONFLICT

158

PUBLIC SQUARE

ASSEMBLY

159

Assembly DECENTRALIZED LOCATION OF THE LEGISLATIVE, TRANSFORMATIVE SPACE FOR TRANSFORMATIVE POLITICS NOMADISM AS AN IDENTITY-CREATING FEATURE OF ONE REFORMED UNDERSTANDING OF DEMOCRACY

TRANSFORMATIVE / ORIENTED TO THE PROCESS

IMAGINARY

FUTURE

Public PRESENT

THE PUBLIC SQUARE AS A CATALYST OF PUBLIC LIFE AND EXCHANGE MARKET AND TRADE AS A CULTURAL IDENTITY

REALITY

Archive of the Conflict THE ARCHIVE AS A CENTRAL FOUNDATION / ORIGIN OF A PEACEFUL SOLUTION PARTICIPATION AND ACCESS TO THE ARCHIVE AND TO THE CONSTITUTION AND ITS INTERPRETATION AS A STANDARD FOR EFFECTIVE DEMOCRACY

PAST

INFORMATION

160

CONSTANT / STATIC / ENDURING

Rules Council Interest Panel ADMINISTRATION

Oversight Council

Agenda Council

Policy Jury

Assembly

Review Panel

Public Space

Consensus

Dissent

Archive

161

4.3.5

Public Sphere | Square

FICTION

Grid -Topography - Disturbance

Public Square The public space serves not only as buffer space between archive and Assembly, but also as a mediator for both functions. By manipulating the topography, the entrances for archive and Assembly are created.

A fold in the plaza ensures access to the archive, while an elevation offers the possibility to enter the floating structure of the Assembly. The rigid grid of the structure dominates the square. A disturbance is created by a line in the perpendicular pattern.

164

Tram Stop

Kinder

GEBÄUDEGRENZE ASSEMBLY

Public Forum

LICHTHOF

GEBÄUDEGRENZE ARCHIV

Urban Gardening

ROLLTREPPE

ZUGANG ARCHIV ROLLTREPPE

LICHTHOF

öffentlicher Platz

Marktplatz

Markt-Gastronomie freie Bühne

LICHTHOF

ZUGANG ASSEMBLY

Urban Gardening

öffentlicher Park

s Gate

Damascu 10

165

20

FIKTION

Grid -Topography - Disturbance

This disturbance stands as symbol for border and can be perceived as historical reference. The harmony of the landscape (topography) is disturbed by a human intervention and shows the brutality and absurdity of borders in the special context of the Middle East. The artificial axis becomes apparent in the inner courtyard of the archive. The structure of the Assembly, in which the fictional border no longer matters, overcomes this rift.

166

167

168

169

4.3.6

Archive

Concept | Archive WORKSHOPS

ARCHIVE

PATIO

ADMINISTRATION PUBLIC

EXHIBITION

The functional areas archive, workshops and administration are situated around three courtyards. In addition to illuminating the work and access areas, the courtyards provide a visual link between public and visitors space and the archive space. Classic functions such as collection, cataloging, restoration, digitization and archiving are supplemented by the educational mandate. Visitors should be given the opportunity to participate in the process. The center of the complex is an Exhibition Space. Access, exhibition, event areas and the actual archive are arranged around the main courtyard in three layers.

ARCHIVE

|

EXHIBITION |

PUBLIC |

EXHIBITION |

ARCHIVE

|

WORKSHOP |

PUBLIC |

WORKSHOP

ARCHIVE

|

EXHIBITION |

PUBLIC |

EXHIBITION |

ARCHIVE

|

WORKSHOP |

PUBLIC |

WORKSHOP

172

COMMUNICATION & ACCESS

Eingang

ACCESS

Locker

Toilets

Storage

ARCHIVE

Visitors

CheckIn

Information

Foyer

EXHIBITION

Visitor

CAFETERIA

EDUCATION & EXCHANGE Visitors

Exhibition

Storage Visitor Cafeteria

Storage

Mediathek Kitchen

Storage

Events Storage staff Workshop

Visitors Restoration

LOGISTICS WORKSHOPS

Archiving

Distribution

Delivery

Logistics/ Controlling & Packaging

Interim Storage

WS Analogue Photography

Storage Cleaner

Waste

ACCESS

WS Cartography

WS Buchbinder

WS Reproduktion

Public Rel.

Exhibition

Conference

Think Tank

WS Metall

WS Restoration

Storage

Storage

Storage

Staff

Changing Room

ADMINISTRATION

Deliveries & Staff

WS Carp.

Janitor

Workshop

Material Storage

TECHNICAL FACILITIES

Education & Exchange

Communication

Kitchenette

Events

Server

Preservation

First Aid

Logistics

Director

Building Service

Toilets

HVACR Control Centre

Utility Interface

SPACE DISTRIBUTION

DELIVERY / STAFF ENTRANCE

Delivery Hall

Distribution

Material Storage

Logistics/ Control Interim Storage and Packing Space

Painting

Changing Staff Room

Workshop

Storage Storage

ENTRANCE

Storage

Events

INNERCIRCLE

Information

Utility Interface

Archive

Laboratory Storage

Events

Storage

Kitchenette Server

Foyer

HVACR Control Centre

Kitchen

CIRCULATION

Access

Building Service

Archive

Garbage Cleaning Storage

Lockers

Archive

Storage

Storage

OUTERCIRCLE

Restroom

Archive

Archive

Janitor

CheckIn

Cafeteria

First Aid

Restroom

Library WS Ceramics

WS Wood

WS Metal

WS Restoration

WS Analogue Photography

WS Cartography WS Bookbinding Bookbinding ,Repro

Workshop

FACADE

Admin Commun

Admin Admin Edu&Exch Exhib

Conf.

Space

Think Tank

Admin Events

Directors Admin Admin Preserv. Logistics

COURTYARD

CAFETERIA

ADMINISTRATION

WORKSHOP SPACE

EDUCATION & EXCHANGE

LOGISTICS TECHNICAL SPACE EXHIBITION SPACE

173

Archive Logistics, Archive - Objects, Video, Audio, Print

Entrance

Admi Comm Works

174

Workshops Photography, cartography, printmedia, Bookbinding, Wood- & Metalworkshop Restauration, Laboratory Digitization Archive

inistration munication, Exhibition, Educational Program, Events, shopmanagement, Management, Conference

175

1

2

UTOPIA 2

2

2

3

1 2 3

LIBRARY EXHIBITION EVENT VISUALIZATION

Visitors to the archive are led down inclined levels. The visitor's space ends in an auditorium below the courtyard.

The main circulation encircles the inner courtyard, which is set apart from the facade. The lavishly landscaped and topographically designed courtyard itself is part of the exhibition and can be understood as a further reference to the Israel-Palestine conflict. It represents one of the central issues of conflict between the two people: ‘a piece of land’. It is an element of utopia which can never be reached within the complex of the archive.

176

177

Archive | 0 1 2

Main Entrance, Archive Information center | 300m2

178

GSPublisherVersion 0.1.100.100

Eingang Archiv Mediathek, Cafeteria

5

1 ,

2 Eingang Infozentrum Wechselnde Ausstellungen

10

179

20

Archive | 0 1 Library | 350m2 2 Foyer | 225m2 3 Lockers | 50m2

180

2

4

Eingang Archiv Mediathek, Cafeteria

1

3

10

GSPublisherVersion 0.1.100.100

181

20

Archive | -1 1 Technical Facilities | 130m2 2 Logistics/ Packaging | 220m2 3 Distribution | 120m2 4 Delivery | 150m2 5 Interim Storage | 75m2 6 Exhibition | 420m2 7 Mapping, Print, Reproduktion | 100m2 8 Wood-Workshop | 80m2 9 Metal-Workshop | 100m2 10 Circulation | 170m2 11 Management | 170m2 12 Public Relation | 75m2 13 Exhibition / Event | 300m2 14 Archive | 650m2

182

Werkstätten Fotografie,Kartography, Printmedien, Buchbinderei Holz- & Metallwerkstatt Restauration, Labor Archiv Logistik, Archiv - Objekte, Film und Ton, Print..

7 8

2

5

4

9

3 1

10

6

11

13 12 14 Administration Kommunikation, Ausstellung, Bildungsprogramm, Werkstättenmanagement, Verwaltung, Direktor,

14

10

GSPublisherVersion 0.1.100.100

183

20

Archive | -2 1 Technical Facilities | 130m2 2 Archive | 785m2 3 Bookbinding | 106m2 4 Digitization | 108m2 5 Photography | 162m2 6 Photo - Lab | 60m2 7 Communicationzone | 170m2 8 Exhibition / Event | 720m2 9 Archive | 400m2 10 Auditorium | 380m2 11 Archive | 250m2

184

Werkstätten Fotografie,Kartographie, Printmedien, Buchbinderei Holz- & Metallwerkstatt Restauration, Labor, Digitalisierung Archiv Logistik, Archiv - Objekte, Film und Ton, Print..

4

3

5

2

2 7

1

6

8

10

11 9

10

GSPublisherVersion 0.1.100.100

185

20

Archive | -2 1 Technical Facilities | 130m2 2 Archive | 225m2 3 Archive | 560m2 4 Technical Facilities| 80m2 5 Exhibition | 285m2

186

Archiv Logistik, Archiv - Objekte, Film und Ton, Print..

4 2

1

3

5

10

GSPublisherVersion 0.1.100.100

187

20

4.3.7

Assembly

System

TIMBER

5M

CONCRETE

20M

10M

30M

2

1

10M

3

The structural system of the Assembly is based on a 10 x 10 meter grid. In order to partially span larger spaces, such as for the large assembly hall, the strict column grid will be "cleared".

The dimensions of the adjacent components vary according to their "new" structural requirements. An order of individuality arises, which is reflected in the diversity of the structure. The overlying grate resumes the original order.

3

1

2

0

1,20

0,6

190

0

0,8

CONSENSUS

DISSENT

191

Interessen

2. Interests Panels

Einreichung von einem oder Teilen eines Gesetzesvorschlags / Formulierung von Interessen

3. Review Panels

Organisation von Expertenanhörungen, Vorträgen usw. auf Basis des Inputs aus den Interest Panels

~ 250 MP

5. Rules Council

Überprüfung und Modifikation von Verfahrensregeln

150 MP

12 MP x N N = Interessensgemeinschaften, Lobbys

50 MP

Gesetzgebung

Gesetzesvorschlag

<400 MP

20 MP

400 MP 6. Oversight Council Überwacht die Einhaltung der aktuellen Regeln

1. Agenda Council

Vorschlag von Themen für Gesetzesänderungen

4. Policy Jury

Anonyme Abstimmung und Verabschiedung Gesetz

Program The program is spatially translated into the structure according to the political system of "Multibody Sortition".

The possibility for expansion of space remains. The spatial program of the "Assembly" is generously supplemented with areas for the public.

192

Controlling

Räumliche Beziehung

Integration der Öffentlichkeit

193

Rules Council Interest Panel ADMINISTRATION

Oversight Council

Agenda Council

Policy Jury

194

Review Panel

Public Facilities

Roof Garden

Agora

195

Forum

Public sphere The individual spaces, the elements of the Assembly are surrounded by a coherent network of paths, terraces and squares. The public thus becomes an integral part of the building and gains insight and participation.

196

3

I 4 B V 2

A

6

5

R P

A

R

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 A I P R V B

AGORA GASTRONOMY TERRACE FORUM ROOF GARDEN GALLERY AGENDA COUNCIL INTEREST PANEL POLICY JURY REVIEW PANEL VERWALTUNG VISITOR CENTER VISUALIZATION

197

198

199

Mat-Building The system for floor plan organization is formed by cutting the basic grid of 10m x 10m in half and overlaying it with a second grid, which is created by offsetting these 5m axes on both sides. The program will be distributed within this tartan-like pattern, whereby the dimensioning of the volume and the public circulation is based on a 40m x 40m grid. 40 meter correspond to about 30s walking time. The overlapping grid defines the zones for the public pathways through the structure. Following the strategies of "Mat-Building", which were developed by various architects in the 1950s - 1970s, this design attempts to offer an answer to future transformation processes within the building and includes a strategy for expansion, conversion or reproduction at other places.

2. INTEREST PANEL

3. REVIEW PANEL

~30s GEHZEIT

4. POLICY JURY

40M 1. AGENDA COUNCIL DIMENSION BAUTEILE / ÖFFENTLICHE DURCHWEGUNG KONSTRUKTION 10 x 10 / 5 x 5 ÖFFENTLICHE ERSCHLIESSUNG

GSPublisherVersion 0.1.100.100

GSPublisherVersion 0.1.100.100

GSPublisherVersion 0.1.100.100

200

Fig 059 - FU Berlin - Candilis, Josic, Woods and Schiedhelm

"Mat Buildings can be said to epitomise the anonymous collective, where the Functions come to enrich the fabric, and the individual gains new freedoms of action through a new shuffled order, based on interconnection, close knit patterns of association, and possibilities for groth, diminuition and change" Alison Smithson

201

Assembly

Assembly Kontext Kontext

Assembly Assembly

Kontext Kontext

Assembly

Damascus Triangle

Archiv

Decentralization While the functions of archive and public space represent the unchangeable and are thus fixed in place and form, the concept of the Assembly provides the possibility for a transformational process.

Like politics itself, the building is based on the premise of being reactive and able to react to changes in system and use. This transformation includes the possibility of expanding the building. The building in Jerusalem could also be supplemented by satellite structures distributed over the national territory.

The possibility of constructing or extending parts of the building at other locations should increase the possibility of identification and thus the legitimacy of the institution itself among the population.

202

BSHARRI

HAMAT

BYBLOS

BEIRUT

KARAK NOUH

DUMA

SIDON

TYRE

DAMASCUS

METULA SASA

235km

JASIM AKKO

IZRA

TIBERIAS

HAIFA NAZARETH

DARAA

1,5h

AFULA

IRBID km

BET SHE‘AN

215

JENIN TULKARM

AJLOUN

NETANYA

AL-MAFRAG

TUBAS JERASH

NABLUS HERZLIYA

TEL AVIV - YAFO

SHILO

AS-SALT

RAMALLAH

1h RAMLA

ASHDOD

AMMAN

m

JERICHO

70k

JERUSALEM BETLEHEM

km

100

MADABA

QIRYAT GAT HEBRON

1,3

h

ASHKELON SA‘AD

2h

GAZA

KHAN YUNIS RAFAH

BE‘ER SHEVA

KERAK

ARISH

SEDOM

240km

DIMONA

NITZANA SEDE BOQER

AT-TAFILAH

AL QOSIMAH

MIZPE RAMON

SHOBAK

HASNA

MA‘AN

AL MDAYREJ NEKHEL

LOTAN

EL THAMAD

EILAT TABA

203

AQABA

AZ-ZARQA

Assembly Hebron

204

Assembly Nablus

205

Assembly Negev

206

Assembly Haifa

207

Interest Panel

Oversight Council

Besucherzentrum

Agenda Council

208

Rules Council

Review Panel

Policy Jury

209

Assembly | +1 1 Agora 2 Foyer - Zugang Agenda Council | Policy Jury | 475m2 3 Agenda Council | 1.000m2 4 Public Path 5 Escalator 6 Access Review Panel 7 Access Besucherzentrum 8 Access Administration 9 Access Interestpanel 10 Public Forum

210

10

9

8 5

6

7

5

H

3

2

4

10

1

20

211

Assembly | +2 1 Agenda Council | 2.000m2 2 Visitor Centre / Restaurant | 650m2 3 Interestpanel | 1.800m2 4 Administration | 350m2 5 Review Panel | 1.420m2 6 Policy Jury | 635m2 7 Public Path 8 Foyer / Security | 200m2

212

4

3

5

2 7

6 1

8

7

10

20

213

Assembly | +3 1 Agenda Council | 825m2 2 Interestpanel | 1.775m2 3 Administration | 350m2 4 Review Panel | 1.650m2 5 Policy Jury 6 Policy Jury - Galerie 7 Roofgarden

214

3 2

4

6 1 5

7

10

20

215

Assembly | +4 1 2

Oversight Council | 635m2 Rules Council | 700m2

216

1

2

10

20

217

FUTURE TRANSFORMATION POSSIBILITIES

OVERSIGHT COUNCIL

RULES COUNCIL

INTEREST PANEL

REVIEW PANEL

218

FUTURE TRANSFORMATION POSSIBILITIES

POLICY JURY

AGENDA COUNCIL

219

AGENDA COUNCIL

Topic determination, Agenda, Dialogue with the public, Research Petitions

Public Path

Visitor Centre

Promenade, Roofgarden, Gallery, Forum

Library, Restaurant

Policy Jury - Galery, Roof Garden

Conference Room

MAIN ENTRANCE - POLICY JURY AGENDA COUNCIL

REV

Prep

POLICY JURY

Large ballot hall, Pnyx. Presentation of the bill by 3 me Voting among a committee chosen b

220

INTERESTPANEL

Preparation of legislative proposals, "Lobbies" in autonomous groups formulate interests Transfer of proposals and requests to review panel

ADMINISTRATION

OVERSIGHT COUNCIL

Compliance monitoring of rules of procedure

RP | AUDITORIUM

Hearings, panel discussions, interviews with experts, Lectures for general information collection for "Committees

VIEW PANEL

paration of the legislative proposal based on the input of the interest panel

embers of the Oversight council by lot | 400 persons

221

Agenda Council 1. Agenda Council (proposals on topics) The legislative process begins in the Agenda Council. It is the place where the agenda is set. Problems are identified or introduced via petitions. In addition to examining and researching individual topics, decisions are made together on where action is needed and what needs to be negotiated in the further process. "The Common" or "the Collective" should be spatially symbolized. The visibility within this body strengthens the collective nature of the Agenda Council. Visual relationships are enabled by a ring or atrium configuration.

1. Agenda Council

1. Agenda Council

Vorschlag von Themen für Gesetzesänderungen

Vorschlag von Themen für Gesetzesänderungen

The Collective

Ring

222

BISTRO

ROLLTREPPEN

POLICY JURY

FOYER

PLENUM

AGENDA COUNCIL

LICHTHOF

10

20 223

LUFTRAUM

Interest Panel 2. Interest Panel (preparation of legislative proposals) In the Interest Panel, legislative proposals are developed by smaller interest groups. The focus here will not be on an exchange of ideas between groups, but rather on individual units. Self-organized groups of up to 12 people assemble here. The individual units are spatially organized in cells.

2. Interest Panel

2. Interest Panel

Erstellung von Gesetztesvorschlägen

Erstellung von Gesetztesvorschlägen

Units

Cell

224

PUBLIC FORUM

INTEREST PANEL

BIBLIOTHEK REVIEW PANEL

225

BISTRO

Review Panel 3. Review Panels (review of legislative proposals) The Review Panel organises hearings, interviews with experts, lectures and discussions. The input coming from individual Interest Panels passes through a process of review and comparison leading to a final legislative proposal.

The various situations and settings along this path are translated spatially in a bracket or u-shape configuration.

3. Review Panel

3. Review Panel

Gesetztesvorschläge überprüfen und ausarbeiten

Gesetztesvorschläge überprüfen und ausarbeiten

Process

U-Shapes

226

ANEL

ROLLTREPPEN

TECHNIK

REVIEW PANEL

AUDITORIUM

POLICY JURY

FOYER

227

Policy Jury 4. Policy Jury (Vote on legislation) Arguing against a physical space for voting in the era of digitization is fundamentally understandable. However, a dignified framework speaks for the importance, significance and burden of this institution. An architectural experience is essential for the ritual of a vote. In the design of a hall, the significance of each individual voice is to be emphasized through proportion of human to space.

4. Policy Jury

4. Policy Jury

Abstimmung über Gesetzesvorschläge

Abstimmung über Gesetzesvorschläge

Rite

Hall

228

ROLLTREPPEN

TECHNIK

BIBLIOTHEK REVIEW PANEL

BISTRO

AUDITORIUM

ROLLTREPPEN

POLICY JURY

FOYER

NUM

AGENDA COUNCIL

229

Assem

The Parliament building of the F An imaginati

230

m bly

Future in a pacified Middle East tive Journey

231

Building physics

Green spaces for microclimate

Cross ventilation

Horizontal sun protection

Water surfaces in place level

Component activation of the ceilings

4.3.8

Construction Textile sun protection, Linen white, extendable

Extensive greening + substrate 10cm Waterproofing 2nd layer - slated - root resistant Sealing 1st layer Root-resistant/self-adhesive gradient insulation Vapor barrier PE foil 0,2mm Concrete/wood composite floor ( prefabricated)

Industrial screed (with hard grain infill) PE foil 0,2mm Cement-bonded particleboard Hollow floor 15cm /installation area Concrete/wood composite floor (precast) H: 30 +20 Component activation of the ceiling Cooling in summer Heating in winter

Textile sun protection, Linen white, extendable

Solar radiation (Summer/Winter)

Roofgarden

D3

Cross ventilation

D2

Two-pane solar protection glazing Reinforced concrete primary structure 10m x 10m

D1 Glass parapet

BSH Laminated timber Secondary construction 5m x 5m

232

Concrete/wood composite prefabricated panel, h: 20+15

Climate conditions RAINFALL - ANNUAL IN MILLIMETERS

CLIMATE ZONES ACCORDING TO W. KÖPPEN Csa Bsh BWk BWh

- Mediteran (Hot summer) - Semiarid - Arid Climate (Desert) - HyperArid

800 700 600

600

600

500

400 300 200 150 100 50

<25

Fig 060 - Annual precipitation

Fig 061 - Climate-Zones ALTITUDE 90°

35

JUN 12

HIGHEST RECORDED TEMPERATURE

80° 11

30

13 70°

25

14

10

60°

AVERAGE TEMPERATURE - MAX

20

9

15

50°

AVERAGE TEMPERATURE

15

40°

AVERAGE TEMPERATURE - MIN

10

8

16 11

13

10

7

0

12 DEC

30° 14

17 20°

9

-10

15 18

6

TIEFSTE AUFGEZEICHNETE TEMPERATUR

8

10°

16

-15 120°

JAN

FEB

MAR

APR

MAY

JUN

JUL

AUG

SEP

OCT

NOV

DEC

90°

60°

0°

30°

30°

60°

90°

120°

AZIMUT

ANNUAL

Fig 062 - Average temperature

Fig 063 - sun position 0% 1% 30% 46% 23%

< 20 20 - 40 40 - 60 60 - 80 > 80

87,94 WEST

EAST

34,94

14m/s 12m/s 10m/s MAX

MIN

Ø MIN Ø

10%

MAX

NOV 18:00

SEP

MIN

0%

24:00

WIND SPEED IN M/S

Ø

RELATIVE AIR HUMIDITY in %

JUL

MAX

12:00 MAY

WIND TEMPERATURE in °C

6:00

MAR JAN

HOURS 20%

Fig 064 - Wind direction

Fig 065 - Humidity

233

Industrial screed (with hard grain infill) PE foil 0,2mm Cement-bonded particleboard Hollow space floor 15cm / Installations Concrete/wood composite slab (prefabricated) H: 30 +20

Cover strip ( pine)

12mm 2x TVG white glass Silicone joint heavy

Hollow floor stand h:15cm Hollow floor Installation area, cable routing electrical, EDP Double-glazed insulating glass lower part - black enamel on the back Precast concrete/wood composite panel

Prefabricated concrete/wood composite panel

Glass mounting stainless steel profile 1.2cm Mounting on concrete slab Neoprene bearing Diffusion-tight foil

Foil diffusion open glued Cover plate

Thermal insulation boards 8cm - WLG 040

Timber beam layer interlocked in secondary construction span width 5m

Support in secondary construction

Glued laminated timber - Glulam pine secondary construction max span width 10m

Reinforced concrete girder grid (10 x 10m) | primary construction max span 20m

Construction technology concept - Connection detail D1 - M10

GSEducationalVersion GSPublisherVersion 3.1.99.100

234

Industrial screed (with hard grain infill) PE foil 0,2mm Cement-bonded particleboard Hollow space floor 15cm / Installations Concrete/wood composite slab (prefabricated) H: 30 +20

Edge insulation strips

Hollow floor stand h:15cm Hollow floor Installation area, cable routing electrical, EDP

Precast concrete/wood composite panel Neoprene bearing Foil diffusion open glued

Cover Plate Component activation of the ceiling mass storage, Supply by solar thermal energy Cooling in summer Heating in winter

Guide rail Sun protection

Window profile - pine

Fitting strip natural pine

Cross ventilation

Automatic ventilation flap Cross ventilation over inner courtyards

Window profile - pine

Construction technology concept - Connection detail D2 - M10 GSEducationalVersion GSPublisherVersion 3.1.99.100

235

Textile sun protection, linen white, extendable

D3 - M10

Extensive greening, 150 mm Bituminouse waterproofing, slated and root resistant Heat insulation slabs Vapour barrier raw ceiling, reinforced concrete-wood composite panel 200 mm Gutter sheeting, integrated into roof cladding

Cross slope 2°

Thermal insulation boards 10cm - WLG 040

Filter fleece pulled up to Gravel Shield Gravel Shield Gutter substructure made of three-layer boards, weatherproof glued Vapour barrier and vapour compensation layer

Cover Plate

Cross Ventilation

Glass mounting stainless steel profile 1.2cm

Double-glazed insulating glass

GSEducationalVersion GSPublisherVersion 3.1.99.100

236

Wood reinforced concrete composite panel

Pine - Glued wood - Construction Dimensioning according to span widths and structural requirements

237

4.3.9

Concrete Reinforced concrete is unquestionably the dominant construction material in the Middle East conflict. Whether it is watchtowers, barrier blocks or the 8-meter high wall that separates large parts of the West Bank from Israel. Concrete is the unvarnished truth that conflicts bear. The heavy and above all hardly destructible material, which can be poured into any possible shape or can be installed immediately as a prefabricated element, turned out to be the most suitable material for the high demands of conflict constructions. In addition to its use for border fortifications or other barriers in conflict areas, concrete is also used to provide a stable framework for residential buildings and has become indispensable as a building material for private homes. Not only the application within the context of a conflict, but also its visual and tactile qualities give it a heavy, threatening and unapproachable connotation. In contrast to masonry, for example, which can always be understood as a testimony to human activities, the traces of human work - the craft - are blurred in concrete elements. Anchor holes and joints are the only reference to the formation process of a concrete building component. Among other things, the lack of reference to craftsmanship is responsible for the inhumane character to which concrete is usually ascribed. The intention of concrete, however, is not to appear humane, but to be raw, solid and honest. The essential architectural idea remains visible. The naked forms and the structural system appear, freed from all decorative elements, pure and openly visible. Uncovered concrete elements symbolize pragmatism, honesty, as well as durability and stability.

238

Fig 066 - Betlehem Wall

239

Fig 067 - Pineforest

Fig 068 - Destroyed Palestinian Villages

Fig 066 - Forestation-program 240

4.3.9

Pines Using timber as building material for a parliament in a pacified Middle East has two crucial connotations.

Due to the circumstances described above, which among other things have led to the planting of pine forests, a political dimension must be given to the raw material of timber from this region. In the scenario of an enlightened society in the Middle East, on which this work is based, a common Israeli-Palestinian historiography is assumed. This includes above all the honest dealing with traces of past events and making them visible. This work proposes to use precisely those trees and woods that still cover the ruins of Palestinian villages today.

In addition to the political significance that wood has for this design, it is also the social and ecological aspect that speaks for the choice of this material.

Wood stands for naturalness and honesty. Two characteristics that should correspond to a building of democracy. The easy reproducibility of wooden elements is an advantage for the concept of migration and transformation within the building. The symbolism of wood and especially the contrast to a primary structure of concrete should leave space for interpretation.

Financed by reforestation programs and organized by the Jewish National Fund, over 240 million trees were planted across the country from 1908 to the present day. In a country that consists to 2/3 of desert, this is about 8% of forest area.

Besides terebinths, cedars, oaks, cypresses, almonds, pistachios, olives or walnut trees, pine forests were planted on a large scale. In addition to economic and ecological backgrounds, the elaborate reforestation program also had a political dimension. The official narrative of the Zionist movement "The Land without people for the people without land"1 was to be ensured by systematically erasing Palestinian traces in the region. As a result of the expulsion of over 700,000 Palestinians in the so-called Nakba (Arab: catastrophe) of 1948 from Israel to the West Bank, Jordan, Lebanon and Egypt, over 400 Arab villages and small towns were destroyed. The ruins of the destroyed villages and thus the traces of Palestinian life were to disappear as quickly as possible from the view of the newly arriving Jews from Europe and the USA. Besides building above bulldozed ruins, such as in Tel Aviv, a very efficient strategy was the planting of pinewoods and other coniferous forests. Apart from their rapid growth, pine trees had the advantage that fallen needles acidified the soil and prevented the growth of undergrowth and other plantations. The land was to be made unusable for grazing livestock and prevent Palestinian herders from returning to their previously cultivated lands. 2

241

4.3.9

Glass Glass, as a transparent, hard and precious material, embodies essential attributes that are symbolic for everyday political life. Even on a closer examination of glass, a clear physical and phenomenological description becomes difficult.

The possibility of creating a closed physical space while maintaining visual openness makes glass particularly valuable. The preciousness of glass is also reflected in its sensitivity. The irretrievability and the visual as well as acoustic effects that destruction of glass entails lead to respectful distancing.

Although today's laminated glass elements by means of glued foils or thermal hardening processes would make a destruction much more difficult and, above all, would change its behavior significantly when destroyed, glass still carries the spirit of a sensitive and fragile material. A material that needs to be protected, but is also hard enough to protect itself to a certain degree. This ambivalence is reflected in its molecular composition: crystalline - amorphous. Crystallized and not crystallized molecule groups alternate.

242

Fig 070 - Glazing

243

Fig 071 - Hebron Linen

244

4.3.9

Linen The building material wood is supplemented with a movable linen sun protection system to protect the bright, sunflooded spaces from direct sunlight. As a second shell, the light textile elements act as a combination of moving and non-moving elements, adding an element of dynamism to the static structure. The material heaviness of exposed concrete elements as well as laminated timber construction is complemented by the lightness of linen. This special aesthetics of an interaction between material elegance on the one hand and construction on the other hand stands analogous to architecture as a visual metaphor for a correlation of two cultures in one country. The textile surfaces produced on the loom are created from crossing threads. The unique accordioning of the fibers characterizes the individual properties of the textile. In a democracy, heterogeneous social structures are created by crossing and weaving different identities, with a special focus on common interests.

The fabrics made from spinnable fibers are thus symbolic of social and political processes in a society.

245

246

247

Appendix Field Trip New Earth References Bibliography Online Sources Figures Quotes

250

DAMASCUS

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15

Tel Aviv - Jaffa

Jaffa, IDF Museum, White City, University Etzel Museum

TYRE

Hebron

METULA SASA

H2 Hebron, Cave of Patriachs, Political Tours, YAS Youth Against Settlements

8

Betlehem

Wall, Settlement, Highway 60, Campus in Camps Dheisheh Refugee Camp Ramallah

JASIM

Bil‘In, Birzeit University, Legaslative Council, Arafat Museum, Mahmud Darwish Museum

AKKO IZRA

HAIFA

Nablus

Talk to Nasser Arafat, Architect - Rest. Old Town Balata Camp, Mount Jerzim Samaritans - Minority

14

15

Jenin

Jenin Refugee Camp UNRWA,

7

TIBERIAS

NAZARETH

DARAA

IRBID

AFULA

Tiberias

BET SHE‘AN

Wall and Tower - Kibbutz Museum Tiberias

JENIN

6

Golan

Golan Heights, Druze Villages Minority, Syrian Border Kibbutz

TULKARM NETANYA

AJLOUN AL-MAFRAG

NABLUS

5

Bezalel Academy of Arts and Design, Knesset, Wall Al Quds, abandoned Legaslative Council - Abu Dis Tel Aviv

Shimon Peres, Center for Peace

TEL AVIV - YAFO

10

Jerusalem

Yad Vashem, Lifta - abandoned palestinian Village

1

JERASH

HERZLIYA SHILO AS-SALT

4

RAMLA

Ein Gedi - Kibbutz

12 JERICHO

9 JERUSALEM 11 3

ASHDOD

Mitzpe Ramon

Beduine Villages - Minorities, Ben Gurion Tomb IDF AirBase Negev Dessert Beer Sheva Brutalism

MADABA

BETLEHEM

QIRYAT GAT

Nazareth

Palestinian Majority Cities in Israel

ASHKELON

GAZA

2

HEBRON

SA‘AD

Haifa

Technion Haifa, Akkon -Palestinian Communities Ein Hod - Illegal Village Israel KHAN YUNIS

BE‘ER SHEVA KERAK

RAFAH ARISH

DIMONA

SEDE BOQER NITZANA

AT-TAFILAH

AL QOSIMAH

MIZPE RAMON

13

HASNA

SHOBAK

MA‘AN

AL MDAYREJ

LOTAN

NEKHEL

EL THAMAD

TABA

251 EILAT AQABA

AZ-ZARQA

AMMAN

RAMALLAH

Jericho

5.1

Fieldtrip

TUBAS

Jerusalem

SEDOM

1

5.2

New Earth 2037 - Le grand Bouleversement

2037 - Le grand Bouleversement The fictional short story entitled "2037 - Le Grand Bouleversement" by Orwell Prize winner Raja Shehadeh, forms the basis for this design. The Palestinian author and advocate lives and works in Ramallah. The story, which is currently published only in Arabic and French, is set in the year 2037. The political situation of this scenario is described only briefly.

In the dialogue between the main protagonists Leila and Moshe, schematic insights into society and previous events are outlined.

It gradually becomes clear that a nuclear catastrophe, referred to in this short story only as "L'Horreur" (the horror), had led to the rural regions of today's Israel / Palestine becoming uninhabitable. The entire region, which was forced to cooperate and show solidarity in the face of the common crisis, joined to form a federation of states. Countries and their borders as we know them today became obsolete as a result of the catastrophe. For decades, only cities could be inhabited, while the rural regions became nuclear-contaminated and infertile.

By the time of the story, the catastrophe took place almost 30 years ago and people began to cultivate the regenerated land again. Radiation-proof express trains connect the metropolises of the region: it is possible to travel from Istanbul to Tiberias within two hours, while the train journey to Damascus takes just 30 minutes.

Leila, the main protagonist in this story, had tried to organize a family meeting and reunite her family, who had been scattered all over the world since the expulsion of many Palestinians in 1948. The huge gathering should take place at Mount Arbel near Tiberias.

Over 50 invitations have been sent to the descendants of her grandfather, the Palestinian journalist Najib Nassar. The story takes place one week before the planned meeting. Leila, who herself lives in Great Britain, took two upcoming events as an occasion to celebrate the great family and to organize a meeting: The procession to celebrate the renewal of the Jordan Valley and the great bicycle race from Syria to Tiberia.

A long-time friend of the family, Moshe Levinger, should also be invited to the meeting. The short story is mainly about the reunion of the two and a conversation about the current situation.

252

„II portait un short et un tee-shirt sur lequel était ecrit en arabe et en hebreu: « Fêtons la Nouvelle Terre ».“1

He was wearing shorts and a T-shirt with the slogan "Celebrate the New Earth" written in Arabic and Hebrew.

Moshe reports about an exhibition he had visited with his son Nathan in Bet She'an the morning before meeting Leila. His story provides above all an insight into the social consensus of this fiction. It describes the conflict-ridden past that has been part of this exhibition. Moshe, who was an Israeli citizen before the catastrophe, recounts the barriers, walls and checkpoints that shaped the image of his youth. He himself was then a young soldier in Great Israel and the son of a fervent nationalist. In this fiction, the author already addresses a scenario that is becoming more and more evident in recent times. The complete annexation of the West Bank. A Greater Israel from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean. Although the Palestinians were granted autonomy, the Palestinian and Jordanian security forces worked strictly with the "Israeli Defense Forces". „C‘etaient surtout des photographies de cette epoque stupide: des barrieres, des murs, ce genre d‘absurdites. Elles m‘ont rappele bien des souvenirs, mauvais pour la plupart.“2

They were mainly photographs from this idiotic time: barriers, walls, just this kind of absurdities.

They brought up many memories, mainly bad ones.

It becomes clear how Moshe feels about this time today. He admits that he did not have a single Arab friend during this time and is glad that this "madness" has come to an end, even if the price for it was immeasurably high. „A l‘epoque, comme tu le sais, c‘etait le Grand Israel. Du fleuve a la cöte, toute la terre était a nous. II y avait des colonies juives partout.

Les Arabes d‘lsraäl étaient confines et dociles. On leur avait accorde l‘autonomie mais ils etaient lies a la Jordanie et vivaient saus un regime de securite draconien.“ 3

At that time, as you know, it was the time of "Great Israel". From the river to the shore, the whole land was ours. There were Jewish settlements everywhere. The Arabs of Israel were legally restricted and compliant. They were granted autonomy, but they were linked to Jordan and lived under a draconian security regime.

In the short story, the catastrophe is referred to only as "L'Horreur" (the horror). Moshe describes the events of that day in great detail, following Leila's request: "It was an earthquake that caused the nuclear catastrophe. A heavy-duty transport vehicle, which was transporting new nuclear warheads from Dimona, the then nuclear weapons depot, to Eilaboun in northern Israel, overturned due to the earthquake and caught fire. The authorities had not implemented all necessary safety precautions and could not prevent the detonation of the warheads. The radioactive plutonium was then spread to the west by dry winds, which were common at that time. When it became known that the wind turned and would contaminate the soil and groundwater in the west and north, the inhabitants fled across the river and across the borders to Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. „Malgré ses miradors, le mur qui encerclait la Cisjordanie n‘avait rien pu faire pour empêcher la propagation de la radiation. Les fortifications qui serpentaient inutilement à travers les collines et les vallées ressemblaient a une mauvaise plaisanterie. Les Jordaniens couraient également. Nous fuyions tous ensemble. … Les ennemis d‘hier étaient devenus des compagnons de survie.“ 4

Despite its watchtowers, the wall that surrounded the West Bank could do absolutely nothing against the spread of radiation. The fortifications, which unnecessarily wound their way over the hills and valleys, seemed like a bad joke. Jordanians also had to flee. We all fled together. ... The enemies of yesterday had suddenly become companions of survival.

It soon became clear that this was a catastrophe that wouldn't stop at national borders. And although the question of guilt had to be asked, we were forced to learn to deal with the consequences together. Previously existing enmities became obsolete

253

as a result of the joint escape. The previously all-dominant land claims of the most diverse ethnic groups no longer had any meaning after the destruction of the land. The new common enemy and the fight for survival, which affected all people living in the area equally, led to cooperation and solidarity. „Cette fuite tut comme une sortie de prison. Les gens découvrirent combien leurs langues étaient proches. lls se rendirent compte qu‘ils connaissaient les mêmes endroits, même s‘ils leur donnaient des noms differents. lls virent que le paysage était continu, que leurs cultures étaient fondamentalement liees. Tout ce qu‘on leur avait appris à penser sur leurs differences, qui faisaient d‘eux d‘eternels ennemis, tut mis en doute. En perdant tout, nous gagnâmes notre liberté.“5

This escape was like a prison break. People discovered how similar their languages were. They realized that they knew the same places, even if they gave them different names. They saw that the landscape was continuous, that their cultures were fundamentally connected. Everything they had been taught to recognize their differences, which made them eternal enemies, was suddenly viewed with doubt. By losing everything, we have gained our freedom.

Moshe describes the days after the catastrophe as a great uncertainty. Although the refugee camps, which were quickly set up by UN aid, helped over the first few months, reconstruction and the necessary financing seemed questionable. Contrary to expectations, the funds for reconstruction did not come from the United States, but from the Gulf States. However, the support was tied to a demand. The founding of a new secular country-a confederation that banned any nationalist movement within its territory. Complete demilitarization and denuclearization was intended to prevent the Middle East from ever returning to the conflict region of the past. Despite resistance from all sections of the population, there were no other options than to accept the conditions and rebuild the country with the promised funds. After the Palestinians, Israel and Lebanon decided to form a confederation, Syria and Jordan also joined. Finally, Turkey followed, which wanted to be part of the successful project after the end of nationalism.

"Le Mayen-Orient devait apprendre à cooperer, et les anciennes manières de faire devaient etre abandonnées. Israel devait cesser d‘être un État exclusif. La Jordanie, Israel et la Palestine devaient abandonner leur nationalisme étouffant.“ 6

The Middle East had to learn to work together and not fall back into old patterns. Israel had to stop being an exclusive state. Jordan, Israel and Palestine had to give up their oppressive nationalism.

This agreement was called "Great Deal". Further details of this fictional story become clear towards the end. In a conversation between Leila and Moshe's son Nathan, it is indicated that a new writing had been developed during the time of the Confederation. Hebrew characters were incorporated into the Arabic alphabet. Hebrew and Arabic are now mandatory in all school. Talaat, who was also invited to the meeting as Najib Nassar's great-grandson, is another character in history. He lives in Istanbul and also arrived by express train. With the arrival of Talaat the procession begins. The most remarkable aspect of this story becomes clear towards the end. While the spectators of the procession indulge in a brilliant spectacle, a heated discussion erupts in the group around Leila, Moshe and Talaat. The excitement is triggered by the procession itself, in which figures with clear religious symbols appear. Crusaders with spears and the symbol of cedar heat up the minds of Moshe and Talaat.

According to the Constitution of the Confederation, any symbols ,dances or songs of religious or nationalistic origin are forbidden. Weapons, even if they are primitive weapons such as swords, are not allowed in public. The discussion allows an insight into the social thinking of this fiction. The outrage shows the sensitivity and general fear of a relapse into old patterns and old rivalries. There is controversial discussion about the tension between the basic commandments for self-protection laid down in the constitution and the moral obligation to educate.

Admittedly, the scenario drawn in "2037 - Le grand bouleversement" seems drastic. However, with regard to the current situation in the Middle East, it is clear that without an enormous crisis, a big bang effect, a rethink will hardly take place. "Le Grand Bouleversement", the great upheaval becomes conceivable in the author's vision, Raja Shehadeh only by the catastrophe. In view of the current situation in the Middle East and the tendency of a further intensification of the conflict in the near future, it is quite understandable why Raja Shehadeh chooses this extreme way. An impulse from the international community or a rethinking from within is actually not to be expected according to current assessments.

254

Fig 072 - 2037 | Le grand bouleversement 255

References 2.1 Definition

1 cf. Parlament o.V. o.J., Parlament

2 cf. Online Etymology Dictionary o.V. o.J., Parlament

3 cf. Parlament o.V. o.J., Parlament

4 cf. XML (2016),p. 6

5 cf. ibid., p. 8

6 cf. Politik-lexikon o.V. o.J.: Parlament

2.2 Democracy - Role model in antiquity

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

cf. ibid., p.51 cf. Sudjic, D., et al. (2001), p.16 cf. ibid., p.17 cf. ibid., p.18 cf. ibid., p.19 cf. Lankes, C., ( 1995), p.56f cf. ibid., p.57f cf. ibid., p.58f cf. ibid., p.59f cf. ibid., p.60ff

2.4 Parlamentary Representation

cf. Demokratiezentrum Wien o.V. o.J., Demokratie cf. Sudjic, D., et al. (2001), p.12 cf. Nolte, P. (2012), p. 27 cf. Sudjic, D., et al. (2001), p.12 cf. ibid., p.13 cf. Vorländer, H. (2014), p.1 cf. ibid., p.1 cf. Vorländer, H. (2014), p.2 cf. ibid., p.2 cf. Sudjic, D., et al. (2001), p.16 cf. Vorländer, H. (2014), p.2 cf. Sudjic, D., et al. (2001), p.16 cf. Vorländer, H. (2014), p.1 cf. ibid., p.1 cf. Vorländer, H. (2014), p.2 cf. Nolte, P. (2012), p. 41 cf. end., p. 41 cf. Nolte, P. (2012), p. 41 Cicero, M.T. 54-51 v.Chr., De re publica, zit. nach Vorländer 2014, p. 2 cf. Vorländer, H. (2014), p.2 cf. Sudjic, D., et al. (2001), p.16

2.3 Political Architecture - Evolution

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18.

cf. Sudjic, D., et al. (2001), p.8 cf. ibid., p.8 cf. ibid., p.12 cf. Athenian Agora Excavations o.V. o.J., Ekklesia cf. ibid. cf. Sudjic, D., et al. (2001), p.13 cf. Athenian Agora Excavations o.V. o.J., Agora and Pnyx cf. Lankes, C., ( 1995), p.8

256

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38

cf. Hofmann: Repräsentation p.41 cf. Lankes C, (1995) p.38 cf. Noll, A,(2014), p.76f cf. Wefing, H. (1995) p.68 cf. ibid., p.2 cf. ibid., p.68 cf. ibid., p.73 cf. ibid., p.73 cf. ibid., p.74 cf. ibid., p.70 cf. ibid., p.70 cf. ibid., S71 cf. ibid., 116 cf. mdr o.V. o.J Die Schlösser des Sozialismus cf. Wefing, H. (1995) p.72 cf. Lankes C, (1995) p.45 cf. Schäuble, W. (1994) p.27 cf. Lankes C (1995) p. 67 f cf. Beyme v., K. (1992) p. 34 vgl Lankes C (1995) p. 69f cf. ibid., p.67ff cf. Kühn, C. (2014), p.14 cf. Boeckl, M. (2014), p.145f cf. ibid., p.144 cf. Kühn, C. (2011) p.7 cf. ibid., p.3 cf. Strodthoff, W. (1992) p. 265 cf. Stegers,R. (1994) p.1 cf. Haubrich, R. (2009) p.1 cf. Przybilla, M (2015) p.1 cf. Lankes,C. (1995), p.11 cf. Lankes C (1995), p. 76 cf. Kühn,C. (2014), p.14 cf. Lankes C (1995), p.77 cf. ibid., p.67ff cf. Cullen, S (1989), p.1885 cf. Lankes C (1995), p.68 cf. Cullen, S (1989), p.1885

39 vgl Lankes C (1995), p.69 2.8 Résumé

1 Cf. Lankes (1995) p. 9

2.5 Plenum

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

cf. XML (2016), p. 6 cf. Wefing, H. (1995) p.138 cf. ibid., p.159 cf. ibid., p.141 cf. ibid., p.149 cf. XML (2016), p. 20 cf. Wefing, H. (1995) p.165 cf. ibid., p.177 cf. XML (2016), p. 20 cf. ibid., p. 20 cf. Wefing, H. (1995) p.187 cf. ibid., p.187

4.1 Situation

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

cf. Abé, N., (2018), p.1 cf. Stein, p., (2019), p.1 cf. Topçu, Ö., (2019), p.1 cf. Topçu, Ö., (2019), p.1 cf. Stein, p., (2019), p.1 cf. ibid., p.1 Cf. Knipp, Kersten (2017), p.1 cf. ibid., p.1 Cf. Fisher, M. (2016), p.1 Cf. Kurier o.V. (2013), p.1 Cf. Knipp, Kersten (2017), p.1 cf. Arendt, H. (1948), p.1

2.7 Political Representation in Israel and Palestine

4.2 Scenario

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Cf. Heinze-Greenberg, I. (2014) p.215 cf. ibid., p.215 cf. ibid., p.216 cf. ibid., p.217 cf. ibid., p.219 cf. Sudjic, D., et al. (2001), p.38 Cf. Wikiarquitectura o.V, o.J., United Nations Headquarters in New York Cf. Heinze-Greenberg, I.(2014) p.212 cf. ibid., p.212 cf. ibid., p.223 Cf. Knesset o.V. O.J., The Cornerstone and Dedication Certificate Cf. Heinze-Greenberg, I.(2014) p.223f cf. ibid., p.223f Cf. Voigt, W. (2007) p.7 Cf. Heinze-Greenberg, I.(2014) p.228 cf. ibid., p.229 cf. ibid., p.231 cf. Evrat,Z (2018) p.405 cf. Rolef, Susan Hattis (2000), p.8 cf. Palästinensische Mission o.V. o.J., PLO-Komitees Cf. Palästinensische Mission o.V. o.J., Zeit nach 1948 Cf. Petti, A., et al. (2013). p.168f cf. ibid., p.168f Cf. Petti, A., et al. (2013). p.167 cf. European Council of Foreign Relations o.V.o.J., PLC

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

cf. Ilan Pappe, (2013), p. 405 cf. Mendes-Flohr, Paul (2019), p.1 Cf. Arendt, H. (1948), p.1 Cf. Van Reybrouck, D (2016), p.14 f Cf. cf. ibid., p.14 f Cf. Van Reybrock, D. (2016), p.20 Cf. cf. ibid., p.145 Cf. Van Reybrock, D. (2016), p.17 Cf. Bouricius, T (2013), p.6f Cf. ibid., p.8f Cf. ibid., p.9f Cf. ibid., p.10f Cf. ibid., p.13 Cf. ibid., p.13 Cf. ibid., p.14 Cf. Van Reybrock, D. (2016), p.151 Cf. Bouricius, T (2013), p.16

4.3 Material

257

1 2

5.2

Neue Erde 1 2 3 4 5 6

Cf. Weizman, E. (2009) p.135 Cf. Evrat,Z (2018) p.238

cf. Shehadeh, R. (2011) p.76 cf. ibid. p.78 cf. ibid. p.79 cf. ibid. p.92 cf. ibid. p.92 cf. ibid. p.94

Literature Beyme v., Klaus, (1992) Parlament, Demokratie und Öffentlichkeit, in Flagge, I. (Hrsg.). Architektur und Demokratie Bauen für die Politik - von der amerikanischen Revolution bis zur Gegenwart. Stuttgart Bouricius, Terrill G. (2013): Democracy Through Multi-Body Sortition: Athenian Lessons for the Modern Day in Journal of Public Deliberation, Volume 9.

Boeckl, Matthias (2014): Antike und Moderne - Theophil Hansens Wiener Parlamentsbau in Anna Minta und Bernd Nicolai (Hrsg.) Parlamentarische Repräsentationen - das Bundeshaus in Bern im Kontext internationaler Parlamentsbauten und nationaler Strategien. Bern Cullen, S (1989) in Schneider, H.-P. and W. Zeh.(Hrsg) Parlamentsrecht und Parlamentspraxis in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland - ein Handbuch. Berlin Ehs, Wolfgang (2007): Hohes Haus auf Hohem Hügel - Wie Josef Klarwein vor 50 Jahren gegen Widerstände die Knesset in Jerusalem baute In: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Nr. 181, 07.08.2007

Heinze-Greenberg, Ita (2014): „Ein Symbol des Fortbestands“ Die Knesset in Jerusalem in Anna Minta und Bernd Nicolai (Hrsg.)

Parlamentarische Repräsentationen - das Bundeshaus in Bern im Kontext internationaler Parlamentsbauten und nationaler Strategien. Bern Hofmann, H. (1998). Repräsentation Studien zur Wort- und Begriffsgeschichte von der Antike bis ins 19. Jahrhundert. Berlin Kühn, C. and K. Brandl (2014). Plenum places of power catalogue Austrian Pavilion, La Biennale di Venezia 2014. Basel Kühn, Christian (2014): Provvisorio in ÖGFA (Hrsg.) UmBau27, Plenum. Orte der Macht. Basel Lankes, C. (1995): Politik und Architektur eine Studie zur Wirkung politischer Kommunikation auf Bauten staatlicher Repräsentation. München.

Niemeyer, Oskar (2012): in: Wir müssen die Welt verändern. Riva, Alberto (Hrsg.). Milano, München Noll, Alfred J. (2014): Repräsentation der Repräsentation in ÖGFA (Hrsg.) UmBau27, Plenum. Orte der Macht. Basel

258

Nolte, P. (2012).:Was ist Demokratie?: Geschichte und Gegenwart. München.

Petti, Alessandro.;Hilal, Sandi; Weizman, Eyal(2013). Architecture after Revolution. Berlin Pappé, Ilan (2013). Zu beiden Seiten der Mauer -auf der Suche nach einem gemeinsamen Bild der israelisch-palästinensischen Geschichte. Hamburg

Schäuble, Wolfgang. (1994) An Symbolen rührt man nicht. in: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 26.02.1994, Nr. 48 Shehadeh, Raja (2011) 2037 - Le Grand Bouleversement, Paris

Sudjic, Deyan, et al. (2001). Architecture and democracy. London, Laurence King in association with Glasgow City Council.

Strodthoff, Werner (1992) Der alte Plenarsaal. Eine zerstörte Erinnerung, in Flagge, I. (Hrsg.). Architektur und Demokratie Bauen für die Politik - von der amerikanischen Revolution bis zur Gegenwart. Stuttgart Schumpp, M. (1972). Stadtbau-Utopien und Gesellschaft der Bedeutungswandel utopischer Stadtmodelle unter sozialem Aspekt. Gütersloh

Shoshan, Malkit. (2010). Atlas of the conflict Israel - Palestine. Rotterdam, 010 Publishers.

Van Reybrouck, David. (2016): Gegen Wahlen – Warum Abstimmen nicht demokratisch ist. Göttingen.

Wefing, Heinrich. (1995): Parlamentsarchitektur zur Selbstdarstellung der Demokratie in ihren Bauwerken - eine Untersuchung am Beispiel des Bonner Bundeshauses. Berlin Weizman, Eyal. (2009). Sperrzonen Israels Architektur der Besatzung. Hamburg

XML (2016): Parliament, XML, Amsterdam.

Efrat, Zvi (2018) The object of zionism - The Architecture of Israel. Leipzig

259

Onlinesources Abé, Nicola (2018): Die Ein-Staaten-Lösung, 05.01.2018 In: https://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-155098112.html am 03.11.2019.

Arendt, Hannah (1948): To Save the Jewish Homeland: There is Still Time; in: https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/to-save-the-jewish-homelandthere-is-still-time/ am 03.11.2019.

Athenian Agora Excavations o.V. O.J.: Ekklesia (Citizens' Assembly) erklärt. In: http://www.agathe.gr/democracy/the_ekklesia.html am 03.11.2019.

Athenian Agora Excavations o.V. O.J.: The Agora and Pnyx erklärt. In: http://www.agathe.gr/democracy/the_agora_and_pnyx.html am 03.11.2019.

Calabuig, Debora Domingo (2013) The Strategies of Mat-building in: https://www.architectural-review.com/the-strategies-of-mat-building/8651102.article am 03.11.2019.

Demokratiezentrum Wien o.V. O.J.: Demokratie erklärt. In: http://www.demokratiezentrum.org/wissen/wissenslexikon/demokratie.html am 03.11.2019.

DWDS o.V. o.J.: Parlament, In: https://www.dwds.de/wb/Parlament am 03.11.2019.

European Council of Foreign Relations o.V.o.J., Mapping Palestinian Politics, PLC; erklärt in : https://www.ecfr.eu/mapping_palestinian_politics/detail/palestine_legislative_council am 03.11.2019.

Fisher, Max (2016), The Two-State Solution: What It Is and Why It Hasn’t Happened, 29.12.2016 In: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/29/world/middleeast/israel-palestinians-two-state-solution.htm am 03.11.2019.

Parlament o.V. o.J.: Parlament erklärt, In: https://www.parlament.gv.at/PERK/ am 03.11.2019.

Haubrich, Rainer (2009): Der Reichstag wäre fast potthässlich geworden, in: https://www.welt.de/kultur/article3544664/Der-Reichstag-waere-fast-potthaesslich-geworden.html am 03.11.2019.

Knesset o.V. O.J. The Cornerstone and Dedication Certificate. In: https://www.knesset.gov.il/tour/eng/tour6.htm am 03.11.2019.

Knipp, Kersten (2017) Frieden in Nahost - Vier Lösungsvorschläge, 17.12.2017 In: https://www.dw.com/de/frieden-in-nahost-vier-l%C3%B6sungsvorschl%C3%A4ge/a-41850600 am 03.11.2019.9 Kühn, Christian (2011): Bauen für die Demokratie - internationale Beispiele 07.11.2011, in: https://publik.tuwien.ac.at/files/PubDat_205961.pdf am 03.11.2019

260

Kurier o.V. (2013), Wenig Hoffnung auf Zwei-Staaten-Lösung, 03.07.2013 In: https://kurier.at/politik/ausland/umfrage-israelis-und-palaestinenser-fuer-zwei-staaten-loesung/17.787.610 am25.05.2019 Mendes-Flohr, Paul (2019): Martin Buber’s “greater realism”: Palestine and the politics of dialogue, in https://www.abc.net.au/religion/martin-buber-on-zionism-palestine-and-the-politics-of-dialogue/10723326 am 03.11.2019 MDR o.V. o.J Die Schlösser des Sozialismus. In: https://www.mdr.de/heute-im-osten/parlamentspalast100_showImage-bild337198_zc-6de34b3e.html am 03.11.2019 Online Etymology Dictionary o.V. o.J.: Parlament erklärt, In: https://www.etymonline.com/word/parliament am 3.11.2019 Palästinensische Mission o.V. o.J., PLO-Komitees; erklärt in: http://palaestina.org/index.php?id=78 am 03.11.2019.

Palästinensische Mission o.V. o.J., Zeit nach 1948 http://palaestina.org/index.php?id=68 am 03.11.2019.

Politik-lexikon o.V. o.J.: Parlament erklärt, In: http://www.politik-lexikon.at/parlament/ am 03.11.2019.

Przybilla, Marika (2015): Der Reichstag - Ein Ort der Demokratie 27.10.2015, in http://www.demokratie-goettingen.de/blog/der-reichstag am 03.11.2019 Rolef, Susan Hattis (2000), The Knesset Building in Giv’at Ram: Planning and Construction, Critique; In: https://knesset.gov.il/building/architecture/eng/art1_critique_eng.htm Stegers, Rudolf (1994): Gestrickter Eierwärmer. In: Die Zeit, 26.08.1994, Nr. 35 https://www.zeit.de/1994/35/gestrickter-eierwaermer?print am 03.11.2019.

Stein, Shimon; Zimmermann, Moshe (2019): Demokratie im Stress, 24.04.2019, In: https://www.zeit.de/2019/18/israel-rechtspopulismus-benjamin-netanjahu-regierung am 03.11.2019.

Topçu, Özlem (2019): Der Bibi-Sitter, 27.03.2019, In: https://www.zeit.de/2019/14/benjamin-netanjahu-israel-premierminister-parlamentswahl-korruptionsvorwurf am 03.11.2019.

Vorländer, H. (2014): Grundzüge der athenischen Demokratie, 06.01.2014, In: https://www.bpb.de/175892/grundzuege-der-athenischen-demokratie?p=all am 03.11.2019.

Wikiarquitectura o.V, o.J., United Nations Headquarters in New York. erklärt In: https://en.wikiarquitectura.com/building/united-nations-headquarters-in-new-york/ am 03.11.2019.

261

Figures Plans, diagrams, graphics, visualizations, collages and other illustrations were created by the author, if not otherwise indicated.

Fig 001 Organs in Greek democracy - Own work Fig 002 Organs in the Roman Republic - Own work Fig 003 Model of Pnyx. Visited 03.11.2019.

URL: http://agora.ascsa.net/id/agora/image/2010.01.0004?q=references%3A%22Agora%3APublication%3AHesperia%20 Supplement%2019%22&t=&v=icons&sort=rating%20desc%2C%20sort%20asc&s=2 Fig 004 Curia Iulia, Visited 03.11.2019. URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2935928.pdf?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents Fig 005 Casa del Fascio Visited 03.11.2019. URL: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casa_del_Fascio_(Como)#/media/Datei:Casa_del_ Fascio_dal_2017.jpg Fig 006 Wrapped Reichstag of the artist Christo. Foto: © Wolfgang Volz URL: https://www.tagesspiegel.de/images/no_ text/11945282/2-format6001.jpg?inIsFirst=true Fig 007

Construção de Brasilia Foto: © Thomaz Farkas. Visited 03.11.2019 URL: https://mexperiencia.com/wp-content/ uploads/2018/05/Brasilia.jpg Fig 007.1 Plenaryhall German Bundestag - Bonn - Planaryhall Layout, Visited 18.11.20 URL: https://docplayer.org/docs-images/60/44408253/images/40-0.png Fig 007.2 Plenaryhall German Bundestag - Bonn Visited 18.11.20 URL: https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:1998_bundestag_bonn_plenum.jpg Fig 008 Building volume Parliament building - Percentage distribution - Own work Fig 009 Korrelation: Volume Parlamentbuilding - Democracy Index Fig 010 Korrelation: Women in Parlament - Democracy Index - Own work Fig 011 Parlamentbuilding | Year of construction - Own work Fig 012 Plenaryhall types - Sorting by democracy index - edited by the author Datasource cf. XML p.420 Fig 013 Plenary hall type - percentage distribution - Own work Fig 014 Korrelation: Plenarsaaltypus - Demokratie-Index - Own work Fig 015 National parliament buildings - Part 1, Edited by the author. Single image sources: Plenum. Places of Power

Visited 20.09.2019 URL: https://www.places-of-power.org/wiki/index.php?title=Browse_all_Parliaments Fig 016 National parliament buildings - Part 2, Bearbeitung durch den Verfasser. Einzelbildquellen Plenum. Places of Power

Visited 20.09.2019 URL: https://www.places-of-power.org/wiki/index.php?title=Browse_all_Parliaments Fig 017 Jewish Agency Tel Aviv. Visited 20.09.2019. URL: https://hamachtarot.blogspot.com/2012/ Fig 018.1 The model of the Knesset building, presented by Klarwein for the competition, 1957 Visited 18.11.2020 URL: https://knesset.gov.il/building/architecture/eng/photo_eng.asp?pic=ar031 Fig 018.2 The Knesset Visited 20.09.2019. URL: https://www.places-of-power.org/wiki/index.php?title=Browse_all_Parliaments Fig 019 Timeline PNC - Own work Fig 020 Palestinian Legislative Council, Abu Dis Foto: © Dusan Vranic Visited 20.09.2019.

URL: https://www.timesofisrael.com/forlorn-palestinian-parliament-a-glum-emblem-of-lost-optimism/ Fig 021 Palestinian Legislative Council, Abu Dis - Plan - Own work Fig 022 Texture - © Wolfgang Fischer Fig 023 One Land - © Wolfgang Fischer Fig 024 Markt in Hebron - © Wolfgang Fischer Fig 025 Markt in Jerusalem - © Wolfgang Fischer Fig 026 Tunnelroad - © Wolfgang Fischer Fig 027 Hope - © Wolfgang Fischer Fig 028 Peres Center for Peace and Innovation © Wolfgang Fischer Fig 029 Fire - Own work © Wolfgang Fischer Fig 030 Wind - Own work © Wolfgang Fischer Fig 031 Earth - Own work © Wolfgang Fischer Fig 032 Water - Own work © Wolfgang Fischer Fig 033 Al-Shuhada Street © Wolfgang Fischer Fig 034 Mitzpe Ramon © Wolfgang Fischer Fig 035 Palestinian Museum - © Wolfgang Fischer Fig 036 Yad Vashem - © Wolfgang Fischer Fig 037 Colonies - © Wolfgang Fischer Fig 038 - 040 Towers - © Wolfgang Fischer

262

Fig 041 - 042 Barriers - © Wolfgang Fischer Fig 043 Solution? - © Wolfgang Fischer Fig 044 Wired - © Wolfgang Fischer Fig 045 UN Vote - edited by the author. Original. Foto: © Kathy Willens Visited 20.09.2019.

URL: https://www.thedailybeast.com/un-vote-to-recognize-palestine-puts-netanyahu-in-a-corner Fig 046 Israeli settlements in the West Bank, Palestinian Territories. -Own work. Datasource:

B'Tselem: Visited 04.11.2019 URL: https://www.btselem.org/download/201411_btselem_map_of_wb_eng.pdf Fig 047 Satelite - edited by the author. Original: Visited 20.09.2019.URL https://eoimages.gsfc.nasa.gov/images/imagerecords/47000/47503/Israel_amo_2010336_lrg.jpg Fig 048 Hannah Arendt- edited by the author. Original. Foto: Visited 20.09.2019.URL https://mondoweiss.net/2012/01/arendt-born-in-conflict-israel-will-degenerate-into-sparta-and-american-jews-will- need-to-back-away/ Fig 049 Martin Buber - edited by the author. Original. Foto: Visited 20.09.2019.URL https://www.the-philosophy.com/buber-i-thou-summary Fig 050 5 Dillemmas of the lottery procedure - Own work Fig 051 Multibody Sortition - Terminologie nach Bouricius -Own work Fig 052 Jewish und Palestinian Diaspora - Own work. Datasource:

Le monde diplomatique, Visited 04.11.2019. URL: https://mondediplo.com/maps/refugeesdiasporapaldpl2000;

The Map Archive, Visited 04.11.2019. URL: https://www.themaparchive.com/jewish-diaspora-587-bce300-ce.html

Encyclopaedia Judaica 1971, Vol 8, 753-754 URL: https://www.hist-chron.com/judentum-aktenlage/migration/EncJud_ migration03-1915-May-1948-d/EncJud-Lestschinsky_karte-jued-auswanderung-1915-1939.jpg Fig 053 Cedric Price: The Fun Palace, interior perspective, 1964. Image: © Cedric Price funds, CCA Montreal Visited 20.09.2019.URL: http://www.uncubemagazine.com/blog/13212377 Fig 054 Nest we Grow / Kengo Kuma & Associates, Foto: ©Shinkenchiku Sha Visited 20.09.2019.URL https://www.archdaily.com/592660/nest-we-grow-college-of-environmental-design-uc-berkeley-kengo-kuma-and-assoc iates/54c9b0cfe58ece457a000216-portada_nest-we-grow_048-jpg Fig 055 Motive aus Licht und Glas. 7 Stehende Scheiben, Gerhard Richter, Visited 02.11.2019. URL: https://www.baumeister.de/motive-aus-licht-und-glas/#!/foto-post-36421-2 Fig 056 Border dynamics - Own work, inspired by Shoshan, Malkit (2010) Atlas of the Conlict. Visited 02.11.2019. URL: https://www.publicationstudio.biz/books/atlas-of-the-conflict-israel-3-palestine/ Fig 057 Jerusalem Satelite - Own work, Composed with frames from https://www.google.com/maps/ Fig 058 Damascus Triangle - ©Christoph Mertsch, Elisabeth Hulin - edited by the author Fig 059 FU Berlin- Floor Plan - Candilis, Josic, Woods and Schiedhelm aufgerufen 01.11.2019 URL: http://socks-studio.com/2015/10/29/the-free-university-of-berlin-candilis-josic-woods-and-schiedhelm-1963/ Fig 060 Niederschlag jährlich - Own work. Datasource: Gugger, Harry. (2017) Israel lessons industrial arcadia. Zürich Fig 061 Klimazonen - Own work. Datasource Fig 062 Durchschnittliche Temperatur - Datasource: Visited 01.11.2019 URL: https://energyplus.net/weather-search/jerusalem

evaluated with Climate Consultant 6 Fig 063 Sonnenstand - Datasource: Visited 01.11.2019 URL: https://energyplus.net/weather-search/jerusalem

evaluated with Climate Consultant 6 Fig 064 Winddirections - Datasource: Visited 01.11.2019 URL: https://energyplus.net/weather-search/jerusalem

evaluated with Climate Consultant 6 Fig 065 relative Humidity - Datasource: Visited 01.11.2019 URL: https://energyplus.net/weather-search/jerusalem

evaluated with Climate Consultant 6 Fig 066 Betlehem Wall - ©Wolfgang Fischer Fig 067 Pines - ©Wolfgang Fischer Fig 068 Zerstörte Palästinensiche Dörfer - Own work.

Datasource: Shoshan, M. (2010). Atlas of the conflict Israel - Palestine. Rotterdam Fig 069 Forests - Own work.

Datasource: Jüdischer Nationalfonds. Visited 24.10.2019 URL: https://www.jnf-kkl.de/d/aufforstung.htm Fig 070 Glazing - edited by the author Fig 071 Hebron Textile - ©Wolfgang Fischer Fig 072 2037 - Le grand bouleversement - Own Work

263

Quotes

„We inherit our ideas from the Greeks, but our practices from the romans..“ Kenneth Minoque, Historiker cf. Sudjic, D., et al. (2001), „We shape our buildings and afterwards our buildings shape us“ Winston Churchill 1943 cf. Sudjic, D., et al. (2001), „Dieses Parlamentsgebäude beansprucht mehr als die architektonische Umsetzung parlamentarischer Funktionen. Es will selbst ein bestimmtes Demokratieverständnis zum Ausdruck bringen.“ Bundestagspräsidentin Rita Süssmuth, bei der Eröffnung des neuen Plenarbereichs des Deutschen Bundestages in Bonn am 30. Oktober 1992 cf. Wefing, H. (1995) p.116 "Ich brauche etwas Großes, etwas sehr Großes, das zeigt, was wir bereits erreicht haben" Nicolae Ceausescu cf. mdr o.V. o.J Die Schlösser des Sozialismus „It is not the leaders who influenced the shape of the building, but the wars among the architects. The compromises were frequently attained through the mediation of foreign architects and officials. The process, at the end of which the knesset building was built as it was built, was extremely Israeli.“ Rolef, Susan Hattis (2000), p.8 „Das eigentliche Ziel der Juden in Palästina ist der Aufbau einer jüdischen Heimstatt. Dieses Ziel darf niemals der Pseudo-Souveränität eines jüdischen Staates geopfert werden.“ Cf. 12. Arendt, H. (1948), p.1

“Je dauerhafter ein Gebäude sein soll, umso mehr muss es flexibel und veränderbar sein. Nur die echt veränderbaren, anpassungsfähigen Konstruktionen altern nicht. Sie bleiben stets neu, da sie sich ständig verjüngen.”

Frei Otto Cf. Schumpp, M. (1972), p.131

"Mat Buildings can be said to epitomise the anonymous collective, where the Functions come to enrich the fabric, and the individual gains new freedoms of action through a new shuffled order, based on interconnection, close knit patterns of association, and possibilities for groth, diminuition and change" Alison Smithson Cf. Calabuig, Debora (2013), p.1

264

Thank You! My gratitude goes to my family, my friends, my supporters and companions on this, now after all, rather long journey. Many thanks to Professor Christian Kühn for the constructive conversations, the valuable input and the professional supervision of my thesis. The meetings with Lorenzo de Chiffre allowed me a change of perspective and "spatial sensory" access to the project that did not exist before due to the typological and political dimension. I would like to thank him for the pleasant conversations.

My stay in Israel and Palestine was filled with inspiring encounters and conversations for which I am very grateful. Elad for your welcome in Tel Aviv and for your hospitality. Thank you Trey, for the pleasant conversations in the woods near Jenin and the spontaneous travel company. Colum and David for the company in Ramallah and the joint visit to Bir Zeit University. Bubu for the insights into your life in Ramallah and the inspiring nature that your self-sustaining project has.

Your perseverance and way of making the best of situations is of incomparable value.Monged and Roxane for the pleasant time and barbecue in Nablus. The long interview with architect Nasseer Arafat was very motivating for me. Thank you for the time and the interesting insight into the valuable work in Nablus and the gallery of broken doors. Youssef for the nice conversation in Hebron, I wish you much success in your work in the US. Everyone deserves to hear your story.

Ghassan for the insight into the daily life of Hebron, I hope your visions come true one day. Chris for your company under stone fire and the craziest meeting i will probably ever have at the General's place for coffee and cake. Isshaq from Campus in Camps and Laylac - The Palestinian Youth Action Center For Community Development for the insights into your work at Deheisheh Refugee Camp. And the many for me nameless encounters over hummus, cigarette or tea that have shaped my image of Israel and Palestine and their inhabitants.

To my friends in Vienna for their support and companionship on the final straight.

Joe, Kora, Ivi, Kim, Verena and Georg, Lisa, Dhanna, Max, Severin and Sebi, as well as my parents and my sister Kathrin for coming to my diploma presentation. It meant a lot to me. Thank you so much for being there and for your warm-heartedness. Lucas who witnessed a big part of the work in Arsenal and Marius who witnessed my diploma from exile. Many Thanks to Alex for his valuable input, help, friendship and nerve food towards the end.

But most of all my biggest gratitude goes to you, Julia.

Thank you for everything.

265

Assembly The Middle East conflict as an opportunity.

This thesis is based on the idea of a rapprochement between two conflicting parties in one of the most complex and protracted conflicts of our time. A scenario of a "one-state solution" as an alternative to the currently discussed proposed solutions for a peaceful future for Palestinians and Israelis. Deliberative democracy as a capable system and essential reform for a just and fair consensus in the legislative process.