MILITARY JUSTICE IN AUSTRIA BEFORE 1938

The basis for military criminal law of the Habsburg Monarchy were the military penal code from 1855 and the military penal procedure code dating back to the reign of Maria Theresa.

Trials against members of the Imperial and Royal Army were characterized by the lack of rights of the defendants. Only in July 1912 was a modern military penal procedure code adapted, which contained elements of the civil penal code, including the possibility of appealing against verdicts. With the beginning of World War I in 1914, the powers of the Austro-Hungarian military judiciary were significantly expanded.

Crimes such as treason, lèse majesté or the disturbance of public order were now tried by military judges, also known as »auditors«. The military judiciary of the Austro-Hungarian Army also served as a political instrument to deter and eliminate opposition – civilians too were tried before military courts. The total number of death sentences meted out by the Austro-Hungarian military judiciary is not known, but is said to have increased considerably between 1914 and 1918. In total, about three million people were court-martialed – this number roughly corresponds to the number of trials carried out by Wehrmacht courts. Within the postwar borders of Austria alone 162,000 cases were tried between 1914 and 1918.

First Republic

The defeat of 1918 brought about the end of monarchy in both Germany and Austria. On November 12, 1918, the democratic Republic of German-Austria was founded. Since the peace treaty of St. Germain prohibited the state’s planned accession to the new German Republic, it was officially renamed »Republic of Austria« on October 21, 1919. The democratic revolutions of 1918/1919 also entailed the end of military justice. A law passed on July 15, 1920 placed all army members under civil jurisdiction. A further law regulated the transfer of employees of the military judiciary to the civil judicial service. These provisions remained in force until 1934. The Austro-fascist dictatorship reintroduced military justice and established a military tribunal. The Austrian Army was used to combat the »enemy within« more and more frequently from the early 1930s on. The primary targets were Social Democrats as well as terrorist National Socialist groups, who were de facto the reason for the reintroduction of military justice.

The path to a “political soldier”

The Catholic-fascist governments under Engelbert Dollfuß and his successor Kurt Schuschnigg found little support in the Austrian public. The government struggled not only with the Social Democrats, who were banned in 1934, but also with the Nazi party, which had been operating illegally since 1934. The party radicalized its agitation to parallel the political developments in Germany: In January 1933, Adolf Hitler had been appointed Reich Chancellor and the National Socialists had dismantled the democratic state within only a few months. Already in May 1933, military jurisdiction was reintroduced; universal conscription applied from 1935 on. The »political soldier«, committing his life to »the leader and the people«, became a model in the German Reich. Leaders of the military judiciary immediately began to adjust military criminal law to the requirements of the planned war. Important instruments to this purpose were the decree on wartime special criminal law and the wartime criminal procedure code, which were both carried into effect shortly before the war began in 1939. Both granted military prosecutors nearly infinite possibilities of taking action against »enemies without and within«. The group of persons considered as such became ever larger as the war progressed.

Austria’s »Anschluss« to the German Reich

The annexation of Austria by the German Reich came as no surprise. At the beginning of 1938, political power had shifted in favor of the National Socialists. On March 11, two days after chancellor Kurt Schuschnigg had announced a referendum on Austria’s independence, the local NSDAP organized large-scale demonstrations in all the provinces, storming and occupying the regional seats of power. That same evening, Austrian president Wilhelm Miklas appointed the National Socialist minister of the interior Arthur Seyß-Inquart chancellor. The marching in of German troops on the morning of March 12 resembled a victory parade. The next day, the cabinet under Seyß-Inquart passed the »Constitutional law on the reunification of Austria with the German Reich«, and on March 15, Adolf Hitler gave a speech on Vienna’s Heldenplatz in front of cheering crowds. The Austrian Army was promptly subordinated to the German Wehrmacht. Within a few days, the new authorities dismissed 14 generals and about 50 staff officers. Until the end of 1938, some 18 percent of Austrian officers were retired, while 1,600 members of the officer corps continued their careers in the ranks of the Wehrmacht. It is to be assumed that Austrian lawyers were incorporated into the judicial apparatus of the Wehrmacht in the same manner.

Important Provisions of Military Law during the »Third Reich«

New Military Law for a New War

After coming to power in 1933, the new Reich government under Adolf Hitler began destroying the constitutional independence of the judiciary. At the same time, the regime and its leading jurists set out to change the legal norms in force. Military justice was reintroduced in May 1933 and adapted to the new set of conditions. The objective was to create a new criminal law that would be stricter and harsher than the provisions in force between 1914 and 1918 – the Nazis partly blamed a supposedly lax military judiciary for the German defeat in World War I. This is why military jurists developed legal principles geared towards the »Führer state«. Adolf Hitler’s will was to be the »highest legal asset«. The ultimate goal was not finding the truth, but winning the war. Nazi criminal law theory no longer considered an offense the wrongdoing of an individual, but damage to the community. One of the questions to be considered before court was whether the defendant could remain part of the »national (völkisch) defense community«.

The »Wartime Special Criminal Law Decree«

In January 1936, experts presented the draft of a new military penal code; it was to replace the one that had been in force since 1898. This undertaking was later abandoned, as the code was considered not National Socialist enough, despite the fact that there were leading Nazi jurists on the responsible committee in the »Academy for German Law«. Instead, the Wehrmacht armed forces high command had a new abbreviated wartime criminal law written  in the course of preparations for the invasion of Czechoslovakia in the summer of 1938, the »Wartime Special Criminal Law Decree«. At the same time, another decree significantly modified wartime criminal proceedings. Both decrees, makeshift at first, made military law radically harsher. The decrees remained confidential while Germany prepared mobilization and entered into force, just prior to the invasion of Poland, on August 26, 1939 – both in Germany and »annexed« Austria.

»Undermining the Military Forces«

One of the central provisions of the Wartime Special Criminal Law Decree pertained to the offense outlined in paragraph 5: »undermining the military forces«. It ruled on how to deal with criminal offenses that, according to the German leadership, had been punished too laxly during World War I, contributing to the »signs of disintegration« in 1918. The new provisions on »undermining the military forces« contained regulations previously found under »inducement to desertion«, »incitement to insubordination«, »insubordination or defiance«, »self-mutilation« and »evasion of service through deceit« in the military penal code. Previously, these offenses were penalized with prison or death sentences, as long as they had taken place »in the field« – however, death sentences were not meted out as a regular punishment. The new Wartime Special Criminal Law Decree now introduced the threat of a death sentence as a general rule. The personal motivations of the defendant were considered marginal, the »maintenance of discipline« and apparent needs of the »national community« came into focus. The paragraph was made more stringent even further during the war. Beginning in March 1943, for example, the regular penalty range could be exceeded if the »healthy national sentiment« called for it.

Adolf Hitler’s Directive from April 14, 1940

Shortly before the military campaign against France and the Benelux countries, the »Führer« and commander-in-chief of the Wehrmacht Adolf Hitler issued new guidelines for the punishment of deserters and those »undermining the military forces«. They defined under which circumstances a death sentence could be handed down, but also stated when mitigating circumstances should be taken into account. Countless verdicts speak to the importance of this directive, at the same time showing the leeway available to judges. The judges could decide whether »youthful injudiciousness« or »difficult domestic circumstances« were applicable as mitigating circumstances. Legal commentaries and instructions required that the »personality indicators« of a defendant be examined to establish whether the case at hand involved »criminal activity«. If defendants were considered »asocial« in the National Socialist meaning, they would frequently be sentenced to death. In such cases in particular, not just the offense but the »offender personality« was judged.

Further Increases of Punishments in the Face of »Total War«: The »Dönitz Decree«

Adolf Hitler’s guidelines for dealing with desertion crimes were made even more stringent three years later by a decree issued by supreme commander of the navy, Fleet Admiral Karl Dönitz, on April 27, 1943. Desertion was now considered a »failure of treacherous weaklings«. Dönitz informed the navy judges’ corps that he would »reject all acts of grace towards deserters«. This was probably the navy’s reaction to the situation following the German defeat at Stalingrad in early 1943: While Reich Propaganda Minister Josef Goebbels called for a »total war«, the Wehrmacht began to take even more brutal measures against »signs of disintegration«. The »Dönitz Decree« manifests the Wehrmacht’s proactive stance towards shaping their judicial practice of deterrence. The interests and aims of the leadership in the various branches of the armed forces were very close to those of the Nazi leadership – up until the end of the war.

Terror Unleashed in the Last Days of War

As Germany’s defeat seemed ever closer, the military leadership reacted to the uncertainty, desperation and combat fatigue with a wave of threats and arrest orders. Soldiers and civilians no longer prepared to risk their lives in a hopeless war were declared to be »weaklings« and »traitors«, threatening »final victory« with their actions. How many lives were lost in this judicially sanctioned terror – in summary courts as well as through arbitrary killings by secret military police units, the SS and other formations – is not known to this day. The rights of the defendants, already vastly restricted by the Wartime Special Criminal Law Decree, were reduced to an absolute minimum; at the end of the war, even the right of pardon was voided.

Deterrence – Retribution – Education

The National Socialist leadership began to plan for a new war immediately after coming to  power in 1933. The military judiciary they reintroduced was to play an important role: as a means to winning the war. The Wehrmacht judicature had the complex task of deterring soldiers from committing crimes by meting out harsh rulings, while at the same time not weakening the troops too much. To achieve both, the execution of sentences and the penitentiary were of crucial importance.

Desertion, »undermining the military forces« or »military treason« constituted only a fraction of the criminal cases tried by Wehrmacht courts during the war – even if most of the death sentences were meted out in those cases. Of the approximately three million verdicts, most were for »absence without leave«, insubordination, theft and minor offenses. The sentences for these ranged from three months to one year in prison; depending on the judge, the »offender personality« of the defendant, the battleground or situation on the front the verdicts could be harsher or milder, or they could even be the subject of disciplinary proceedings instead of a court trial.

The longer the war lasted, the more deadly even short prison sentences could be for those convicted. Soldiers were already told during basic training that the smallest deviation from the norm could entail the harshest forms of penitentiary; deterrence was a top priority. Court martial files reflect this, as they contain a specific category of motive for desertion: fear of punishment.

Soldiers convicted before a court martial entered a complex penal system characterized by »hard atonement«, »probation« and »education«, as it was expressed in contemporary terms. The conditions in various penal camps, prisons or penal deployment in war were relentlessly severe: undernourishment, insufficient clothing and medical supplies, unbridled use of force and particularly dangerous missions on the front. These measures were an expression of the Nazi idea of man, in which disobedient soldiers were quickly classified as »inferior«. At the same time the idea of »education« endured, giving convicted soldiers the prospect of returning to the »national (völkisch) defense community« in case of »probation«. Due to the horrific treatment they were subjected to, however, the chances of this were slim. It is not known how many soldiers lost their lives in this penal system; it is likely that there were tens of thousands of victims.

Wehrmacht Prisons and other Penitentiaries

The military leadership tried to separate »ineducable« soldiers from those deemed »corrigible« in the various military penitentiaries, in order to reintegrate the latter into the armed forces. Especially after the beginning of the war against the Soviet Union, which was causing heavy losses, sentences were increasingly served at the front, not in prisons back home. Soldiers were to be granted a chance to »prove themselves« before the enemy under exacerbated conditions. The Wehrmacht prison at Fort Zinna in Saxon Torgau was a hub of the front probation system. During the war, between 60,000 and 70,000 prisoners were interned here. They were tested for their »aptitude for the probation troops« and assigned to probation and penal units following a brutal selection process. Alternatively, they were transferred to concentration camps as »incorrigible Wehrmacht pests«. Vienna was one of the most important military bases within the German Reich. There were several so-called Wehrmacht remand prisons located here, in which soldiers served their sentences, waited for trial, for their verdicts or for transfer to another prison. The penal system in »Ostmark« has not yet been researched.

The Emsland Camps

Between 1933 and 1938, the Nazi regime established 15 camps in Emsland, in the northwestern periphery of the German Reich, in which inmates and prisoners of war from all over Europe were held captive. Since the beginning of the war, the Reich Ministry of Justice increasingly interned former German soldiers in the six northern camps. They had been declared »unworthy of military service« and removed from the Wehrmacht. They were »detained«, meaning that the time spent there would not be taken into account as part of their prison sentence, which was to officially begin only after the war was over. In total, between 25,000 and 30,000 people convicted before military courts were held in the camps as Esterwegen, Brual-Rhede, Börgermoor, Aschendorfermorr, Walchum, and Neusustrum. At least 780 of them died there during the war of hunger, diseases and abuse, were »shot fleeing« or executed. Wehrmacht military justice transferred between 5,000 and 6,000 prisoners to the Torgau Wehrmacht prison at Fort Zinna, where their further path within the penal system was decided.

Execution Sites

Wehrmacht military justice carried out most death sentences against deserters and those »undermining the military forces«, mostly by firing squad. During the course of the war, German military courts also transferred soldiers who had been sentenced to death to execution sites administered by the Reich Judicial Administration, which were usually prisons. Most convicts were beheaded; some were also hanged. Such executions were considered particularly »dishonorable«. The executioners of the Reich Ministry of Justice killed between 1,500 and 2,000 members of the Wehrmacht, who had been convicted by military courts during the war. It is not possible to determine the number of victims of summary courts held in the final stage of war; this applies to both soldiers and civilians who were shot or hanged without trial in the last months of war.

Probation Units 500

From April 1941 on, soldiers convicted by Wehrmacht courts fought in so-called probation unit 500 on »particularly dangerous sections of the front«, where they were to prove themselves by displaying »exceptional bravery«. If they succeeded, they could hope for a reduced sentence or even a pardon; otherwise their original sentences would be enforced. Around 27,000 »probation men« served in the »500« units during the war, guarded and commanded by officers, sergeants and squads selected for this purpose from the regular troops. A qualified leadership on the one hand, probation pressure and, in part, the »will to prove oneself« on the other made these units strong in battle. Yet losses were also particularly high. After an average of six months, a battalion of around 1,000 men had been »worn down«, meaning the men had been killed in action, gone missing or been wounded. The existence of these units was to deter obedient soldiers from any form of insubordination.

Probation Unit 999

Probation Unit 999 was usually formed of men who had not previously been in the military because they were considered »unworthy of military service« – especially civilians, prisoners, and concentration camp inmates. At the beginning of the fourth year of the war, however, the Wehrmacht needed every available man to fight. The Wehrmacht leadership gave members of probation unit 999 the prospect of »redeeming their honor by courageously serving as soldiers, to become fully adequate soldiers and citizens once again.« Those who did not prove themselves faced returning to prison or being transferred to a concentration camp, and the time spent on the front line would not be taken into account as part of their sentence. Close to a third of the 28,000 probation soldiers in the 999 unit were »political« prisoners, mostly communists and social democrats; the others were classified as »criminals«. These units were primarily deployed in Africa and in the Balkans. Several hundred of the »political« probation soldiers in particular defected and joined the resistance against the German occupation.

Field Penal Units

The harshest conditions of detention were to be found in field penal units and field penal camps. Wehrmacht courts frequently transferred anyone who had received a prison sentence of more than three months after the spring of 1942 to mobile field penal units instead of stationary prisons. The prisoners usually carried out their tasks unarmed, they were undernourished and subject to harsh drills, mostly on the Eastern front. Their daily lives consisted of »grueling work under dangerous conditions«, such as bunker and fortress construction, clearing mines and recovering bodies. In total, over 50,000 soldiers were forced to serve in these units. Courts transferred soldiers whom they had deemed »incorrigible Wehrmacht pests«, »carriers of an attitude hostile to military service« or those who had not »improved« in field penal units to field penal camps. The conditions in field penal camps were supposed to be even harsher. Some 4,000 to 5,000 soldiers went through these camps between May 1942 and the end of the war. Due to a lack of documentation, little is known of their fates.

The Victims Welfare Act

The Victims Welfare Act, which was passed in 1947 and amended numerous times, established narrow criteria defining who would be considered a victim of National Socialism. The lawmakers differentiated between “victims of the struggle”, categorized as “active” actors, and “passive” “victims of political persecution.” The former had to prove that they had fought for “an independent and democratic Austria, conscious of its historic mission, and engaged in the armed fight against the ideas and aims of National Socialism in particular, or having fought against it unreservedly in word and in deed.” The “victims of political persecution” had to have “severely suffered damage for political reasons or reasons of origin, religion or nationality caused by measures carried out by a court, a government office (especially the state police) or the National Socialist Party, including its organizations”, in order to be recognized by the Victims Welfare Act. Over the years, victims could apply for compensation for prison time, benefits for deprivation of freedom, loss of income and education, and for victims’ pensions, depending on the category they were deemed to belong to. These were provided on the basis of the required official documents or victim identity cards.

Inappropriate Distinctions: “personal” and “political” motives

While the victims of Nazi military justice were not explicitly excluded from these benefits, the provisions of the Victims Welfare Act strongly curtailed their chances. A 1948 decree stated: “The offences of […] desertion and undermining the military forces cannot be classified political as such […]”, since “in such cases, ver often personal, and not political motives were the cause.” This ex post examination of conscience by the state authorities was however very questionable. For one, it was difficult to assess the motives in hindsight. Karl Lauterbach, for example, did not mention his involvement in the communist underground before the court martial. Furthermore, this provision ignored the fact that crimes such as desertion and “undermining the military force” were considered highly political by the Nazi state in all cases and accordingly punished particularly harshly. Victim welfare files show that without an official confirmation from one of the political parties, it was practically impossible to prove political motives; this put religious conscientious objectors at a significant disadvantage. Only in 2005 were the victims of Nazi military justice included in the group of people eligible for victim welfare (Nazi Repeal Act). The Second Republic only recognized the inherently criminal dimension of Nazi military justice with its Repeal and Rehabilitation Act of 2009; only from that point on were insubordinate soldiers considered victims of the Nazi regime, regardless of their motives.

Scarce Acknowledgment of Deserters

A little less than 4 percent of all victims of National Socialism (those persecuted themselves and their surviving dependents) who applied for recognition and respective benefits had been persecuted for military offenses, mostly desertion. They had by far received the most death sentences and their actions were stigmatized particularly harshly. On the other hand, it was especially difficult for deserters to gain recognition as victims of Nazi persecution from the social security authorities: their applications were turned down at a disproportionally high level compared to other victim groups. In cases of sentences for “undermining the military force”, the authorities frequently distinguished between “undermining” statements and acts of resistance, such as self-mutilation. In case of the latter, the petitioner had a relatively slim chance of being granted victim benefits. Crimes such as high treason, military treason and “aiding the enemy” resulted in a higher ratio of benefits awarded, since the authorities often acknowledged the political motives of these actions and recognized them as resistance against the Nazi regime.

Prison Terms Not Counted Towards Pensions

The practice of granting benefits to victims of Nazi military justice according to the social security law (e.g., retirement benefits) have not yet been researched. On principle, however, soldiers convicted by a military court could not have their time in prison, in an internment camp or a concentration camp counted towards his pension. Following the “duty fulfillment discourse”, obedient soldiers were given preferential treatment, while deserters and other persecuted soldiers were at a disadvantage – even though around the year 2000, the Ministry of Social Affairs, at the time led by the Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ), still claimed that the German Wehrmacht should be considered a “foreign army”. Until 2009, the Austrian state’s basic stand on desertion was that it continued to constitute a criminal offense, making an across-the-board rehabilitation of this crime impossible.

Recognition by the National Fund

The Austrian legislature established the National Fund of the Republic of Austria for Victims of National Socialism in 1995 in order to facilitate the rehabilitation of hitherto “forgotten victims” (homosexuals, Sinti and Roma, survivors and relatives of victims of “euthanasia” etc.). Yet the victims of Nazi military justice were once again omitted from the list of those eligible for rehabilitation – at first, they only stood a chance of being recognized if they could simultaneously demonstrate persecution by civilian courts (e.g. for high treason). The committee entrusted with conferring benefits also failed to recognize the inherent injustice of persecution under Nazi military law, particularly in its early years. At the time, it was common practice for the committee to distinguish between political motives, which were worthy of recognition, on the one hand, and “personal” motives on the other. This changed in favor of the petitioners around the turn of the millennium, and in the last one and a half decades, all of the XXX applications submitted have been approved. It needs to be emphasized, however, that while many petitioners were persecuted under military law, they were recognized as victims on other grounds, such as religious (conscientious objectors) or political (deserters who became partisans).

Too Late for Many

Many victims of Nazi military justice did not live see their recognition under the Victims’ Welfare Act of 2005 – those who were able to submit their applications had to frequently endure a long bureaucratic process. This is illustrated by the example of David Holzer, whose story you can read below. In 2016, the Federal Ministry of Labor, Social Affairs and Consumer Protection stated upon request that only seven applications were processed between 2005 and 2010; three were granted, three were turned down. One petitioner died during the review process.

Literature

Karin Berger; Nikolaus Dimmel; David Forster; Claudia Spring; Heinrich Berger: Vollzugspraxis des „Opferfürsorgegesetzes“. Analyse der praktischen Vollziehung des einschlägigen Sozialrechts, Wien / München 2004.

Brigitte Bailer-Galanda: Wiedergutmachung kein Thema. Österreich und ide Opfer des Nationalsozialismus, Wien 1993.

David Forster: Die Opfer der NS-Militärgerichtsbarkeit und die Zweite Republik. Fürsorge und Entschädigung. In: Manoschek, Walter (Hg.): Opfer der NS-Militärjustiz. Urteilspraxis – Strafvollzug – Entschädigungspolitik in Österreich, Wien 2003, S. 651-703.

David Forster: Die Zweite Republik und die Wehrmachtsdeserteure. Fürsorge und Entschädigung für Opfer der NS-Militärjustiz. In: Pirker, Peter; Wenninger (Hg.): Wehrmachtsjustiz. Kontext, Praxis, Nachwirkungen, Wien 2010, S. 242-254.

Hannes Metzler: Ehrlos für immer? Die Rehabilitierung der Wehrmachtsdeserteure in Deutschland und Österreich, Wien 2007.

Moos, Reinhard: Die juristische Rehabilitierung der Opfer der NS-Militärjustiz. In: Kohlhofer, Reinhard; Moos, Reinhard (Hg.): Österreischische Opfer der NS—Militärgerichtsbarkeit – Rehabilitierung und Entschädigung, Wien 2003, S. 65-90.

The first Deserter’s Monument is situated in Vienna 

Neu: Broschüre zum Deserteursdenkmal. Klick aufs Bild zum Anschauen & Download.

During the Second World War Nazi military justice handed out more than 30,000 death sentences: against soldiers, prisoners of war and civilians, in particular from the regions occupied by the German Wehrmacht all over Europe. Most of the death sentences were passed against deserters and “Wehrkraftzersetzer” (subverters of the war effort). Many thousands of other soldiers died at the front after being sentenced by the military courts to serve in “penal/probation battalions”.

The actions punished, ways of life and biographical backgrounds of those persecuted varied widely. Political opponents of Nazism faced the military courts just as much as people who were looking for individual freedom for very different reasons. Any form of resistance or, for example, support for deserters by civilian helpers was regarded as a political crime and was thus punished with the greatest severity.

After the end of the war, Austrian society met the survivors of this persecution with rejection and hostility. Because in Austria for a long time the myth continued that in 1938 it was made the “first victim” of German war policy; yet the service of Austrian soldiers in the Wehrmacht was considered to be the fulfillment of duty or even heroic.

Inspired by historic research, it was only after the turn of the century that the recognition prevailed that Nazi military justice had put itself unconditionally at the service of a criminal war. In 2009, with the votes of the Social Democrats, the People’s Party and the Green Party, Austria’s National Assembly rehabilitated the victims of the persecution by the Wehrmacht courts, and in 2010 the City of Vienna decided to erect a monument to the victims of Nazi military justice.

The Memorial

The sculpture by Olaf Nicolai on this central location of the Austrian Republic takes up the classical elements of a memorial, the “pedestal” and the “inscription”. Yet it arranges these completely differently than in traditional war memorials. An outsized, lying “X” constitutes the three-step pedestal, on the third level of which the inscription is embedded. The text is only readable from above and quotes a poem by the Scottish artist Ian Hamilton Finlay (1925–2006), who was friends with important representatives of the language-critical and experimental Viennese artists’ scene. The interplay between pedestal and inscription stages the situation of the individual in and toward the social order and power relations. Threatened by anonymization and extinction, which turn him into an “X” in a file, his or her position is nonetheless central. The sculpture demonstrates respect for all those who take their own decision, defy heteronomy and through their independent action position themselves against the prevailing system.

The Artist

Olaf Nicolai grew up in Karl-Marx-Stadt, what is today Chemnitz. Between 1983 and 1988 he pursued a degree in German studies and went on to earn his doctorate at the University Leipzig (entitled “Gestures between Expression and Calculation. On the Poetics of the Vienna Group”). Since the beginning of the 1990s, he has presented his works both in group and solo exhibitions at the most important locations of the contemporary art scene.

Sites of Imprisonment: WUG II | WUG VII | WUG X | WUG XIX | WUG XXI | Rossauer Lände |

Citymap of Persecution

For enlarged display and detailed descriptions of 16 sites in Vienna please click on the blue pins. You can move the map with the cursor.

If any problem arrise, please press F5!

BESCHLUSS

The decision to erect the memorial in Vienna was part of an agreement reached by the social democratic/green coalition in 2010. In November of the following year, municipal department 7 (MA 7/culture) assembled a group of experts to discuss the project’s key points. Three subcommittees were tasked with developing a mission statement, deciding on a location, and making recommendations for the memorial’s use after its opening.

The first initiatives paying tribute to the Austrian victims of Nazi military justice were launched by the victims’ relatives. However, the grief they expressed through memorial stonesremained private out of shame or fear. In the 1990s, peacemovement activists organized the first political initiatives to commemorate deserters. At the turn of the millennium, a group of students from the University of Vienna first began researching the history of Nazi military jurisdiction. The Austrian Parliament then commissioned an in-depth study of the issue, which became the basis for future legislation. In October 2009, the Social Democratic Party, the People’s Party and the Green Party together passed the Repeal and Rehabilitation Law, sweepingly and comprehensively nullifying sentences issued by Wehrmacht courts. One year later, the municipal government of Vienna led by the Social Democratic Party and the Green Party decided to erect a memorial to deserters.

HISTORY OF PERSECUTION

Karl Lauterbach, 1945 in Wien wegen Selbstverstümmelung hingerichtet

Austria became part of the German Reich in March 1938. Between 1939 and 1945, Germany and its allies spread a war of exploitation and extermination over Europe. By its end, some 35 million people had lost their lives.

Nazi military justice was an important instrument of war for the political and military leadership, which set off a flood of trials in order to thwart any deviation within the German army, the Wehrmacht. As the war progressed, the sentences issued by military judges became increasingly severe. Many of the sentences were suspended until after the war and replaced by »probation at the front«.

One Million Trials

In total, Nazi military courts conducted at least one million trials. Even minor offences frequently yielded long prison sentences. Many died in prison due to the harsh conditions, and there is only little research on how many soldiers perished while imprisoned or serving in penal units or other special units.

Simone Schloss, Mitglied einer kommunistischen Widerstandsgruppe bei einem Schauprozess vor einem deutschen Militärgericht in Paris 1942

German military justice also affected Austrian soldiers and civilians. Wehrmacht judges also tried allied prisoners of war. Between 7,000 and 10,000 death sentences were meted out to members of these two groups alone – it is not known exactly how many of the sentences were carried out.

15,000 Death Sentences Against Deserters

The dimensions of the verdict ratio become clear when comparing the way in which the largest group of convicts, the deserters, was dealt with: while Nazi military justice carried out death sentences against 15,000 deserters during World War II, the US Army carried out only one death sentence against a deserter between 1941 and 1946. The military justice of the armies in the German Empire (1871 – 1918) carried out a total of 18 death sentences against deserters.

Austro-Hungarian courts martial conducted about three million trials, meting out some 30,000 death sentences, particularly to civilians in Eastern and South Eastern Europe. Although the Austrofascist dictatorship (1933 –1938) did use the army to suppress the »internal enemy« (social democrats, communists and national socialists), it did not introduce an independent military justice to this purpose. Following Austria’s »Anschluss« (»annexation«) to Germany in March 1938, the Austrian army was incorporated into the GermanWehrmacht, taking on its military justice and code of criminal procedure.

 

Literaturhinweise

History of Persecution

Faltblatt “Das Denkmal für die Verfolgten der NS-Militärjustiz in Wien” auf Deutsch.

Faltblatt “Das Denkmal für die Verfolgten der NS-Militärjustiz in Wien” auf English.

Bezugsmöglichkeiten: Die in deutsch und englisch vorliegende Informationsbroschüre zum Denkmal kann u.a. auch über das Stadtinformationszentrum im Wiener Rathaus, das Dokumentationsarchiv des österreichischen Widerstands, die Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, das Wiener Stadt- und Landesarchiv, das Mauthausenkomitee Österreich, die Informationszentren von WienTourismus, über die Kunst im öffentlichen Raum (KÖR) sowie über die dem Denkmal jeweils direkt gegenüberliegende Präsidentschaftskanzlei in der Hofburg und das Bundeskanzleramt in gedruckter Form bezogen werden. Derzeit setzt sich das Personenkomitee auch für eine Box mit Flyern am Denkmal selbst ein.

Führungen, die das Denkmal für die Verfolgten der NS-Militärjustiz mit einbeziehen, können beim Mauthausenkomitee Österreich, bei den FremdenführerInnen von Guides in Vienna sowie über das Dokumentationsarchiv des österreichischen Widerstands gebucht werden.

Materialien zur politisch-historischen Bildung

Im folgenden stellen wir thematische Vertiefungen der Fallgeschichten verfolgter Soldaten und Zivilisten für die Bildungsarbeit zur Verfügung. Das Material ist gedacht für historisch Interessierte im Allgemeinen und ebenso als Handreichungen für LehrerInnen zur Vorbereitung des Unterrichts oder für Exkursionen zum Denkmal. Ausgearbeitet wurden Biografien von Menschen aus allen Teilen Österreichs und zudem von Angehörigen regionaler Minderheiten sowie europäischer Widerstandsbewegungen, die von Wehrmachtgerichten verfolgt wurden. Ziel der Auseinandersetzung mit den Materialien ist es,

• historisches Wissen über die Zeit des Nationalsozialismus und seine Nachgeschichte in der Zweiten Republik zu vermitteln
• die Bedeutung individueller Freiheitsrechte und demokratischer Grundwerte für jedeN Einzeln herauszustellen – damals wie heute
• und im Zusammenenhang damit die Leistungen und Leiden derer zu würdigen, die – aus welchen Gründen auch immer – Widerstand leisteten oder für sich Freiräume jenseits der herrschenden Normen reklamierten.

Angestrebt wird – entlang der im Lehrplan der Allgemeinbildenden Höheren Schulen formulierten Prinzipien – »ein an den Menschenrechten orientiertes Politik-und Demokratieverständnis zu erarbeiten«.

→ DOWNLOADS

Pädagogische Materialien/ ausführliche biografische Informationen zu den Verfolgten der NS-Militärjustiz

Thematische Einführung mit pädagogischen und didaktischen Handreichungen

Richard Wadani Fallgeschichte und Dokumente (PDF)

Fallgeschichte und Dokumente zu Maria Kacprzyk und Krystyna Wituska (Polen), verurteilt wegen Spionage und Feindbegünstigung (PDF)

Fallgeschichte und Dokumente zu Anton Tischler (Wien), verurteilt wegen Fahnenflucht (PDF)

Fallgeschichte und Dokumente zu Ernst Volkmann (Vorarlberg), verurteilt wegen Kriegsdienstverweigerung (PDF)

Fallgeschichte und Dokumente zu Anton Brandhuber (Niederösterreich), verfolgt wegen Fahnenflucht (PDF)

• Fallgeschichte und Dokumente zu Maria Musial (Wien), verurteilt wegen Wehrkraftzersetzung (PDF)
• Fallgeschichte und Dokumente zu Alois Tiefengruber (Steiermark), verurteilt wegen Fahnenflucht (PDF)
• Fallgeschichte und Dokumente zu Erich Schiller (Niederösterreich), verurteilt wegen Fahnenflucht (PDF)
• Fallgeschichte und Dokumente zu Erwin Kohout (Oberösterreich), verurteilt wegen Fahnenflucht (PDF)
• Fallgeschichte und Dokumente zu Franz Severa (Wien), verurteilt wegen Fahnenflucht (PDF)
• Fallgeschichte und Dokumente zu Johann Kuso (Burgenland), verurteilt wegen Fahnenflucht (PDF)
• Fallgeschichte und Dokumente zu David Holzer (Tirol), verurteilt wegen Fahnenflucht (PDF)

Fallgeschichte und Dokumente zu Anton Schmid (Wien), verurteilt wegen Feindbegünstigung (PDF)

Fallgeschichte und Dokumente zu Jurij und Frank Pasterk (Kärnten), verfolgt wegen (Beihilfe zur) Fahnenflucht (PDF)

Fallgeschichte und Dokumente zu Johann Lukaschitz (Wien), verurteilt wegen Nichtanzeige von Kriegsverrat (PDF)