"Non-Germans" Under the Third Reich (183 page)

24.
Urgent memorandum of March 14, 1941, from the Reich Ministry of the Interior (ibid., sheet 116).

25.
Ibid., sheet 126.

26.
Letter of December 15, 1941, from the Reich governor of Posen, Referat I/40 to Referat I/23 (ibid., sheet 129).

27.
Urgent memorandum of January 14, 1942, from the Reich Ministry of the Interior: “It would be completely unacceptable to concede a right of complaint to Poles…. The penal justice order of December 4, 1941, against Poles and Jews [
RGBl.
I 769] takes the requirements of the national struggle into account in many particulars. It allows the justice authorities efficient action without being tied down by restrictive provisions. In a similar way it is unthinkable not to have an equivalent overriding freedom of action against Poles in the police sector too” (State Archive Pozna
,
Reichsstatthalter
802, sheet 138).

28.
Report by Dr. Körth from the office of the Reich governor of Posen on an official trip to Berlin on March 27–28, 1942: “According to a communication from
Regierungsrat
von Rosen, the introduction of the police authority law is still hampered by differences between order police and Security Police…. Abteilung 1 East now intends to send a decree signed by State Secretary Stuckart to the chief of the German police indicating the urgency of its introduction, which has now been pending for two years” (State Archive Pozna
,
Reichsstatthalter
802, sheet 139).

29.
“I shall propose to the Reich minister of the interior that we include appropriate provisions in the introductory order, or otherwise that these questions be settled in a decree to be issued by myself in accordance with sec. 8 of the draft text” (ibid., sheet 128; circular also to be found in ZSt, Poland, film 14, 772 ff., copy; IfZ, MA-708/2, 772–73).

30.
The ultimate aim of the police leadership was to preclude
all
legal action against
any
political measure. The exclusion by law of legal recourse against ordinances by the Gestapo (Secret State Police Law of February 10, 1936, sec. 7,
Preußische Gesetzessammlung
21) was only the first step in broad plans to brand all “offenses not covered by the justice system” as criminal, i.e., all offenses under the economic legislation and all the rest of the administrative penal law (exclusion of
administrative
sanctions, introduction of
penal
provisions), and to derogate the judicial verification of police ordinances. The Ministry of the Interior (Abteilung 1), in accord with the regular police headquarters and the Reich Security Main Office (RSHA), therefore planned to abolish requests for judicial verification (Code of Criminal Procedure, secs. 413 ff.) against penal decisions by the police (note dated February 2, 1943, by the Reich Ministry of the Interior, Pol. O-VuR. Org. Ost 133/41, State Archive Pozna
,
Reichsstatthalter
802, sheet 144, in which suspension of the Code of Criminal Procedure, secs. 413 ff., is declared necessary “for reasons pertaining to the police not defined in more detail”), a situation that did not in fact materialize. The police were, however, able to chalk up a certain success in that they introduced the
reformatio in peius
clause in the event of a complaint against penal action by the police, so as to deter people from taking legal action (RFSSuChddtPol decree of December 2, 1942,
MinbliV
[1942]: 2245).

31.
The draft envisaged a separation, on the Austrian model, of judicial and administrative offenses (no judicial appeal against punishment possible), communication by
Ministerialrat
Rietzsch of the Reich Ministry of Justice at the meeting of chief presidents and prosecutors-general, Berlin, February 10–11, 1943 (record BA R 22/4200, Ref. Rietzsch, sheet 48 ff.).

32.
See Reich Ministry of the Interior note of February 1943, Pol. O-VuR. Org. Ost 133/41: “It is felt necessary to preclude the possibility of an appeal for a judicial decision on police grounds, and efforts are being made to include the territory of the Altreich…. In the opinion of the chief of the Party Chancellery, a special arrangement is required for the Polish and Jewish populations, as is the case in penal law. The following is in line with this standpoint” (State Archive Pozna
,
Reichsstatthalter
802).

33.
Letter of March 25, 1943, from the
Gau
staff office of the NSDAP
Gauleitung
Wartheland to the Reich governor of Posen:

It is far more important to counter all legal action against decisions of the secret police and the criminal police, as provided for in sec. 1, par. 1, of the draft. This proposal goes too far…. To exclude legal recourse in such serious decisions necessarily gives the individual the impression that he is at the mercy of the judgment of relatively subordinate offices of the police in matters that are of vital importance to him, and that he has lost his rights…. And the absence of legal recourse could even have a deleterious effect on the police officer himself. Experience shows that when there is an overload of work, our police officers, like those of other departments, have a tendency to use the harshest means only because they achieve the desired aim more rapidly and conveniently. Such a tendency will doubtless be enhanced if no appeal is possible. It is dangerous because it is likely to produce or strengthen a very problematic contrast between the police and the citizen. Appeals to the Reich governor against police decisions and the imposition of coercive measures by offices of the secret state police are legitimate. The decision of the Reich governor is final. (ibid., sheet 7)

34.
Ibid., sheet 142.

35.
Communications of June 28, 1940, from the district president of Posen to the
Landräte
and commissars of the district (State Archive Pozna
, Gendarmerie Schrimm, 10, sheets 27 f.), and of March 31, 1941, from the Reich governor of Posen to the district president of Łód
(State Archive Pozna
,
Reichsstatthalter
1216, sheet 17); circular of July 31, 1941, by the Reich governor of Posen (
Reichsstatthalter
1218, sheet 386).

36.
State Archive Pozna
,
Reichsstatthalter
802, sheet 128.