"Non-Germans" Under the Third Reich (267 page)

125.
In the Warthegau, the instruction of April 24, 1942, by the Reich governor of Posen to the district president of Posen had already reduced the local police authority to issuing sentences of up to
three
months’ prison camp (penal framework under the Police Decree of June 15, 1942:
six
months) (State Archive Pozna
,
Reichsstatthalter
487, Bl. 14).

126.
See, for example, the RFSSuChddtPol decree of February 20, 1942, under the terms of which all such “criminal acts” “by aliens” “from the East” were to be prosecuted by the Gestapo (Allgemeine Erlaßsammlung des RSHA, A III f.); see also the situation report of November 28, 1942, by the presiding judge of the Court of Appeal of Königsberg (BA R 22/3375), which speaks of this instruction: the presiding judge states: “The German women—until the Führer forbade this—were often branded by having their hair shorn, being led through the streets, etc.”

127.
Reports of September 3, 1942, and June 8, 1944, by the chief public prosecutor of Kattowitz (BA R 22/3372, p. 2). Also the situation reports of September 25, 1943, and January 26, 1944, by the chief public prosecutor of Posen (BA R 22/3383); situation report of February 10, 1944, by the chief public prosecutor of Danzig (BA R 22/3360).

128.
Situation report of January 31, 1943, by the chief public prosecutor of Königsberg (BA R 22/3375, Bl. 23); situation report of May 31, 1943, by the chief public prosecutor of Posen (BA R 22/3383).

129.
Situation report of August 6, 1942, by the chief public prosecutor of Kattowitz (BA R 22/3372), which speaks of a discussion on public executions between the Gauleiter of Upper Silesia and the
Reichsführer
-SS.

130.
Situation report of January 31, 1943, by the chief public prosecutor of Königsberg: public execution no longer had a deterrent effect, but only increased the “restiveness” of the Poles (BA R 22/3375).

131.
Cf. the situation report of April 11, 1944 (BA R 22/3372), which states, among other things, that the work of the judiciary “is duly appreciated by leading personalities in that it in no way lags behind other such state authorities. For this reason I regret that none of the presiding judges under me … have received a mark of honor.”

132.
Situation report of July 10, 1942, by the presiding judge of the Court of Appeal of Danzig (Nuremberg doc. NG-432). See the situation reports by the chief public prosecutors from 1941 on, especially that of July 26, 1941, by the chief public prosecutor of Marienwerder (Kwidzyn) (BA R 22/G 5/5 -18), according to which, in the course of an investigation procedure, a Pole was handed over to the Gestapo for trial; on July 2, 1941, the public prosecutor requested the Pole’s return. The Pole was executed by the Gestapo on July 8, 1941.

133.
More on this subject in part 2, section 1, excursus, 3, a (“Collaboration between the Reich Ministry of Justice and the Police”), above; see also the significant but completely unsatisfying reaction of the Reich Ministry of Justice to the remark by the presiding judge of the Kattowitz Court of Appeal at the meeting of presiding judges of the courts of appeal and chief public prosecutors, Berlin, February 10–11, 1943, that the police courts-martial in Upper Silesia were increasingly taking over the whole administration of justice against Poles, but also against
Germans
. The minister demanded documentary evidence and claimed to be against such practice in principle. He knew of no case in which a German had been condemned by a court-martial, but there were cases in which individuals had been erroneously included in the German Ethnic Classification List in Upper Silesia and had then been treated as Poles by the Gestapo, and also cases of sexual intercourse between Poles and Germans. Poles were dealt with according to the Decree on Penal Law for Poles; Germans were not. It “did happen that the police put the German(s) into concentration camp,” and this was right, but in no case was this tantamount to adjudication by a court-martial (minutes, BA R 22/4200; see also note 101 above).

134.
An example are the conditions in Łód
, where in certain cases the police themselves intended to decide as a “court.” See the situation report of August 14, 1942, by the chief public prosecutor of Posen (BA R 22/3383): “In Łód
it has even come about that the police president let the judge of the court of summary jurisdiction know by a messenger that the police themselves now wished to deal with all criminal cases not liable to a penalty of more than six months, and that such cases should be taken away from the public prosecutor or the court. With this the thought looms in people’s minds that the broadening of the retributive powers of the police … also includes the possibility to try the accused in an oral hearing. The senior public prosecutor in Łód
has so far managed to prevent this development.”

Part Two. Section 2. C. Civil Law

1.
RGBl.
I 2042.

2.
See also Pungs, Buchholz, and Wolany,
Ostrechtspflegeverordnung
(1943), 3 f., 6; Klee,
Die bürgerliche Rechtspflege
(1942), 17, 49; Fechner, “Das bürgerliche Recht in den eingegliederten Ostgebieten” (1941), 2481; von Rozycki, “Über den Geltungsbereich des Reichsrechts im Großdeutschen Reich” (1941), 54 ff., 57.

3.
Pungs, Buchholz, and Wolany,
Ostrechtspflegeverordnung
, 6 f. (The authors were judges at the Posen Court of Appeal.)

4.
Ibid., 6 f., 161; Klee,
Die bürgerliche Rechtspflege
, 17, 47; Fechner, “Das bürgerliche Recht in den eingegliederten Ostgebieten,” 2482; see also Enke, “Die Rechtspflege im Volkstumskampf” (1941).

5.
Fechner, “Das bürgerliche Recht in den eingegliederten Ostgebieten,” 2482; Klee,
Die bürgerliche Rechtspflege
, 47.

6.
BA R 43/II/694.

7.
Pungs, Buchholz, and Wolany,
Ostrechtspflegeverordnung
, 33.

8.
Fechner, “Das bürgerliche Recht in den eingegliederten Ostgebieten,” 2485.

9.
For example, it was disputed whether sec. 7 of the Führer decree merely propounded that German law as practiced by the courts was to remain valid, or whether, generally speaking, all the regulations under Reich law that conflicted with the National Socialist ideology should become ineffective in the Annexed Eastern Territories (see
Meldungen aus dem Reich
, June 27, 1940, BA R 58/ 151).

10.
Fechner, “Das bürgerliche Recht in den eingegliederten Ostgebieten,” 2485.

11.
Ibid. See also the (undated) list drawn up by the presiding judge of the Posen Court of Appeal regarding the “jurisdiction to be applied in the Annexed Eastern Territories” (Institute for Western Studies, Pozna
).

12.
Note at Referat II/2 of the Office of the Reich Governor on a discussion with the deputy presiding judge of the Posen Court of Appeal, Dr. Tautphaeus (State Archive Pozna
,
Reichsstatthalter
857, Bl. 80–81).

13.
These directives were made known via notification of court of appeal decisions (see circular of November 19, 1940, from the presiding judge of the Posen Court of Appeal to the presiding judge of the District Court [
Landgericht
] there, State Archive Pozna
,
Landgericht
Posen 10) or by way of personal instructions to the
Instanzgerichte
, which then adhered to them (Pungs, “Die bürgerliche Rechtspflege im Warthegau” [1941], 2492). See also the letter of October 8, 1942, from the presiding judge of the Posen District Court to the president of the special courts and the criminal and civil courts requesting that the presiding judges of the courts of appeal be sent a report directly—
before
the trial date—of important criminal and civil cases (State Archive Pozna
,
Landgericht
Posen 11, Blatt 33).