Special Jurisdiction from the Bavarian Soviet Republic to the Hitler-Trial. Bavarian People´s Courts (1919-1924)

巴伐利亚苏维埃共和国对希特勒审判的特别管辖权。

• 批准号: 525789955
• 负责人: Professor Dr. Arnd Koch
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: Lehrstuhl für BR, Deutsche und Europäische Rechtsgeschichte und Kirchenrecht
• 依托单位国家: 德国
• 项目类别: Research Grants
• 资助国家: 德国
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gepris.dfg.de/gepris/projekt/525789955?language=en
• 关键词: Special; Jurisdiction; Bavarian; Soviet; Republic

Criminal justice is the yardstick for the rule of law in times of political up-heaval. "Undemocratic", "blind in the right eye", "political", these are the terms most often used to characterise the judicial practice of the Weimar period. However, there are no legal-historical works that could prove or disprove these evaluations on the basis of historical sources. The aim of the project is therefore to examine these evaluations using the example of the Bavarian drumhead courts martial (Standgerichte) and people´s court (Volksgerichte). The majority of criminal proceedings in Bavaria took place before these courts from 1918 to 1924. This also includes the proceedings against members of the Bavarian Soviet Republic (Räterepublikaner) (1919) or the so-called Hitler putschists (1923/24). The judicial practice will be examined on the basis of an analysis of the trial files. This includes those sources that allow conclusions to be drawn about which procee-dings were not carried out due to amnesties or service orders. The project combines the interests of procedural history with those of dogmatic history and social history. In this way, the evaluation of judicial practice can be placed on a broad scientific basis. The concept of „political justice“ will be clarified by pointing out the legal weaknesses in the design of the administration of justice and by gathering comprehensive information on the social backgrounds of those involved in the trials and the possib-le references to sentencing practice. After an initial random examination of the Bavarian file holdings, we cansurmise: A more differentiated evaluation of Bavarian judicial practice is required than has been the case so far. This, in turn, can give us reason to examine and differentiate common theories about the role of the judiciary in the functioning or failure of the Weimar Republic. In this context, moreo-ver, existing knowledge must be reclassified. On the one hand, the Hitler-Ludendorff trial is probably the best researched trial of a people´s court (Volksgericht). On the other hand, there is a lack of knowledge about its legal-historical and socio-historical context; only this context, however, makes it possible to comprehensively situate this trial in Weimar judicial practice. We want to accomplish this re-location as well as a diachronic re-evaluation of trial models and regulations on the rules of procedure that characterise the German special courts (Sondergerichte) as a juridical in-stitution – for example, with regard to proceduaral innovations such as lay participation in criminal proceedings.

刑事司法是政治动荡时期法治的标尺。“不民主”、“右眼失明”、“政治”，这些是最常用来诋毁魏玛时期司法实践的术语。然而，没有任何法律历史著作可以根据历史资料证明或反驳这些评价。因此，该项目的目的是以巴伐利亚鼓面军事法院（Standgerichte）和人民法院（Volksgerichte）为例，审查这些评估。1918年至1924年，巴伐利亚州的大多数刑事诉讼都是在这些法院进行的。这也包括对巴伐利亚苏维埃共和国（Räterepublikaner）（1919年）或所谓的希特勒政变者（1923/24年）的诉讼。将根据对审判卷宗的分析审查司法实践。这包括那些可以得出结论的来源，即由于大赦或服务命令而没有进行的程序。该项目结合了程序历史的教条主义历史和社会历史的利益。这样，对司法实践的评价就可以建立在广泛的科学基础之上。“政治正义”的概念将通过指出司法制度设计中的法律的弱点、收集有关参与审判者的社会背景的全面资料以及可能提到的判刑做法加以澄清。在对巴伐利亚州的档案进行初步随机检查后，我们发现：需要对巴伐利亚州的司法实践进行比迄今为止更有区别的评估。反过来，这也给了我们理由去审视和区分关于司法在魏玛共和国的运作或失败中所起作用的常见理论。在这种情况下，更重要的是，现有的知识必须重新分类。一方面，希特勒-鲁登道夫审判可能是人民法院（Volksgericht）研究得最好的审判。另一方面，人们对这一审判的法律历史背景和社会历史背景缺乏了解;然而，只有这种背景才有可能在魏玛司法实践中全面再现这一审判。我们希望完成这一重新定位，以及对审判模式和程序规则的历时性重新评估，这些规则将德国特别法院（Sondergerichte）作为一个司法机构-例如，关于程序创新，如非专业人员参与刑事诉讼。