Protektorát Čechy a Morava

Immediately after the constitution of the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia (1939 – 1945), the Nazis began with interventions in the labor law. Labor law was one of branches of law, which were influenced very much during the German occupation (compared, the civil law remained practically unaffected). This article involves following sections: introduction, labor law according to the Nazi ideology, creating of the forced and controlled labor system, regulations in labor relations and situations of Jewish employees.

The Relationship of Czech State to the Empire in the Middle Ages and its Use and Abuse in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia

The relationship of Czech state and the medieval German Empire is the core of the dispute between the Czech and German general and legal historians at least the last 150 years. Czech and German nationalist historiography used to interpret this relationship mainly in the second half of the 19th and in the first half of the 20 century quite different as it was at the moment suit the national ideas of the nation. Either it was considered that the Czech state was fully dependent component of the Holy Roman Empire, or that it was not at all. After March 1939 when there was a military occupation of Bohemia and Moravia and the establishment of the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, the Nazi leaders and Czech collaborators tried to convince Czech as well as world public community that the constitutional relationship of the Czech state and the Empire after 15 March 1939 is nothing new and that it only continues the thousand-year old tradition that links the two state units. This paper points out the way how the historical subject of the proportion of Bohemia and Empire has been used and misused in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia (1939 -1945).

"Vztah českého státu a středověké německé Říše je jádrem sporu mezi českými a německými obecnými i právními historiky přinejmenším posledních 150 let. Nacionalistické české i německé dějepisectví si tento vzájemný vztah interpretovalo především v druhé polovině 19. a v první polovině 20. století zcela odlišně tak, jak se to v dané chvíli vyhovovalo státoprávním představám daného národa. Buď byl zastáván názor, že české země byly na Svaté říši římské závislé a tvořily její součást, nebo že tomu tak nebylo. Když došlo v březnu 1939 k vojenskému obsazení Čech a Moravy a ke zřízení Protektorátu Čechy a Morava, snažili se nacističtí představitelé a čeští kolaboranti přesvědčit českou i světovou veřejnost o tom, že státoprávní vztah českých zemí a Říše po 15. březnu 1939 není nic nového, a že se pouze navazuje na staré tisícileté tradice spojení obou těchto státních celků. Tento příspěvek tak poukazuje na to, jakým způsobem byla využita a zneužita historická látka vzájemného poměru Čech a Říše v období Protektorátu Čechy a Morava (1939 – 1945).

"Criminal Law in the Protectorate Bohemia and Moravia

This article deals with the material criminal law in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia. In the branch of the criminal law during the period of the Nazi-Occupation, the most changes (compared to other branches of law during this period) were implemented. The criminal law valid on the area of the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia was considerably complicated and unclear. There were some reasons for it. One of them was the fact, that the rules of the criminal law were not codified in any single legal enactment. The second reason was the exist-ence of two legal orders, which were valid simultaneously in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia and the substitution of the territoriality principle by the personality principle. Over the years, the use of the taken over Czechoslovakian rules of criminal law had been increasingly reduced for the benefit of the German criminal law and of the hearing of torts and delicts before the German courts in the Protectorate."

Jakým způsobem probíhalo po druhé světové válce v českých zemích potrestání tzv. každodenní kolaborace? Tato kniha se věnuje právě trestání provinění proti národní cti podle dekretu prezidenta republiky č. 138/1945 Sb., tedy tzv. „malému retribučnímu dekretu“. Kromě detailně rozpracované legislativní stránky retribuce a popisu retribuční praxe je zde také prostor pro komparaci s průběhem retribucí v dalších zemích. Formou lokální sondy kniha navíc popisuje činnost a výstupy konkrétní Trestní nalézací komise v Benešově u Prahy. Tato sonda nabízí jak analýzu zahájených kauz a statistiku typů obvinění, odsouzených či osvobozených případů, druhů a výše trestů, tak komparace těchto údajů s údaji v jiných okresech.

Predstavitelia a veriaci Gréckokatolíckej cirkvi v Československu museli počas jesennej krízy v roku 1938 a po rozbití republiky reagovať na zmeny politickej situácie. Mukačevská a Prešovská eparchia boli rozdelene najprv v jeseni 1938 na niekoľko mesiacov medzi dva štáty, a od marca 1939 do troch štátnych útvarov, z ktorých ani jeden nebol demokratický. V daných podmienkach cirkev vykonávala svoju činnosť a miera jej angažovania v spoločensko-politických otázkach bola rôzna. Monografia sa v štyroch kapitolách venuje reakcii na zmeny hraníc a činnosti cirkvi na jednotlivých územiach bývalého Československa počas rokov 1938 – 1945. Odkrýva zapojenie niektorých duchovných do politického diania a zaoberá sa aj situáciou vo vzťahu k Židom. Všíma si aj dôsledky vyplývajúce pre gréckokatolícku cirkev v slovenskom štáte.

At the beginning of 1930s, the overall circumstances for German art historians along with institutional, financial, educational, and publishing possibilities in Czechoslovakia were not very good in comparison to the golden era in the first decade of the 20th century. By the 1930s, however, the situation had improved. Not only because of Karl Maria Swoboda’s
appointment as the chair of Art History at the German University, but also thanks to scholarships financed by Berlin which were awarded to a younger generation of art historians who often crossed paths with Richard Hamann and his Institute of Art History in Marburg. Thus,
German historical research of art in Bohemia had been incrementally gaining never-before-seen institutional, financial, and staff support since the 1930s. During this time, however, the protagonists promoting such progress were opportunistic participants within the propaganda
machine of a Nazi regime in search of scientific arguments to legitimize a Greater German solution to Czechoslovakia and, later, also its destabilization and annexation.

Discrimination against Jews in the Labour Law Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia
According to the German model, in the Protectorate also racial legislation, that had not enabled practicing of some professions to persons, who this legislation referred to, was initiated. Above all, the Regulation Nr. 136/1942 Coll. about legal position of Jews in public life, which edged the Jews out of all professions in the public service, education, legal professions, health service and journalism, was included. Last but not least, the Regulation Nr. 260/1942 Coll. about employment of Jews represented derogation of the protective function of labour law.

"The Implementation of Compulsory Labour Service and Peonage System in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia
This contribution deals with one of the labour law fields in the period of the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia (1939 – 1945), namely the implementation of compulsory labour service and peonage system. In the first part of the article, the author deals with the ideological concept of labour, that means the attitude of the national socialists towards labour and its function in the national society. Further, the situation during the period of the so called Second Republic (October 1938 – March 1939) is described. In that period, we can find certain Nazism tendencies in the labour law.

Gradually, the inhabitants of the Protectorate were forced to accomplish community service. Also the compulsory labour service was implemented. The newly constituted employment offices played an important role in this process, because they were the main offices for controlling the labour forces. The last years of the Protectorate period were connected with the so called forced labour – thousands of Czech workers were sent to work in Germany.
"

O čtení Petera Demetze z knihy Praha ohrožená v Moravské zemské knihovně 25. listopadu 2010 u příležitosti 20. výročí založení Rakouské knihovny v Brně.
Lesung von Peter Demetz aus seinem Buch Mein Prag in der Mährischen Landesbibliothek Brünn anlässlich des 20. Gründungstages  der Österreich-Bubliothek Brünn.

COMPENSATING FOR IMAGES OF HISTORY PRODUCED BY ‘RIVAL’ HISTORIOGRAPHY.  THE CASE OF CZECH AND SUDETEN GERMAN HISTORIOGRAPHIES IN 1938–1945:
This contribution is based on a comparative analysis of images of important turning points (symbolic centres) of Czech and Sudeten German history created in 1938–1945 by Czech and Sudeten German historiography. Its aim is to describe the main strategies these historiographers used to refute or at least compensate the image or interpretation of a historical phenomenon as described by the ‘rival’ historiography. Based on a generalisation, this contribution offers a classification of typical strategies which were used to this purpose. It turns out that on this general level, and although the nationally conditioned content was different, strategies used by the Czech and Sudeten German were identical. The analysis and generalisation are introduced by a theoretical introduction which offers arguments for the still sadly neglected use of comparative and relation-historical approach to the history of Czech historiography.

THE VIEW OF PEASANT SCRIBES AND IN PARTICULAR F. J. VAVÁK IN CZECH HISTORIOGRAPHY IN THE 1930S AND 1940S:
The study analyses the concepts of peasant scribes and in particular F. J. Vavák in the works by Zdeněk Kalista, František Kutnar and Bedřich Slavík in the period of the Second Republic and the first years of the Nazi occupation. It notes the broader temporal factors influencing their interpretations, and the sources they drew on in formulating their theses.

NATIONAL ANCHORAGE OF GENEALOGICAL RESEARCH IN THE CZECH LANDS IN 1918-1948 (WITH REGARDS TO THE PERIODS OF THE SECOND REPUBLIC AND THE NAZI OCCUPATION):
The study deals with national conditions of the Czech genealogy in the scope of the years 1938-1945 (with overlaps to pre-Munich Agreement period  and a post-war period). It contains a relation-comparative analysis with Sudeten German genealogy. The study analysis ideological, programmatic, publication and institutional characteristic of genealogy, as well as specific outcomes of constituent research projects.

AN EDITION OF AN ESSAY BY JAROSLAV WERSTADT - A VOICE OF RESISTANCE FROM THE TWILIGHT OF THE SECOND REPUBLIC AND THE FIRST MONTHS OF THE NAZI OCCUPATION:
In the edited text, written in 1966, the Czech historian Jaroslav Werstadt describes his experience of publishing in the Second Republic, when he focused on critics who attacked the ideological foundations of the Czechoslovak Republic, which they accused of having brought about the Munich catastrophe, and in the early months of the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, when he focused on Nazi ideology and propaganda and German visions of new ordering of the Central Europe. His campaign in the press represented a daring defence of the official ideology of the First Republic, the work of T. G. Masaryk and E. Beneš, and is also an expression of Werstadt’s conviction that the current situation was only a brief deviation in the democratization of Europe and indeed the whole world, which had been under way since the First World War. Considering that the edited text was written in the 1960s, it is fair to see it also as evidence of a striking continuity in Werstadt’s thinking and world-view, which were essentially unchanged since the First Republic, despite the many political and social ups and downs. An introductory essay links Werstadt’s connection with First Republic ideology together with similar positions held by men from the group of so-called ‘Castle historians’, including (apart from Werstadt), K. Krofta, J. Slavík, and J. Borovička.

Besprechung der deutschen wie auch der tschechischen Ausgabe von Peter Demetz' Buch Prague in Danger  (Mein Prag, Wien, 2008, Praha ohrožená, Praha, 2010).  Unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Persönlichkeit von Demetz, Ehrendoktor der Philologie der Masaryk-Universität (2014) und Mitglied des Ehrenkomitees Wisseschaftskolleg (2010)Österreich-Bibliothek (wiko.phil.muni.cz). Zur frühen Lyrik von Peter Demetz und Physiognomie seines Gesichts. Warum die "blinde" Übersetzung "...a ten vzácný dar/ i v trápení se umět usmívat" des sonst kongenialen Übersetzers Vratislav Jiljí Slezák (... und seine seltne Art/ Zu lächeln aus den starren Mienen - Böhmen böhmisch, 2006/ Dějiště Čechy, 2008) zum konzentrierten Blick in das Gesicht des noch lebenden Peter Demetz provozieren sollte ...

This article examines a minor topic from the history of the
Czech refugees, who had emigrated from the Protectorate of
Bohemia and Moravia to fight against the Germans. These exiles
after the World War II often wrote memoirs, or they were
interviewed by historians. In their memoirs the veterans were
using Hungarian words: with deformation. The users learned
these foreign words in Hungary, but usually without any
knowledge about the Hungarian language. These words are
also indicators about their journey: the refugees learned everyday
words, sentences, place names during their escape to
Yugoslavia. The Hungarian Government issued strict orders
against the Czech refugees: most of them were arrested by the
police, and sent to prison. During their imprisonment, they
also learned new worlds: mostly about their surroundings in
the prison.

A Few Remarks on the Nazi „Private“ Law as a Model for the Law of the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia (Analyse of the Selected Branch of Law)

The intention of this contribution is to point out the basic data of the Nazi ideology and the Nazi legal theory in the field of the “private” law, to show the reader the principles of the protectorate law and the principles which would have concededly been instituted into the protectorate law, if the Nazis had not been defeated in 1945.
The Nazi ideology was characterized by the fact, that it by all means tried to distance itself from the liberalistic concept of law, which was based on the protection of interests of individuals. The Nazi ideology was inspired by the old Germanic law. The Nazis rejected the Roman law just because of its individualistic character. According to Nazi ideas, the purpose of the private law should, on the contrary, be the welfare of the national community (Volksgemeinschaft).

Nacistická ideologie se vyznačovala tím, že se všemi různými způsoby snažila oprostit a distancovat od liberalistického pojetí práva, které spočívalo na ochraně zájmů jednotlivce. Nacistická právní věda odmítala římské právo právě pro jeho individualistickou povahu. Dle nacistických představ měl být naproti tomu účelem soukromého práva prospěch pospolitosti - národního společenství. Na jednotlivce se tedy nehledělo jako na osobu (individuum), nýbrž jako na člena národního společenství. Jelikož i soukromé právo mělo sloužit zájmu národního společenství, tak se nacistická právní teorie bránila samotné diferenciaci práva na veřejné a soukromé, jelikož veškeré právo mělo směřovat ve prospěch celku.
Nikdy však v období vlády národního socialismu nedošlo k masovému odstraňování převzatých liberalistických soukromoprávních institutů ovlivněných římským právem. K tomu mělo dojít až okamžikem vydání připravovaného lidového zákoníku (Volksgesetzbuch), který měl nahradit stávající občanský zákoník.

Matrimonial Law in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia

This article describes changes to laws regulating marrage, which occurred in 1939-1945 in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia. Particular attention is paid to the influence of Nazi ideology and legislation on this issue.

Rodinné a obzvláště manželské právo bylo v období trvání Protektorátu Čechy a Morava pod silným ideologickým vlivem národního socialismu. Charakteristickým znakem byla rovněž jeho vázanost na národní příslušnost snoubenců (manželů), neboť manželské poměry se řídily výhradně právem určeným dle národní příslušnosti. Autonomní i říšské manželské právo však mělo jeden společný znak: neumožňovalo svobodný výběr partnera. Osoby, které nemohly prokázat existenci řádného rodového původu, byly tak vyloučeny z možnosti uzavřít manželství s protektorátními i německými státními příslušníky.

"The application of German criminal law in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia

Criminal law in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia is an area of law, where most procedures were performed. The existing criminal law on the territory of the Protectorate was very complicated and confusing.

Das Strafrecht im Protektorat Böhmen und Mähren stellt ein Rechtsgebiet dar, in dem die meisten Eingriffe durchgeführt wurden. Das auf dem Gebiet des Protektorats geltende Strafrecht war sehr kompliziert und unübersichtlich. Dies bestand in mehreren Gründen. Erster Grund lag darin, dass die strafrechtlichen Normen nicht in einer Rechtsvorschrift kodifiziert wurden, wie es heute der Fall ist; in der Zeit der deutschen Besatzung der böhmischen Länder gab es Dutzende und vielleicht auch Hunderte von sog. Nebenstrafgesetzen, welche Strafsanktionen auferlegten. Die Zahl der Strafgesetze stieg ständig an. Die Anwendung der rezipierten tschechoslowakischen Strafrechtsnormen wurde schrittweise zu Gunsten der Vorschriften des Reichsstrafrechts beschränkt. Die Delikte der Protektoratsbevölkerung wurden immer öfter vor den deutschen Gerichten im Protektorat verhandelt."