These two kinds of knowledge are evidently crucial for the chances of implementation of a potential law. By legal knowledge, we mean, on the hand, knowledge about the existing law and its practical consequences and, on the other hand, a basic understanding for the systematics of law, i.e. the eradiating influence of one law on other connected laws or regulations and legal entitlements generated hereby.
“[..] You say the phrase `within the limits of their possibilities´ should be deleted completely. I am no jurist, but I could imagine that this would create an entitlement [to integration] although the school is not ready, yet” (ANHÖRUNG 69.Bl (04.07.2002), 14 WP, 10).
Historical knowledge implies knowledge about the present institutional and organizational environment developed over time as well as the “history” of opinion formation within the parties. Both aspects can be elucidated with examples from interviews with the political decision-makers: “[..] that was an ongoing struggle from 2001 until 2003: what can really be done in Bavaria? It was always out of the question to completely abolish the special needs school system, because such a fast transformation probably wouldn´t have worked, from a practical point of view alone” (I1:28.31).
In this citation the historical knowledge about the existing and non-anullable differences between the differing opinions of the parties gets articulated: “Then there are topics were the fractions talk to each other but everybody knows that we simply have different positions [..] [I2: But how does one know that beforehand? Because you said: one already knows about the differing positions..] Well, topics most of the times have a history, they don´t come up over night, but rather every party usually has a history of opinion formation concerning this" (I20: 620-629).
NASSEHI A., VON DER HAGEN-DEMSZKY A. & MAYR K. (2009), The Amendment of the Bavarian Education Law in 2003: A Long Way towards Inclusion, Report, 27.