Faculty of Information Quarterly Vol 1, No 4 (August 2009)

former East German government’s The Poisoned secret police agency, the Stasi. The Stasi records of mass surveillance and Madeleine: Stasi punishment of citizens serve as both a record of the East German people’s Files As Evidence oppression and a vital tool for coming to terms with the communist and History dictatorship in East Germany. Debates about opening versus sealing these files allowed Germans to analyze the disconnect between rights of privacy Rachel E. Beattie and rights of information. The success

Rachel E. Beattie, a recent graduate of the laws created to both open and of University of Toronto’s Faculty of restrict the use of the Stasi files can be Information, has an interest in both attributed to the innovative way that Archives and Libraries. She combines these laws were able to these interests with her background in accommodate those who needed English and Film, which she hopes will the information as well as those lead her to a career in an audio-visual concerned about their privacy. archive or library. This paper builds on Further, the whole debate raises many the work of her Film Masters thesis that questions about the power of sensitive dealt with German reunification in documents. In the course of the 1989 and its representation in debate, the veracity of the files was contemporary German film. She is questioned repeatedly, and interested in how the German people individually they are highly suspect. use the tools of information, from However, taken as a group, they build historical records to fictional texts, to a very accurate picture of a repressive deal with their troubled history. police state. Additionally, the files work as a collective memory-building Abstract project for former East Germans. Through the files, they can This article examines the privacy acknowledge and work through the debates surrounding records from the trauma of the East German

Page 1 of 11 Faculty of Information Quarterly Vol 1, No 4 (August 2009)

government’s surveillance. Ultimately, to reinterpret his view of his former the German resolution to the problem government. These revelations throw Georg’s of the Stasi files serves as an example world into confusion as he learns that his deceased former lover had informed on him and for other governments struggling with that it was the Stasi agent assigned to watch him the disposal of extremely sensitive who removed incriminating evidence before a documents. Stasi search of his apartment. Through the

collection of records that is his file, Georg learns “But what a gift to memory is a Stasi file. Far better the truth—that of the power of one man than a Madeleine” (Garton Ash, 1997, p. 12). resisting an unfair government. Thus, suspect

records with questionable evidential value in the “Archives have the power to privilege and to marginalize. legal sense of the term come to stand for much They can be a tool of hegemony; they can be a tool of more. They mix with former East Germans’ resistance. They both reflect and constitute power personal memory, build identity, and create relations” (Schwartz and Cook, 2002, p. 13). catharsis for survivors of oppression. Through

the Stasi lies, former East Germans can learn There is a moment at the end of the the truth about their government. film The Lives of Others (Das Leben der Anderen , This article, through the example of the 2006) when, after German unification, the lead East German Stasi files, will examine the role of character, East German writer and cultural critic records from totalitarian regimes as objects of Georg Dreyman (Sebastian Koch), goes to look power, evidence, and keys to memory. These at his Stasi file. Georg is shocked to find within records are automatically suspect, as they were his file the story of another man, Agent Gerd often filled with conjecture, errors, and straight- Wiesler (Ultich Mühe) . This scene demonstrates out lies. However, it is possible that these the incredible power of the ability to see the questionable records also act as evidence in a information collected by the secret police in that different, deeper sense of the word and in fact it positions the Stasi file as a method for are important agents of memory and identity— reclaiming identity. both of the criminal excesses of the system that The film neatly articulates the function created them and of the events they reflect. The of the Stasi record as evidence of not only the Stasi files are imperfect documents and would East German government’s oppression but also likely not be admissible as evidence in a court of the East German people’s defiance of it. In the law. However, they are vitally important for all film, a visibly shaken Georg reads a transcript of Germans, and especially former East Germans, surveillance on his house. Georg had thought he who seek to understand the communist regime, was free from Stasi surveillance, so this scene hold responsible individuals accountable, and acts as an important revelation and forces him incorporate their pasts into their identities. In

Page 2 of 11 Faculty of Information Quarterly Vol 1, No 4 (August 2009)

essence, the same records that once oppressed (Miller, 1999) informants (called IMs) in their can now free and facilitate healing. employ. Before analyzing the archival After the Berlin Wall was breached on implications of the Stasi files, it is first necessary November 9, 1989, there was widespread panic to examine the East German context. In 1989, among the Stasi elite. There was a mass the borders were opened for East Germans and destruction of files, with some shredded and West Germans to freely visit either side, and others burned (Adams, 2000; Funder, 2003). A eventually the repressive East German regime large-scale reconstruction project has taken was toppled. While that dictatorship is long place wherein the shredded files have been gone, massive traces are left of its oppression, reassembled and magnetic tape re-spooled not the least of which is the immense number of (Adams, 2000). However, East Germans feared documents kept by all levels of government. Of that the Stasi would destroy all traces of their those records, the ones that affect the most operations. In December 1989, the regional ordinary East Germans (Ossis, as they are called offices of Stasi headquarters, with the exception in the vernacular) were the records of the of the Berlin office, were occupied by protestors Ministerium für Staatssicherheit (Ministry for State who prevented further destruction of records Security), known as the Stasi ( Economist, 2000). (Adams, 2000). Unfortunately, it was too late for This internal secret police force kept tabs on the some records, specifically those about foreign East German people from 1950 until 1990, political figures, thought most sensitive and thus when the East German government fell the highest priority for destruction. Thus, many (Funder, 2003). East Germany had a population Stasi files are now incomplete (Garton Ash, of roughly 16 million (12.5 million adults), and 1996; Miller, 1998). there were files on approximately six million Moving forward in time, there was great people (Miller, 1998). The Stasi, under the debate in 1990 and into 1991, approaching direction of the ruling Sozialistische Einheitspartei official unification with West Germany, about Deutschlands (Socialist Unity Party of Germany, what to do with the remaining files. West or SED), achieved this level of surveillance German archivists worried about people’s right through the use of a vast web of “volunteer” to privacy and argued the files should be locked informers. They bribed East Germans with away until those named in them had died travel privileges, favours, better jobs, and (Economist, 2000; Danielson, 2004). Others, immunity for transgressions in exchange for mostly East Germans, wanted the files open so information (Adams, 2000; Garton Ash, 1996; that those responsible for the surveillance and Miller, 1998). By the time the SED was defeated state-sanctioned terror would be held and Germany turned to democracy, it is accountable for their actions ( Economist, 2000). estimated that the Stasi had 90,000 full staff and Additionally, they argued sealing the files could between 170,000 (Miller, 1998) and 174,000 leave individuals open to blackmail. Indeed,

Page 3 of 11 Faculty of Information Quarterly Vol 1, No 4 (August 2009)

some files had already been used for this The StUG law is unique because the purpose (Danielson, 2004). In the end, those files are not completely open to all individuals. advocating for open access for victims won. The They are open and free to all those who have a resulting legislation, which was enacted in file and to other persons, such as researchers, December 1991, was called the Law on Documents journalists, and employers, wishing to perform of the State Security Service of the Former GDR (Stasi- background checks for Stasi collaboration Unterlagen-Gesetz, or StUG) (Miller, 1999). (Maddrell, 2004). Third party names are blacked One of the key outcomes of the law was that it out by the archivist on the reference copies stipulated a bipartisan democratically elected made for users (Miller, 1998). However, the official (the first of whom was Joachim Gauck) names of informers and those who had watched would govern an authority separate from the the user are not hidden, though the files often unified government and the federal archive, contain code names for both the victims and the where privacy laws dictate no access for 30 years perpetrators of the surveillance (Miller, 1998). In (this came to be known as the Gauck Authority, fact, the law states that archivists must make despite Gauck’s subsequent retirement) every effort to find the real name of the (Maddrell, 2004; Miller, 1998). The Gauck informer or Stasi member in the files (Miller, Authority has branches with Stasi files in all 1998; Garton Ash, 1997). major East German cities to facilitate former Danielson argues that this legal victory East Germans’ viewing of their files (Adams, led to the most successful coming to terms with 2000). Miller explains that under the StUG, a totalitarian communist past of all the former there are four categories of individuals in the U.S.S.R.-controlled countries. Poland’s files, which are more or less divided into victims restrictive measures, stating that files can only and aggressors. The victims include: affected be used to expel former communist leaders persons (those who were the target of from employment, and Russia’s similar controls information gathered by the Stasi) and third on the files have only made their process of parties (those who are mentioned in the files but coming to terms with the past all that much are not part of the other three categories). The longer and more painful (Danielson, 2004). aggressors are: collaborators (either former Stasi A major concern in the debate over the employees or those who “declared themselves Stasi files was that of the competing rights of ready to supply information”) and advantaged privacy and information. The Stasi files seriously persons (those who received advantages such as compromised the privacy of all individuals travel, gifts, career advancement, and amnesty affected. The files not only contained from the Stasi). As one person could fit into incriminating information about the informers more than one category in different files, the and Stasi agents, but also highly personal definition applies differentially to each file information about those under surveillance. The (Miller, 1998). archive’s way around this was to make

Page 4 of 11 Faculty of Information Quarterly Vol 1, No 4 (August 2009)

anonymous the information pertaining to third from those who cannot know about it” (2004, p. parties (Miller, 1998). However, the law 17). Thus, the West German government’s specifically negates the privacy rights of those proposal to lock the files would have deprived who spied or collaborated with the Stasi. One of East Germans of the knowledge of who had the main functions of the files was a resource betrayed them and how deep the surveillance for employers, specifically in the Civil Service, to went (Danielson, 2004). Additionally, many determine whether job applicants or employees Ossis argued that “thousands of Ossi civil had been collaborators (Miller, 1999). As a result servants were thrown out of their jobs on the of this type of use, many Stasi collaborators lost basis of information in the Stasi files. Some their jobs. Numerous West German politicians were sent to prison largely on evidence thus subsequently argued that everyone has a right to gathered. Few Westerners protested then” privacy, especially because the information in (Economist, 2000). the files was highly untrustworthy ( Economist, Another concern mentioned by 2000). Gauck responded to this charge by opponents of open access to the Stasi files was pointing to the vast amount of material how former East Germans might respond to the collected and the meticulous record keeping information in the files. They warned of revenge habits of the Stasi (Adams, 2000). killings, suicides, and general violence, none of Conversely, the files also contain which actually happened (Adams, 2000; important information about the inner workings Danielson, 2004; Miller, 1998). In fact, many of the state security agency. This information is opponents now admit that allowing affected important both historically and legally. As persons to know the identity of the informant Danielle Laberge argues in reference to actually benefited democracy in unified legislation mandating the destruction of young Germany (Danielson, 2006). Danielson argues offenders’ case files, “what we should ask is that the most common response to the what knowledge will be forever lost if we information revealed by the files was “…endless destroy particular information (or the records or discussions (private and in the press), other media which contain that information)?” encounters with history, and a search for a (1987, p. 45). Laberge argues that records are so truthful understanding of the past” (2006, p. essential for redress from crimes committed by 177). the record creators that they trump privacy However, it is true that the unreliable rights. James O’Toole states, “If records are content of the records leads to questions of preserved in archival custody but remain their value as evidence for accountability. withheld from contemporary or historical Duranti explains that a record is reliable “when scrutiny, how can any accountability be its form is complete, that is, when it possesses possible? The secrets will remain secret, and all the elements that are required by the socio- those who are guilty of moral failure will be safe juridical system in which the record is created

Page 5 of 11 Faculty of Information Quarterly Vol 1, No 4 (August 2009)

for it be able to generate consequences promises and thus they would possibly have recognized by the system itself” (1995, p. 6). motives for exaggerating or inventing material Further, a record can be said to be authentic so as to have something to report (Garton Ash, when it “is the document it claims to be… [and] 1996; Adams, 2000). does not result from any manipulation, However, despite the errors in each substitution, or falsification occurring after the individual file, there is a totality of truth—if not completion of its procedure of creation” of the individuals in the files, then of the society (Duranti, 1995, p. 7). Indeed, the Stasi had a in which these massive inventories of citizens’ very precise and rigorous file keeping process lives were created. Meehan argues that archivists (Adams, 2000). However, while the speed of must work toward a theory of the concept of unification did not give the Stasi time to modify archival evidence. She posits an “archival their files, it did give them time to destroy parts concept of evidence as a relation between of those files, leaving many of them only record and event” (2006). Meehan’s project partially complete. Yet, because the Stasi had unites the concepts of evidence and memory strict rules about their records, the documents that are often placed in opposition to each are considered mostly reliable because they did other, and explains that our thoughts about meet all the “elements required by the socio- memory and evidence have many similarities in juridical system” in which they were created. relation to records. Both conceptions position The problem then becomes: while the records as being “about” the events inspiring documents are what they claim to be and were their creation and then use those records to created in a manner to ensure their reliability, have information on those events (Meehan, can we know if the information within the 2006). Likewise, the Stasi records represent the documents is in fact true? Miller argues that country-wide suppression of citizens in East most of the information within the files was Germany and offer insight into the workings of collected illegally and therefore would never be the State. Further, Meehan argues that the admissible in a court of law (1998). As evidential value of the records comes not from mentioned, the files are also likely full of errors, each individual record but from the “very whether fabrications or simple typographical processes that treat and use records as evidence, errors. Garton Ash explains that while that invariably involve analysis and creation transcribing phone tap conversations, agents (more than mere identification) of relationships may not have known how to spell names between records and events.” (2006, p. 141). mentioned (1996). Garton Ash compared his The way that archivists situate the records and own file with his diary from the time, and notes how they prepare them ensures evidential value. several instances where dates of trips he made In her work, Meehan refers largely to records were incorrectly recorded (1996). Additionally, that come from democracies and are not, informers were recruited with a wide range of presumably, as full of mistakes and fabrications.

Page 6 of 11 Faculty of Information Quarterly Vol 1, No 4 (August 2009)

However, her conception of archival evidence situation were like all record makers; that is, can also be applied to compromised records “active participants in the dynamics of power such as the Stasi records. The archivists in the relations” (Harris, 2005, p. 115). An East Stasi archives can ensure the evidential value of German’s Stasi file could radically alter his or the collection of records by securing the her life. However, Harris (2005) and Schwartz relationships between individual records. The and Cook (2002) argue that records, and often speed with which the Gauck Authority was set the exact same records, can be both tools of up, as well as the East German civilians’ control (as the Stasi files were from 1948 to occupation of Stasi offices and refusal to leave 1989) or of resistance (as those same records, in the records to the Stasi, proves they are the hands of the East German people, are now). authentic records of the secret police force’s Indeed, power in records is always shifting and operations because they have not been often depends on who controls the record and tampered with by outside parties (Adams, 2000). for what purpose. Derrida states that: Essentially, there is an unbroken chain of “…effective democratization can always be custody between the Stasi and the new archives. measured by this essential criterion: the Thus, the records are evidence—not necessarily participation in and the access to the archive, its of specific East Germans’ lives but of life in constitution, and its interpretation” (quoted in East Germany. Harris, 2005, p. 119). The careful planning of Questions of evidential value and trust the StUG document law demonstrates an of records become even more important when awareness on the part of German lawmakers of the power relations within those records are the power inherent in the archives and the considered. Schwartz and Cook state that power responsibility to use that power to strive for relations are constantly at play within records justice, not oppression. (2002). They write, “archives then are not some There are parallels between the pristine storehouse of historical documentation handling of the Stasi records and other that has piled up, but a reflection of and often successful attempts to come to terms with justification for the society that creates them” traumatic history. The assessment of records by (Schwartz & Cook, 2002, p. 12). Indeed, during South African judge and victim of Apartheid, the Stasi’s heyday, the Stasi files functioned as Albie Sachs, and the Truth and Reconciliation the instrument of state-sponsored terror. Many trials in South Africa has resonance with the East German citizens were imprisoned, compromised files of the Stasi. Sachs argues that tortured, separated from their loved ones, fired records themselves are important but do not from jobs, refused access to university, and constitute the entire picture. Documents must made generally miserable as a direct result of the mix with memories from people to fill out what information in those files (Funder, 2003). Thus, really happened (2006). Therefore, the Truth as Harris argues, the record makers in this and Reconciliation trials were so important

Page 7 of 11 Faculty of Information Quarterly Vol 1, No 4 (August 2009)

because they mixed documentary evidence with It is true that people have been hurt by the responsible parties actually acknowledging the contents of the files. The information in what they had done (Sachs, 2006). Thus, it was them has ended marriages and dissolved the combination of documents and discussion friendships (Danielson, 2004; Garton Ash, 1996; that made the experience so cathartic. While the Miller, 1998). There is incomplete and unfettered access for victims to their files in inaccurate information in the files as well. Germany did not constitute the same kind of However, if the records had been destroyed or reconciliation that happened in South Africa, it sealed until all those mentioned had died, there did allow the victims of the Stasi to confront would be no Vergangenheitsbewältigung—no their betrayers, and it gave them evidence. opportunity for East Germans to talk about Additionally, victims of the Stasi were allowed their files and work through them. Danielson to publish information from their files, which and Garton Ash both report that most people fostered public debate about the legacy and found that viewing their file, though extremely implications of the Stasi (Miller, 1998). Access difficult, was overall a therapeutic experience to the files also allowed those who would be the (2004; 1996). victims of slander to clear their name. Danielson There is no doubt that the Stasi files describes the situation for Ralf Hirsch, a hold important information for survivors of the dissident involved in politics, who was the Stasi surveillance. However, there is yet another subject of rumours of Stasi collaboration. important use for this collection: it is the Hirsch was able to access his file (before the law communal coming to terms with the Stasi past came into force) and clear his name. Danielson that plays a role in building identity for East quotes Hirsch as saying “If I hadn’t got access Germans. Coming to terms with a traumatic to my file, I would have been finished” (quoted past is, unfortunately, not new for Germans. in Danielson, 2004, p. 178). The files fit into an The experience of the long process of dealing equation that allowed East Germans to engage with their guilt from the Second World War in Vergangenheitsbewältigung , the process of dealing perhaps made the issue of Stasi files more with a traumatic past (Garton Ash, 1996). The pressing. There was a feeling, especially in East metaphor of an equation suggests that the files Germany, that the legacy of the Stasi could not (as untrustworthy as the information they be ignored, and it must be dealt with contain may be), plus the memory of the people, (Danielson, 2004; Garton Ash, 1996; Miller, will equate to some kind of societal truth. In 1998). In the process in which archives build order to talk about the files, debate their collective memory, Millar conceives of archival contents, and work through the implications of documents as touchstones, likening them to the information, people must be able to see Proust’s madeleine as an object that brings forth them. memories (2006). These records become a vital part of the process of collective memory

Page 8 of 11 Faculty of Information Quarterly Vol 1, No 4 (August 2009)

creation. These collective memories, she argues, request their file be made anonymous. The join together to create a sense of identity (Millar, names of the person requesting this will be 2006). Millar further explains, quoting Eric blacked out of the record forever. However, the Ketelaar, that an essential component of record will remain, so its overall historical collective memory creation is access to these lessons will survive (Miller, 1999). Thus, not just touchstones, that “it is their selection, the files but the actions of the Gauck Authority, preservation, and articulation that allow them to the open and transparent nature of the files and serve society as clues to remember and the record keeping practices have helped forge a knowing” (quoted in Millar, 2006, p. 121). Like post-unification identity that acknowledges and, Millar, Craig argues that the notion of archives hopefully, moves on from the totalitarian past. as sites for building collective memory A concrete example of the process demonstrates the power that archives wield. She from file to identity is contained in The File , a says, “Memory has a social role as well, shaping book in which English journalist and historian our sense of the group through its shared Timothy Garton Ash, a frequent visitor to experiences” (2002, p. 281). The usefulness of Berlin in the late 1970s and early 1980s, muses the memories that archives summon is on the meanings of the Stasi file. Garton Ash’s predicated on the documents’ value as evidence file acts as a focus in his analysis of the Stasi and transparency in dealing with records (Craig, period; these files, which he refers to as 2002). Therefore, she argues, it is essential for poisoned madeleines, shape his recollections archivists to include contextual materials with and his understanding of this time in his life records. Archivists must enable memories when (1997). Garton Ash’s book charts the process of those who lived through a time are no longer reinterpreting memories. He reads accounts of alive (2002). Memory, for both Millar and Craig, visits to friends through their report to the Stasi is contained in archives, but it is the way the and must question his own interpretation of the documents are organized and made available interview. Garton Ash then confronts those that shapes collective memories and builds who gave information about him and analyzes identity. As Danielson argues, the opening of their reactions, which range from outright denial the Stasi files led not to violence but to to justifications for the betrayal. Thus, Garton discussion (2004). Access to the Stasi archives, Ash’s access to his file allowed him not only to then, allowed former East Germans to take their discuss the Stasi and the historical implications past and make it part of a national dialogue. The of their actions in public discourse, but also to German government realized the historical create his own historical record, his book, so importance of the Stasi legacy and ensured the that this discussion would be recorded. files’ protection. However, the StUG is also Schwartz and Cook (2002) argue that designed to protect those already victimized by archives play an important role in what is the Stasi and thus allows for affected persons to remembered and what is forgotten. They

Page 9 of 11 Faculty of Information Quarterly Vol 1, No 4 (August 2009)

examine the power archivists have over this promoting memory and building identity. The memory through the processes of appraisal of question of access versus privacy is a hugely documents. Further, they explain, a record is not contentious issue for archives. While people only a trace of events but also “a reflection of reserve the right to keep their secrets safe, the the needs and desires of its creator,” the context larger needs of a historical record must also be in which it was created and received, and the taken into consideration. The Gauck Authority way it was organized by the archivists to whom ultimately managed to efficiently balance the it was entrusted (2002, p. 3). The archive then rights of individual privacy with the rights of has power to shape all of these traces and leave information. In the example of the East a record of these interactions. Therefore, in the German Stasi files, these issues clashed case of the Stasi files, this archive contains more significantly. Additionally, the theme of archives than just a record of the abuses of the as arsenals of accountability emerges. In Communist GDR government. It is also a conclusion, the German resolution to this record of the SED’s policies and the Stasi quandary in the form of the Law on Documents of procedures, of the many people who stormed the State Security Service of the Former GDR can be the Stasi headquarters in order to stop the instructive in other situations around the world destruction of the files, and even of the where these issues emerge. archivists, a mix of former East and West Germans (Miller, 1998), who made those files I am grateful to Wendy Duff for bringing to my attention accessible and helped victims find their files. the connection between the climax of the film The Lives The Gauck Authority is highly invested in of Others (Das Leben der Anderen) and the importance ensuring that the lessons of the Stasi and the of archival records. people who suffered at its hands will be remembered so that Germany can learn, again, from its mistakes. The debate and ensuing law dealing with the records of East Germany’s feared state security agency ended with a victory for democracy and accountability. The compromise created by the newly unified German government has worked the best among all the former Russian-controlled countries. This successful situation underlines some important ideas about archives. The Stasi records can be seen as records of evidence of events and an oppressive culture, as well as records for

Page 10 of 11 Faculty of Information Quarterly Vol 1, No 4 (August 2009)

References

Adams, Jefferson. (2000). Probing the East Miller, John. (1998). Settling Accounts with a German State Security Archives. International Secret Police: The German Law on the Stasi Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence, 13, 21- Records. Europe – Asia Studies, 50 (2), 305-330. 34. Nagorski, Andrew. (2001, July 2). Handle this Craig, Barbara L. (2002). Selected Themes in the Box of Dynamite Very Carefully. Newsweek Literature on Memory and Their Pertinence to International , pp. 32. Archives. American Archivist, 65, 276-289. O’Toole, James. (2004). Archives and Historical Danielson, Elana S. (2004). Privacy Rights and Accountability: Toward a Moral Theology of the Rights of Political Victims: Implications of Archives. Archivaria, 58 (Fall), 2-19. the German Experience. American Archivist, 67 (2), 176-193. Sachs, Albie. (2006). Archives, Truth, and Reconciliation. Archivaria, 62, 1-14. Duranti, Luciana. (1995). Reliability and Authenticity: The Concepts and their Schwartz, Joan M. & Cook, Terry. (2002). Implications. Archivaria, 39 (Spring), 5-10. Archives Records, and Power: The Making of Modern Memory. Archival Science , 2, 1-19. Economist. (2000). Open the files! The Economist, 355 (8165), 54-55. Berg, Quirin & Wiedemann, Max (Producers), & von Donnersmarck, Florian Henckel (Director). Funder, Anna. (2003). Stasiland . London: (2006). The Lives of Others (Das Leben der Anderen) Granta. [Motion picture]. Germany: Sony Pictures Classic. Garton Ash, Timothy. (1997). The File . New York: Random House. Harris, Verne. (2005). The Archives Is Political. In Marion Beyea, Reuben Ware & Cheryl Avery (Eds.), The Power and Passion of Archives: A Festschrift in Honour of Kent Haworth (pp. 113-125). Ottawa: Association of Canadian Archivists.

Laberge, Danielle. (1987). Information, Knowledge, and Rights: The Preservation of Archives as a Political and Social Issue. Archivaria, 25 (Winter), 44-50.

Maddrell, Paul. (2004). The Revolution Made Law: The Work Since 2001 of the Federal Commissioner for the Records of the State Security Service of the Former German Democratic Republic. Cold War History, 4(3), 153-162.

Millar, Laura. (2006). Touchstones: Considering the Relationship Between Memory and Archives. Archivaria, 61(Spring), 105-126.

Miller, Barbara. (1999). Narratives of Guilt and Compliance in Unified Germany: Stasi Informers and Their Impact on Society . London: Routledge.

Page 11 of 11