No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Position of Aliens in National Socialist Penal Law Reform
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 April 2017
Extract
The draconic character of German National Socialist legislation on political crime has been brought forcibly to public attention by the recent activity of the People’s Court (Volksgericht), which was established last year for the purpose of assuring a more effective repression of treason and espionage. The subject is one of international concern, since the court has jurisdiction over aliens for acts committed abroad as well as upon German territory, and applies a law which is almost unparalleled at the present time in its severity and comprehensiveness. The safeguards commonly deemed essential to the protection of the accused are absent from the proceedings of the Volksgericht, which are secret as to indictment, investigation and trial.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Society of International Law 1935
References
1 Gesetz zur Änderung von Vorschriften des Strafrechts und des Strafverfahrens, Arts. Ill, IV, April 24, 1934, Reichsgesetzblatt, I, 341 (cited hereafter as Law of April 24, 1934). The Volksgericht was inaugurated on July 14, 1934.
2 The provisions as to secrecy in proceedings involving political crimes were not introduced by the present Government. Sec. 173 of the Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz, as amended by the law of April 5, 1888 (RGBl. I, 133), provides that the courts may exclude publicity in all proceedings in which secrecy is required in the interests of public order, and, especially, of the security of the state. The decision is made public, but the grounds therefor may be suppressed in whole or in part (§174). “Through this exclusion of publicity the first fundamental principle of law, that of the lex certa, is violated; for the question as to what is punishable is itself, thereby, made a secret.” E. J. Gumbel, in 2 Justiz (1926-27), 86.
3 New York Times, Jan. 30, 1935.
4 As, for example, in the well-known “Panter incident.” See The London Times, Oct. 27, 29, 30, and Nov. 8, 10, 1933.
5 By the Gesetz über Reichsverweisungen, March 23, 1934 (RGBl. I, 213), “A foreigner may be expelled from the territory of the Reich… . 3. If he acts or has acted in a manner inimical to the state, or if his sojourn in the country is likely to endanger the internal security of the Reich; 4. If his conduct is likely to endanger the relations of the Reich to foreign countries.“ See Bernhard Wolff, “ Reichsreform des Ausweisungsrechts,” 26 Archiv des öjfentlichen Rechts (1934), 1-40; and Dr. Schack, “Die Reichsverweisung,” 64 Juristische Wochenschrift (1935), 96-97.
6 See Art. Ill, 1 (b); and § 4, par. 2, No. 2, Strafgesetzbuch (1871).
7 That is, to “Gefängnis.” On the various degrees of punishment provided in the German penal law, see §§ 14-19, StGB.
8 Sec. 92d: “Wer vorsatzlich über amtliche Ermittlungen oder Verfahren wegen eines in diesem Abschnitt bezeichneten Verbrechens oder Vergehens [Landesverrat] ohne Erlaubnis der zuständigen Behörde Mitteilungen in die Öffentlichkeit bringt, wird mit Gefängnis bestraft.“ Sec. 3 of the Verordnung zur Abwehr heimtückischer Angrife gegen die Regierung der nationalen Erhebung, March 1, 1933 (RGBl. I, 135) provides: “Whoever intentionally makes or spreads an untrue or grossly misrepresented statement of a factual nature which is apt toprejudice gravely the interests of the Reich or of a German State, or the prestige of the Government of the Reich or of a German State, or of the parties or associations standing behind these governments, shall, in so far as a more severe penalty is not established in other provisions, be punished with imprisonment up to two years, and, if the statement is made or spread publicly, by imprisonment for not less than three months.“ This provision applies to aliens only with respect to acts committed upon German territory.
9 Gesetz über den Friedensbeschluss zwischen Deutschland und den alliierten und assoziierten Machten, July 16, 1919 (RGBl. I, 687); and Art. IV, Reichsverfassung.
10 The Reichsgericht, which could not admit the truth of the charges of secret rearming, developed the doctrine that there is attempted treason if a person reveals false or incorrect information which, if true or correct, would be to the interest of the Reich to keep secret. See Klee, “Eine Lücke im Tatbestande des Landesverrats,” 29 Deutsche Juristen-Zeitung (1924), 360-363.
11 See, for example, the decisions of the Reichsgericht of March 27, 1924, 54 Juristische Wochenschrift (1924), 1531; and March 14, 1928, 62 Entscheidungen in Strafsachen, 65. In 1923 the Reichsgericht condemned to six years of penal servitude, for diplomatic treason and receiving stolen goods, one Wandt, who had made public in Belgium certain documents purloined from the German archives and containing statements as to the activities of Flemish separatists during the German occupation. The court held “that through the betrayal of the documents the Belgian personalities with whom the German Government had entered into association during the war were at the same time betrayed. Should our Government at some time be in the position of having to make use of the aid of these men for carrying out its aims—which could easily happen in the event of a change in the present political situation— this would be rendered considerably more difficult by the betrayal.” Summary by Oborniker, in 1 Justiz (1925-26), 320-321. See Lothar Schiicking, “Landesverrat und Friedensvertrag,” 3 ibid. (1927-28), 509 ff.; and, for a thorough treatment, Hellmuth von Weber, “Die Verbrechen gegen den Stoat in der Rechtsprechung des Reichsgerichts,” DieReichsgerichtspraxis im deutschen Rechtsleben, V (1929).
12 That is, in order to secure a conviction for consummated treason. See note 10, above. The law of April 24, 1934 (§ 90a, par. 2) provides that “whoever divulges information [Gegenstande, Tatsachen oder Nachrichten] which he knows to be false, falsified or untrue, and which would be state secrets if they were genuine or true, without indicating them to be false,” is punishable with penal servitude (Zuchthaus).
13 The same law provides (§ 90b, par. 1) that “whoever publicly makes known or discusses former state secrets, which were already known to the foreign governments from whom they were to be kept secret, or which have already been made publicly known, and thereby endangers the welfare of the Reich, shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three months.“ The above provisions are, with slight changes, taken from the Verordnung gegen Verrat am deutschen Volke und hochverräterische Umtriebe, Feb. 28, 1933, which was repealed by Art. VIII, No. 4, Law of April 24, 1934.
14 The above subject is discussed more fully by the present writer in a paper read before the Grotius Society, June 14, 1934, on “International Law and German Legislation on Political Crime.” Transactions of the Grotius Society (London, 1934).
15 See Helmut Nicolai, Die rassenpesetzliche Rechtslehre (Munich, 1932), and Schmelzeisen, G. R., Das Recht im nationalsozialistischen Weltbild (Leipzig, 1934).Google Scholar For general discussions of the race theory in political and legal thought, L. Preuss, “La tthéorie raciale et la doctrine politique du national-socialisme,” 41 Revue générale de droit international public (1934), 661-674; and “Germanic Law versus Roman Law in National Socialist Legal Theory,“ 16 journal of Comparative Legislation and International Law (1934), 269-280.
16 “Whoever violates the law of the state acts against the will of the Leader, acts against the Movement, against the notion of the state and against our Weltanschauung. He violates thereby the sacred duty of fidelity to the Leader, for loyalty signifies obedience. He thereby acts also against the popular community, which is filled with the spirit and will of the Leader and is embodied in them.” General Göring, “Die Rechtssicherheit als Grundlage der Volksgemeinschaft,” address before the Academy of German Law, Nov. 13, 1934, Volkischer Beobachter, Nov. 14, 1934. Also, H. D. Freiherr von Gemmingen, Strafrecht im Geiste Adolf Hitlers (Heidelberg, 1933), 16; and Hans Richter, in 55 Reichsverwallungsblatt und Preussisches Verwaltungsblatt (1934), 494. For an example of the attempt to express National Socialist ideas in old-Germanic language, see the following statement by Dr. Roland Freisler in the introduction to an official report on penal law reform: “According to the German conception, the dead man accuses the perjurer who approaches him through the bleeding openings of his wounds, for the murdered one shrieks for vengeance. And the inner justification of vengeance lies in the cry for expiation, for the expiation which the guilt of Oedipus, the guilt of the Nibelungen, which every guilt demands.” Das kommende deutsche Strafrecht, Allgemeiner Teil; Bericht über die Arbeit der amtlichen Strafrechtskommission (Dr. Franz Gürtner, Reichsminster der Justiz, herausg., Berlin, 1934), 14. Cited hereafter as “Gürtner, Bericht.“
17 On this conception of penal law, as opposed to the Erfolgsstrafrecht, which emphasizes the result of the criminal act, see Freisler, “Willensstrafrecht: Versuch und VoUendung,” in Gurtner, Bericht, 9-36; Karl Larenz, Deutsche Bechtserneuerung und Rechtsphilosophie (Tübingen, 1934), 34 ff; Edmund Metzger, “Willensstrafrecht, Gefährdungsstrafrecht and Erfolgsstrafrecht,” 39 Deutsche Juristen-Zeitung (1934), 97-103.
18 For an historical sketch of the principal German theories of penal law, see Erik Wolf, Krisis und Neubau der Strafrechtsreform (Tübingen, 1933).
19 On the relation between the character of the National Socialist State and that of its penal law, see J. M. Ritter, “Bemerkungen zum Wandel des politischen Deliktes und der Strafgesetze zum Schutze von Volk, Bewegung und Stoat in Recht und Rechtspolitik,” 63 Juristische Wochenzchrift (1934), 2213-2225; and Dr. Strauss, “Die Erweiterung des Rechtsgüterschutzes im nationalsozialistischen Strafrecht,” Denkschrifi des Zentralausschusses der Strafrechtabteilung der Akademiefiir Deutsches Recht über die Grundzüge eines Allgemeinen Deutschen Strafrechts (Berlin, 1934), 31-41. Cited hereafter as “Denkschrifi“
20 For a typical statement, Hitler, Mein Kampf (Munich, 12th ed. 1933), 775.
21 “Our penal law must once more become penal law. The idea of retribution (Vergeltungsgedanke) must again become decisive, and the word ‘terrorization’ must again become, I might say, ‘respectable’ (salonfähig).” Heinrich Gerland, in 38 Deutsche Juristen-Zeitung (1933), 860.
22 See statement by Dr. Roland Freisler, in Gurtner, Bericht, 12.
23 For a brief survey, see Jahrbuch des Deutschen Rechts, I. Bd., Neue Folge (1934), 66-79,494-500, and 745-755.
24 Nationalsozialistisches Strafrecht: Denkschrift des Preussischen Justizministers (Berlin, 1933). Cited hereafter as “Preuss. Denkschrift.“ For commentaries, see Friedrich Schaffstein, “Nationalsozialistisches; Gedanken zur Denkschrift des Preussischen Justizministers,” 53 Zeitschrift fur die gesamte Strafrechtswissenschaft (1933), 603-628; and E. S. Rappaport, “Le futur code pénal du troisième Reich,“11 Revue internationale de droit pénal (1934), 279-303.
25 Gürtner, Bericht. Cited in full, note 16, above.
26 Denkschrift. Cited in full, note 19, above.
27 The constitutional order which is the object of protection in the law of high treason includes more than the formal text of the written constitution. The Denkschrift of the Prussian Minister of Justice suggests the following provision: “As high treason is to be punished with death the undertaking of the direct, forcible alteration (a) of the existing fundamental political, economic and social order of the national life… .” (p. 31.)
28 This law replaces §§ 80-93 of the Reichsstrafgesetzbuch of 1871. For brief analyses, see Hans Richter, “Die neuen Strafbestimmungen und Verfahrensvorschriften gegen Hoch- und Landesverrat,” 55 Reichsverwaltungsblatt und Preussisches Verwaltungsblatt (1934), 493-498; and 3 Bulletin de la Commission Internationale Pimale et Pinitentiaire (1934), 365-368.
29 The offices of Reichsprdsident and Reichskanzler are now united in the person of der Fiihrer.
30 Sec. 5, No. 1, Verordnung zum Schutze vonVolk und Stoat, Feb. 28, 1933 (RGBl. I, 83), provides that anyone who shall undertake to kill the President or a member of the Government of the Reich or of a State, or who shall incite or conspire thereto, shall be punished with death or by penal servitude up to fifteen years, unless a more severe penalty is elsewhere provided.
31 See Richter, op. cit., 494.
32 The Gesetz gegendie Neubildung von Parteien, July 14,1933 (RGBl. 1,479), provides that the N.S.D.A.P. shall be the sole political party in Germany, and makes punishable by penal servitude to three years or by imprisonment to three years the attempt to maintain or to establish any other political party, provided that a more severe penalty is not established elsewhere. Treasonable intention need not be proved.
33 See also the Gesetz zur Gewährleistung des Rechtsfriedens, Oct. 13, 1933 (RGBl. I, 723).
34 In the case of all offenses under §§ 80-84, an unlimited fine may be added (§ 86). See the Gesetz uber die Einziehung kommunistischen Vermögens, May 26, 1933 (RGBl. I, 293), and the Gesetz über die Einziehung volks- und staatsfeindlichen Vermögens, July 14, 1933 (RGBl. I, 479).
35 The Gesetz gegen den Verrat militärischer Geheimnisse, June 3, 1914 (RGBl. I, 195), is repealed by Art. VIII, No. 1.
36 If the act cannot lead to any danger to the Reich, the penalty is penal servitude for life or for not less than five years in the case of offenses against § 89, and penal servitude to fifteen years in the case of § 90. See the other provisions of this law cited in notes 8, 12 and 13, above.
37 291 Verhandlungen des Reichstags, XIII. Legislaturperiode, 1912/14, 5991.
38 Reichsgericht, May 12/19, 1884, 10 Entscheidungen in Strafsachen, 420; Dec. 16, 1893, 25 ibid., 45. On the entire subject of military secrets, Preiesleben, “Einzelne Fragen aus dem Gebiete des Landesverrats und der Spionage,” 45 Zeitschrift für die gesamte Strafrechtswissenschaft (1924), 237-262.
39 This is specifically provided in § 87.
40 Roland Freisler, in Denkschrift, 13; also, Preuss. Denkschrift, 112-113.
41 Sec. 4, par. 2, No. 1, StOB. (1871). See Heinrich Gerland, “Internationales Strafrecht nach den Bestimmungen des deutschen Strafgesetzbuchs und den Vorschtägen des Entwurfs,“ 6 Zeitschrift für ausldndisches- und Internationales Privatrecht (1932), 177-184.
42 See, for example, Verhandlungen des Reichstags, VIII. Legislaturperiode 1892/93, II. Anlageband, Drucksache Nr. 171; 305 ibid., XIII. Legislaturperiode 1912/14, Drucksache Nr. 1640.
43 Entwurf eines Allgemeinen Deutschen Strafgesetzbuchs, Reichstag, III. 1924/27, Drucksache, Nr. 3390.
44 Preuss. Denkschrift, 128. A note adds that “Nationals and foreigners who, for example, carry on atrocity-propaganda abroad against Germany are to be punished, but not, on the other hand, for example, an alien who marries a Jewess.” This note refers to the recommendations of this same Denkschrift that marriage or intercourse between a German and a member of an alien “Blutgemeinschaft” be punishable as “treason to the race” (Rasseverrat) (ibid., 47-49). One of the collaborators in the Denkschrift of the Academy of German law finds that this provision is “too narrow,” and suggests that ridiculing the consciousness of race (Rassenempfinden) be punishable (37).
45 Art. VIII. Prosecution of an alien for an extraterritorial offense is initiated only with the authorization of the Minister of Justice. Art. VIII, 1 (c). The above provisions will, no doubt, be carried over into the future Penal Code. See Dr. Reimer, “Räumliche Geltung des künftigen Strafgesetzes,” Gürtner, Bericht, 140-146.
46 An extreme provision is found in § 92a, Law of April 24, 1934: “Whoever in time of war or threat of war against the Reich does not fulfill a contract with an authority relating to the requirements of the national defense of the Reich or its allies, or fulfills it in such a manner as to frustrate or endanger the purpose of its performance, shall be punished with imprisonment for not less than one year. The same applies in times of general need with respect to a contract with an authority for the delivery or conveyance of provisions or other commodities necessary for the removal of the common need.” There is a similar provision in the Italian Penal Code (1930), Arts. 251-252.
47 “Report on Extraterritorial Crime,” League of Nations Document, 1926. V. 7, p. 3.
48 Protective legislation in some countries is even more extreme than the German. The Polish Penal Code of 1932, for example, provides (Art. 104) for the punishment of anyone who “in time of war or threat of war, for the purpose of influencing the spirit of resistance of the population, spreads information of a nature to weaken this spirit of resistance.” Art. 265, Italian Penal Code (1930), is similar.
49 “The legislator is absolutely sovereign in the determination of the circle of persons who are to be bound by his legal principles. He can direct his commands to the entire world, but can also confine its actual sphere of application more narrowly.” Dr. Schoetensack, Denkschrift, 62. See also, Karl Binding, Handbuch des Strafrechts, I (Leipzig, 1885), 374.
50 Another law of international interest is the Gesetz iiber den Widerrufvon Einbürgerungen und die Aberkennung der deutschen Staatsangehörigkeit, July 14, 1933 (RGBl. I, 480), which provides that nationality may be withdrawn from German citizens residing abroad “if they have by their conduct, contrary to the duty of fidelity to the Reich and the people, injured German interests.” For detailed discussion, see L. Preuss, “International Law and Deprivation of Nationality,” 23 Georgetown Law journal (1935), 250-276.
51 Art. Ill, §1 (1). Cases of lesser importance, involving preparatory acts (§§82, and 90b-e) may be turned over to the Oberlandesgerichte for trial and decision. The Special Courts (Sondergerichte) established by the Verordnung über die Bildung von Sondergerichten, March 21, 1933 (RGBl. I, 136), are competent in less important political cases arising under the Verordnung zum Schutz von Volk und Stoat, Feb. 28, 1933 (RGBl. I, 83), and the Verordnung zur Abwehr heimtückischer Angriffe gegen die Regierung der nationalen Erhebung, March 21, 1933 (RGBl. I, 135).
52 Art. III § 1 (2). The members are appointed by the Chancellor upon the recommendation of the Minister of Justice. (Art. III , § 2). The Italian Tribunal for the Defense of the State probably served as a model for the Volksgericht. Prowedimenti per la difesa dello Stato, Art. 7, Nov. 25,1926, Gazzetta Ufficiale, Dec. 6, 1926.
53 Kichter, op. cit., 497.
54 See the comment in the Volkischer Beobachter (Dec. 24/25/26, 1933) on “das Fehlurteil von Leipzig,” and the article “Was Lehrt der Leipziger Prozess,” ibid., Jan. 11, 1934.
55 See Heinrich Lange, “Justizreform und deutscher Richter,” Deutscher Juristentag, 1933 (Berlin, 1933), 181-189; and Lothar Schone, “Richter und Rechtspflege im neuen Stoat,” 25 Archiv des öffentlichen Rechts (1934), 265-290, for discussions of the position of the judiciary.
56 Sec. 5 of the Verordnung zum Schutze von Volk und Stoat, Feb. 28, 1933 (RGBl. I, 83), changed the penalty for arson from life imprisonment (§ 307, StGB.) to death, and § 1, Gesetz über Verhängung und Vollzug der Todesstrafe, March 29, 1933 (RGBl. I, 151), made the penalty retroactive for acts committed between Jan. 31 and Feb. 28, 1933. See Van Hamel, “The ‘Van der Lubbe Case’ and Diplomatic Protection of Citizens Abroad,” 19 Iowa Law Review (1933-34), 237-243.
57 Sec. 2, par. 1: “An act can be visited with a penalty only if the penalty was determined by law before the act was committed.“
58 Art. 116.
59 For example, the Declaration des droits de I'homme et du citoyen of June 23, 1793, providesé (§ 14): Nul ne doit êtré jugé et puni qu'après avoir étéentendu ou légalement appeé, et qu'en vertu d'une loi promulguée antérieurement au délit. La loi qui punirait des delits commis avant qu'elle existât serait une tyrannie; l'effetetrtroactif donné à la loi serait un crime.“ See Heinrich Klee, “Strafe ohne gesehriebenes Gesetz,” 39 Deutsche Juristen-Zeilung (1934), 639-643; and Dr. Matzke, “Was bedeutet die Vfberwindung der Überalistischen Weltanschauung fur die heutige Stellung des Richters zum Strafgesetz,” 63 Juristische Wochenschrift (1934), 1612 ff.
60 Gürtner, Bericht, 132.
61 Preuss. Denkschrift, 116.
62 Nicolai, Die Rassengesetzliche Rechtslehre, 32-33.
63 2 Deutsches Recht (1934), 233. The emergency measures taken by the Government from June 30 to July 2, 1934, were ratified by the Gesetz uber Massnahmen der Notwehr, July 3, 1934 (RGBl. I, 529).
64 “Der Führer schültzt das Recht,” 39 Deutsche Juristen-Zeitung (1934), 947. Also, “Nationalsozialismus und Rechtstaat,” 63 Juristische Wochenschrift (1934), 715-718.